Printable View
But, are they original to this receiver? I like the selective sanding of the stock. You can see it had a type II or III barrel band on the pic's taken from the top but, from below it has been removed.I beleive it is a put together carbine. Looks like 2 sets of hammer strick marks on triggerframe. Does it come with an ALL DAY SUCKER? JMHO.GK
I agree that it is a put-together but somebody did a lot better job than on the S'G'. The only part I can positively ID as a reproduction is the safety. The stock probably came from another carbine, it has been sanded and has had a later type band installed, but it is moderately hard to come by even in this condition and is valuable. The 7-42 barrel assembly looks un-messed with to me, very well could be original to the receiver and has considerable value on its own. The extractor assembly may have been been replaced to the correct first type plunger because it doesn't match the bolt in finish wear and the sear spring is not correct. I can't see if there are any stake marks under the rear sight but there are none grossly evident.
My standards may not be as high as some others here and this is not a $7000 carbine, but it is a very low serial number, it has a bunch of valuable parts and I think it is worth considerably more than your average 'corrected' carbine. JMHO
Your comments make sense and are true, but at what point does someone draw the line? Is a half corrected carbine better than a 3/4 example? It is still a fraud and always will be. To have it as a safe queen do you tell someone that you show it to: "This is a nicely done fake original early SG." how about when it comes time to sell it? Unless it is busted up (again) for parts, it will remain nothing more than a part gun. I would value it for nothing more than the price of its parts.
I'm fairly sure that this is it's second time out, and brought $3600.the first time but didn't meet reserve.:eek:
No doubt a 4 didgit is on everyone's short list.
I agree the Inland has a lot less repo than the S'G' does. However they both are put together and not near original as manufactured. Those repo parts on the S'G' are a rear turnoff, more so than mismatched wear and finish on the Inland.
That's the price for a "rare S'G'"? I could sell mine and pay for 2 semesters of class.
I'm struggling with this question. I have a very nice S'G' that appears original except the trigger housing, it has a IP housing. If I replace the housing with a S'G' and the BR hammer it would be correct and a parts gun.Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveHH
It is very possible that the IP trigger housing is original to your S'G' carbine. Saginaw Steering Gear of GM Corp. took over the Irwin-Pedersen (IP) carbine contract and plant in Grand Rapids, MI. Saginaw (S'G' designates the Grand Rapids works) also aquired all of the existing IP parts on hand at the time of takeover and used them, along with newly manufactured S'G' marked parts, during (mostly early) carbine production. It is very common to see an S'G' marked carbine with many IP marked parts, and vice versa to some extent.Quote:
Originally Posted by madcratebuilder
Your hammer (B/R?) is probably a Rock-ola hammer and I don't know if Rock-ola provided any hammers to Saginaw S'G' through lateral transfer of parts, which was not uncommon at the time. Better informed collectors here may jump in on the hammer issue. HTH
+1 IP could be correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChipS
The B/R (Brunner Ritter) hammer is a replacement hammer, not a Rockola (see KR, KR2 etc) hammer. Madcratebuilder probably has an original S'G' with a replaced hammer. A heck of a lot more genuine than some slapped together part gun. I wouldn't change a thing.