1921 Buttstock On Evilbay

[giantpanda4]

Link below.

 

Has 3988 stamped on all 3 pieces. Should have the Rem anchor on the wood as well, right?

 

My 1928 buttplate has the same type of numbers stamped in it. Not on the stock or release lever metal. Were 1928s ever stamped? And mine looks like it is got two stamps - one over the other. Someday I will figure out the pictures and post it.

 

I also thought 1921 release lever buttons were nickel or otherwise different color than later 1928s, right?

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...AMEWA%3AIT&rd=1

 

Lotta money. And this guy buys a lot on ebay for big money... now he is selling out??? http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/ph34r.gif

[gijive]

MIke,

 

That isn't a Colt butt stock, it's an early WWII butt stock probably from a Savage gun. The Colt butt stocks were not numbered on the attaching slide, just the butt plate and stock. Yes, the latching device should be nickel colored.

 

I remember that guy buying everything he could on Ebay a few years ago. He'd buy it, regardless of price, and snipe every auction with outrageous bids. He probably paid too much for it, so he's trying to recoup his losses. http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[John Jr]

Even if it was Remington wood, that freaking $1,200 buy it now price is absurd.

 

http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/blink.gif

[philasteen]

http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/huh.gif

[Arthur Fliegenheimer]

If you scroll to the bottom of the ad you will see where he included my comment to him and his reply.

 

gijive,

 

I was going to mention his history on ebay out bidding everyone on TSMG stuff with no rhyme or reason in my email, but his current auction pretty much reveals the error of his ways.

[gijive]

Arthur,

 

Do you know what he is talking about with the reference to the "R" on the stock latch? The "R" he refers to may only be a contractor's code, which appears on some WWII production slide attachments and latches. It probably is the more common "P" on the latch and he is imagining that it is an "R". http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/wink.gif The only place an "R" appears on the Colt/Remington butt stocks is on the inside of the butt plate. He's determined to find an uninformed buyer for that stock.

[Arthur Fliegenheimer]

gijive,

 

I have no idea what the WWI reference to "R" on the stock is about. Maybe this is one of those super "rare" 1918 Colt TSMG buttstocks? Since the pic with a closeup of this "R" is the one he wants interested bidders to email him for, I would Hazard County a guess something is up with it. But what about his response that not all Colt/Remington stock latches are nickel? Considering the stock went through a major refinish, he senses that it feels like a Colt stock........OK.

[Arthur Fliegenheimer]

Bingo! But it is still somewhat confusing in that Colt Navy stocks do not have WWII swivels, nor numbered latches. Did DR use an original Remington/Colt stock and then refinished it, removed the anchor, and added the wrong swivel? Would he do that? Why would he use WWII numbered and blued latches if this was all original only refinished? Or is the whole deal actually WWII Savage? In other words, did DR sell these as original, merely refinished, Colt Navy complete buttstocks, or as WWII Savage buttsotcks posing as Colt/Remington Navy ones?

 

I had seen these "Colt Navy 1928 Buttstocks, All matching numbers" advertised in his catalog, sans photo, for $200. At that time, DR didn't describe them as being refinished. I was wondering where he would get such a supply of truly scarce correct Navy buttstocks with offset Enfield swivels that appeared in his catalogs as far back as 1991, and maybe further, right up until a few years ago. After seeing "antonia 2's" stock, I think the riddle is solved. They are actually early Savage. But he also advertised "Savage 1928 Buttstocks (early style-identical to Colt) V.G," for $150 in the same catalog. So how did DR distinguish between them?

 

But does DR inscribe his "R" only on parts he makes or on all things sold? If the frame latches are of his own manufacture, did he believe that Colt/Remington stocks had matching serial numbered latches?

 

OR.....Is it "antonia2" who has confused the two stocks DR offered for sale and decided to err on the side of eccentric economic envy?

[gijive]

Lionhart and Arthur,

 

I too saw the stocks advertised in Doug's catalogue for several years. They are obviously early Savage numbered buttstocks, not Colt/Remington. I'm sure Doug knows the difference. The Colt/Remington buttstocks will not accept a WWII milled swivel if the inletted area was done durring the Colt Thompson era. Arther, as you pointed out the Enfield type swivel was used on the Colt guns and has a smaller base. Those are WWII buttstocks pure and simple. If I remeber correctly Doug advertised them as being refinished.

 

Maybe he did stamp an R for Richardson on them after refurbishing them?

[1921A]

ebay Colt/Navy butt stock?

 

This looks wacky to me. Except for the wood itself, nothing looks like or is marked like a "Colt" stock. I agree with most of you - this looks to be an early Savage stock and hardware. I've owned and examined a lot of Colt 21s and not one of them ever had an "R" stamped anywhere on the wood or metal. In this case maybe the "R" stands for "RONG."

