History Lost? / Mil Spec?
I had to
burn some scrap wood that’s been laying around the shop for some time.
Some of it was left over from various home improvement projects and some
from several projects in my shop. Some of it was history and that’s the
sad part. Eight years ago I took on a project to restore an M3 rifle
rack. The project turned out great and the finished product looked like
new even though it was originally built in 1944. It must have held
thousands of M1 Garand rifles during it’s life. It started out as an M1
Rack and was later modified to M3 so it could also hold 20 1911-A1
pistols. Eventually it was modified again to hold the M1 Carbine and the
M14. I’ll bet this rack could really tell some stories if it had a
voice.
I rescued the rack from my local gun club. They had it buried in a storage shed where it sat for many years. It’s wood was … distressed … to say the least, mostly a mass of splinters and a lot of OD green paint to hold it together. The metal was getting rusty and some weld joints were broken. It was missing one of it’s locking bars. The restoration project was fun and expensive, but in the end it looked like new. I discarded the Carbine modifications, but kept the M14 mods so it can now hold the M1, M14, and 1911-A1.
Did you know that these racks were made with old growth, vertical grain, Douglas Fir? The folks at San Antonio Arsenal, where this rack was originally made, used good stuff. It now sits proudly in the middle of my shop and gets used daily. I expect to see the tree huggers out front, picketing my shop, any day.
But, after several years of working around the pile of old wood, more like tripping over it, I finally decided it was time for it to go. You’d think it would be easier since I have the beautifully restored rack here to admire.
Unfortunately the rack wood wasn’t the only thing to go into the burn pile. I also burned the remains of a wood box that held a Unertl 100 MM Team Spotting Scope. I bought the scope from the CMP Auction and, as usual, the box was a mass of splinters and literally falling apart. About all I could salvage from the original box was most of the hardware and the lens holders. It came out very well and the box may even be nicer than the day it came out of the Unertl shop many years ago. I don’t know how old it is, but I found a marking on one of the eye pieces that says USAMU 6-2-77. I’m sure it is much older than that, but I haven’t been able to find out much about it. It is great to know that it was used at Ft. Benning. I had to strip several layers of old paint off the scope. Now it looks pretty good and works fine. Unertl really built things to last (except maybe the box). I wonder how many Army coaches used this scope?
The shop is neater. But, it’s still history lost. Not completely….
I’d like to thank the folks from the TFL that gave me their suggestions on subjects to write about. I’ve been doing this column for several years now and I run out of ideas from time to time. Writer’s block?
The subject of military specifications has come up. I have some thoughts on this subject. I’ve written about it before and was quoted recently from my past writings. I think it would be good to clear up some misconceptions on the subject since it gets mentioned so often.
First, I’ll reiterate, No one is making anything for the M14 that is mil spec. Mil Spec is a conundrum. Maybe it’s an oxymoron. Original government issue M14 parts were made to mil spec. That is, the government published specifications that had to be met by contractors who wished to manufacture M14 parts and sell them to the government. These specifications were designed to insure that the parts in question could be made, with a high degree of consistency, on the machinery available at the time. This included material integrity, workmanship, and interchangeability. The results are reflected in the overall quality of government issue parts that we all prefer to use.
The key phrase here is “the machinery available at the time”. Today, both machinery and materials have improved. 50 years ago, there wasn’t CNC, EDM, MIM, etc. Several manufacturers are presently making M14 parts that are equal to or actually better than original mil spec.
Producing parts on modern machinery has forced some parts to be made that do not meet all of the dimensional specifications and tolerances originally specified. Since many of these changes are directly related to the machinery or manufacturing methods being used, most should be considered improvements and little should be made of the fact that they are not exactly “mil spec”.
What is important is how well something works and whether it’s overall quality is satisfactory. The military is currently using many items which never had a military specification. They use what works and allows them to achieve their mission.
Along that line, many parts are being made that are very close to earlier specifications. Companies like Sadlak, Badger Ordnance, LRB Arms, and others are producing parts that are very close. Once again, manufactured to the highest quality on the machinery available at the time.
