LRB T44E4 Receivers
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Joined
·
869 Posts
Joined
·
4,072 Posts
KurtC; you are correct.
Now if you really want on, check out GWLA they are making T44E4 receivers, the right way.
Joined
·
5,934 Posts
I could be wrong also, but weren't there a few different revisions of the T44E4 in regards to the scope mount area. Seems like I recall seeing one without anything, like mentioned, and a couple different variations of scope mount milling. The T44E4 was, after all, an experimental job where they tried many things to find what worked best for their needs.
I agree though, I like the GWLA T44E4 clone receiver. I am thinking about rebuilding my T44E4 rifle with a GWLA receiver instead of the LRB that is on it now. It is to tough and expensive to find the parts to build another, so I will either leave it alone, or rebuild it with a GWLA receiver.
I agree though, I like the GWLA T44E4 clone receiver. I am thinking about rebuilding my T44E4 rifle with a GWLA receiver instead of the LRB that is on it now. It is to tough and expensive to find the parts to build another, so I will either leave it alone, or rebuild it with a GWLA receiver.
Joined
·
2,814 Posts
This, they are the closest thing available according to Ted Brown.
LRB T44E4 receivers were so marked for a couple of reasons. It made them compliant in some restricted locals and made them unique as a tribute to the pre-M14 era. Other than that they are exactly the same as any other LRB Arms M14SA receiver, the same high quality we have all come to expect from LRB. I still have a couple available for those who would like a rifle built on them.
Joined
·
12 Posts
I was reading this discussion about the T44E4 configuration from LRB since I recently purchased one and noticed the scope mount on the left side. After looking at many photos I have collected for my "T44 file", including reviewing photos in my Blake Stevens book "US Rifle M14", it appears that the early T44E4 did have the scope mount on the left side, which does make the LRB a close copy. I can't seem to find a photo of a T44E4 without the scope mount provision. Does anyone have one?
Joined
·
3,990 Posts
GWLA - are making the flat sided T44E4 receiver - I bought a LRB for my build but right before I started GWLA came out with one that is much closer to the orginal. The LRB is a great forged receiver and I got it on sale so ?I will just use it for another build.
M1Army
Joined
·
1,423 Posts
All I can say is Thanks to ALL who have inputted to T44 Posts. Lastly God help those of us running down that rabbit trail.
Pfc out
Pfc out
Joined
·
1,819 Posts
I don't know enough about the T44E4 and the development to add much to this discussion directly. However, in my study of the .30 cal Browning belt fed series, it seems that there are some photos of development models that were likely one-offs, or one of very few, and they vary in many details from the early issue guns and production models. In some cases, one knows that at least one gun was built that way, because there is the picture. Might well BE only one. Also, I know of examples of early manuals that used prototype images, where the guns varied in detail from what the troops were being issued from the production line.
Not sure how many T44E4s were actually produced, but it seems entirely normal (to me) that some did get the scope mount feature, while some did not. Maybe early versions, maybe they just tried it both ways at the same time. Interesting to note that the images of the one (above) that show the scope mount provision is dated EARLIER than the one with no such provision, by about 6 months. That doesn't prove anything, but it does tell us the scope provision existed before 1955!
Now hat's off to GWLA for going to the trouble to do an authentic version. I've gone to great lengths myself with the WWI Brownings, and no one else is crazy or stupid enough to do that. I get it, believe me. But as the owner of four or five LRB receivers, all T44E4 marked, I have no complaints. (Well, except that I paid full boat for them before they offered them at a steep discount on special!) I was more amused by just having receivers that the average person is not going to know is really an M14 by any other name. If the alphabet boys look at paperwork, they won't know what the heck a T44E4 is, most likely. Not really trying to do an authentic repro. I already do that on my Brownings, so I certainly appreciate the appeal and the fun/frustration in hunting down rare parts!
Not sure how many T44E4s were actually produced, but it seems entirely normal (to me) that some did get the scope mount feature, while some did not. Maybe early versions, maybe they just tried it both ways at the same time. Interesting to note that the images of the one (above) that show the scope mount provision is dated EARLIER than the one with no such provision, by about 6 months. That doesn't prove anything, but it does tell us the scope provision existed before 1955!