 

I have several early Savage 1928 stocks. All of them have a number stamped on the stock and the butt plate like the Colt. Of the "original" issue non-cross bolt '28 stocks, the only ones I've seen without numbering are the "service replacement" stocks. I'm not sure if this a coincidence or if they were all numbered up to a point in the production run.

 

We know the Colt/Remington stocks were not intended to be numbered to the guns. The use of this numbering seems to be nothing more than a "craftsman's" aid to match parts that needed to be fitted, disassembled, finished and then reassembled. This is still a common technique. I could be wrong - it wouldn't be the first time, but it makes as much sense as some other theorys.

 

I've kept several original Colt stocks - one has a very unusual feature. It has a "round" sling swivel. This one came from a Navy overstamp that had the horizontal forend and weird sling attached to the butt by a snap. The blue finish and fit suggest it might be original to the gun.

 

I'd post pictures of some of these but I'll be damned if I can figure out how to do it. If somebody wants them I can e-mail them.

 

1921A

 

 

 

[gijive]

Ron,

 

Email them to me, I'll post them for you.

[Arthur Fliegenheimer]

gijive,

 

I figured DR also must have known they were early Savage buttstocks and hardware (yet he did also believe those XX rd mags were one of a kind, see other thread) since in the same catalog the next item down are the Savage early style complete buttstocks for $50 less than the advertised "Colt" ones. He also says they are "identical to the Colt stocks."

 

If they are "identical" how did he determine which was which? If the swivels are the same, blued latches instead of nickel, and no anchor, then something is amiss.

 

DR also stated in this early catalog that, "All parts are new or excellent used condition unless otherwise stated." DR makes no mention that these stocks are refinished/refurbished by him or anyone else. In subsequent catalogs he does say "as new reconditioned condition." This is a distinction that would be of interest to the collector buyer.

 

 

1921A,

 

My Navy stock has anchor, rough offset Enfield swivel with "E" on smaller than WWII base plate above and to right of rear screw. If DR had a bunch of these, and maybe even your version, buttstocks I sure wish he had pictures of them in his old catalog for reference.

[gijive]

Lionhart and Arthur,

 

I believe some of the very early Savage made guns utilized left over Colt era parts. Maybe they had many leftover butt plates from the Colt guns that had the R stamped on them. I haven't seen an R stamped on a latch or slide on a Colt/Remington stock, only on the inside of the butt plate. The hand numbering on the stocks and butt plates on Colt guns is a larger font style than that of the numbered Savage stocks. The stampings are smaller on the many Savage stocks I have examined. The pictures on the Ebay auction appear to be the smaller stampings that Savage used.

[Arthur Fliegenheimer]

QUOTE

The Markings in which everyone here is talking about, was on my Stock as well, including the "R". At the time, and I believe this still, is that these Stocks were not of WW2 Production, but slightly before, perhaps for the Savage Commercial Thompsons, produced for them, by Remington, thus the "R" Stamping. There was No Anchor Stamping, but may have vanished during the Refinishing Process. But the overall look, and feel, felt very much like a Colt Stock, and not that of WW2 Manufacture.

Devlin

 

Since Auto-Ord-Corp had Savage making TSMG's as of 1940, whether they be of the early "Commercial" variety or later for Lend Lease or the U.S. military, they are both of the WWII era. But this does not explain how DR describes the Colt Navy complete stocks as "identical" to the early Savage complete stocks in his catalog. Since DR has recently posted here, perhaps he can lay to rest whether the "R" is his or Remington's and what was/were the difference(s) between the Colt and Savage stocks he was selling.

[Arthur Fliegenheimer]

Devlin,

 

If they did then they completely changed their attention to detail. Looking at "antonia2's" inside buttplate, the area around the oil can latch is roughed out while on a Colt/Remington 21 or Navy stock it is smooth as a baby's business end. Now my Navy buttplate has only one "R" on the left side of the latch ears, but on my 1921 buttplate, there are two "R's," one on the left side ear and one below it on the actual plate.

 

Since Savage Commercials did use some surplus Colt parts, a Colt/Remington buttstock might also be attached. But did Savage get together with Remington to make completely new stocks and hardware for their TSMG's? One wonders why Remington would have given up on that soon to be very lucrative contract with U.S. entry into WWII looming?

[gijive]

Arthur,

 

I have two Colt/Remington buttstocks also. One has two "R's" as you describe and one has only one. Interesting; I believe, if memory serves, that the lower numbered buttstock has the two "R's" and the higher numbered one has one "R". Is that the case with your two guns?

 

If so, apparently they ceased marking the component parts as production progressed.

