It is the real thing except for the lock bar sight. Mine has the same test marks on the receiver ring.
Printable View
It is the real thing except for the lock bar sight. Mine has the same test marks on the receiver ring.
I have Vol. 1 (1983) and Vol. 2 1986 of the SRS "Serial Numbers of Martial Arms", just based on where the information relating to M1 ser. numbers came from, I would say no, at least not in my books. Vol. 1 indicates the main sources of information on M1 rifles were the post WW2 records of SA and records of the DCM, which show mostly NM rifles. In Vol. 2 the main source of data is from pre WW2 records of the USMC. My Vol. 1 only lists six rifles in the 400,000 range and they are all records from the 1950s.Quote:
Originally Posted by davfink
I would guess the reason some have indicated they would rather the British Proof markings be at the rear of the barrel, behind Op-Rod is because those rifles are the only ones you can be sure are, in fact, lend lease. Those marked in the front between rings of gas cylinder may or may not be lend lease. While yours certainly is within the correct range, you just can't tell for sure.
As far as the lock bar sights, they were a upgrade from the short-pinion/flush nut. My guess is that the original sights w/ flush nut on your rifle were not removed by a collector looking to make a few dollars, but were changed back in the 1940's.
Are you aware that you can tell the year your rifle was proofed for export at Birmingham by examining the "date code" in the left angle of the "crossed swords". They started with the letter A for 1950 and progressed (omitting the letter I ), to the letter Z for 1974.
In any case, you have a beautiful rifle and I would think long and hard before spending the money that is being asked for short pinion/flush nut sights and ligit SA/GHS stock. And before I bought a stock I would want the opinion of an expert. Just to many fakes floating around.
As someone else said, it is what it is, and anyone would be happy to own it.
By the way, the rifle in my AVATAR is 422881. From what I can see of your parts, they are the same, except the heat lot on my -2 bolt is RE4A
OK, you are a few little parts shy that you get to groan about, but what is there is absolutely magnificent - congratulations on a veryu nice find. Seriously, the condition is absolutely impecable. Look to the leading edge of the bolton top - one of the neat things that I got to do was go thru a few racks of flat new collector grade rifles at the North store when they had them a few years ago and this seemed to be one of the first areas to show signs of wear and firing (it is where the bolt passes under the receiver bridge) - yours is showing only the slightest signs of wear and looks to be nearly perfect!
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IMG_8207-1.jpg
Also cool is in this picture you can see the little BNP proof mark that they placed on the barrel ring of the receiver and bolt (see the smudge and if you look close you can see the little BNP to the right in this picture) - the hardened steel of these parts was very hard on the steel of the stamp which slowly got pounded into what ends up being more of a blob than anything else - the result is that they look like (and many people mistake them for) a small imperfection in the metal, but isn't it odd that roughly the same shape and size imperfection is in two different parts at the same time (grin).
Yours actually appear to be almost discernable and quite nice - some are really just blobs that look like an imperfection. (As an aside, it is this kind of information that, while neat can also be a tidbit of information that is quite useful by pointing to something tht you might not be seeing - let me explain; if in your gunshow travels you happen to trip across a near mint early Garand that is NOT Brit marked on the barrel it would be quite a find. But, as such a rifle tended to get a premium in years past, back in the day when early barrels might still be found in excellent condion, there were fellas who sould swap out a barrerl for a non-Brit marked one and there was little or nothing they could do about, even had they noticed, those little Brit BNP marks ... and because you know that they are part of the British proving marks you would be able to spot such an altered item ...).
Also in that picture is something I can't say that I have seen - on the bolt to the far right of the markings is another 'B'. It doesn't appear to be a skip on the 'RE4B' but it sure looks to be the same 'B'. There are wayward marks on bolts and several other parts and that 'B' is not an uncommon one. Kinda neat and I can't say I have ever seen that before.
Other than that, boy I have to say that I am impressed with the general condition of the rifle. The stock sure appears to be a correct long channel but finding one with a cartouche AND in that condition is going to be ... well, you will have to buy a whole LL rifle to get that. I am not saying it wouldn't be worth it to buy someone's restoration and part it out, just that loose wood is impossible and unreasonably expensive (I actually think someone has a restoration of one up on gunbroker right now with a very nice stock - he even said he could make more money but couldn't bear to part it out). Me? I'd be happy with that one - it sure looks to be the right one already ...