Now hat's off to GWLA for going to the trouble to do an authentic version. I've gone to great lengths myself with the WWI Brownings, and no one else is crazy or stupid enough to do that. I get it, believe me. But as the owner of four or five LRB receivers, all T44E4 marked, I have no complaints. (Well, except that I paid full boat for them before they offered them at a steep discount on special!) I was more amused by just having receivers that the average person is not going to know is really an M14 by any other name. If the alphabet boys look at paperwork, they won't know what the heck a T44E4 is, most likely. Not really trying to do an authentic repro. I already do that on my Brownings, so I certainly appreciate the appeal and the fun/frustration in hunting down rare parts!
Joined
·
12 Posts
Finally I remembered how to upload larger sized photos from Photobucket instead of the small thumbnail versions!!
Anyway this is an interesting subject almost like "which came first, the chicken or the egg"? It does look by this 1954 dated photo below (Mathewson Tool Company prototype) that the receiver with the scope mount is labeled a T44 (someone wrote in ink T44E4), and in the later 1960 dated photos from M1Army it was labeled T44E4, which is also correct. And to complicate this further, the T36 trials rifle in 1950 had the scope mount provision.
According to the Blake Stevens book "US Rifle M14 from John Garand to the M21", here are a couple of interesting excerpts from the book about the development of the T44/T44E4 rifles that competed with the T48 and Fal, so bear with me:
1. The contract to design and build the first, short-receiver T44 rifles was thus in place at the Mathewson Tool Company with John Garand acting as consultant. Twelve rifles were contracted for; the first (batch) was to be ready by June , 1954, and the second by September 1st. The remaining 10 were to be ready soon after. This model was christened the T44E4.
2. By August of 1955, Springfield was "on schedule" with the production of its lot of 500 test T44E4 rifles (based on the Mathewson prototype).
3. The Springfield records show they actually assembled 510 T44E4's, eight of which were held back for endurance trials. The rest were ready by September for the Ordnance Corps previously scheduled test of rifles made by American manufacturing methods. They were serially numbered from 1,001 to 1,510 (all of which had non-chromed barrels).
4. At the Pentagon, the T44E4 was preferred (over the T48 and Fal), due to its similarities to the M1 rifle.
5. Consideration of all of the above factors (extensive testing against the T48 and Fal) led to only one logical conclusion: that the Army should classify the T44E4 rifle as standard. A new number is obtained, which in this case turned out to be M14 for the light barrel version and M15 for the heavy barrel version.
6. William H. Brucker, the Secretary of the Army, made the announcement of the adoption of the M14/M15 family on May 1, 1957.
7. While the original Mathewson Tool Company design of the T44 / T44E4 rifle pioneered a threaded and keyed attachment point for telescopic sights and night vision equipment, Springfield was (later) ordered by Ordnance Weapons Command at Rock Island to build only the "absolute essentials" (for trials) into the final production drawings (which omitted the attachment point for telescopic sights).
8. Prior to final mass production contracts by Springfield, TRW, H&R, and Winchester the attachment point for telescopic sights was incorporated from the Mathewson Tool Company design.
So, in summary, it appears from my reading of Blake Stevens book that the Mathewson Tool Company T44 prototype was quickly renamed the T44E4, it originally was designed for a scope attachment, and the non-scoped provision version trials rifle by Springfield was also called the T44E4. The receiver made by LRB appears to be a faithful reproduction (some cosmetic differences noted) of the Mathewson Tool Company T44 / T44E4 until it was renamed the M14.
Anyway this is an interesting subject almost like "which came first, the chicken or the egg"? It does look by this 1954 dated photo below (Mathewson Tool Company prototype) that the receiver with the scope mount is labeled a T44 (someone wrote in ink T44E4), and in the later 1960 dated photos from M1Army it was labeled T44E4, which is also correct. And to complicate this further, the T36 trials rifle in 1950 had the scope mount provision.