[Arthur Fliegenheimer]

gijive,

 

You are correct, sir! Where is this cool minutia info mentioned in any of the periodicals floating around out there?

[Arthur Fliegenheimer]

Devlin,

 

Anything is possible, but until DR can shed some light on my questions (although who knows when he will return to the board again) I am befuddled why all of his Navy stocks are sans anchors and Enfield swivels? Sure refinishing could remove the anchor if the person doing the refinishing was indifferent to such things, but as you surmised, WWII swivels might have been added in 1940's or 1990's(?) to a (now) unmarked buttstock, that may or may not have been of Remington manufacture, or was of 1940 manufacture, and, therefore, not in any way related to the 1928 Colt Navy stock.

 

How and where did DR happen to stumble across such a stash of strangely fitted out stocks, all of them refinished, and with blued latches and R's on their latches in addition to the usual ones found on the inside buttplates?

 

And since he described his "early" Savage stocks that he once had for sale as indistinguishable from the Colt Navy ones, I'm thinking what was the buyer getting for the extra $50 for the Navy ones?

 

If Savage/AO had contracted Remington in 12/39 to make brand new latches for their 19 year old stocks, or even brand new stocks, buttplates and latches (although Maguire surely got all the extra complete stocks from the Marcellus Thompson/Kane deal in 1939) whose latches were now (in 1940) sporting the Remington "R," why would they end their relationship with Savage/AO at the exact time the big orders were rolling in? In other words, if Maguire was willing to commit to Remington for new slides, why wouldn't he have them continue to make the complete stocks as well? Would Remington even bother with such a small order for a handful of latches?

 

And since gijive hit on the notion that as the serial number on the stocks got higher Remington was stamping their buttplates with one less "R," is it likely that in 1940 they were now adding an additonal "R" to their latches?

 

Since the only marking on the Colt/Remington 1921 wood is the anchor, even though not all left the factory so emblazoned, and a stash of all refinished (to explain the lack of anchor) stocks that were adapted for WWII Savage/AO TSMG's with milled or stamped regular swivels, and early WWII numbered and blued latches, then their origin is definitely in doubt. If only one of these DR "Navy" stocks still had the anchor at least we could be certain of the wood.

 

The only mystery is the "R" on the inside buttplate, as one would find on a Remington buttplate, and now the addition of the "R" on the latch where on the 15,000 Colt production TSMG's non appeared.

 

Maybe the "R" does stand for "Reject." But surely the font would have changed over the 19 year period, or maybe not. We need to see that damn "R" on antoniah2's buttplate and latch.

 

If DR's "R" is similar to Remington's "R" then this isn't going to help matters.

 

As far as milling marks inside the receiver, I don't see the connection with uneven crater like finishes around the inside of the buttplate trap door. The receiver is hollowed out, the door is just, or should be, a clean tapered hole. Did you ever see the stocks you purchased attached to the Colt TSMG they once belonged to, or were they always floating around loose when you found them?

[Arthur Fliegenheimer]

Wait, wait, wait. If Savage began acquiring most of Auto-Ordnance's tools and gages from Colt and REMINGTON in 1940, as Frank Iannamico states in his book, then it does seem likely that these "different" stocks were not of the 1921 Remington manufacture, but of 1940 Savage manufacture using Remington stamps, except for maybe the anchor stamp?.....Hummmm.......

 

But Frank goes on to say that in Janauary of 1942, AUTO-ORD acquired the machinery from Remington (not Savage, as stated at the beginning of the book) installed it in their Bridgeport plant, and turned out the parts themsleves. But Frank does not mention stocks, buttplates or latches, only bolts, extractors, ejectors and disconnectors.

 

Did Savage have Remington make new stocks in 1940 for them before Auto-Ord took complete control of Remington tools in 1/42? Or did Auto-Ord make the stocks using Remington tools in 1942? Or both?

 

[Arthur Fliegenheimer]

QUOTE

Again, at present, I believe these Stocks once owned/sold by DR are of 1920's production, later Modified by Savage to include the Later Swivel.

Devlin

 

Without further explanation from DR about the "R" marked latch. it is still accurate to conclude that if antoniah2's ebay stock is indeed one of the twelve advertised by DR to be a "Colt Navy" stock, and since the ebay stock serial number matches one listed in DR's "Colt Navy" ad, and there is no doubt about that, then in fact what DR advertised and sold under said description, as much as I would like to cut him some slack, were not strictly speaking Colt Navy stocks at all.

 

The only thing accomplished by taking a Remington stock, even if it was one of the original 1921/22 production date made ones, and chiseling out a portion of the bottom to accept a WII swivel that is larger and no way similar to a Navy one, even if this was done by Savage/AO (although who knows who did this modification), is to essentially ruin it as a Colt 1921 stock and completely disqualify it from being a true Colt Navy stock.

