Questions from an amateur

[cmbtinfantry]

Hello all,

I have an M1 that I acquired a while ago. I have been very pleased with it and never got worked up over parts and specifics. Lately however I am looking at another and it got me curious about mine. The receiver is a Springfield ser. # 705xxx. Barrel date is S-A-6-42. After hearing many words on "mixmasters" I got to looking at the various parts. All parts ar SA stamped so I began to wonder if possibly a restoration. The op-rod is numbered D35382 SA, trigger group is D28290-SA, Bolt is 6528287-SA Y01. I also had a question about the stock, I cannot find any markings other than PB stamped on the metal of the section that holds the receiver. There are also faint traces of white numerals on the end of the buttstock. Any help is appreciated and does anyone know of any good reference books that can be acquired.

Thanks,
Rick

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[John Kepler]

Hello all,

The receiver is a Springfield ser. # 705xxx. Barrel date is S-A-6-42.

Consistent with the receiver build-date (early July 1942)

The op-rod is numbered D35382 SA

Nonsequitur. No op-rods were made without a "Dash" number following the drawing number

trigger group is D28290-SA,

Inconsistent with the build-date (March-Sept.1940). Replacement part

Bolt is 6528287-SA Y01

Inconsistent with the build-date (Post-War). Replacement part.

I also had a question about the stock, I cannot find any markings other than PB stamped on the metal of the section that holds the receiver. There are also faint traces of white numerals on the end of the buttstock. Any help is appreciated and does anyone know of any good reference books that can be acquired.

The "PB" is Pietro Baretta...an Italian replacement stock. Your rifle MIGHT be a re-pat Danish Garand, but like most, it certainly is a "Mixmaster".

[BrianQ]

Nonsequitur. No op-rods were made without a "Dash" number following the drawing number

[John Kepler]

Then let's just say that Scot Duff says there aren't any on a gas-port rifle, and I've got a copy of PhotoShop too!

[leecorky]

It appears that you have a desirable WW II receiver with the original barrel. If it were mine and the receiver and barrel are in good condition, I would consider restoring the rifle to its original configutration. Of course, this possible restoration would also depend upon other factors such as the parkerization of the metal and barrel muzzle and throat measurements. Many of the parts you mention have value and could be sold or traded to acquire the correct parts for your rifle. It may take you a couple of years to get your Garand correct, but it could be a very enjoyable project. And when you are done, your rifle may be worth 2 to 3 times as much as it currently is.

[cmbtinfantry]

Thanks for the info. I like the idea of a project, gives me something to do and an excuse to buy more "for research" when wife raises eyebrow. As far as books is this Scott Duff fellow to be considered quite the authority on the subject? Thanks again for the help.

Rick

[latigo 1]

Then let's just say that Scot Duff says there aren't any on a gas-port rifle, and I've got a copy of PhotoShop too!

Are you saying that Brian posted a photoshop altered picture? Maybe you should do a little research before debunking his post. He is absolutely right. I have seen probably twenty or so of the D35382 SA op rods just like Brian's picture. They are a very common post war replacement op rod.

[John Wyatt]

I have a D35382 SA op-rod in an M1D. It was a common early post war part.

[goo]

i would avoid mixmasters... just like G.I.'s in ww11 and korea did. G.I's always checked to see if their garands were 'correct'. it was something that made a really big difference to them.
...
http://www.olive-drab.com/gallery/ph...talking_sm.jpg

[Bill Hollinger]

John, I too have D35382 SA op-rods, two to be exact. They are post war replacements. Don't believe everything you read.

PS Photoshop has nothing to do with it.