Pictures of my "somewhat original" Inland - what do you guys think?

[USGI]

Here's some pictures of the internal parts. I see two things so far that might not be right - the hammer spring and the staking of the gas piston nut. I'll try cleaning the area around the nut and getting a better picture. I hope to disassemble the bolt later today. Please comment about the two items I have in question and/or anything else you see that may, or may not look "right." If those stock numbers are Julian, do they have to do with the date of the whole carbine or just the stock? Thanks! - Bob

[ABPOS]

The thing looks spotless except by the piston and inside the receiver. Did you just shoot it?

I'm no expert on all the markings. But I think you got a good one there.

[NRA]

damn nice pics

[USGI]

The stock being so clean makes me wonder if someone had the action in a different stock, and then swapped it back just before selling. No, I haven't shot it yet - need to go see about getting that bolt apart. Thanks for the nice comments! After a closer look at the operating slide spring, I'm thinking it might not be GI. JimF is good at counting holes in targets - Jim: How many coils on that spring? Isn't it short by about 10 coils? - Bob

[INLAND44]

That's one of the nicest ones I've ever seen. I would advise to not get hung up on originality of maintenance parts like springs and the staking of the piston nut. Any G.I. or armorer could have taken the gas piston out and put it back at any time.

[USGI]

I know most of you guys like pictures, so here's a bunch more of them. Hope I'm not over doing it. The gas piston nut was loose so I took it the rest of the way out. I believe it's the earlier type nut - and there is an extra stake mark on the housing. There isn't much wear on the bolt or the internal parts, hardly any peening at the back of the bolt. I need to check my books on these parts because I see the earlier firing pin and ejector. The safety and mag release plungers were pretty hard to get out - took some coaxing. Charlie Painter: If the picture of the extractor plunger is good enough for you to see it, the tip is a little bit blunt and a there's a small lip or ledge forming. Didn't you say it would be a good idea to stone that ledge off so it's smooth? At first I was afraid that bolt had been reblued with a sharpie like the story you told awhile back - but all is good! I guess that about does it for the pictures unless there's something else you guys want to see. Oh, how about that hammer - is that marking "H" ?
Thanks! - Bob

[JimF4M1s]

Bob, Great pictures.
Jim

[USGI]

Jim,

Is this one close to the s/n of the Inland you got earlier this year? I still need to look up info on the parts - everything is probably original except some of the springs. I've been getting behind on everything else around here because of spending too much time cleaning and "fiddling" with this stuff! - Bob

[painter777]

Charlie Painter: If the picture of the extractor plunger is good enough for you to see it, the tip is a little bit blunt and a there's a small lip or ledge forming. Didn't you say it would be a good idea to stone that ledge off so it's smooth?

Hey Bob,
I use a light stone to remove the burrs that form UNDER the ledge.

Charlie-painter777

[USGI]

Charlie,
I probably didn't use the best choice of words. I was talking about stoning off the slight "hook" that's forming at the tip of the ledge. When finished, it would have the same shape as a new plunger except the point would be slightly blunt. I think we're talking about the same thing??

After checking in Riesch's book, I find the following parts on my Inland that don't match his charts: Hammer spring (I knew that was probably changed), handguard (my type not used that early), and buttplate (should be diagonal rows). I was wrong about the op slide spring, it does have the right number of coils at 120. The buttplate doesn't really look like it's ever been off, and I know Riesch has errors on other plates. I wonder if he could be wrong about the buttplate and the handguard? One interesting thing I found was small dots of red paint on various parts including the stock, handguard, receiver, and trigger housing as if someone marked them to keep all the parts of this carbine seperate from others that may have been apart at the same time - possibly done at a repair depot?

Thanks, - Bob