USC Storage Boxes

The US Cartridge Co used obsolete cartridge boxes for storage of assorted parts and draw pieces. Here are several of these boxes with their content. All are two piece split boxes with the Lowel, Mass address.
280 ross box 280 ross box side 280 ross draw
280 Ross FMJ bullet draw pieces.

45 60 box

45 60 box side 45 60
45-60 draw pieces

56 56 box 56 56 box side 56 56 draw
58-56 Spencer draw pieces.

56 46 box 56-46 box side
56 46 draw
56-46 Spencer draws Raised “US”

I’m sure there must be many other of these storage boxes out there. What ones do you have?

Paul

3 Likes

Were these not actually used by WRA? It seems unlikely to me that USC actually manufactured the .280 Ross cartridge. Jack

I have one so headstamped.

I have heard these were also used by WRA. These boxes reportedly come from a Winchester employee, at least that’s the story I was told when I got them. Winchester acquired the assets USC Co. in 1926 the same date that is seen on the box containing the 280 Ross draw pieces. The raised “US” headstamped Spencer draw piece is definately USC Co. probably from 1900 or earlier. Earlier I posted a 38 SPL draw set form a USC Co box. it was dated 1924 which is before Winchester purchased USC Co.

Paul

Rich: Thanks for the info. I thought I recalled the story about WRA using these boxes (noting the 1926 date inked on the .280 box) and then began to wonder if USC had even made that caliber; now I know. Bet they didn’t sell a bunch. Jacj

The story I also had was WRACo samples were in these boxes.
That there was a carryover in manufacture by WRACo of US product it is not surprising to see US marked items in these boxes.
I have photos & will add later as something is wrong at the moment.
photos & inner contents is the blue box. Red is MT
tops
sides inside blue

Pete, thanks for posting the photos.

Paul

I too got a box at an antique store. Mine are 25-20 inside and some extra pieces also.





2 Likes

Neat box and content.

Rimfire,
I believe the story you heard is correct. I received some of this material directly from the ex-Winchester employee who told me that Winchester was throwing the USCCo case draw collection boxes away and he liberated many of the boxes from the trash! In his digging he found some 9mm Glisenti ,material. He mentioned that this material was in boxes but what he he gave me was in a brown paper envelop marked “Maxim DS”. I suspect he didn’t want to waste neat old .22 boxes on me.

In my case he provided me about 35 pieces for the Maxim headstamped 9mm Glisenti made for Italy in WWI. The Maxim made cases had headstamp of medium size letters and dated 1917. In late 1917 problems at Maxim resulted in USCCo taking over the contract, and all Western production I have seen, except as noted below, was dated 1918 with small size letters, except for the cases in this batch which were dated 1917 with small letters. About half of these items (both bullet and case stages) had a small clip soldered on the back to be attached on a board. These appear to constitute a complete draw set. The others were just assorted draw pieces with one exception. One primed case, 23.26mm long, and dated 1918 with a copper primer has a poorly made shoulder at about 19mm. It looks like it may have intended as an extended case blank, but this is only a guess. The 1918 cases have brass primers, but a number of the 1917 cases in this group have brass primers, and have not been trimmed to 19mm, which seems strange to me!

Subsequently I found a single loaded round dated 1917 with the (USCCO) small letters and a copper primer. It is polished, which may have happened later, There is no indication it is a dummy, but it could have been some sort of inert display item. I have never been tempted to pull the bullet to see in it is inert.

If anyone can shed some light on any of the obvious questions raised by this group, I would be delighted!

Cheers,
Lew

Lew, I don’t think this relates directly to your question, but I have a MAXIM USA 1917 dummy 9mm Glisenti cartridge, which looks in profile like a loaded round - no special case finish or flutes, holes, etc. to identify it as a dummy; simply no primer and a blind primer pocket (no flash hole).

Tthe differences in the MAXIM headstamps are so tiny that every time I look at the few in my collection, I have to re-acquaint myself with why they are different!

John M.

John,
I have the identical dummy and the size of the headstamp letters indicate to me that it is a product of Maxim not USCC.

Lew

Another post below notes these storage boxes. I too thought they were from WRACo

Bob Reichenbach or John Hintlian or Jim Tillinghast ?