The L.C. Smith Collectors Association

The L.C. Smith Collectors Association
[ The L.C. Smith Collectors Association ]

USA-F Markings; A Theory

Posted by Tom Breeden on September 26, 2020, 11:08 am

It is well documented that 1535 guns were shipped with USA-F and probable US Army Ordnance markings during the middle of WWII. These guns are within the serial number range of 197321 and 202813 or a total of 5492 guns. A question that arises is how are the other (5492-1535) 3957 guns marked? What is not documented and the subject of some controversy is the reason for the presence of USA-F guns without army ordnance marks.

Two opinions have been offered as to the original intent of the USA-F markings. One opinion is that the markings stand for the United States Armed Forces (Houchins, page 542) and a second opinion expressed elsewhere offers it as Hunter Arms inspection markings. Neither of these opinions have any factual support. I cannot claim any factual support for the theory I present below but I do offer some reasonable evidence.

My theory is that (1) the army/Rochester ordered more Hunter (HAC) guns than were delivered to them (2) HAC marked the guns USA-F on the assumption that they would be delivered and (3) HAC sold excess marked guns on the civilian market.

Here are the reasons I believe in my theory
First, I contend that the sequence of marking was initiated by HAC applying the USA-F markings in their factory followed by ordnance markings by the army at the armory because there are guns in circulation with USA-F markings and no ordnance markings.
Second, I contend that the USA-F marking stands for the US Armed Forces because the army bought guns on behalf of all the military; in support of this is a mention on our website of "...SN 200947 surfaced in 2016...shipped to Rochester Ordnance in 1942. It is marked United States Coast Guard."
(see Album: Hunter Arms Military Purchase Guns on our website)
Third, the military has a propensity, then and now, for ordering more than they need. They probably gave a blanket order for guns and later refused to accept delivery in the same manner that bankrupted HAC when the Navy, at the end of WWII, asked for repayment of a government $167K advance during the war. (Houchins, page 18)

I readily admit that this is pure conjecture but I cannot believe that USA-F is a mark for any other reason than presented here.

I put this on our website in hopes of generating some opinions, further insight and a call for those in possession of USA-F marked guns, with or without armory markings, to provide serial numbers so that we can obtain a better picture of when the guns were produced.

This message is locked.

Re: USA-F Markings; A Theory

Posted by Jim Stubbendieck on September 26, 2020, 3:36 pm, in reply to "USA-F Markings; A Theory"

Somethings to think about:

What would be the explanation for the USA-F markings appearing on shotguns made in 1939 - at least two years before war was declared (December 1941), three years (1942) before the first purchases were made from Hunter Arms Company stock, and three years (1942) before receipt of the first orders from the US Army? If the US Army was planning on these purchases as early as 1939, why did the Hunter Arms Company have to scramble to complete the first order (1941) by filling in with Ideal Grades and odd configurations?

Secondly, what would be the reason for the position of the hyphen between "Armed" and "Forces"? Separating Armed Forces with a hyphen would be unconventional. Has anyone seen a hyphen used between those words?

I believe that the explanation is a lot less interesting and less complex - simply a barrel inspector's mark. After all, the Rochester Ordnance marks were much more prominent and placed on the frame. Why mark the barrels? In addition, the location of the barrel mark is in the same as others that one occasionally sees. For example, I have a Specialty with JJ stamped in that location.

This message is locked.

Re: USA-F Markings; A Theory

Posted by Tom Breeden on September 26, 2020, 6:16 pm, in reply to "Re: USA-F Markings; A Theory"

Jim poses a lot of good questions that are difficult to answer because we have no facts. I can add a question to his list and that is why did HAC select such a 'strange inspectors' mark that suggests a military connection? Answers to all these questions can only be guesses, again, because of the lack of any factual information. Speculative answers can run the gamut from (1) early guns were provided as "try guns" to determine if they would be suitable in their intended role and (2) the hyphen was used to distinguish from any specific military branch because HAC intended, and maybe the government intended, that the guns would be used by all the services, not just the army.