Some companies, like Smith Enterprise for instance, produce parts that are widely utilized by our military, but which had no military specification. However, that’s what the military ordered… so it must be mil spec?
I’d suggest that we get over the mil spec hang up. There are other adequate and better things out there.
By Ted Brown
Shooters Den
I rescued the rack from my local gun club. They had it buried in a storage shed where it sat for many years. It’s wood was … distressed … to say the least, mostly a mass of splinters and a lot of OD green paint to hold it together. The metal was getting rusty and some weld joints were broken. It was missing one of it’s locking bars. The restoration project was fun and expensive, but in the end it looked like new. I discarded the Carbine modifications, but kept the M14 mods so it can now hold the M1, M14, and 1911-A1.
Did you know that these racks were made with old growth, vertical grain, Douglas Fir? The folks at San Antonio Arsenal, where this rack was originally made, used good stuff. It now sits proudly in the middle of my shop and gets used daily. I expect to see the tree huggers out front, picketing my shop, any day.
But, after several years of working around the pile of old wood, more like tripping over it, I finally decided it was time for it to go. You’d think it would be easier since I have the beautifully restored rack here to admire.
Unfortunately the rack wood wasn’t the only thing to go into the burn pile. I also burned the remains of a wood box that held a Unertl 100 MM Team Spotting Scope. I bought the scope from the CMP Auction and, as usual, the box was a mass of splinters and literally falling apart. About all I could salvage from the original box was most of the hardware and the lens holders. It came out very well and the box may even be nicer than the day it came out of the Unertl shop many years ago. I don’t know how old it is, but I found a marking on one of the eye pieces that says USAMU 6-2-77. I’m sure it is much older than that, but I haven’t been able to find out much about it. It is great to know that it was used at Ft. Benning. I had to strip several layers of old paint off the scope. Now it looks pretty good and works fine. Unertl really built things to last (except maybe the box). I wonder how many Army coaches used this scope?
The shop is neater. But, it’s still history lost. Not completely….
I’d like to thank the folks from the TFL that gave me their suggestions on subjects to write about. I’ve been doing this column for several years now and I run out of ideas from time to time. Writer’s block?
The subject of military specifications has come up. I have some thoughts on this subject. I’ve written about it before and was quoted recently from my past writings. I think it would be good to clear up some misconceptions on the subject since it gets mentioned so often.
First, I’ll reiterate, No one is making anything for the M14 that is mil spec. Mil Spec is a conundrum. Maybe it’s an oxymoron. Original government issue M14 parts were made to mil spec. That is, the government published specifications that had to be met by contractors who wished to manufacture M14 parts and sell them to the government. These specifications were designed to insure that the parts in question could be made, with a high degree of consistency, on the machinery available at the time. This included material integrity, workmanship, and interchangeability. The results are reflected in the overall quality of government issue parts that we all prefer to use.
The key phrase here is “the machinery available at the time”. Today, both machinery and materials have improved. 50 years ago, there wasn’t CNC, EDM, MIM, etc. Several manufacturers are presently making M14 parts that are equal to or actually better than original mil spec.
Producing parts on modern machinery has forced some parts to be made that do not meet all of the dimensional specifications and tolerances originally specified. Since many of these changes are directly related to the machinery or manufacturing methods being used, most should be considered improvements and little should be made of the fact that they are not exactly “mil spec”.
What is important is how well something works and whether it’s overall quality is satisfactory. The military is currently using many items which never had a military specification. They use what works and allows them to achieve their mission.
Along that line, many parts are being made that are very close to earlier specifications. Companies like Sadlak, Badger Ordnance, LRB Arms, and others are producing parts that are very close. Once again, manufactured to the highest quality on the machinery available at the time.
Some companies, like Smith Enterprise for instance, produce parts that are widely utilized by our military, but which had no military specification. However, that’s what the military ordered… so it must be mil spec?
I’d suggest that we get over the mil spec hang up. There are other adequate and better things out there.
By Ted Brown
Shooters Den
Comments