1917 Eddystone Advice

Several years ago I believe I brought my first rifle to the attention of this group. I sought advice on whether it was a good purchase or not considering it's condition. I did end up buying it and over the past few years just never was satisfied with it. The stock was heavily sanded, it has a WWII 2 groove replacement barrel that is pitted and while it looked decent and filled a spot in my collection I kept my eyes open for something better.

That came along this past weekend. This one also is not perfect but is a huge step up in my opinion. From an exterior inspection, every part could be identified as Eddystone with the exception of the safety lever, and nose cap which had no markings. The barrel is an original 9-18 barrel although it also has pitting. The stock is un-sanded, has the original acceptance stamps and two rebuild/inspection stamps.

On tearing it down I found replacement parts. A Winchester trigger guard, Remington spring, base plate and trigger and safety.

Here's where the advice comes in. I'm planning to sell the old one, but it has an Eddystone safety, trigger guard, spring and base plate although all but the safety are in worse shape finish wise than the ones it came with. It unfortunately has a Winchester trigger.

Is it better to keep it as is with mix matched but better finished parts or swap out all the stuff for the correct Eddystone. The safety is a no brainer, they look the same.

If swapped out, all that is not Eddystone is the trigger and that shouldn't be hard to find.

The old one was major mismatch. Remington stock, Remington bolt, etc so nothing lost there by taking a few Eddystone parts off it.

What to you guys think, I'm leaning toward going all Eddystone.

Go all eddy - won't hurt the old rifle's value but should help the new one

I think I'd go all Eddystone too. That way when you ponder the thing that little voice in your head won't say "yeah but its mismatched" you know what I mean? As you find parts in better shape you'll replace 'em but you'll already be ahead of the game. My 2c's

Swapping parts just to make it correct would, IMO, be destroying it's history. If they are defective then that's a bit different. If you want an all correct example use the 2 you have now as trading fodder to get it. It is what it is and I'm in favor of leaving it as is, but it's yours to do with as you wish I reckon. Just my .02 worth.

I'm not big on the "history of the rifle" so not really part of my consideration. The rifles history as I know it today is where and when it was made, where it was refurbished and who owned it before me. That isn't enough to prevent me from swapping out parts.

Don't get me wrong, I love history or I wouldn't be collecting these in the first place but the concept of leaving things as is just to preserve something which is complete speculation isn't history to me. If it had a paper trail, that's different but very few rifles have a paper trail. I have no idea if the guy that owned it before me swapped out the parts, or the guy before him. I can speculate that the parts were swapped out by the General Motors facility during the WWII refurbishment.

Sanding the marks off the stock would be destroying it's history, I can't see swapping parts as doing so.

Armourers would swap parts in and out so no biggee for you doing the same IMHO. If you are not that bothered about being that correct what about an after market barrel?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aragorn243

Sanding the marks off the stock would be destroying it's history, I can't see swapping parts as doing so.

---

The major feature of M1917 production was that, as far as possible, all parts from 3 different manufacturers should be interchangeable. So no US armourer fixing up M1917s would have worried much about matching E's or R's or W's. Part interchangeablilty was intended to be used to produce as many rifles as possible as fast as possible in the factory, and to keep up the maximum availability of functioning rifles in the field. Especially for the M1917, the snooty collector's attitude of "it's not all matching therefore not original" is historically incorrect. See Ferris "United States Rifle Model of 1917".

As to "history", nobody can tell now whether the parts were used in the factory, because delivery shortages required taking parts from one of the other factories, or "officially" swapped by a US armorer at a later date, or even swapped by you or me five minutes ago.

So go all-Eddy if you like. It's irrelevant for shooting anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ssj

Armourers would swap parts in and out so no biggee for you doing the same IMHO. If you are not that bothered about being that correct what about an after market barrel?

---

No, an after market barrel would be over the top for me. I believe the barrel is fine, it's just not as clean as I'd like. Rifling is strong and muzzle wear is not excessive.