The big question that always comes back to haunt me is what kind of an inspection mark is 'USA-F' if it was only intended for HAC's use. I still believe it indicates a connection to the military, maybe even as a marketing ploy to draw attention to Smith guns for military use.

At any rate here is a theory to chew on that has as much creditability as an HAC inspectors mark because neither can be backed up by facts, so take your choice and join the effort to document more of these interesting guns.

This message is locked.

Re: USA-F Markings; A Theory

Posted by Roger Domer on September 27, 2020, 7:33 am, in reply to "Re: USA-F Markings; A Theory"

After thinking about this subject for awhile, lets think about the U S Government procurement process and why this mark would be stamped under the barrel. ‘USA-F’ could stand for United States Army - Fixed .... price contract. I found three pages of discussion in a Federal procurement book that describes the process. I won’t attempt to extract pieces of it here for fear of taking it out of context. I can email them to whomever is interested.

If we think of the product delivery, inspection, and contractor payment process, it would be something like this. Inspectors receive and inspect the shotgun - shotgun looks good. Then he looks at the inspector mark and sees that it is a Fixed contract, He tells accounts payable the specifics of the shotgun, e.g. serial number, model, etc., and that it is a Fixed price. AP looks at the contract and pays the agreed upon price. A simple process - receive, inspect, transmit information, and pay the vendor.

This message is locked.

Re: USA-F Markings; A Theory

Posted by stanley hackett on September 27, 2020, 9:09 pm, in reply to "USA-F Markings; A Theory"

Not all of the 1535 guns were shipped with the USA-F marking. I have 198621 and it is marked with the flaming bomb, crossed cannons and RLB (inspectors initials); it does not have the USA-F marking. Not sure what this means to the theory.

This message is locked.

Re: USA-F Markings; A Theory

Posted by Roger Domer on September 28, 2020, 6:32 am, in reply to "Re: USA-F Markings; A Theory"

Here are the details of my Rochester shotgun:
FIELD Grade Serial number 198451
Hunter One nonselective trigger
Manufacturer start date - 11/14/1941
Manufacturers finish date - 3/ 9/1942
Shipped to Rochester Ordnance Depot on 6/23/1942
Flaming bomb
Cross cannon ordinance stamp
Initials RLB
Hunter Arms factory beavertail forend
No military Service shown
USA-F marking stamped on barrel

This message is locked.

Re: USA-F Markings; A Theory

Posted by Tom Breeden on September 28, 2020, 8:55 am, in reply to "Re: USA-F Markings; A Theory"

As a result of Mr. Hackett's post I reread my first post and find that I made a wrong assumption in the first sentence. It should properly read that 1535 guns were shipped to Rochester Armory with unknown markings. The quantity is justified by Jim Stubbendieck's research of the records as reported in his book about production records on pages 114 and 115, but we only know about very few of the markings on these guns as reported by the membership. The point of this thread is to try and obtain a better understanding of how the guns were marked which might lead us to explaining the USA-F marking.

This message is locked.

Re: USA-F Markings; A Theory

Posted by Tom Breeden on September 28, 2020, 12:25 pm, in reply to "Re: USA-F Markings; A Theory"

I'll get it right pretty soon. To clarify what we are looking for: guns bearing serial numbers 197321 through 202813 with markings such as USA-F, flaming bomb armory markings and any military ID such as US Army, etc. in any combination as well as those within the s/n range without any markings. It is also of interest to document guns outside of the s/n range with any combination of these markings.

I am sure there are some in members hands so please respond with s/n and your observations to help solve the mystery.

This message is locked.

Re: USA-F Markings; A Theory

Posted by Ken Descovich on September 28, 2020, 10:45 pm, in reply to "Re: USA-F Markings; A Theory"

I was going thru my records and I own a 16 gauge field grade serial number 202536 feather weight with 30 inch armor steel barrels. I will have to dig it out of storage to see if any other markings are on it. I will get back with you with my findings.
Ken

This message is locked.

