Printable View
This should give you a good laugh, probably the worst example of a forgery I've ever seen, couldn't believe it, check out picture #26. An NFR marked Danish Beech stock, wow, now I understand why it is $1500, its the only one in existance.
http://gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewIte...Item=132623941
No, he probably has more. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by geberl
Good point, but honestly I couldn't believe it, I read the description then turned to the photos. I immediately saw that it was a put together, then once I recognized the stock and saw the cartouche I started to laugh. Unbelievable, wow not even a remotely educated forger did this one, I had to send the guy an e-mail to see what he'd say.
wow, where did this guy get the beaters? my pawn shop has better for half the price. did this guy reply to your PM?
Not yet, still waiting, he did have a few decent Garands not long ago but they sold. He had two SA's with decent HRA wood that he sold for $699, wasn't a bad deal considering the condition of the stocks and barrels. I had considered buying one of them so I marked his listing so I could go back to them. When I saw his latest example it really had me laughing, he's claiming he bought it that way. I don't know if he did or if that will be his excuse, I've seen some really bad examples but this one takes the cake. I'm not one of the "experts" but I've been playing with Garands for about 20 years and this is the worst example of a forgery I've ever seen.
Is the seller a pawn shop? If so, educating him means better fakes coming our way! Fake, fake, fake.
I don't know what the Harrison book says but Duff's book on WWII Garands shows:
A 3.798M receiver dates from June 1945
The 1-SA-5 45 barrel seem correct
Bolt would be a -19 so it seems OK
TG would be stamped - OK
Production of -7 hammers ended in Jan '45; a -8 was mde for a couple of months but by Mar, the -9 was standard. Still, a -7 is in the realm of possibility.
Trigger housing would be a -18; the -14 ended in Feb & a-16 was used for a ouple months.
A -9 op rod is correct, not a post war type he lists.
The Type II lock bar sight he shows was replaced by the Type III by S/N 3.0M
Of course the stock is wrong!
and no surprise, no reply. he knows it's bogus and is just another sleazy SOS.
Kirk,
Yea some of the parts are "correct" for the period but honestly look at the rifle there aren't two parts on that rifle that was on it five years ago. I've seen alot of blurred lines when it comes to "original", "correct", "restored" but this one is the winner. He hasn't responded yet, maybe he will on Monday, wait and see but I doubt it.
Very sad.
The guy has a stamp set at his shop. No doubt it, good case of interstate fraud. Postal Inspectors interested?
Heard from him, he apologized said he bought it that way, he's going to pull the add and cut the stock to prevent it from being used in another forgery. The guy he bought the rifle from is dead so he can't take it back to get a refund.
Put a nice replacement stock on the rifle and you have a "correct rifle" as far as I can see. The NFR stock is a joke, but, really, are we getting that worked over another forged stock on an otherwise pretty decent rifle?
Anyone who has done his research knows that lockbars were not left on NFR rifle and the beech stock is of Euro origins. But the metal and the barrel are more than decent, so replace the wood and enjoy a little history. Granted, it is not a pristine "original" fresh from some undiscovered cases of rifles loaned to the Kingdom of Lower Slobovia in the day following the end of WWII.
I think the difference between this rifle and some of the VERY expensive rifles offered by some is simply that they have deigned their rifle as "original" where some others admit to adding parts to produce a "correct" rifle from a time period. This smacks of an elitism.
This hobby is in danger of becoming much like the restored car market, a haven for the effete who shun all but what fits in their narrow purview.