Early Inland on GB

[Garandrew]

Ive asked him about that

[perrydcox]

Hello Gentlemen and fellow collectors,
At the urging of my friend Garandrew (whom I hold in high regard), I have joined your fine forum. I've read the comments made about this particular rifle and indeed, I am the one who purchased it. I will update my profile soon, but for now I'll tell you I've been collecting seriously for only 5 years now. I've crammed as much as I can in that time due ot sheer enthusiasm and love of these historic artifacts. I will now attempt to briefly address some of the concerns about this particular early Inland example I obtained recently. I'll address the ?? as I remember them..... First, the question of "How did I get this gun so fast?" Well, if you know me and have ever sold me a gun, you'll note I immediately request express mailing of all my guns. I also express mail the payment. A quick study of my Gunbroker feedback (been there 10 years) will kinda give you that idea. I don't like my shipments bouncing around for weeks not to mention I'm just plain excited to see it. I can also tell you that there was something awfully right looking about this example that I could see from the images even without seeing the internal images provided later. Like many of you, I was concerned about the "rust" also. Who wouldn't be. But I went with my gut on it , and it turned out to be the right decision. I haven't always come out a winner (case in point, 9/42 inland purchase earlier this year..) ...... 2nd concern: The internal parts look rusty??? Well, actually, in reality, it was more like a rust/mold combination caked on some areas. I can tell you it cleaned right off and in some cases left that familiar patina, but NO, I mean NO pitting whatsoever. I was incredibly happy about that, because that was the clear gamble I was taking. 3rd concern: "Bullish bidding"... INdeed, I am agressive on the ones I want to win because it takes so long to find authentics as you know. My bidding history will show you that. And also like many of you, We seem to have to "browse through thousands" to find that one right gem. To me, this one is one of those gems. 4th concern: Did all the interior parts come up right? I can assure you, each and every single part came up exactly as it should be for it's time of mfg. I have a list of all parts ID for this one down to the springs, and every one are completely correct. I sent the complete list to Garandy and I'll gladly send to anyone that asks. 5th concern: Why is the buttplate "later and of vertical/horizontal pattern?".....well, this FINALLY seems to be getting straightened out. A couple years ago, I also picked up a "right" 111xxx Inland which also had what most thought to be a "later" buttplate. The incredible new Carbine book by Roger Larson points out that the plates were mixed after the very earliest examples... Harrison's book always mentioned it. The fact that these plates have not been "swapped out" is a great thing as many collectors who believe they had to be "diagonal only" would've swapped out these plates and changed their historic correct status. I'd appreciate any comments on this or anything else. And to the gentlemen who referred to me as "dummy" in your heading, I can only say that I'm sure you spoke out of complete ignorance. Common courtesy is appreciated and should be afforded to those who are less informed. I'm only a student of this hobby. I'm not a master of it. I'm interested in learning what is true and accurate for the sake of pure enjoyment and respect of the hobby and field. Certainly not to gain some lofty heady status that lords their knowledge over others in belittlment. In my profession, I am the author of 8 different books on the subject of Collectible Beatles Memorabilia. I am considered an expert in that field. I learned early on to remain a teachable student in that field too. Even after 8 books and 30 years. I welcome newcomers and I never forget I was one once. How we treat them insures a nice future for the fields. Anyway, there you have it... I"m open to any questions about this gun or anything else. Thanks Garandrew for inviting me over. My best, Perry
p.s. Indeed, the sling is khaki, and is marked "S.M. Co. 1942"

[Garandrew]

See what I mean? Perry is quite a guy, and gracious with information.
Andy

[Newscotlander]

Congratulations on your acquisition. Could you tell me if that is a narrow buckle or a wide buckle on that 1942 dated sling. I would be very surprised to see a wide buckle on a sling with a 1942 date.

[perrydcox]

Hello Newscotlander,
Thanks much.
It is a wider buckle. The best source for verification on what soldiers carried are 42 vintage dated photographs. Based on those images found on web pages, books, etc. the commonly perception that only narrow buckles are from 42 don't seem to hold up. In fact, I do see the narrower buckle, but in far less numbers. In Roger Larson's book, he shows the round metal and flat metal wider buckles are correct for the earlier khaki slings. He also mentions the narrow buckle was in extremely limited use at any time. This seems to support the vintage photos I've seen in various publications. (I also don't see any one book as the final authority just like I don't see any one "expert" as the final word.) Anyway, It's possible that the long held belief may be going the way of the long misled belief that only diagonal buttplates should be on early Inlands. This is my opinion of course. For certain, I didn't witness this sling being put on this rifle, but it sure appears to have been there quite awhile and looks right in terms of age and wear compared to the rest of the gun. My 12/42 Inland also has a khaki sling from the same mfg with a 42 date, but with a round wire style wider buckle. I agree, most accessories (and parts for that matter) have a ballpark range in terms of timeframes, but aside from that, the only thing 'absolute' is that there are very few absolutes in our hobby. Did they issue any 1945 with Dogleg hammers? Probably not many if ever... Did they issue straight hammers in 42? No, they didn't. But did they issue khaki buckles in 1942 with wider buckles? I think it's very likely they did.

[Newscotlander]

Thank you. Could you post a picture of the sling marking? Also, the sling marking on your "12/42 Inland"? I would be very interested in seeing what they look like.

I suggest that you use a book source other than Larson's.

[BrianQ]

I suggest that you use a book source other than Larson's.

Good advice.

[DaveHH]

to the seller who posted the photos on the auction. Obviously the buyer (you) had nothing to do with it. I just found it odd that a person selling a nice piece like that wouldn't take the time to remove the rust. Made no sense unless there was another motive in leaving it there. So yes, I was speaking out of ignorance: what's up with the rust?

[perrydcox]

Hi DaveHH,
Thank for the clarify,
I appreciate that. Oddly enough, I"ve often found with collectibles, that some of the best items came from those "dummies" who didn't present them well at all. Bad pictures, limited text. etc. etc.. It was that reason that I ended up with this one I think. Sometimes you just have to see the wheat with the chat and realize that many of these prizes are still with those who have no clue. You and I would've never presented it like that... oh, and that "rust" just brushed and cleaned off easily. Some patina left in areas, but no pitting at all. There was also some moldiness in the slingwell and stock that was so easy to just brush and clean off. Thanks again!

---------- Post added at 09:19 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:19 AM ----------

I have 7 or 8 references. I used that one as it has the best illustrations of them all and I just got it. I've found NO one book is totally 100% correct.

[DaveHH]

I would agree with you about hidden gems, but this guy apparently knows his carbines as he points out all of the various features of this early carbine. The photos are not at all poor and for the format, quite well done. I just find it very odd that a knowledgeable collector would allow one of his units, an apparently very valuable one, to go out the door or be portrayed like that. Kind of like showing a classic car for sale and having a flat tire in the photo.