According to the Blake Stevens book "US Rifle M14 from John Garand to the M21", here are a couple of interesting excerpts from the book about the development of the T44/T44E4 rifles that competed with the T48 and Fal, so bear with me:
1. The contract to design and build the first, short-receiver T44 rifles was thus in place at the Mathewson Tool Company with John Garand acting as consultant. Twelve rifles were contracted for; the first (batch) was to be ready by June , 1954, and the second by September 1st. The remaining 10 were to be ready soon after. This model was christened the T44E4.
2. By August of 1955, Springfield was "on schedule" with the production of its lot of 500 test T44E4 rifles (based on the Mathewson prototype).
3. The Springfield records show they actually assembled 510 T44E4's, eight of which were held back for endurance trials. The rest were ready by September for the Ordnance Corps previously scheduled test of rifles made by American manufacturing methods. They were serially numbered from 1,001 to 1,510 (all of which had non-chromed barrels).
4. At the Pentagon, the T44E4 was preferred (over the T48 and Fal), due to its similarities to the M1 rifle.
5. Consideration of all of the above factors (extensive testing against the T48 and Fal) led to only one logical conclusion: that the Army should classify the T44E4 rifle as standard. A new number is obtained, which in this case turned out to be M14 for the light barrel version and M15 for the heavy barrel version.
6. William H. Brucker, the Secretary of the Army, made the announcement of the adoption of the M14/M15 family on May 1, 1957.
7. While the original Mathewson Tool Company design of the T44 / T44E4 rifle pioneered a threaded and keyed attachment point for telescopic sights and night vision equipment, Springfield was (later) ordered by Ordnance Weapons Command at Rock Island to build only the "absolute essentials" (for trials) into the final production drawings (which omitted the attachment point for telescopic sights).
8. Prior to final mass production contracts by Springfield, TRW, H&R, and Winchester the attachment point for telescopic sights was incorporated from the Mathewson Tool Company design.
So, in summary, it appears from my reading of Blake Stevens book that the Mathewson Tool Company T44 prototype was quickly renamed the T44E4, it originally was designed for a scope attachment, and the non-scoped provision version trials rifle by Springfield was also called the T44E4. The receiver made by LRB appears to be a faithful reproduction (some cosmetic differences noted) of the Mathewson Tool Company T44 / T44E4 until it was renamed the M14.
Joined
·
82 Posts
2 T44E4 styles
Charlie
I have never seen these pictures of what looks like a scope mount on the side of a T44E4 receiver. The pictures on the NRA museum show the left side flat. I though that the tapped hole and the 2 grooved rails on the left side of the m14 receiver was to attach a grenade launcher. You are calling this one a scope mount so maybe like the dates on the pictures indicate there was a earlier version made just for a scope mount. If you look closely you can see that the left side in the picture is not like left side of a M14 receiver. Anybody out there got any knowledge of the 2 different mount styles on the left side? Anybody got a print, I could make some?BIGOK
Charlie
Joined
·
22,868 Posts
I think you will find that there were many different compositions used during product testing during the pre-acceptance period of development.
There would be no " correct" configuration unless you were to define a specific date and facility. Much the same for the XM21 and other research programs.
All of these came together to establish the M14 we all love today.
Thanks to organizations such as LRB and especially Bula Defense, programs are in effect even today to enhance and improve on the weapon system and keep it a formidable competitor in the world of dependable firearms.
Semper Fi
Art
There would be no " correct" configuration unless you were to define a specific date and facility. Much the same for the XM21 and other research programs.
All of these came together to establish the M14 we all love today.
Thanks to organizations such as LRB and especially Bula Defense, programs are in effect even today to enhance and improve on the weapon system and keep it a formidable competitor in the world of dependable firearms.
Semper Fi
Art
Joined
·
10,121 Posts
Charlie,
Thanks for being so flexible and giving us the opportunity to build accurate clones of the T44E4!
I have one of your receivers in North Carolina and JD Russell is saying they are excellent receivers, please keep it up.
REN
Joined
·
4,016 Posts
The picture I posted from the archives is the T44 short receiver tool room model made by
Mathewson Tool (not WRA).
It has scope mount but was not a production receiver.
T44 long and T44 short were first types
Mathewson Tool (not WRA).
It has scope mount but was not a production receiver.
T44 long and T44 short were first types
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