 

While DR didn't price these refinished functional complete stocks ($200-$350 over the years) as if they were collectible ones, it still isn't accurate to present them as "Colt Navy."

 

I don't think antoniah2 figured on this when he went for a starting bid of $400 on his auction, never mind his $1200 sci-fi figure for a stock whose true identity has been erased from refinishing, replacement latch hardware, and irreversible wrong sling mount modification. The fact that no one bid pretty much bears this out.

 

But can you contact the collector you sold your new in the wrapper complete set of 1921 Remington TSMG wood and see if he would send you pics? Assuming they are in the same condition as they were in 1992, I would like to see what the actual color of the wood was before being subjected to 80 years of handling and exposure to the elements. Even the wood on the supposed #1 Colt TSMG in America #167 owned by Terry Williams doesn't convey the condition described in your post.

[Arthur Fliegenheimer]

Devlin,

 

Did you notice the difference in the indentation of the latch button area on your DR stock? As DR hypothesizes, his three-way numbered stocks, while admittedly not Colt Navy ones, might have been manufactured in 1935 for some modified TSMG. This would account for:

 

1) the lack of anchor

2) the blued latch

3) the numbered latch

4) the WWII style oval latch indentation.

5) The different size number font on the wood itself.

 

It is much more than just the addition of the WWII type (or Springfield type) swivel that separates these stocks from the 1921 Colt/Remington types.

 

Did the pristine Colt/Remington wood you purchased back in 1990 include the hardware for the buttstock?

[Arthur Fliegenheimer]

Devlin,

 

Since antoniah2's ebay DR stock slide has a matching number to the wood and buttplate, it is the same one DR sent him. The portion of the slide I am referring to that has the numbered part stamped on it is the actual slide metal and not the nickel (or blue in this case) spring latch mechanism. It is this numbered part that has the oval recessed area for the button that is not the same shape as Colt/Remington 1921 slides.

 

Did you know that the swivel on your DR stock was of Springfield manufacture at the time, or is this news to you since DR's post? I was wondering why you didn't mention the type of swivel before.

 

The fact that the guy you purchased your complete set of 1921 wood had two complete sets surely means that there was no shortage of replacement 1921 complete stocks to satisfy the demand back in the 20's & 30's. This is why I am perplexed why these "1935" type stocks exist at all when if the only thing needed to match a then ordered horizontal stock with swivel was the addition of a swivel for existing Remington buttsotcks. Why make different buttplates with different font numbers and different slides and refinish all these stocks when they were already unused or NOS?

 

Going by DR's new explanation for these mysterious non-Colt Navy stocks, would you pay $500 for these today?

[Arthur Fliegenheimer]

Devlin,

 

I've already considered that, but the DR stocks don't seem to fit into known Colt/Remington patterns. Judging from the number of anchor stocks I have examined, and the couple that I have in my possession that are bona fide Colt/Remington & Navy, the only difference that I found from stocks in the 1000 range up to stocks in the 8000 range is the absence of the second "R" on the inside buttplate. Aside from that, they have identical font sizes stamped into the wood and un- numbered, no "R" marked slides with nickel latches. I can't say exactly when the buttplates lost the additional "R," but perhaps at some point over the 5000 mark?

 

I've wondered about these DR stocks since I saw his ad over a dozen years ago. If I had purchased one thinking it would be correct as a replacement stock for a Colt Navy, I would have been at the least disappointed upon opening the package. I might have been put into the awkward position of antoniah2, who attempted (unsuccessfully) to get $100 less than what DR is currently selling them for today.

 

Perhaps if DR advertised them as "Colt/Hybrid Stocks," although I am not sure how unique, or even desirable, they are considering DR has/had at least a dozen of them at one time, then the buyer would be able to make a better determination as to how they would use said stock.

 

But since DR still has examples of these stocks a dozen years later, I'm thinking even in the climate of "Thompson Greed," Colt Navy (and 1921) collectors have eschewed the DR stocks for the peace of mind of anchors, nickel, larger thumb areas on the slide release and un-numbered slides.

[Arthur Fliegenheimer]

Devlin,

 

http://www.autoweapons.com/photos05/jul/1001thomp.html

 

Click on the above autoweapons ad link and scroll down to the last photo. This is the infamous reworked/refinished 1921 Colt that we know has WWII grips (or later), wrong barrel, wrong Cutts, and wrong unmarked buttstock with swivel (WWII era?) and showing the smaller thumb area around the slide button (not the button itself) not found on Remington marked stocks, but with a nickel latch, which might not be original to the slide.

 

This is a perfect example of not having the necessary components available to replace lost/broken/worn original parts to complete a restoration on a boat anchor. I wonder if the stock on this puppy is one of DR's?