1917 Eddystone Advice

For what its worth, in the 1920's and the 1930's, the army, through the DCM was selling NEW M1917, and USED M1917. In the 1920's the price was NEW $20.00, USED $7.50. In the 1930's the price of the NEW M1917 was lowered to $12.50, but the USED M1917 remained at $7.50. Unfortunately for the collector, the number sold was probably low (one had to be a NRA member) and many if not most of them were converted to "Sporters". There are many articles in the AMERICAN RIFLEMAN for the between the wars period describing how to convert the M1917 into a sporter. Several corporations, Stoger, G&H, and Sedgley come to mind, would alter the M1917 for a relatively modest price. After WWII there was another frenzied period of conversion of M1917's to sporters - do, I believe, to the cheapness of the M1917 and the lack of availability of commercial rifles. Several corporations would convert the M1917 to a sporter-Johnson Automatics come to mind. I do not remember that any of the post WWII M1917's were listed as NEW- only serviceable or unserviceable. There maybe and are probably a few NEW M1917's out there that have not been altered but they are probably relatively scarce.

Quote:

---

Not to be the guy who says actually, but actually Baldwin built the buildings and owned the land but leased them to Remington and after the war converted to Locomotive manufacturing. Prior to this ONLY rifles where made in the new buildings, which only a few remain today. Eddystone borough is in Delaware county, PA, hence Eddystone M1917's, but they where in fact built by Remington trained personal and on Remington tooling.

---

I think its a tad more complicated. If I am tracking the oddity involved with Eddystone, Remington was the parent company originally

However, it was a Baldwin Executive that built, equipped and managed the plant (werid)

Also an entity called Midvale Steel was involved. which took over the plant in January of 1918 and rifles were delivery until May of 1919 so some were non Remington Corporation made.

Patrick:

Quote:

---

I have no wish to cause irritation by hair-splitting RC20, so I will simply compress my argument to the essence: once parts have been swapped, maybe many years ago, it is practically impossible to say now: who? where? when? why? for mass-production items that were intended to be used, and therefore required servicing. Hence my caution about "all-original" claims, having seen a great number that were too good to be true.

---

We seem to get sideways and I apologize if its partly my fault.

I do not in the least disagree with what you posted, frankly I think there is a lot of that going on though I am not going to try to call anyone on it.

Partly I think its the purists issue with all matching parts which if true is both cool and amazing. The real service guns that I think are really the history are mixed and personally I think should be valued equally to the all original in value and appreciation. Collectors do not agree. I think the values are skewed but then I would not have any if not so...... My take is that the mixed guns are historically accurate and of more interest history wise in they tell us the real story of the rifles but not valued monetarily.

The real value of a all matching is that it exemplified what that really meant as an example and a baseline of where they went from there. Where they went are the real history, the all matching are frozen in time and saw little or now real use and certainly did not even see training use let alone battle.

I like living breathing shootable history (my all matching parts number Lugar I dare not shoot for fear of breaking one of its all so valuable numbered parts!)

" I think the values are skewed but then I would not have any if not so......"


100% agreement there. We gain by collectors turning up their noses at anything less than (to me) unrealistic perfection. A couple of my rifles would, from their appearance, be regarded as tomato stake material by collectors - but they are good shooters!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RC20

I think its a tad more complicated.

---

No, it's fact. Baldwin Locomotive didn't build any rifles. Remington tooled and trained the personal at the plant. Midvale comes later and is a corporate ownership change, so yes, not all rifles were Remington made, I'll concede that. The misconception is Baldwin stopped making locomotives and shifted their tooling and personnel to making rifles, which did not happen. Baldwin didn't mange anything at the arsenal they were only the landlord. This was my point, Baldwin built no rifles, Remington and later Midvale did.

I most respectfully have to disagree (unless Ferris is dead wrong) and other sources.

Quote:

---

"On April 30, 1915, the British government placed an order with Remington of Delaware for 1,500,000 P14s to be manufactured in one of the Eddystone plants.

Samuel L Vaulclain who had been with Baldwin since 1883 and was vice president in charge was responsible for manufacturing the rifles and seeing the plant was constructed and equipped accordingly.

Production was established Dec15, 1915. Charles A Slacks assisted Vauclain (no stated company but seems Balwin)

---

So it was a weird relationship of Baldwin and Remington with Remington looking to provide the overall structure of contracts but Baldwin running the plant.

Midvale Steel was also quoted as being the owner after War was declared, so there continues to be a confusion though it would seem to be more Baldwin and maybe Midvale as Remington did not seem to have a real presence in the operation other than the separate corporate ownership (from the rest of Remington)

Remington and Eddystone each had their own parts commonality separately and in all cases Eddystone was handled as an equal to Winchester and Remington in the discussions.

One source insists Colonel Thompson was in charge, maybe, but not who he reported to. And then there is this and what his relationship with the other two is ?

And there is this

Quote:

---

In 1916, Marcellus Hartley Dodge (CEO of Remington) sold his company's interest in the Remington Arms Company of Delaware and in the military contract for rifles to the Midvale Steel and Ordnance Company, taking in return 400,000 shares of Midvale stock of $20,000,000 par value. [Note: New York Sun, November 24, 1916.]

---

We will part friends, I still contend that Baldwin Locomotive or any of THAT corporations employees ever built one rifle. Only Remington arms of Delaware "I have 1918 as the date Midvale took over" and Midvale ordnance and steel did until 1919. I'm aware of Vaulclain's roll in that he oversaw construction of Baldwin property, but I contend Schlacks, who was general manager, worked for Remington arms. It's a guess, Even Ferris doesn't know, after all what did Vaulclain or anyone for that matter at Baldwin know about building rifles? And Baldwin was still pumping out locomotives during the entire war.

I'd be nice if I could find a really old, old timer around here who worked there and ask him "who signed your check" if only right?

Nothing wrong with a good discussion

the second quote is from the Remington History sight, obvious it could be wrong but interesting.


If it really was Remington questions I have would ask are why a complexly separate corporate entity and why would you have two contract not just one and a single stream of production? (even if separate plants,)

If you take the name Remington out of it, Eddystone was treated completely separately i.e. a stand alone company , or exactly like Winchester and that other R company involved) https://www.milsurps.com/images/smilies/cool.png

It also was the only entity named after a location as Remington did not make guns labeled Ilion in its NY Plant and Winchester did not calls their Rochester. Or it was truly Eddystone Rifle Company.

There is a logic there, not the least bit clear what it was.

One thing it has done is clear up in my mind the oddity of players even if no good explanation for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RC20

Or it was truly Eddystone Rifle Company.

---

The complex was known as the Eddystone rifle works hence the name stamp, Same as Springfield arsenal. ERA = Eddystone Remington Arms.

Heres another corporate twist. Why was the new company called Remington arms of Delaware, yet the arsenal was located in Pennsylvania. Hint, It's not because the arsenal was located in Delaware county PA.

I think the only obvious thing is Remington had a reason for what they did but we will probably never know .

I would call it some kind of corporate Shell game.

At the same time they were doing major re-vamp on their own plant in Ilion.

speculation would be they knew the war would end and did not want to have excess capacity after the war.

Also sorts of things like who paid for the tooling.

I think we can conclude it was a different arrangement that was really meant to keep the two entities completely separate entity and arrangement for whatever reasons.

And it really does not matter as we likely will never resolve it. My take is this was not really a Remington entity as a Remington venture with everyone else having all the skin in the game and Remington taking profits (if any)

realistically to me its a totally separate arms making entity (Flag of convenience) . Others of course may disagree.