When is a Fox not a Fox?

[bamboozler]

Well, as Martha Stewart would say "it's a good thing" that Tony applied the patent dates of the originals to his guns, that way they offer more authenticity to his Fox, even though the original patents expired decades before his 1st CSMC Fox was built.

[DoubleGun]

There are really two things brought up here. The first is if a CT Fox is mechanically a Fox. It is, a lot of the parts won't interchange, but a lot of Phila and Utica parts are different and other parts changed as the design evolved. The important thing is that the design is faithful to the original. So Phila, Utica and CT are all brothers in that the design did not change, only some dimensions.
The second question is history. Old guns of quality are time capsules that bring one back to the times and people who produced them. Realizing that your century old Fox was built before electricity and automobiles were everyday things gives the latest custodian a small time trip every time he pulls the trigger. Imagining the gunmaker who made my gun working by gas light on a steam or water powered lathe is a rush and is an indication of how good those craftsman were. Good hands. NO NEW GUN OF ANY DESIGN OR QUALITY COMES WITH THIS TIME TRIP! There are other good things that come with new guns, but this wonderful time warp is not one of them. You get the history of the company that builds the gun but the gun itself lacks provenance.
Cheers, DoubleGun

[fox-admin]

DoubleGun: Very well said. Thanks

[birdawg]

Possibly the best way to look at the Fox guns reduced to a product would be the evolution in the guns generations.

1st Gen when Mr Fox ran the company. 2nd when Godshalk ran the company. 3rd gen under Savage and now the 4th with the custom guns produced by CSMC.

[FRBRIT]

Here's a link to a magazine article that is applicable to this thread. read what it says about how Tony went about developing the CSMC Fox.

I still think there should be a separate heading on this site for CSMC Foxes.

http://gardenandgun.com/article/connecticut-yankees

[Brian]

If the newest permutation of Savage reintroduced Fox shotgun as their own, would it be considered a true Fox? why/why not. The Savage of today is not owned by any of the original pricinpals from before. The company went bankrupt and was reborn at least once.
At what point are any ties or connections to the original company severed?

Far as I am concerned they are original. Maybe 3rd generation but thats like saying a Remington 700 today is not a Remington 700 becuase the company has been sold many times????

I think that one of the important points here is that Tony owns the rights/ good will of the FOX brand and follows these and the design. While manufacturing techniques and machines may change, the gun has stayed the same in basic design.
Here are some changes over the years to consider:
Moving from Krupp to Chromox steel.
From European to American Black walnut in some grades.
The change in the A grade engraving
The change from Philly to Utica (not all parts interchange)
The change from Utica to Chicopee Falls (not all parts interchange)
The change from Chicopee to New britain.
Tang screw to through bolt design (not all parts interchange)
The one off guns done post war that werent regualr production but assembled from whatever was laying around.
The lunch box specials employees did.

all of these events are significant. Yet none of them change the basic Fox.
so which of the above is or isnt a "true Fox"?


I am sure some of our more educated members could pose more pointed questions but This is just my .02.