Patrick made some good points. I believe I'm going to replace all the internals and items of equal wear/quality with Eddystone. Still a little undecided on the base plate and trigger guard. The difference in wear between the old and new is considerable. The new is nicely parkerized and essentially unblemished. The old is stained, down to bare metal, etc. I may hang on to them until I can find someone that needs those parts and has Eddystone parts of equal quality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aragorn243

I believe the barrel is fine, it's just not as clean as I'd like. Rifling is strong and muzzle wear is not excessive.

---

So shoot, clean, shoot, clean, shoot, clean...and enjoy!

Patrick made very good points, but as best as I know the WWI plants did not swap anything. They were direct competition with each other and did no swapping. After WWI SA did a huge re-build program and many parts were swapped out in the early 1920/22 timeframe. WWII then saw parts swapping again, so "correcting" an M1917 is just fine by me.

After reviewing the price of replacement parts, I've decided to swap out the good Eddystone stuff and leave the better non-Eddystone stuff on it. Hopefully, I'll be able to find comparable condition parts to swap with someone who needs them. $69 for a trigger guard? WOW.

So that leaves me needing a trigger guard, floor plate, and trigger. I have an excellent condition parkerized Winchester trigger guard, an excellent parkerized Remington floor plate and either a Remington or Winchester trigger, both appear to be blued.

The Eddystone parts I received from Springfield Sporters were either OEM or very nicely refinished.
You might try them.
Springfield Sporters, Inc.
The parts are segregated on top of the list as ERA (Eddystone),REM (Remington), etc.
Make sure when ordering to specify Eddystone parts.

D. :cheers:

If you find a pure 1917, its a fake. I have yet to see a pure one (maybe in a museum and the ones taken off the line for presentation to various

Your gun and up to you, I don't think historic value is ruined, not a lot to start with, no one knows where parts were swapped. Barrel condition is going to drive the value anyway (as is finish)

In response to Patrick.

In fact the parts interchange delayed production by a significant time when rifles were in extremely short supply (non existent in many cases of training) It was a negative. P14s did not have that interchange capability. The exchange ability while convenient latter on overall was probably a significant negative. More guns would have also meant more spare parts and far less need to fudge them back together rather than just issue a new gun and send the messed up one to a rear area where they could be torn down, spare parts created (or new spares installed)

Factories did not swap parts, period. They came out all OEM.

Yes they did get mixed up not only in the field (where the interchange did make it easier) but all the re-arsenal work they went through did that as well.

Quote:

---

The major feature of M1917 production was that, as far as possible, all parts from 3 different manufacturers should be interchangeable. So no US armourer fixing up M1917s would have worried much about matching E's or R's or W's. Part interchangeablilty was intended to be used to produce as many rifles as possible as fast as possible in the factory, and to keep up the maximum availability of functioning rifles in the field. Especially for the M1917, the snooty collector's attitude of "it's not all matching therefore not original" is historically incorrect. See Ferris "United States Rifle Model of 1917".

As to "history", nobody can tell now whether the parts were used in the factory, because delivery shortages required taking parts from one of the other factories, or "officially" swapped by a US armorer at a later date, or even swapped by you or me five minutes ago.

So go all-Eddy if you like. It's irrelevant for shooting anyway

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RC20

If you find a pure 1917, its a fake.

---

My unissued 11/18 Eddystone isn't fake. They ARE out there!!!

I stand corrected, correct that to any issued 1917 will not be true with all OEM components.

Unissued is pretty much the same as a museum piece, not typical thats for sure.

I have never seen one, so certainly pretty rare and I don't even know what you would pay for one, beyond my means I am sure.

Good to know there are some out there not in a museum.

In response to the response:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RC20

... In response to Patrick.
In fact the parts interchange delayed production by a significant time when rifles were in extremely short supply (non existent in many cases of training) It was a negative. P14s did not have that interchange capability. The exchange ability while convenient latter on overall was probably a significant negative. More guns would have also meant more spare parts and far less need to fudge them back together rather than just issue a new gun and send the messed up one to a rear area where they could be torn down, spare parts created (or new spares installed)

Factories did not swap parts, period. They came out all OEM.

