ihc in the firearms business

[joe.mathias@domain.elided (joe mathias)]

>From joe.mathias
From: joe.mathias
Full-Name: joe mathias
To: ihc-digest@domain.elided
Subject: IHC in the firearms business
X-Status: Unsent

From: joe.mathias
Subject: IHC in the firearms business
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 12:47:03

TO: ihc-digest@domain.elided (ihc-digest)
RE: IHC rifle manufacturing

On 11/24, Don Bowen wrote:

>From: Don Bowen <donb@domain.elided>
>Subject: IHC and guns

>Guns do have a place in IHC discussions.  I am looking for an
>IHC M-1.  So far I have not found any locally and the only one I
>have heard of was way more than I want to spend.  Does anyone
>have a reference to books on the IHC M-1?

Scott Duffy has written some good reference books on the M-1
Garand, covering its development & adoption before 12/7/1941
through its replacement by the M-14 in the 1950's.  In
particular, look for his book(s) on post-WWII happenings.  He
also has written on Springfield Arsenal (in MA) activities after
WWII and there is mention in that book about the assistance
Springfield provided IHC, both in setting up M-1 production in
Evensville and in assisting the Evansville plant while IHC had
production up & running and later when it was winding down at the
end of the IHC contract.

------------------------------

On 11/24/97, Jim Grammer posted:

From: Jim Grammer <jimg@domain.elided>
Subject: RE: IH guns ramble

>So, on to the M1 carbine....I picked up a thread a long time
>back about how the IH rifles were the least favorite version of
>the M1, something to do with reliability problems IIRC. Any gun
>knowledgable lister want to comment? Seems hard to believe IH
>would have skimped on a War Department contract, so maybe(if
>true) it was an unfamiliarity with firearms manufacture?

Don't believe IHC ever had a contract for M-1 carbines (they were
probably too busy producing armored cars for the Army in WWII).

Because of the Korean War, the Army developed a severe shortage
of M-1 rifles in the early 1950's.  The only place producing them
when Korean War started was Springfield Arsenal, which was making
new M-1's & reconditioning used M-1's at a LOT smaller rate than
they did during WWII (with 2 & 3 shifts employed during WWII
years).

The government did get smart between WWI & WWII, and had the
government arsenals prepare lots of design drawings for use in a
war.  The drawings were to go to new contractors who may or may
not have produced firearms before the contract award.  The gov't
arsenal would act as a resource to the contractor, assisting them
to get into production by supplying all the needed engineering
diagrams, helping them acquire tooling (most of which belonged to
the gov't and would be returned to the gov't when the war was
won/the contract ended), and helping train the contractor's
quality control personnel.

When WWII rolled around, this plan went into effect and lots of
companies with little or no previous firearms manufacturing
experience got into the business (as examples, Singer -- of
sewing machines reknown, with no prior firearms business -- in
Elizabeth, NJ was given a pilot program prior to 12/7/41 to make
500 M1911A1 pistols, as a doublecheck that the M1911A1
engineering plans in storage for use in event of a war were OK,
and IBM made LOTS of M-1/M-2 carbines after the US got into
WWII).  The gov't got lots of work helping those with little
experience in firearms manufacturing get up to snuff LONG BEFORE
IHC got their contracts because of Korean War.  The first rifles
from IHC were delivered either right at the end of Korean War or
soon afterward.  The production line was at IHC's Evansville
plant, but I'm unsure if IHC made everything for the M-1 there or
obtained components from other IHC locations or from sub-
contractors.  At several points in time, Springfield Arsenal did
supply parts to Evansville, and Springfield also probably used
IHC parts on Springfield M-1's.  IHC parts also likely wound up
being used in post-Korean War depot repair/rebuilds of damaged or
old M-1 rifles, probably caused by unused IHC parts from the
contract being turned over to the gov't at the end of the
contract and later sent out to repair/rebuild programs ("parts is
parts").  Many IHC manufactured M-1's are still in "war reserve
storage" by the gov't, and every once in a while, when a civilian
who likes to participate in rifle matches applies for purchase of
his very-own M-1 Garand (for about $180, last time I checked), he
opens the box and finds he has a Garand made by IHC.