Re: USA-F Markings; A Theory

Posted by Will Favre on September 30, 2020, 5:58 am, in reply to "USA-F Markings; A Theory"

Here is my Guns info.
SN# R198629, Started 12-1-41; Finished 2-23-42, Shipped 5-9-42 on Order # 52269. 32" barrels, 2-3/4" chambers, roll marked Wild Fowl on lug, no SSP rib, not marked USA-F, Ordance Marked,RLB, Crossed Cannons, Flaming Bomb, , All Matching Serial Numbers, dual triggers. My take on the USA-F is it is the Barrels Manf. Mark and was not a HAC stamping. Do we know who was the barrel supplier at this time?

This message is locked.

Re: USA-F Markings; A Theory

Posted by Ken Descovich on September 30, 2020, 2:54 pm, in reply to "Re: USA-F Markings; A Theory"

It appears I should have looked through Jim's book as there were not any 16 ga shotguns ordered.
Ken

This message is locked.

Re: USA-F Markings; A Theory

Posted by Tom Breeden on September 30, 2020, 5:17 pm, in reply to "Re: USA-F Markings; A Theory"

Ken, it is important that you report the markings on your 16 Ga because a USA-F mark would support the notion that it is probably an unknown HAC inspector's mark and has nothing to do with the military. Your gun is probably one of the 3957 guns in the serial number range that were not bought by Rochester Armory but we would still like to know how they were marked.

This message is locked.

Re: USA-F Markings; A Theory

Posted by Tom Breeden on September 30, 2020, 5:26 pm, in reply to "Re: USA-F Markings; A Theory"

Will, that is an interesting remark about barrel markings. We know that before the war HAC and their competitors obtained their barrels from European suppliers and that the war cut off that supply line. I cannot recall who the war time suppliers were-maybe it is not known-but HAC may have used existing stock as they weren't shipping many guns at that time.

This message is locked.

Re: USA-F Markings; A Theory

Posted by Will Favre on September 30, 2020, 7:38 pm, in reply to "Re: USA-F Markings; A Theory"

Tom,

The War in Europe had cut off supplies from Belgium by 1940 and I’m sure American barrel Manufactures were established by that time. One of the Hunter Brothers had testified before Congress in the early 1900’s to get relief from Tarriffs on imported barrels,
I have seen the font or stamping of the USA-F marked barrels and it does not fit or resemble the in use font of HAC. I’ve noticed HAC used the same basic stamps with the main difference being the size. Fore arm and barrel stamps were about the same size and frame stamping a little larger, but all common to each other. The USA-F stamping doesn’t fit in with any stamps in use at HAC. Just my guess.

This message is locked.

Re: USA-F Markings; A Theory

Posted by Ken Descovich on October 1, 2020, 12:43 pm, in reply to "Re: USA-F Markings; A Theory"

Tom,
I just looked at serial number 202536 and it does not have the USA-F marking it does have the armor steel barrel marking though.
Ken

This message is locked.

Barrel tube suppliers

Posted by Drew Hause on October 1, 2020, 2:56 pm, in reply to "Re: USA-F Markings; A Theory"

I like Will's idea that the USA-F could be a tube supplier or importer. I've searched every combination of USA-F for U.S. and Belgian steel mills without success. Germany invaded Belgium in May 1940 and I certainly agree Hunter Arms was using up old stock after that.

This is a 1948 Ideal with 'Belgium LLH' (Laurent Lochet-Habran) on the right barrel over-stamped with 'London Steel.' No way to know if old stock or new.

It does appear that LLH reorganized after the war. There are Belgian doubles proved in the 50s with the LLH mark.

This message is locked.

USA-F Markings

Posted by Roger Domer on October 4, 2020, 3:39 pm, in reply to "Re: USA-F Markings; A Theory"

I believe the USA-F markings are components of a contract with the U S Army. The Department of Defense (DOD) uses a thirteen alpha-numeric system to convey certain information. Position 9 identifies the type of contract. For example, capital A is a blanket purchase order, D is an Indefinite Delivery contract, F describes contracts w/or through other Government Depts., or agencies, (more words), etc., and P is a Purchase order-automated. So, I believe the capital letter F is one of several alpha letters that describes the type of instrument mentioned in the contract.

