Results 1 to 10 of 201

Thread: "Inland" Manufacturing M1 Carbines - 1st hand experience

Click here to increase the font size Click here to reduce the font size

Threaded View

  1. #1
    Legacy Member Sleeplessnashadow's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last On
    10-09-2022 @ 01:01 PM
    Location
    Los Angeles area
    Posts
    111
    Local Date
    05-08-2024
    Local Time
    03:05 AM

    "Inland" Manufacturing M1 Carbines - 1st hand experience

    I'm looking for owners with first hand experience with the new commercially produced carbines under the name of Inland Manufacturing. I'm hoping to compare hands on operational experience to learn if what I'm encountering is the norm or an oddity. I'm familiar with who the company is and the marketing, also probably a bit more familiar than most with commercial carbines, their weaknesses and strengths. This thread is intended to be specific to first hand experience with these new "Inland" carbines so we can all learn.

    I picked mine up 09 Aug 2015. Serial number 9000696. Cleaned it then 10 Aug 2015 I had it out on a range feeding it Aguila and LC 1971 purchased from CMPicon. Put about 600 rounds through it with my veteran son.

    Accuracy wasn't measured in inches. We used various size steel targets out to 200 meters. Accuracy was pretty good under these conditions. A cataract in my right eye inhibits my use of a peephole sight so I stick to metal targets instead of a bullseye.

    Function improved with the number of round being fired but a number of problems became evident. These issues had been seen during cleaning before firing and were examined closer during firing and a subsequent cleaning afterwards.

    The most prominent issue is the receiver is warped. In more than one area. The rear wall of the trigger housing abuts up against the bottom of the receiver and prevents the holes in the trigger housing and front receiver lug from aligning to insert the trigger housing pin. During the first cleaning and disassembly it took a brass punch and ball pin hammer to get the pin out. Knowing well the danger of snapping the front lug it was done cautiously. Rubber/plastic mallets would not budge it. Attempting reassembly it became obvious the bottom of the receiver was pivoting on top of the trigger housing rear magazine wall and the holes wouldn't line up. With as much care as possible the parts were forced into position. It became obvious whoever assembled it originally had to encounter the same problem.

    Looking down the right side of the receiver along the slide groove the groove is warped in several places as in the metal the slides travels back and forth on.

    Inside the receiver the casting mold marks protruded into the path of the bolt. Working the action the bolt hangs up in two distinct positions. This played out during firing when the bolt occasionally locked up all the way to the rear past the hold open pin detent and occasionally failed to rotate and lock into place due to the amount of energy absorbed by the ridges inside the receiver. The top of the bolt has been repeatedly scratched by these ridges, beyond the normal wear of a round bolt.

    When attempting to seat their magazine, or a new commercial mag of quality and a couple GI mags in good condition, the mags often failed to lock into position above the mag catch. The space for the magazine to be seated properly has been reduced by the bow in the bottom of the receiver that the rear wall of the trigger housing pivots on. Close exam of the trigger housing later it looks ok, the issue is the warping of the receiver and casting mold ridges that should have been machined smooth.

    At this point I won't get into the construction of the barrel or a few other interesting things. They worked, so far, so not an issue at the moment.

    Next up is the finish on the stock. During cleaning of the powder residue from inside the handguard and inside the stock's slide well and barrel channel, I used cotton patches with Hoppe's #9. It removed the powder residue but also a percentage of the walnut stain finish, particularly in the areas where they stained it to the point of black. If I repeated the process after the powder residue was removed it removed more of the finish. Tested this on the outside of the stock with the same results. One thing I haven't seen before was the patches also came away with a light to medium green colored residue. Have no idea what this was from and can only guess.

    Also, the receiver finish along the area where the slide travels has been worn off unevenly, consistent with the warping in that area.

    I hope to shoot pics of it the next couple nights and will add a few here. After the pics I'll contact them for an RMA# and return it for correction. There are a couple other issues but minor compared to these.

    Anyone else have first hand experience shooting/cleaning one of these?

    Thanks folks

    Jim
    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.
    Last edited by Sleeplessnashadow; 08-13-2015 at 01:27 AM.

  2. The Following 12 Members Say Thank You to Sleeplessnashadow For This Useful Post:


Similar Threads

  1. Anyone have experience with GB seller "sreisel" Enfields
    By chuckchili in forum The Lee Enfield Knowledge Library Collectors Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 09-01-2012, 05:39 PM
  2. Replies: 17
    Last Post: 05-29-2012, 01:07 AM
  3. M1903 Remington "Modified" Hand Guard Rear Band
    By Zeewad in forum M1903/1903A3/A4 Springfield Rifle
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-27-2012, 01:01 PM
  4. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-21-2010, 08:25 PM
  5. The "Difficult Process" of converting a K31 to Left Hand Operation......
    By diopter in forum Milsurps General Discussion Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-30-2009, 08:59 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts