Questions about Savage no.4 magazines

[mike webb]

Have a couple mags here I am wondering about. One is stamped with the superimposed L over B for Long Branch on the spine but has the boxed S for Savage on the follower. I read somewhere that Savage didn't make their own mag bodies. Is this true?
Second also has a boxed S marked follower but has a square font S on the spine. also has a 2BZ stamped on the spine. Are both mags proper for Savage built rifles? I wondered whether the S on the spine stood for Savage or perhaps Shirley?
Can post pics if required.

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[browningautorifle]

I wondered whether the S on the spine stood for Savage or perhaps Shirley?

M47/C (BSA Shirley). The "S" is Savage.

[mike webb]

Thanks, apparently Savage did produce their own magazines. I heard that LB supplied them with some hence the LB mag body with the boxed S follower. Safe to assume both were originally in Savage built rifles.

[browningautorifle]

pparently Savage did produce their own magazines. I heard that LB supplied them with some

If you look through the threads here long enough, you'll find testimony from Peter Laidler and others that worked on the rifles personally...that describe great piles of parts being used in the combined workshops of NATO and how "Parts is parts". Anything would be used anywhere. To imagine these rifles or parts are new after this long, we reparkerized or bead blasted and blued parts to refurbish them regularly and then matched them with whatever rifle they matched... Unless it's one of the mummy wrapped rifles, it's hard to say where it's been...

[mike webb]

I see your point. Only collectors would be concerned about "correct" parts. To an armourer or supply officer the only thing that mattered was serviceable rifles.

[browningautorifle]

Only collectors would be concerned about "correct" parts.

Not quite what I'm saying. Just because they're all the same maker doesn't make them correct. Sometimes it's just fantasy.

[CINDERS]

Even so if one buys a rifle and starts swapping bits and pieces to make it all matching then in reality its a bits'a as the only real way of having an all correct rifle would be a mum wrapped straight off the factory floor on the day it was made.
I brought bits for my 5MD 1916 Lithgow as it was missing a few key components namely the magazine and complete safety catch & sling, oiler/pull through etc so swapping out other smaller pieces in period correct was no big deal so now its is a bitsa but with 1916 period correct minor Lithgow parts.

[Simon P]

We brought in a large batch of wrapped No4 Mk2 rifles it to the UK a few years back, some had Long Branch Barrel Bands & two had Long Branch Mk1 Rear sights.

One customer moaned about the Long Branch rear sight and insisted I change it, as it couldn't possibly be correct, to keep the peace I obliged