Any thoughts on this one ? I am thinking restoration.
Extremely Rare 2 Digit M1 Garand w/9-41 barrel : Semi Auto Rifles at GunBroker.com
Printable View
Any thoughts on this one ? I am thinking restoration.
Extremely Rare 2 Digit M1 Garand w/9-41 barrel : Semi Auto Rifles at GunBroker.com
extremely rare indeed. Wasn't 87 the first rifle shipped to the Army?
#87 was the first rifle actually completed after #81 failed. The first assemblies were very much trial pieces to evaluate the production line, and there were a lot of glitches that held up successful completion for about three weeks. #87 was successfully test-fired in early August 1937. #81 did not go to Ballistics for retest until the end of September.
I don't think you would want to attempt "Restoration" - the gun is in a proper state for a US Arsenal rebuilt "Gas Trap to Gas Port" Conversion of WWII Vintage, and you would be destroying the rifle's true history by changing ANYTHING. Better to find a bare two or three digit reciever and start gathering pieces (Good Luck with That!) than to alter what is here and destroy it's collectability altogether. Still a magnificent M1, just to own, exactly as it is.
Besides that, the parts needed to make it into a real Gas Trap again are pretty much unavailable and might cost more than the starting price of the rifle! A reproduction barrel/gas cylinder Gas Trap setup (making it into a half replica) is $2500, if you can still find one. Nothing is impossible with enough time and money, in theory - but I would leave this one "as found" even if I could afford to buy it. Just one opinion..... CC
I think the rifle is a restoration and it wouldn't matter to change the configuration anyway. The receiver looks to be Zinc parkerizing which was used during rebuilds after WWII and appears to have a mark on the right side receiver leg ,( possible sharpie, rebuild mark, or shadow ? ) . My assumptions may be wrong and the pictures are hard to tell so take what I am posting with a grain of salt . Assuming the park on the receiver is Zinc , then the armory probably didn't put it in this configuration . The parts, although some neat and somewhat hard to find a few of them , do not match the rebuild of a 9-41 barrel date . Again , my assumption . If Springfield armory had done the rebuild then wouldn't the rebuild P proof be different and not a square box P and the stock would have a regular cartouche stamp at this point in time ? The rifle is neat and has some cool parts I just don't believe it is an original Springfield armory rebuild from 9-1941 . Of course whoever buys this rifle can do whatever they want to with it. I do agree that if it was indeed an original 1941 rebuild then I agree, I wouldn't want to change the rifles configuration .
I would not go so far as to say that the 9/41 barrel was installed in this rifle in September 1941 at SA, and there is no reason to assume that date, even adding three months, as a condition of the rifle having genuine SA Rebuild status. SA could have done the rebuild anytime after that, as barrels were not necessarily all used up each month and one could have remained "in the back of the bin" for a long time before getting used.
I noticed the "Square P" rebuild proof, but stocks are instantly changable and difficult to prove they came with a specific rifle. I can argue "put together" on this one, based on finish details too, but an accurate restoration to original Gas Trap would seem to me to be a Fool's Errand with the severe scarcity of original parts. Treated as a WWII rebuild/conversion, a stock would make the rifle pretty "right" overall, if that is even needed. Much cheaper!
But the new owner can do anything he likes! If you do want to make a Gas Trap, and have the deep pockets this project would certainly require, this would be the ideal rifle to start with. Wish I was able! CC
I wouldn't touch this rifle. I would leave it as it is. The serial number alone tells a fascinating story. I would put it behind some glass and display it. JMO
In my original post, when I said " Any thoughts on this one ? I am thinking restoration.", I meant I believed THIS rifle was ALREADY a restoration. I did not intend to imply that it would be a candidate to "restore" to gas trap configuration. Sorry for any misunderstanding.Quote:
Originally Posted by Col. Colt
Does anyone here know the history of the rifle?
A 2-digit rifle is a dream to even have a shot at. I wonder what the reserve is??
Joe, it certainly could be a well done restoration imitating an SA GI rebuild, based on what is visible. But I don't know enough about SA's mid-war rebuild policies to say if an enthusiast put it together, or it came that way. I'm sure more experienced heads will be along shortly to expound on that. CC