Pre-WWII vs post WWII quality difference?

Posted by Jay Magruder on May 10, 2012, 6:50 pm
71.35.180.253

Is there any difference between pre and post WWII guns? My apologies if this is a dumb question. I am seeing what look like good post war guns, but looks may be dceiving? Any thoughts?

Re: Pre-WWII vs post WWII quality difference?

Posted by David Williamson on May 10, 2012, 7:41 pm, in reply to "Pre-WWII vs post WWII quality difference?"
174.49.147.138

They were all good, but, as the years went by labor costs and everything associated to it went up also. Some of the earlier guns in my opinion, the pre-1912 guns were the nicest made as to quality.

Re: Pre-WWII vs post WWII quality difference?

Posted by Tom Martin on May 11, 2012, 7:47 am, in reply to "Pre-WWII vs post WWII quality difference?"
98.16.95.86

I think it is hard to give a definitive answer to your question. Once the design of the guns had stabilized around 1910, all the guns were made to the same design and on the same machinery until the end of production in 1950. There were some cost cutting measures taken over the years, such as coarser checkering,flat top checkering rather than pointed (saved $.10 per gun)and different rib matting. If you are comparing a field grade gun of the late 1930's to a gun of the late 1940's I think you will be hard pressed to find any quality differences because they were built to the same plans, by the same men, on the same machinery. Just my opinion.

Re: Pre-WWII vs post WWII quality difference?

Posted by Steve Arnett on May 11, 2012, 7:49 am, in reply to "Re: Pre-WWII vs post WWII quality difference?"
65.188.174.186

I think the most important factor in answering your question is your intention for the gun. If you plan to buy a shooter, I don't think you'll find much difference in quality. I have a 1946 16 ga. that is a great gun to carry hunting and shoot clays with. It is a Featherweight frame, as I think all Marlin era guns are, and weighs 7 lb. (with added spacers and Pachmayr Decelerator pad). I believe all the Marlin-era guns made in Fulton also had the "Improved) high solid rib (Single Sighting Plane). I think this is an advantage in shooting, too. If original appearance and other collector factors are important, I think the earlier the gun, the nicer they are. Many will also contend that there was a "break" in quality in the post-1913 guns. The market is a pretty efficient barometer of how important this is. My $0.02 worth.

Re: Pre-WWII vs post WWII quality difference?

Posted by Tom Archer on May 11, 2012, 2:35 pm, in reply to "Re: Pre-WWII vs post WWII quality difference?"
173.186.25.4

Tom Martin is correct, the only changes made to the Smith gun after acquisition of the gunworks by Marlin were in final finishes; the metal hardening process was changed from bone charcoal to cyanide, a faster barrel and small parts bluing process was adapted, and stock shapes were changed a bit (later stocks are thicker in the wrist area for instance). But these late period changes are far more evident on low grade Marlin era guns than the high grades; I personally don't see that "short cuts" were ever taken on the high-grade Smith guns produced during the Marlin era. As to quality, my personal observations are that the finest fitted and finished Smith guns ever made, looking at a production period in its entirety, were those produced during the Syracuse period.

Re: Pre-WWII vs post WWII quality difference?

Posted by Tom Salzer on May 14, 2012, 6:38 pm, in reply to "Pre-WWII vs post WWII quality difference?"
173.48.190.46

IMHO a higher percent of prewar guns were carefully crafted and had nicely figured and finished wood. That being said, many post war guns are absolutely gorgeous, especially in the higher grades.

Re: Pre-WWII vs post WWII quality difference?

Posted by Patriot on May 15, 2012, 2:16 pm, in reply to "Re: Pre-WWII vs post WWII quality difference?"
24.14.160.134

Only draw back to the high rib was a few added ounces. But, I do have a 1946 16 28" with a pad 14" lop that weighs 6 lb 13 oz. Wasn't it around 1939 with the new high rib that they were supposed to have beefed up the stock head a little. Note especially the stock head strips on photo trail. The 1921 16 (average thickness .085 and the 1945 16 (average thickness .129. http://www.picturetrail.com/sfx/album/view/17090409 As years went by the standard checkering area also shrunk.

Re: Pre-WWII vs post WWII quality difference?

Posted by Steve Arnett on May 15, 2012, 3:39 pm, in reply to "Re: Pre-WWII vs post WWII quality difference?"
65.188.174.186

The fences (or breach balls) on my 1946 16 ga. are also squared off on their perimeter, rather than the nicely rounded ones on earlier guns. Don't know when or why this was changed. I think it would take a sensitive hand to note the weight difference. Mine weighs just under 7 lb. after adding a 1/4" spacer and a Pachmayr Decellerator (1") pad. That adds a lot more weight than the higher rib, but is essential for me to shoot it.

Re: Pre-WWII vs post WWII quality difference?

Posted by Tom Salzer on May 16, 2012, 8:36 am, in reply to "Re: Pre-WWII vs post WWII quality difference?"
173.48.190.46

I have a 1947 16 ga. that has conventional rounded fences. I've never seen the squared-off ones you described.