doublegunshop.com - home Forums Thread Like Summary - IGCo's 1914 purchase of Union Firearms

I am in the final stages of transferring all of my IGCo's records to the Buffalo Bill Center. This batch contains the file of the Union Firearms company. It has a few period catalogs, original notarized purchase agreements for the 1914 transaction. The original Charles Wilson patent and a listing of all the finished guns (131) works in progress, etc. Mention is made of a model 60 repeater. The patent shows the interworks. Claude Smith was the Ithaca buyer. Claude was the IGCo. treasurer at the time. I only recorded one Union gun sale when I had the shipping records. I am assuming Ithaca lumped the guns to dealers, hardware stores and the like.
All soon to be on its way to Cody and will be available for study should anyone care to venture there.
ps. The purchase price was $3000 with $500 down and remainder due upon delivery.

All this activity 23 years before Ithaca announced the Model 37 repeater.

Thank you, Walt, for your decades of work as well as your personal expenditures to collect and preserve the Ithaca records and write the histories. The double gun community is the richer for it and you have our grateful thanks.

Also, a note of personal thanks, for writing the Ithaca book. I have enjoyed my copy for many years now. And, as long as I remain, it's going nowhere.

Hats off to Walter, but while he's written no books (that I know of) there's something to be said about Researcher over the years educating those on this forum (and other forums) on the little known details of our guns and ammo. Gil

All of us with this disease owe Walter a great Thank You for all he has done to further our understanding of these relics we are so interested in.

The Russians were very poorly equipped to start the war. They had more men in uniform that they had long guns to equip them with. A lot of contracts for manufacture were given out by them in 1915-1916. They also bought a lot of obsolete arms, if ammunition was provided as well. As a neutral the US was well positioned to produce arms for whom ever had the money. And a lot of manufacturing companies tried to cash in, rightly so. But this was a double edged sword in that when things ended they had a lot of investment in materials and equipment that they had no market for. But for about four years there was a lot of money to be made.

I think the war ended six months earlier that the most "optimistic planners" expected. The US had just ramped up a huge number of Patterson Conversions for the 1903 that was to be the secret weapon which would win the war in the Spring of 1919. Whoops, it never got used and was shortly after the war all but completely destroyed. It was going to convert the bolt action into a walking semi automatic rifle capable of a huge number of shots as men advanced to break the trenches. The pistol round was limited but at close range would be impressive. I am glad it never got used because I do not think that the machine gun was going away and any advance across no mans land was still going to be brutally expensive. Once in the trenches it would have been a game changer.

Thank you Walter. I have long suspected that the addition of a pump gun to their lineup, was the most likely reason for the acquisition. Winchester, Remington and the Browning designed Steven/Savage cornered the growing pump gun market and I think double makers knew their days were coming to an end. In the end, I suspect Ithaca decided the Model 60 was not a very good design, or one they thought they could redesign into a better design, at a profit. In the end, instead they waited until the patents ran out on what became the Model 37, which I think was an excellent decision.

I base my lack of love for the Model 60 based on my own examples of them and the guns they evolved from. I have several and several parts guns. Including the early model 24, 25, 27 and the later Model 60. The Model 60 is just an updated version of the Model 24/27. I have seen the Model 27 designation used on both the hammer and hammer-less pump guns, mine is hammer-less. Why on both, nobody knows. I suspect it was a mistake as they both share the same front end to attach the barrel and tube magazine to the receiver. Just got miss-stamped or they made guns up with parts on hand and they interchange.

The Model 60 is a striker firing system and cocking the striker takes great effort in the last 1/2" of the pumping cycle. It operates smoothly until then and then becomes a very difficult to cock gun. I have not measured it but it has to be in the 12-15 pound range of effort. There is no mechanical advantage and all the force require to compress the spring is ridiculous. To do it you have to take the gun off the shoulder and use both arms. Without mechanical advantage I think this was what killed this design because it was too difficult to operate. And I do not think you can redesign it to make it easier to operate.

Timeline: Name changes.
Colton Arms 1894 founded by George B Colton circa 1894

Union Fire Arms Company of Toledo incorporated in 1902
Name changed to Union Arms Company 1911
Union Arms Company was purchased by Toledo Fire Arms Company in 1913.
Toledo Arms Company (1913 Toledo was started in 1871) Bought and absorbed by Ithaca 1917.

I think the 1914 sale was only for the Model 60 rights. ""...all the letters patent together with tools, jigs, fixtures and special appliances, etc....the exclusive right to manufacture and sell same throughout the world.""? I think they bought only the pump gun design and patents and things needed to make them but none of the machinery which I suspect was kept by the Toledo Arms Company. Toledo did keep operating after 1914.

I also have seen a sale date of Toledo Arms, to Ithaca of 1916-1917, not the 1914 time frame. Perhaps the did buy the equipment during WWI to increase production of military contracts. That sale I was told was at auction, which is how I have been told Toledo Arms was disposed of. Maybe after I retire I will travel out to look at the records and see if there are any answers to be had. I have several city or Toledo information sources and should be able to cross check some of the physical locations at least and pin down years they were incorporated in Ohio. Nobody pays for papers after they close. The problem is I think they only rented space not owned physical property so tax records are not of much help. Somebody 110 years ago should have taken better notes.

Evolution of the pump gun designs: The Model 24 were a two trigger pump gun, with a front reversed trigger which could cock or de-cock the gun. Later redesigned as the 24A and then the Model 50 which had only one trigger. The Model 50 was made 1911-1913. The Model 60 I think was just coming into production in 1914 and ended there with this sale to Ithaca. I think the Model 60 is just an updated model 50 with some new patent improvements and protection. I ought to take one of each apart to compare but they are a pain the the Arizona to take apart and put back together. I'd rather do the same, on one of the Marlin Chinese bolt pump guns, with oven mitts on, in the dark. I think Ithaca dodged a bullet in not making these guns. I suspect they wanted the patents and thought they could fix it. Somebody 110 years ago should have taken better notes. Thanks again for all the information that you have so kindly shared.