Import Marked WWII Garand

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brian Dick

I have a rifle that's just like yours except it a 3371xxx with correct SA/GAW stock and all original-correct parts. The lock bar staked on the rear sight has never been broken. Obviously some of the rifles imported in the 80's from Korea and elsewhere were unalterd originals in grungy but nice condition when cleaned up. My attitude is that the import mark is just another day in the history of the rifle unless horribly done and obtrusive. I know some think that it detracts from value but I don't really understand why as unaltered, original rifles are so difficult to find at all. I'd much rather have this rifle with it's import mark than one that has been restored by a collector/enthusiast. Just my 2 cents so take it for what it's worth.

---

I agree 100%. If someone can tell me what's going on with this business concerning import marks I wish you'd fill me in. It's something I can't begin to figure out! Take the "Greek Returns" over at CMP. People are going ga-ga over them. I read a few buyers are complaining that CMP won't put "Greek Return" on their paperwork when they get one! How much history could there possibly be with one of these? I mean with post war, post Korea serial numbers too. On the other hand, I also like Mauser rifles. There are lots of them around with Russian capture marks on them. I got a decent one recently, dated 1941. Now, this rifle could have been picked up at Stalingrad, Kursk, Leningrad or Berlin. Yet the seller told me everyone who looked at it said they didn't want a "Russian Return". Gimme a break here. I asked a guy once why he wanted a "Greek Return", and he said "I don't know, I just want one". Last year I asked a guy why he didn't want a Mauser with Russian capture marks, and was told "I don't know, I just don't". What I see is basically "herd thinking", or something similar.

I got a real nice HRA M-1 that a guy passed on-because the stock had two holes where a grenade sight was attached, who didn't want it because he didn't want to pay for an extra stock that didn't have the holes. What the heck, the rifle had a grenade launcher sight-it was part of that rifles history.

Charlie

Charlie, You've hit the proverbial nail square on the head. The fact is this. Import marks have been a part of U.S. firearms law since 1968. When I first went hunting a nice M1 Rifle in the late 1970's as a teenager, There weren't many to be had anywhere and when I finally did get one, it was a shot out Winchester for $550. Thanks to the import ban on military surplus being lifted in the 1980's, many good quality surplus rifles of foreign and U.S origins were allowed back into the country. It dropped prices and gave us lots of weapons to buy, sell and trade up to this day. In the case of British and Commonwealth weapons, the ones retained for war reserve service were surplused meaning some of the finest firearms we'd ever seen on the market. The guys that poo poo rifles with import marks when it comes to those are silly because most of the ones surplused prior to 1968 were done for a reason. That reason meaning they were out of specification and didn't pass military specification testing for some reason or another. There were lots of nice M1's and carbines that came in during the 1980's too along with the run of the mill rebuilds. The Russian capture Mausers are just another piece of history in their own right for any 98 Mauser collector. Then there are the Russian and Finn Mosins, Swede Mausers and on and on. I think as the supplies dry up, (and they are), the import mark phobia will become less and less important. In the meantime if you get a deal on an excellent rifle because it's got that horrible "import mark", snatch that thing up, shoot and enjoy it. They ain't making them anymore! ATB.

Sounds like a very nice addition to a collection. I would prefer the import mark to a flat spot on a reparked barrel .
Pictures would be great.

I have to side with the "import marks are legitimate" crowd. In Canada, rifles don't have to be import marked, yet. That will probably change with the next change in government.
The milsurps we get up here are mostly marked now, because they are imported from Century in the US. There is an outfit called Marstar and a few others that brings in milsurps from their original countries. These arms aren't marked.
I can understand the reasoning behind desiring the unblemished piece but it just isn't reasonable in this day and age. What it is, is an intrusion of foreign governments, through the UN, imposing laws and regulations on us that we didn't vote for or give the government the mandate to promote. The rejection of the import marks only plays into the hands of the antis. It was just their way of slapping us in the face.

The pieces are still desirable and just reflect current historical anti firearm sentiments. They also negate any ideas an individual might have about the arms being used by US forces. I understand that many lend lease rifles were used by US forces and loaned after WWII but the import mark leaves the glaring question.

Lee Enfields have similar problems. Canadians want Longbranch rifles, Brits want Maltbys and Americans want Savages. Especially the rifles without the lend lease stamps. It's only natural and a sign of national pride. If the milsurp fad continues for any length of time, import marks will be, just a proof mark of foreign use. Nothing more nothing less.

The guys looking for production Savage No.4Mk.1 or 1* rifles without the U.S Property stamp will be looking for a long time. ALL production Savage No.4 rifles have it because they were ALL destined for service in England and the Commonwealth. A fellow collector has serial number 0C1 which has been converted to a sniper in England and the mark is present on that rifle.

Not to get off track too far here but many M1 rifles and other military rifles that have returned from England have commercial proofs applied because any firearm sold out of service had to go through the proof house prior to civilian resale. Rifles imported prior to 1968 also have country of origin stamps required by U.S. commercial law prior to 1968. No one ever seems to notice or complain about those either but they certainly aren't military markings.