Ruger EC9s

[alfsauve]

- WW II arms workmanship, England and Germany both, produced fine quality guns until they were under pressure

I'm given to believe that when the reason Singer only built 500 1911s was the War Dept realized Singer was doing too good a job.   This was expensive and a waste of resources.   I believe after that they gave Singer contracts for airborne navigation and bombing systems where tighter tolerances were the order of the day.  This eventually led to Singer spinoffs of  Friden calculator, General Precision Equipment Corporation, Librascope, The Kearfott Company, Inc, and Link Flight Simulation.   I worked on Singer Autopilot components in the 60s and 70s.

[les snyder]

Alf... I heard a slightly different version... that the War Department wanted to see if a small, non armament oriented company, could produce firearms for the war effort... the contract was for 500, and IIRC all went to the USAAF in the Pacific Theater

I had an opportunity to shoot a "S. Mfg, Co." 1911 very early on in my shooting career... a range officer that had been a pattern maker at Singer had an X serialized 1911... sometime during the 1950s his wife had it BUMPER CHROMED for his birthday 

[tombogan03884]

If they can document that, like if they still have the plating receipt that makes it a 1 of a kind , making it the most collectible of the Singer 1911's.
Found these

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a23340620/singer-sewing-machine-company-45-pistol-gun/

This from Wiki

During World War II, the company suspended sewing machine production to take on government contracts for weapons manufacturing. Factories in the United States supplied the American forces with Norden bomb sights and M1 Carbine rifle receivers, while factories in Germany provided their armed forces with weapons.[15]
In 1939, the company was given a production study by the government to draw plans and develop standard raw material sizes for building M1911A1 pistols. The following April 17, Singer was given an educational order of 500 units with serial numbers S800001 – S800500. The educational order was a program set up by the Ordnance Board in the U.S. to teach companies without gun-making experience to manufacture weapons.
After the 500 units were delivered to the U.S. government, the management decided to produce artillery and bomb sights. The pistol tooling and manufacturing machines were transferred to Remington Rand whilst some went to the Ithaca Gun Company. Approximately 1.75 million 1911A1 pistols were produced during World War II, making original Singer pistols relatively rare and collectable. [16]

[Big Frank]

ROFL 
The AR has tightER  tolerances than an AK but needs dust cover and sealing to be reliable.
The AK on the other hand goes with "Good enough" tolerances with that big gap for the charging handle, (That some think a great addition to AR's ) and let the crap and crud just fall through the gaps.
Reminds me of 2 other things 
1 - WW II arms workmanship, England and Germany both, produced fine quality guns until they were under pressure when they turned out crap like Sten's, and "VolksGewher".  Now look at the Russo/ Soviet Arms. They were not that skilled to begin with, but their quality never got any worse even when the front line was the other end of the building. If anything, it improved, which I find totally hilarious.

 2 I forgot what I was originally going to type .
Good opportunity to point out that INTENTION is an important part of gun design.
The best example I can think of is the M-14/M1A.
You all think it's a wonderful semi Auto rifle for target shooting.
But to the guy's who designed it it's an abject failure.
It sucked so bad it is 1 of the 2 shortest serving Army rifles ( Keep those damned Lee's out of it  )
So what's the difference ?
The M - 14 was intended to be the US equivalent of the German STG and Soviet AK designs, but the M 14 is uncontrollable in full auto, all 7.62 have the same problem 7.62 NATO is to much cartridge for a practical size individual weapon.
There was a REASON the BAR weighed up to 24 Lbs, depending on model.
But you don't have full auto, You don't give a hoot about burst control, and mostly you're just carrying it from the car to the shooting bench, so you don't even consider those aspects .
And it IS a pisser of a target rifle   

I heard the M14 was obsolete before it was even adopted. It may have been one of my instructors in Small Arms Repair school that said that. And I know of one 7.62 NATO rifle that was controllable in full auto but not adopted by the U.S. military. Or by anyone as it was then. During testing of one of the AR-10 prototypes with its oversize compensator the shooter was able to put all 20 rounds into a bushel basket or a target the size of one at 100 yards. It's been decades since I read about that and I can't remember if it was Stoner himself who was doing the shooting or someone else. And I read or heard somewhere that muzzle climb on the M14 is so bad that everything after the second or third shot is more or less anti-aircraft fire. Here's one of the old AR-10s in the National Firearms Museum.

[tombogan03884]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJcuBB24yoE



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FXt5md6jPk


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nuEKwdwoqBA

[Sponsor]

[Big Frank]

Wow. That's about 55 minutes of videos. You've been posting some really good ones Tom, but even I don't have that kind of time. I'm still trying to catch up on the forum from last spring/summer.