Where to draw the line?

Quote:

---

I think most would define "original" as either as it came from the factory or as it was last used/issued. When you speak of adding/swapping the right manufacturer parts, that will only make it "correct" not "original" and it certainly would be fruadulent to try and sell it by representing it as original.

---

Appreciate the replies...My confusion lies in the terms, "correct" & "original".
How could anyone tell the difference if one spends inordinate amount of time and money so as to appear correct, while in their mind they want it to be original. Is that why there is always forum skepticism when somone says they have a "bring-back" from WW11 from their Uncle Willie?:confused:

I believe that "fraud" is probably the correct term, both morally and legally, for changing the condition of an item and then misrepresenting said item in selling it for profit. I think that we have all seen the "one and only" cartouche stamps that have surfaced on some auction boards - in never-ending quantities. Someone is buying them and then strangely alot of stocks show up with cartouches that are pretty darn sharp for 65 years old! I also roll my eyes at the "all-correct" rifle that shows up as "just found in the safe". Yea, I know alot of WWII vets have died in the last few years (including my own father) and some bring backs are surfacing. But how many of those "bring backs" are "all correct"? I have ran a military armory and I can vouch that armorers make mix-masters every time they clean or maintenance more than one weapons at a time. But yet, the rifles and the cartouche stamps still sell. Strange, if it was a Van Gogh painting someone would be going to jail... With that said, I have no problem with people putting a Rock-ola trigger on a Rock-ola trigger housing for their own edification and when they are open about doing it... I don't think twice about putting a Pacmyer grips on a pistol. Just don't try and convince me that the entire Rock-ola "correct" rifle has been laying in Grandpa's closet since 1943.

And while I am on a soap box, I will point out another of my confusions.... The M-16 was a really messed up weapon (for several reasons) when it was first used by our troups in the 60's. Over the years, and several major modifications, it has turned into a dependable weapon. While we all know that the M-1 Carbine was a very good CARBINE (pistol substitute) when it was introduced, it was given several upgraded over its years of service to make it more dependable and mechanically sound. By the end of WWII and the Korea the rifle had better sights, stronger op rod, a bayonet lug/ban type that actually made it more accurate, and other mechanical improvements. With that said, I do not understand the desire that alot of people have to "de-upgrade" their carbines... does that make them more "original" when someone removes the armory rebuild upgrades? Are they more accurate when you put a replace a step sight with a flip sight? Now those thinks I do not understand....

Of course, my opinion and $0.25 will not buy me a cup of GI coffee!

There is a BIG difference between original and correct. The only way to establish a Carbine as original is to have been there and picked it up with your own hands when it came out of the factory where it was originally assembled and to be able to verify that no one else had it in their posession at any time without you having been there, even then there is room for doubt. Other than the above, it can only be correct, not original. JMHO
Chuck

A few months ago I started with several mixmasters and now have all nearly "original" carbines by trading parts and buying only a few. Being a newbie I asked and have taken the advice of those who said "leave the T3 barrel bands, flip safeties, and adj sights alone" etc. Most fun I've had in years. Fully intend to get some more ASAP. And when wx breaks I'll give them a try on the range to see how they match up with my "correct" Win.

OT, kinda, CMP has an unissued H&R Garand up for auction, does the lucky winner take it to the range and try it out?.....Frank:dunno:

I would

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frankderrico

OT, kinda, CMP has an unissued H&R Garand up for auction, does the lucky winner take it to the range and try it out?.....Frank:dunno:

---

To me, that's like having a Sherman tank come out of mothballs. You don't take it 4-wheeling, but you got to take it to the parade and show it off to everyone! Those are the kind of things that you respect, take care extra care of and shoot it with as many people possible watching.

Hey Ed, I agree.....Frank

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tired Retired

By the end of WWII and the Korea the rifle had better sights, stronger op rod, a bayonet lug/ban type that actually made it more accurate, and other mechanical improvements. With that said, I do not understand the desire that alot of people have to "de-upgrade" their carbines... does that make them more "original" when someone removes the armory rebuild upgrades? Are they more accurate when you put a replace a step sight with a flip sight? Now those thinks I do not understand....

Of course, my opinion and $0.25 will not buy me a cup of GI coffee!

---

This is a very good observation. The flip sight and type 1 barrel band are definitely rinky-dink and with the rotary safety at least you won't drop the magazine by mistake. "De-upgrading" just produces an inferior rifle that is also inauthentic.

I, too, have never understood the need for flip sites and Type I barrel bands. To me, a USGI carbine that has been de-upgraded is about as original as one of that new Kahr commercial carbines with "early" features. To each his own, though, that's what's great about America.