Prior to the end of the IHC contract for M-1 rifles, the US let
Italy join NATO and helped build its army by supplying Italy with
excess M-1 rifles leftover from WWII.  After IHC finished its
contract, the tooling was sold by IHC to Beretta, an Italian
gunmaker of long-standing.  Beretta made M-1's for the Italian
army (remember when the US Marine HQ in Beruit got bombed?  There
were lots of subsequent newsclips showing the Italian army
contingent there patrolling around the city, most of the troops
carrying Beretta-produced M-1's, as the army hadn't found enough
money to replace all the M-1's with the "product-improved"
Beretta BM-59 rifle and the 1970's-designed Beretta AR-70 rifle).
Many Beretta BM-59's used Beretta-manufactured M-1 parts as well
as IHC surplus M-1 parts purchased by or supplied to Beretta.

IHC made quite a few M-1's, and I bought one which was lots of fun
to shoot (it was a stock issue-type condition rifle, a "shooter",
not a match-grade rifle, and it had been sent overseas as aid to
who-knows-what-country and returned to the US before I purchased
it).  It wasn't pretty, but it always went BANG when I pulled the
trigger and it never failed me, so you won't hear me saying
IHC couldn't make a quality rifle.

By the time IHC got its contract, many parts of the M-1 had been
redesigned to use stamped and welded sheet metal components that
had been originally designed in the '30's as forged and milled
parts.  But the need to arm a 2 million man army for WWII forced
the gov't substitute less-expensive and less labor-intensive
techniques wherever it could during WWII, since demand always far
outpaced supply.  Nowadays, many M-1 collectors prefer M-1's with
milled and forged parts, partly because those pieces are older and
more scarce, when compared to M-1's made after changeovers in
manufacturing techniques to sheet metal stampings & welding.

Maybe that's the cause of the preference for other M-1's you ran
into!

IHC had not much of a different experience with problems,
compared to other non-traditional manufacturing companies that
got into the firearms business for the gov't in WWII, or compared
to TRW (who made M-1's for Korean War as well as M-14's
afterwards).  Harrington & Richardson made M-1's under Korean War
era contracts and later made M-14's, but that company,
theoretically, was firearms-experienced, so not a good comparison
to IHC.

Many IHC M-1's, after they entered the civilian firearms arena,
were converted to the NATO 7.62mmx51mm (which was a smaller (in
length) cartridge than the .30" caliber round the US army used
while it carried the Garand.  Most of these conversions were
"jerry-rigged" at best and proved unsatisfactory when actually
fired after "conversion."  That may also contribute to the
feelings you read about, but IHC had nothing to do with these
conversions, and the gov't experimented with a few and walked
away displeased.

Sometimes, in gov't service, as in places such as on amphibious
assault ships, the navy would have M-1's in their arms lockers
for issue to navy personnel.  But the ship also had several
hundred marines on board, and the marines (early on) had M-14's
as rifles and either M-15's or M-60's as squad level automatic
rifles/machine guns.  The ship had a shipload of 7.62mmx51mm
bullets for the marines, and it made some sense for the rifles
intended for use by navy personnel to use the same ammo (why
stock 2 different parts numbers, when you can use one for both?).
And, when the 7.62mmx51mm converted M-1's proved unreliable,
someone may have looked at what the navy personnel did with their
rifles and saw 99.9944% of the time, it was for rifle salutes,
and not a lot of nitty-gritty rifle war.  So, even though the
thingy didn't work too well, the navy kept the converted M-1's
after the marines replaced the M-14 with the M-16 (and an even-
smaller cartridge).

Many parts for the M-1 Garand are identical to the same part on a
military M-14 or a civilain M-1A, so you sometimes will find
mis-matched IHC parts on them.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Joe Mathias
joe.mathias@domain.elided

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Joe Mathias
joe.mathias@domain.elided
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^