Yes they did get mixed up not only in the field (where the interchange did make it easier) but all the re-arsenal work they went through did that as well.

---

If you now read my post carefully - i.e. what I actually wrote, and do not read anything between the lines:

The major feature of M1917 production was that, as far as possible, all parts from 3 different manufacturers should be interchangeable. So no US armourer fixing up M1917s would have worried much about matching E's or R's or W's. Part interchangeablilty was intended to be used to produce as many rifles as possible as fast as possible in the factory, and to keep up the maximum availability of functioning rifles in the field. Especially for the M1917, the snooty collector's attitude of "it's not all matching therefore not original" is historically incorrect. See Ferris "United Stateshttps://www.milsurps.com/autolinker/images/link6.gif Rifle Model of 1917".

As to "history", nobody can tell now whether the parts were used in the factory, because delivery shortages required taking parts from one of the other factories, or "officially" swapped by a US armorer at a later date, or even swapped by you or me five minutes ago.

So go all-Eddy if you like. It's irrelevant for shooting anyway."

I did not claim that parts were exchanged in the factory, as I have no knowledge of that, just that it could have happened, as a high degree of interchangeability was intended. This aim was indeed a cause of delay in running up to full series production, as (if I recall correctly, but see Ferris) Winchester had some difficulty in meeting the interchangeabilty requirements.

So if you take regard of my use of words such as "should" and "could", there is no difference between me and other contributors.

Now as to another tricky word: unissued. I too have an 11/18 Eddy, in what I call, for lack of a better expression, "Arsenal mint". Naughty of me to use the word mint, I know. Suggestions for improvement will be taken seriously.

I have a couple of other rifles in this condition, which is (as far as I can tell) never used by regular troops, i.e. never issued to an individual soldier to be kicked around and dropped in the mud etc, but with a perfect interior - bore and working surfaces effectively new and a lot of dings caused by being shunted around arsenals over many decades until being sold as surplus.

So "unissued" in the sense of never leaving the arsenal, but they did, of course, leave the factory, which otherwise would have not received payment from the accepting agencies!

Mediating between RC20 and Warpig, I offer the following thoughts for discussion:

- The M1917 was a mass-production item, produced in 3 factories simultaneously.
- In November 1918 the production was reaching its end.
- So there was no need for anyone to preserve a "sample" at the factory.
- 11-18 marked rifles probably did not actually reach army arsenals until the war was over.
- As a result, they were in some (many???) cases never issued to a fighting unit, but remained in store for decades.
- Most (just about all???) will have been "dinged" by being shunted around on pallets etc.
- With a rifle in perfect internal condition, such as my Eddy, it is tempting to "improve" the exterior to match the pristine interior.
- Especially when there are plenty of people with plenty of money to pay an enormous premium for a factor that is irrelevant for shooting.

So for end-of-war production I conclude:
- "Unissued" in the sense of never left the factory - extremely unlikely.
- "Unissued" in the sense of never reached an soldier on active service - quite possible for types viewed as non-standard for future requirements.
- "Unissued" in the sense of "perfect exterior condition with no handling/transport marks - very, very unlikely.


Readers will note my avoidance of absolute words such as "always" or "impossible", despite the temptation!

Any thoughts on this?

Patrick - you had me at "shoot. clean. shoot. clean - enjoy!" :)

Aragorn & Warpig, let's meet to compare dings, shine, marks and shots fired in '15 - I for one need time away from computers and such...

Just saying! (Sincerely)

Patrick:

As far as I am concerned Warping and I do not need mediation.

He corrected me and I am good with that, no issues being informed I am wrong.

As for the nuanced part about parts could have been interchanged in the factory seems a bit of a red hearing.

Nothing I have heard or read indicates that, the logic of production and how they went about it says not. Suggesting it to me leaves it an open question and unless there is actual evidence I would say it is closed.

