Printable View
I know from my reading that M1 garand receivers did not come out sequentially. The GCA’s articles from the shop Forman’s notebook have shown this, but does anyone think they became more sequential the better Springfield became at manufacturing them? January 1940 produced about 3,000. By January 1944, 122,000. I would think the better the machinists and all the other workers got, the more sequential the rifles would be. Just wondering what everyone’s opinion, or research opinion would be.
I would think you're making receivers and before hardening they get a number. The whole roll mark...sequentially. I know there would be some losses but why would they not for the most part be sequential?
From what I've read, all stations used parts from bins. With heat treating being done in lots of a specific size (I forget how many went in the furnace at once. Its in hatchers notebook I think) and then put in a bin to be wheeled off to the next station, no telling what order the next guy, or the next, would pull one out. The only thing that would be sequential is the counting of the guy at the roll stamp, not the bin he pulled from and not the bin he put the stamped receiver in?
There is a sequential pair on gunbroker selling for a premium. Someone likely got lucky in their collection.
Agreed. They would assemble from bins but they still have sequential serial numbers. Not sure exactly what the OP is asking though.Quote:
Originally Posted by ssgross
I’m asking that yes, in the early days of production, the workers would not be as experienced. The longer they did their job the better they got. Not as many mistakes would cause fewer delays, fewer delays would cause more rifles to stay in sequence.Quote:
Originally Posted by browningautorifle
You're talking about during assembly and packing for shipping then...?Quote:
Originally Posted by SRiverrat11
https://www.americanrifleman.org/con...and-ever-made/
I've seen a picture of a milling station for m1 garand production. Google is not cooperating with me right now in locating it, which means it's likely in a book somewhere. Someone with a better memory will likely beat me to finding it. Anyway, the guy has a box - more like a large crate, with receivers in it. There is no organization in the crate. just a loose jumble.
If you are asking about very early days while production was still being set up and troubleshooted, I would think the lots would have been smaller quantities as fixtures and processes at a each station were refined and tuned. I recall description/discussion of the challenge of setting all this up in one of hatcher's books.
Still, the receivers were stamped with ID after that, just before any heat treat and Parkerizing. Then you see them carried on a different rig with pegs. Parkerizing came after barrel installation at least in the beginning. I wouldn't think they would necessarily be in order though when they were rolled around on those big mobile racks with inspection tags. They would end up moving around and then when crated...they could be in any order.Quote:
Originally Posted by ssgross
But the whole thing of the OPs thread, I thought was talking about they missed numbers or returned receivers so some numbers didn't actually make it out of the factory...
Agreed. Unless they had interns to torture by having them sort to put them back in order for assemble :)Quote:
Originally Posted by browningautorifle
There has been a series of articles in the GCA journal these last many issues about a handwritten notebook detailing this very topic.Quote:
Originally Posted by browningautorifle
I had Winchester serial # 101660 and it had the 7th round stop cut out. That was only seen on very early Winchesters and stopped around 100200 That would mean it was an earlier receiver that was serialed later. Rick B
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...1/dB21Nw-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...1/GzUyLY-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...1/rhVpRu-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...1/jTj8sp-1.jpg