|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 147
Campfire Member
|
OP
Campfire Member
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 147 |
There is a local man that says he has a Savage 1903 with a tube feed magazine, I thought the tubes came out with the 1914
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,928
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,928 |
1903's not only never were tube fed but I have never seen one stamped with a model number and I am reasonably sure they never were - so where does he get the idea it's a 1903? Ask if the tube is in the butt - might be a Winchester.
Gene
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 985
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 985 |
Go & check it out quickly I'll try to find the photo I have somewhere of a prototype tube feed Savage did, (The Link won't Dispaly it any more) I can't Remember what year of manufacture I did PM Rick a photo of one that came up in live auctioeers a year or so ago He may have saved a copy What I am saying is don't can it until you have seen it
Last edited by kiwi; 09/04/09.
One in the hand is better than two in the bush
Graham
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 15,619
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 15,619 |
Was the 1911 considered a tube-feed?
When it comes to choosing friends....I'm at an age where I'd rather have 4 quarters than 100 pennies.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 14,324
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 14,324 |
Ya, the 1911 would be a tube feed but I think what Kiwi is referring to was that prototype that had the tube roll around and up into the reciever. I remember pics of that gun but never saved any of them. Kinda bastardly looking thing, no wonder they never tried to market it, it looked like a half sucked milk dud.
24 hour sarcastic S.O.B.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 147
Campfire Member
|
OP
Campfire Member
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 147 |
I did not go look at it, after talking to him on the phone I saw a bad picture of it that the original seller sent to him, it looks like a 1914 but he says the barrel is marked Model 3C. He also said there were stamps reading 'RW 66' and Remington UMG also. Thats a Savage 22 bolt barrel on a pump? I thought it was a parts gun so I told him I would pass.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 14,324
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 14,324 |
Makes sense, I would to if it was that buggered up. The 3C barrel wouldn't bug me as much as the Rem parts on it would.......
24 hour sarcastic S.O.B.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 155
Campfire Member
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 155 |
I don't think that 1905 was a Savage prototype. I found the patent for it (825416). It was patented in 1906 by a P.W. Wisewell in Boston, Mass. I believe if it was a prototype it would have been assigned to Savage.
Pact
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 14,324
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 14,324 |
So did Savage steal that gun from Wisewell?
With the exception of the tube thats a classic 1905.
24 hour sarcastic S.O.B.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,928
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,928 |
Rebarreled and since 1903's and most 1914's were only marked on the barrels that's the only info they have to go by if they don't know the guns. Any one interested in a Springfield Model 83 clip fed pump? I don't understand the reason for rebarreling and not using a factory replacement - unless they no longer were available, but unmarked replacemnts should not have cost that much. The barrel would have needed to be turned and threaded and couldn't have been real cost effective considering effect on the value of the gun. PS this gun has a great bore.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 155
Campfire Member
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 155 |
I believe the 1905 is Wisewells patent model.
Gene you need a barrel for that one?
Pact
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,928
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,928 |
Pact, I have a barrel but it has the wrong barrel stamping for the serial number range (barrel says patent applied should have 1906 patent for this gun)- I really don't want to do that without marking it somehow, that way I don't put a gun out that might screw up someone trying to gather usable data on these. I have been collecting data and parts swapping like that would sure screw up my data. (whats holding me up the most is not the finding of parts but finding the time and ambition!!)
On the patents, that Steven prototype pump I have never had the patents assigned to Stevens, I think that it probable that they built prototypes when possible before buying a patent and this would also be possibly advantagous to the inventor because he could go to someone else if they decided not to make it.
Gene
Last edited by GeneB; 09/04/09. Reason: clarified barrel stamp info
Gene
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 985
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 985 |
Thanks Mad Dog That is the one I was thinking of. I was a bit off on the date But remembered it was early. I think your discription was a bit on the gental side but it is great what people with imagination can dream up Thanks for posting the pic's I'll save them this time Cheers Graham
One in the hand is better than two in the bush
Graham
|
|
|
|
390 members (1Longbow, 17CalFan, 260madman, 1lesfox, 2500HD, 160user, 37 invisible),
1,829
guests, and
995
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,191,064
Posts18,463,379
Members73,923
|
Most Online11,491 Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|