The U S Army part of USA-F abbreviation is identified in the first six digits of a DOD contract. The 6 positions IDs a department/agency and offices issuing the contract. The DOD uses an activity address code (DoDAAC) that uniquely IDs a unit. activity, or organization that has the authority to requisition, contract for, receive, have custody of, issue, or ship government-owned assets or fund/pay bills for materials and/or services. The U S Army would be one of those organizations.

In summary, the contract ID system used in the 1940 era, looks like, in some respects, to the one used currently. This is a 80 year leap, granted. Also, I hope we can eventually get more information from the Library of Congress that will shed light on the Rochester Ordnance Arsenal/L C Smith shotguns.

Best regards. Roger

This message is locked.

Re: USA-F Markings

Posted by Will Favre on October 5, 2020, 5:53 am, in reply to "USA-F Markings "

Roger,

I believe you are on to something. Wild Fowl guns did not have SSP barrels and could posssable be older stock, if the 8 recorded and the few unrecorded Wild Fowl guns shipped to ROD are unmarked USA-F as mine is and the SSP barrels are Marked USA-F since they would be of more current production would help explain the Markings.

Will

This message is locked.

USA-F .... more discussion

Posted by Roger Domer on October 6, 2020, 8:51 pm, in reply to "USA-F Markings "

In 1991 the Center of Military History, US Army, wrote 3 volumes on the role of the Ordnance Department in WWII. The 2nd volume deals w/Procurement & Supply (P&S). In Chapter II, P&S, page 16, under Contract Forms & Legal Restrictions, it says, quote “Ordnance expected that the most important of the approved contracts would be a fixed price supply contract to be used under the system of competitive bidding. It was thought that this type of contract would account for 95% of all awards by the district offices. But because of the difficulty of estimating costs of war equipment that manufacturers had never before produced, other types of contracts such as the cost-plus-fixed fee, which allowed greater flexibility in pricing, were also considered.”

This quote, in discussing WWII P&S adds credibility to my belief that the ‘F’ in USA-F stands for a Fixed price supply contract. It is in the words of the military a “type of instrument’ which system is still used today when constructing a modern contract number. This is an example of a modern contract number, W912D1-09-P-999. Notice the hyphen before the letter ‘P’, in the ninth position. This contract says that it is a Purchase Order - automated type contract; the ‘09’ in the 7 & 8 position is the fiscal year. I hope this adds substance to our discussions. RLD

This message is locked.

Re: USA-F .... discussion about the ‘USA’

Posted by Roger Domer on October 13, 2020, 10:10 am, in reply to " USA-F .... more discussion "

I read/reviewed Bruce Canfield’s book - A COLLECTORS Guide to UNITED STATES COMBAT SHOTGUNS w/the purpose of finding clues to determine what the ‘USA’ in ‘USA-F’ stands for. The periods covered includes WWI through Vietnam. None of the combat shotguns has martial markings either as stock cartouches or markings on the shotgun frame with ‘USA’, as in the United States of America. Secondly, my Rochester Ordnance Depot (ROD) shotgun already has USA stamped on the top of the left barrel. Third, it would be redundant to repeat it again under the barrel. The U S military is steeped in tradition, so it seems clear that it would not abandon tradition and change their practice of changing their martial markings from ‘U S’ to ‘USA’, as in the United States of America.

Therefore, I believe the ‘USA’ in USA-F stands for the U S Army. The HAC had a contract with the U S Army. We know that b/c shotguns were delivered to the (ROD).

This message is locked.

Locking this Thread

Posted by Jim Stubbendieck on October 13, 2020, 3:19 pm, in reply to "Barrel tube suppliers "

We have reached 20 posts on this subject, so I am locking the thread. Feel free to began another thread on the subject.

This message is locked.

« Back to index

1611

[ The L.C. Smith Collectors Association ]