As Historically Inaccurate As It Gets

[J.Baker]

I don't know who wrote this, but it is by far the most inaccurate history of Savage Arms I have ever seen. I mean, a good 90% or better of the included information is incorrect, and some of it is flat out fictitious. Hell, they even contradict themselves in their own two timelines.

I don't know who wrote it, but I sure as heck hope nobody at WOOX paid for this garbage and if they have any brains they'll pull the article down off their website sooner rather than later. Unfortunately it seems that it's been published their for at least a few weeks, if not a few months.

https://wooxstore.com/blogs/woox-journal/the-evolution-of-savage-arms-a-historical-overview

[sharpshooter]

Whoever wrote that last paragraph/ chart musta been smokin dope....

[Blue Avenger]

definitely some hallucinations going on.

[czgunner]

There are lots of pieces being written by AI the last few years. Its often incorrect and just sounds weird when you read it.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

[Dave Hoback]

Jim, what are the worst parts. I see discrepancies, we’ll, really it seems to me they’ve left a bunch of history out. Basically omitted big portions. The 110 for instance, is mentioned in passing basically. But what exactly is just flat out WRONG? My Savage history basis has always been more about the hardware, not so much the people & politics of the company.

[PhilC]

For one, the chart is chock full of errors. :rolleyes:

[Blue Avenger]

Jim, what are the worst parts. I see discrepancies, we’ll, really it seems to me they’ve left a bunch of history out. Basically omitted big portions. The 110 for instance, is mentioned in passing basically. But what exactly is just flat out WRONG? My Savage history basis has always been more about the hardware, not so much the people & politics of the company.

last chart in particular, look at model numbers.

[J.Baker]

Jim, what are the worst parts. I see discrepancies, we’ll, really it seems to me they’ve left a bunch of history out. Basically omitted big portions. The 110 for instance, is mentioned in passing basically. But what exactly is just flat out WRONG? My Savage history basis has always been more about the hardware, not so much the people & politics of the company.


BEGINNINGS (LATE 19TH TO EARLY 20TH CENTURY)The journey of Savage Arms began when Arthur Savage, an inventor and entrepreneur, successfully patented a hammerless, lever-action rifle in 1892. He founded Savage Arms two years later in Utica, New York, and began producing the Model 1895, which became well-regarded for its design and durability.

From the Savage Model 99 Wikipedia page...


The earliest predecessor of the Model 1895 was the Model 1892, and it was one of the contending rifle models offered to the U.S. Army when they were looking to replace the Springfield Model 1873 trapdoor rifle. The Krag–Jørgensen was chosen over the Savage and other models. The Model 1892 was never put into production (and indeed pre-dated the actual establishment of the Savage Repeating Arms Company

Also, though I couldn't quickly locate the exact reference in my books for this response, either the early 1892 military trial rifles or the first Model 1895's were actually manufactured by Marlin in their factory as Arthur Savage hadn't secured his own production facilities yet.

The latter I could see being omitted as it's not hugely important for the handful of trials guns that were made by Marlin and likely destroyed after the trials, but not the former as the 1895 and later 1899 likely would never have existed if it weren't for Arthur Savage developing the initial design to vei for a lucrative U.S. military contract.

Same paragraph of the article...


Savage's early success was largely buoyed by contracts from major institutions. Notably, in the early 20th century, the company secured a contract to provide the U.S. military with the Model 1907 semi-automatic pistol. These contracts not only bolstered the company's reputation but also provided the capital needed for further expansion and innovation.
Everything about this is wrong. First, as we all know what was to become the Colt 1911 is the sidearm that won the U.S. military trials for a new sidearm in the early 1900's, NOT the Savage design (though the scuttlebutt is that Colt cheated to win by convincing the military to change from a 200gr bullet to a 230gr bullet for the final round of testing knowing the slower twist rate in the Savage would result in degraded accuracy). Savage did ultimately get some military contracts for their pistols, but they were all from foreign countries.

Per Wikipedia's page for the Savage Model 1907 pistol...


Although the Model 1907 was designed for civilian use, the French government purchased over 40,000 .32 ACP Model 1907s between late 1914 and 1917 for the French military in World War I. These military "contract" pistols are recognized by the presence of a loaded chamber indicator and a lanyard ring, or mounting holes in the grip for a lanyard ring; lanyard rings were not available on civilian pistols. The Savage Model 1907 pictured to the right is a French contract pistol. A much smaller contract of 1,150 pistols in the same configuration were purchased by Portugal, which are distinguished by grips bearing the lesser arms of Portugal instead of the standard Indian head.

Back to the article...


THE GOLDEN AGE (MID 20TH CENTURY)

The mid-20th century saw Savage Arms reaching new heights in innovation and recognition. The Model 99, a refinement of the original lever-action design, was introduced and quickly gained popularity due to its unique rotary magazine and ability to handle high-pressure rounds. It became one of the most beloved rifles among hunters and shooting enthusiasts. During both World Wars, Savage Arms played a pivotal role as a producer of military arms, especially during World War II when the company expanded its manufacturing capabilities to meet wartime demands.
The article implies that the rotary magazine came about with the "refinement" of the Model 1895 into the Model 99, which is not correct. The rotary magazine was an original feature of the 1892 design, the successive Model 1895, and ultimately the Model 1899. Around 1920-21 Savage stopped marking these rifles "Model 1899" and instead began marking them "Model 99."


CHALLENGES AND REVIVAL (LATE 20TH TO EARLY 21ST CENTURY)
Like many manufacturing companies, Savage Arms faced significant challenges in the latter half of the 20th century. Economic downturns, increased competition, and changes in consumer preferences impacted the firearms industry. During these challenging times, Savage Arms underwent multiple ownership changes. However, the late 1980s and 1990s saw a resurgence for Savage Arms. The company introduced the AccuTrigger in the early 2000s—a revolutionary design allowing users to adjust trigger pull without the need for a gunsmith. This innovation, along with a commitment to producing high-quality firearms at a competitive price point, rejuvenated the brand.
This paragraph is about the only fully accurate part of this article.


That's a start, but just a drop in the bucket compared to all the errors in the two timelines given.






My References Materials:


Savage Arms Model 99 Wikipedia page (not the best source, but they got it more right than this author)

"The Rifle In America" 1st Ed. by Philip B. Sharpe

"The Ninety-Nine" 3rd Ed. by D.P. Murry

"Savage & Stevens Arms: Collectors History" 4th Ed. by Jay Kimmel
"Savage & Stevens Arms & History" 3rd Ed. by Bill West

"Savage 99 Rifle" 1st Ed. by David Royal

[Dave Hoback]

Thank you for explaining all that. Makes sense now.