Savage Marking Check

[Seaspriter]

Someone in another thread posted an interest to any truth that parts were shared between Savage and Longbranch.

Spike, this is the thread you were referring to:
Savage Enfield and my initial attempt to see if there was a connection:

I did check the railroad maps of the era and the story is actually quite plausible. (see http://www.schenectadyhistory.org/re...ad_map-600.jpg ) The New York Central Railroad ran from Boston through Springfield (Chicopee adjoins Springfield and surely had a spur line) right to Buffalo. The map shows a RR crossing at Niagara Falls through to Hamilton, to Mississauga on the Canadianicon Pacific Railroad (CPR)

While there is a lot of data on subcontractors supplying parts between prime contractors for M-1 Carbines, it's not clear (yet) if this happened between Long Branch and Chicopee in the 1943 era. What is known is that Savage-Stevens was ordered to reduce production at the end of 1943 and wound down production by June 1944, while Long Branch's production slowed down at the beginning of 1944 and was finally finished by summer of 1945, a full year after Savage. Excess inventory of parts from Savage were apparently shipped to Long Branch to supplement production during Long Branch's last year of production.

[SpikeDD]

Would the transfer of excess parts to Longbranch also apply to sub-contractors? Or would they just have to eat the loss? Were cocking pieces even sub-contracted out by Savage? The reason I feel the round "S" in a cornered box would be a sub-contractors mark is because they obviously wouldn't use a mark that Savage used. There would be no way of telling the origins of a quality issue that may have come up if a sub-contractor used exactly the same mark as Savage did. I just find it ironic that this mark appears on 2 of my Savage rifles in the early 60C and late 70C series and subsequently, on a 45' dated Longbranch. If 45' was the last year of Longbranch production and Savage was all but finished by the end of 44', wouldn't a 45' dated Longbranch be the first likely candidate to be fitted with surplus parts shipped to Longbranch? I don't know and am only throwing thoughts out there. I guess it would be nice to know if Savage even outsourced cocking pieces in the first place. The bottom line is this mark exists and I think it would be interesting to see if it consistently shows up on Savage rifles.

[Seaspriter]

Would the transfer of excess parts to Longbranch also apply to sub-contractors? Or would they just have to eat the loss? Were cocking pieces even sub-contracted out by Savage?

David, I don't pretend to know many of the answers to your questions in the specific sense, but there are some general principles that apply:
1) The Prime Contractors would incorporate any part from anywhere, so long as the quality was good. Since parts were interchangeable, it didn't really matter who made them, and there was plenty of movement of war goods across the US-Canadian border.
2) Sub-contractors were all required to mark their products so that any defects could be traced back immediately. An unmarked part would wreak havoc. Every part in an M-1 Carbines is clearly marked; Milsurps dialogue is massive on this issue in the M-1 threads.
3) Sub-contractors were not required to eat losses. The government did not want/allow suppliers to go out of business (thus diminishing supply) or to run losses (which would trigger poor quality).
4) The stories of supply chain collaboration are everywhere when one studies M-1 production, but the stories about sub-contractors are not nearly as renown with Enfields -- I'm not sure why.
5) Your logic is sound, but what's possible is not always what happened. Other members will, I'm sure, chime in.

Personally, as someone who professionally engages in collaborative supply chain development, I'm interested in how cooperation really worked during the war effort. There are many parallels to be drawn here: such as the production of Rolls-Royce Merlin engines in this country to power the P-51 Mustang. On another thread today I posted the almost miraculous cooperative development of Proximity Fuzes which shortened the duration of the war by a year. (see Dropbox - Proximity Fuse Case Study.pdf )

IOW, keep the questions coming, and piece by piece we will find the complete picture.

[Amatikulu]

David,

I took a look last night and I have a 1942, all matching Savage No 4 mark 1 in the 11C serial number block. It has the same mark on its cocking piece, the cornered box with rounded "S"

Not sure if this is useful, but it may help establish a timeline for when the mark started appearing. I tried taking photos last night but simply failed to get a decent picture so will try again during the day when I remember.