As I recall only the bayonets were shared (between Remington and Eddystone)

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by l1a1 breakdown

Aragorn & Warpig, let's meet to compare dings, shine, marks

---

Ok, but I must warn you first. My profile file picture is 20yrs old in reality I'm fat an hairy, I smoke 2 packs a day and I drink too much!!!...:mad smile:.."it's a shame really..:("

Maybe we can get together at one of the shows, after the holidays of course..:thup:

I generally go to the Harrisburg and Philly area shows. Not always but usually.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Patrick Chadwick

In response to the response:


If you now read my post carefully - i.e. what I actually wrote, and do not read anything between the lines:

The major feature of M1917 production was that, as far as possible, all parts from 3 different manufacturers should be interchangeable. So no US armourer fixing up M1917s would have worried much about matching E's or R's or W's. Part interchangeablilty was intended to be used to produce as many rifles as possible as fast as possible in the factory, and to keep up the maximum availability of functioning rifles in the field. Especially for the M1917, the snooty collector's attitude of "it's not all matching therefore not original" is historically incorrect. See Ferris "United Stateshttps://www.milsurps.com/autolinker/images/link6.gif Rifle Model of 1917".

As to "history", nobody can tell now whether the parts were used in the factory, because delivery shortages required taking parts from one of the other factories, or "officially" swapped by a US armorer at a later date, or even swapped by you or me five minutes ago.

So go all-Eddy if you like. It's irrelevant for shooting anyway."

I did not claim that parts were exchanged in the factory, as I have no knowledge of that, just that it could have happened, as a high degree of interchangeability was intended. This aim was indeed a cause of delay in running up to full series production, as (if I recall correctly, but see Ferris) Winchester had some difficulty in meeting the interchangeabilty requirements.

So if you take regard of my use of words such as "should" and "could", there is no difference between me and other contributors.

Now as to another tricky word: unissued. I too have an 11/18 Eddy, in what I call, for lack of a better expression, "Arsenal mint". Naughty of me to use the word mint, I know. Suggestions for improvement will be taken seriously.

I have a couple of other rifles in this condition, which is (as far as I can tell) never used by regular troops, i.e. never issued to an individual soldier to be kicked around and dropped in the mud etc, but with a perfect interior - bore and working surfaces effectively new and a lot of dings caused by being shunted around arsenals over many decades until being sold as surplus.

So "unissued" in the sense of never leaving the arsenal, but they did, of course, leave the factory, which otherwise would have not received payment from the accepting agencies!

Mediating between RC20 and Warpig, I offer the following thoughts for discussion:

- The M1917 was a mass-production item, produced in 3 factories simultaneously.
- In November 1918 the production was reaching its end.
- So there was no need for anyone to preserve a "sample" at the factory.
- 11-18 marked rifles probably did not actually reach army arsenals until the war was over.
- As a result, they were in some (many???) cases never issued to a fighting unit, but remained in store for decades.
- Most (just about all???) will have been "dinged" by being shunted around on pallets etc.
- With a rifle in perfect internal condition, such as my Eddy, it is tempting to "improve" the exterior to match the pristine interior.
- Especially when there are plenty of people with plenty of money to pay an enormous premium for a factor that is irrelevant for shooting.

So for end-of-war production I conclude:
- "Unissued" in the sense of never left the factory - extremely unlikely.
- "Unissued" in the sense of never reached an soldier on active service - quite possible for types viewed as non-standard for future requirements.
- "Unissued" in the sense of "perfect exterior condition with no handling/transport marks - very, very unlikely.


Readers will note my avoidance of absolute words such as "always" or "impossible", despite the temptation!

Any thoughts on this?