But again, condition of the metal is in my experience, far above average - that is a gorgeous rifle, ... really gorgeous.
Congrats again - very nice find.
(PS; on the short pinion flushnut rear sight, you can either put an ad in the back of the GCA Journal or, at the end of one of your posts on this string I would put your email up and just mention that you are in the market for one - I know there is one fella reading here with a few REAL ones left yet from years past and that he has been slowly selling them off. It won't be a give-away but it will be fair, just put it out there and see what happens)
Thank you for all the compiments and observations on this rifle. I noticed the extra B on the bolt, and if you look above it, there is also a cut off 4 visible too.
I probably wont replace the stock, just a coat of RLO on it( correct period for RLO use?) I am debating on the flush, since a flush would be cool, and different, but not necessary. it was also odd that the checkered elevation was kept when switching out the pinion and bar.
I will have to check the date on the proof when i get home since my picture is not clear enough to tell
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...ritproof-1.jpg
Looks like it may be an "F" which would indicate it was proofed in 1955. I believe it was in 1955 that Sam Cummings of "Interarms," importd the first group of LL rifles from Great Britain. This first batch, according to Bob Seijas, were the rifles that were proofed in the date area behind the op-rod. Bob also said " maybe InterArms didn't get them all the first time around, and the second lot got marked in front." Your rifle, if proofed in 1955, would tend to support that therory.
I agree with you that it would be nice to be able to put a short pinion/flush nut on it, if you can find one at a fair price. That rifle is so nice it really deserves one. As the Bodyman said, put an ad in the GCA Journal and see what may turn up.
I kow of a really nice lend lease for sale. I was so tempted, but am going to stay strong and not buy.
I looked at it, and it really looks like a B. the mark on the right side of the "x" looks like a B, so that would be 1951?
The year code is the letter in the "left Angle" of what is crossed swords. The right angle always contains a "B" which indicates "Birmingham". The digit on the bottom, in your case, a "4", is the seniority of the inspector. This number will be 1 to 8. If you compare the "B" on the right to the letter on the left, I believe you will find they are not the same. Also, I don't believe any L.L. rifles were released by Great Britian until those purchased by Sam Cummings in about 1955.Quote:
Originally Posted by davfink
The Birmingham Proof House did not start proof marking Garands at the muzzle end of the barrel until about the 1960s. The date code in the View Mark looks like an L to me which would make the proof date 1960.
Tom, Where did you get that information ?? As far as I know, based on Scott Duff's article "Garands in the Kings Service", Apr. 2002 American Rifleman, and comunications with Bob Seijas, both London and Birmingham proofed L.L. Garands. That only the first group of rifles purchased by Sam Cummings are proofed in the date area behind the op-rod. No other M1 rifles, other than that first group, are proofed in that area. An article in the GCA Journal, summer 1995, page 22) indicates that, based on the book "Deadly Business, Sam Cummings, InterArms and the Arms Trade" by Patrick Brogan and Albert Zarca, published in 1983, that it was in 1954 that Sam Cummings (Interarmco (InterArms), aquired a "consignment" of Lend Lease rifles from Great Britain through an agent in England, Cogswell and Harrison. On the other hand, Scott Duff states that it was in 1957 that Cummings was able to purchase the rifles and 1958 when they were first imported. As I am more inclined to go along with Duff, what I am saying is that Birmingham must have proofed rifles at the "muzzle end", at least as early as 1958.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Doniphon
As far as the "date code' on the rifle belonging to "davfink", I can only make out a straight line which appears to be seriffed on bottom and maybe the top, I can only guess what it might be. I said maybe an "F: (1955) as in Scott Duffs article, he uses an example of a "Private View Mark" showing the "date code" of "F" and and inspectors code of "1", but it may well be an "L" as you say. I would like to see a better picture of the mark.
I would appreciate any information you might have which might offer proof that Birmingham did not proof mark M1s in the muzzle area until the 1960s. I am always looking to learn more on this subject. Thanks