The more I look at it the more it doesn't look right. Comparing it to my stock, the legs on the box are too long, unless that's from the stamping angle.
Printable View
The more I look at it the more it doesn't look right. Comparing it to my stock, the legs on the box are too long, unless that's from the stamping angle.
I will let everyone look this one over as age may have allot to do with the differences. The upper is a square top and the lower comparison is the pointed. Remember angles of the original picture can cause the eyes to scream fake right away while looking real close make you think it is real. What does everyone else think?? Rick B
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...03/m1d13-1.jpg
Well, originally I was concerned with the pointed A, now that doesn't bother me so much. I am now wondering about the length of the bottom end of the S. Is it distortion caused by age or is it wrong. I am so thankful that there are people like Rick around to share their expertise and turn this into a learning experience that hopefully everyone will benefit from.
Edit:
Looking at the comparisons even more, I noticed that the grain in my stock is much rougher than the other stocks posted for comparison. Would that also contribute to the distortions and make it harder to judge the authenticity?
This is on the stock of a M1903A3 from the CMP.
Attachment 32157
This is a old thread but to close the loop, early M1D's seen with both the SA (Springfield Armory) and RA (Raritan Arsenal) stamps, are likley part of the original re-built rifles with the M1D barrels installed at SA. These rifles were then shipped to RA that was responsible for equipping the rifles with the M84 (sometimes M82) optics, sniper accessories. Raritan was then responsible for shipping completed M1Ds to their final destination (CONUS, OCONUS, or storage).
https://i.imgur.com/lRuHsE0.jpg
No pic appears with that link.