---

I read somewhere that over 800,000 went to Europe and another 300,000 plus or so were on barges as backups. I forgot where I read that though. I have a parkerized Eddystone around 215,000 with an excellent 11-17 barrel the production chart dates the receiver to late January early February and the barrel is an 11/17 which pre dates the receiver. I know that all the serialization and production charts are just not an exact science. My Eddystone also has a Remington stock yes it was an arsenal makeover, and who knows what happened to it in private ownership hands ? There are so many people like the poster who started this thread who are swapping out parts trying to get the rifle back to how it should have looked when it left the production line. In reality no one will ever really know. I love the Eddystone it to me is the model that symbolizes the M1917 because the factory was a locomotive manufacturer and to the best of my limited knowledge Eddystone never made another rifle after the war. Enjoy and build your rifle to what suites you best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bearcat132

factory was a locomotive manufacturer

---

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.

For anybody interested. These are what's left of the Eddystone arsenal.
Attachment 58877
Attachment 58878

We're always interested...it looks like a cattle barn.

In "Americas Munitions 1917-1918" Report of Benedict Crowell, The Assistant Secretary of War, Director of Munitions Government Printing Office 1919

he writes on the subject of small arms production specifically the M1917 Rifle. ( page 182)

"In the second place, standardization is essential to great speed in production. If one plant producing rifles encounters a shortage in any of the parts of the gun, it can send to another plant and secure a supply of these parts, a favorable condition in manufacture that is impossible if the weapon has not been standardized."

Now it may have never occurred in actual practice but there it is in writing, in the words of the guy responsible, what the production people were actually considering at the time.

Regards,

Jim

Do they have a historical marker of any type at the Eddystone plant?

No marker, most people around here are clueless of the history of that sight and of many others in the area including Frankford arsenal, Philadelphia shipyard, etc. The buildings are on Kimberly Clarke property, they make s#&t paper and paper towels at this plant. Right next door is Harrahs casino and a state prison,,sad. I can get close once in a while because KC uses liquid CO2 for fire suppression on the roll cutters.

The Remington Society has produced some very detailed articles:

This is a link to "The Eddystone Story". I think it may have listed before -probably should be a "sticky".
Remington Society of America - journals/Eddystone

Jim

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.

A. The state of Delaware has very favorable corporate tax rates. So, Remington arms of Delaware was incorporated in the state of Delaware, with the corporate office in the state, probably Wilmington. Even today, most banks are headquartered there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WarPig1976

A. The state of Delaware has very favorable corporate tax rates. So, Remington arms of Delaware was incorporated in the state of Delaware, with the corporate office in the state, probably Wilmington. Even today, most banks are headquartered there.

---

Been away a while but had to jump in . All I know is that the name on the receiver of my M1917 is Eddystone not Remington. The rifles were built by employees not employed directly by Remington. If it was a separate company I really do not have any proof either way , maybe in a way like Pontiac was to General Motors. I am sure taxes and laws and most of all profit had some hand in it. But what Wardog76 really failed to mention is what else was manufactured in Eddystone PA .......and that was Jennifer Anniston ! I love my "EDDYSTONE" and I do not really care who or what was the overall hierarchy of production other than it's historical perspective.

I read an interesting old story in philly.com about an ammunition explosion on Balwin locomotive property. I forgot that Eddystone, Winchester and Remington also produced the Pattern 14 rifles for Great Britain until converted to M1917's . It is an interesting story but I cut and pasted this snippet which states what Baldwin owned and was producing during WW1


"The Eddystone Ammunition plant was on the property of the Baldwin Locomotive Works, just south of Industrial Highway near the present site of the Philadelphia Electric Co. power station alongside the river.
Baldwin owned the munitions plant, along with two other plants for Enfield rifles and armored tanks for American forces. Although little was said publicly about the operation, for security reasons, more than 10,000 people worked in the plants."

The Mystery Lives Where 139 Perished - Philly.com

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/i...y5q6k7Jq-GEbSA

---------- Post added at 07:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:54 PM ----------

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WarPig1976

For anybody interested. These are what's left of the Eddystone arsenal.
Attachment 58877
Attachment 58878

---

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/i...y5q6k7Jq-GEbSA

Very interesting. Thanks for posting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bearcat132

But what Wardog76 really failed to mention is what else was manufactured in Eddystone PA .......and that was Jennifer Anniston !

