Printable View
Thanks guys, the only thing that got me was why would an armorer install a N/M rear sight on a normal re-build? I was thinking somebody gathered some parts together and made hisself a rifle. Who knows? One of the 1's on the safety is probably covered up by the trigger guard.
Sounds like a beaut, Tom.
It could have picked up that NM sight anywhere. Heck, some platoon might have had a guy who shot it on a pick-up rifle team. There's lots of guys in service who shot competitively and weren't on a major team like the AMU or a Navy Fleet team. Or maybe some Sergeant appreciated finer things and added the sight to *his* weapon.
I'm going to express a "Minority Opinion", but one that I feel needs to be articulated. You say you are "detail oriented"...if that is true, then be advised that your rifle is already more "correct" than anything you can do to it....so leave the rifle alone! By swapping-out the parts that are already there, you are REMOVING history from that rifle, not enhancing it! You are removing the evidence of that rifle within an historic context, and attempting to "replace" it with pure unadulterated fiction.Quote:
Originally Posted by JaxTom
That rifle already has a history that is detailed in the parts that have been replaced BY THE ORIGINAL OWNER (the US Gub'mint!). The ONLY rifles that 60+ years down the road are "complete/correct" are either fakes (as you propose), or never went anywhere. No "complete/correct" rifle survived it's first "Company Rifle-Cleaning Session" as an "issue" firearm (rifles were disassembled and the parts tossed into a communal trashcan full of gasoline/diesel to soak in an effort to keep that pr!ck of a boot DI off everyone's a$$)...few if any rifles with a combat history have their original barrel...all rifles that did anything have had their sights upgraded to the T-105 after WW II...stocks were replaced/swapped routinely....ALL CORRECT, all part of the rifle's history! The one rifle that is almost certainly INCORRECT, is the one that's "complete/correct"!
One of the BIGGEST pieces of historical vandalism that people do is to take the very historical, very clearly marked 1960's Vietnam rebuilds...and "parts-swapping" them into an ersatz WW II configuration! Drives me nuts....like tearing down a Greek temple to make a pig-shed!
Thanks John, you have articulated exactley the conclusion I was coming to, with the help of the expert advice I have been given. This rifle has some sentimental value to me, it may have been overseas when my Dad was (at least the receiver was, thats a stretch I know, but I will take it). The only things I might do is replace the square front clip latch with a round one if i can find one good enough, and place a walnut stock on it, again if i can find something good enough. I like walnut on American arms. Many thanks again.
Lets see if this works.
I'll be durned!
I'm on a roll!
Tom,Quote:
Originally Posted by JaxTom
If you are going to selectively replace items then you might as well do it all. Personally I would leave it alone for just what it is, a nice rifle of unknown origin.
Nice rifle! Love those crisp, sharp heel markings. I've got a rifle that is about 3,000 off from yours. Same kind of markings. Mine is a '46 rebuild with lots of different parts that aren't correct. It stays as it is. Thanks for the pics.
Thank you all very much for the info and insight. More than likley I wont change anything anyway, but that stock still baffles me. Its almost too clear and clean, but the patina is definitely from a ways back. Maybe one day I'll buy another M1. They are my favorite shooting iron. Thank you all again.