---

Wasn't part of the discussion. Since you brought it up here's some more famous people from Delaware county Pennsylvania.

John Morton signer of the Declaration. Tina Fey. Todd Rundgen "who by the way mother was good friends with", Jim Croce. Jamie Kennedy. Danny Bonaduce. Jeff Labar from the 80's hair band Cinderella, I went to High school with his younger brother and his Pop was my school bus driver. New England Patriot Todd Rucci who was my neighbor growing up on Clover lane in Upper Darby. Though Jamaican he moved to Upper Darby young, Seattle Seahawk Floyd Weatherburn who I played high school football with. He won H.S All American in our junior year went on to Penn State and then the NFL,,,dude was huge!!!. Didn't know about the Aniston link though.
It's a small world isn't it. There's more I just can't think of them off the top of my head....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WarPig1976

Wasn't part of the discussion. Since you brought it up here's some more famous people from Delaware county Pennsylvania.

John Morton signer of the Declaration. Tina Fey. Todd Rundgen "who by the way mother was good friends with", Jim Croce. Jamie Kennedy. Danny Bonaduce. Jeff Labar from the 80's hair band Cinderella, I went to High school with his younger brother and his Pop was my school bus driver. New England Patriot Todd Rucci who was my neighbor growing up on Clover lane in Upper Darby. Though Jamaican he moved to Upper Darby young, Seattle Seahawk Floyd Weatherburn who I played high school football with. He won H.S All American in our junior year went on to Penn State and then the NFL,,,dude was huge!!!. Didn't know about the Aniston link though.
It's a small world isn't it. There's more I just can't think of them off the top of my head....

---

We can stray off topic occasionaly we are only human . I knew an NCO who hails from that area from my service days we were stationed in old now closed Ft Ord , CA. always wondered what has happened to him . And all of the Eddystone alumni you mentioned meet my seal of approval in the good egg category except for that Marxist liberal O*ama loving kvetch Tina Fey. Wardog76 I would love to own a metal detector where you live there is history underneath that soil. Now back on topic my Eddystone as best I can deduce was arsenal refurbished in the early 20's and probably in storage until it hit the civilian sector. It is always an honor to own a part of American History and an Eddystone marked rifle to me exemplifies the WW1 era.

If I may stick my oar in here, please use this link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vauclain_compound

Samuel Vauclain may not have been a firearms designer, but he obviously had a good engineering background and would have been conversant with the requirements of industrial-scale precision manufacturing. As a steam locomotive fan I knew about Vauclain compounds decades before I ever heard of Eddystone.

Sorry, correct that - I had heard of Eddystone, but it was a lighthouse!

Not your typical suit.

Fun trivia... During the cold war there was a semi famous ship built in the 70's for a secret purpose right next door to the arsenal. By this time we weren't letting any Russians run around!! Hint>> The hull number wasn't K-129.

My grandfather, two uncles and my father where welders who worked on it. All sworn to secrecy.

Nobody? Ok, here's the answer.

GSF Explorer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WarPig1976

I think I'd go all Eddystone too. That way when you ponder the thing that little voice in your head won't say "yeah but its mismatched" you know what I mean? As you find parts in better shape you'll replace 'em but you'll already be ahead of the game. My 2c's

---

That "little voice in your/my head" has saved me on more than one occasion, but on the flip side has caused me more grief at times than I can recall. OP I'd change the parts and never look back.

Rob

Funny thing that voice, always arguing with mine...:)

Wow this thread was five months ago? Time flies. What'd you windup doing Aragorn?

I ended up not doing anything. I decided to go with the better parts on the better rifle which was pretty much where they were. The other parts just didn't see to fit appearance wise so I decided to ignore the manufacturer. Offered the old one up for a few trades but no one has bitten yet.

I had swapped out a few of the small parts that looked to be in the same condition but these were all interior parts.