I am new to this forum and new to Garands. is it true that Winchester marked receivers Garands are more valuable than others? Even on mixed parts guns?
Printable View
I am new to this forum and new to Garands. is it true that Winchester marked receivers Garands are more valuable than others? Even on mixed parts guns?
I believe this is generally true. Winchester Receivers seem to have some special magic and fewer were manufactured than Springfields which perhaps makes them more interesting.
Thanks. But how come its true even in mixed parts guns? I thought if parts are mixed than the make or the receiver does not effect value of the rifle.Quote:
Originally Posted by shottist
Winchester mix-masters will fetch a bit more the a Springfield mix-master.
In most areas of gun collecting, "parts guns", and re-finished guns don't seem to have much collector value-only what is called "shooter value". I have noticed with Garands, and carbines as well, that isn't exactly the case. I have no idea why, but it even holds true with WW2 Springfields as well. I read lots of posts like: "I finally got a WW2 SA Garand. Barrel date is 4-55, cylinder lock is high hump, bolt HRA, trigger group IHC, stock is USGI with DOD cartouche, oprod is marked RA, etc." It must be Garands are popular enough that the receiver being whatever brand the buyer is looking for in a correct rifle, becomes enough. I'm sure the scarcity of correct rifles has a lot to do with it, if not everything to do with it. The same thing happens with re-parked rifles. Most affordable M-1s are mixmasters. To the new collector, with a tight budget, it is a way to get a Garand that looks very good. My first three Garands were reparked mixmasters that I got many years ago, and I still have two of them! They are WW2 receivers with 60s dated SA barrels. They look good, they shoot good, they're not worth a bundle-and they're not for sale.Quote:
Originally Posted by ap3572001
Charlie
That's why I don't have a Winchester M1 rifle. There's not even the illusion of "correct" parts flying in formation. Receivers are easy. Barrels, op rods (un-cut),and stocks are hard to find bits (at least in reasonably good shape and that don't cost more than a whole Springfield rifle.)
It is the historical significance. Winchester was the only private company to manufacture Garands during WWII. A Winchester is a Winchester, regardless of what other parts are on it. Just the same as a Ford is still a Ford, no matter how many customized parts are on it.Quote:
Originally Posted by ap3572001
I'm finding the barrel and "correct" stock to be the most difficult to locate. Those are the only bits I need to complete my restoration.
Thank You ! I got it now!Quote:
Originally Posted by latigo 1
As a final data point, my experience has been that there are many "Winchester" collectors out there who want to collect anything with the Winchester name on it, including hand tools (yes, they made some).Quote:
Originally Posted by ap3572001
Anyway, once these folks discover that Winchester made Garands and carbines during WWII, they immediately want one each of those.
Some of these guys ONLY buy the name on the receiver, without knowing anything about M1s or carbines, and sometimes they pay BIG bucks for parts guns.
Ubfortunately for the rest of us, this strange fixation on the Winchester brand keeps the prices somewhat higher than they would logically be. Of course, their rarity helps keep prices inflated too.
Hey Rick, do you mean Winchester M-1s prices are being driven up higher, or prices of Garands in general? The more people refusing to consider SA, HRA and IHC, might mean more good rifles for the rest of us.
Charlie
Ouch, ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie59
CMP SG Springfield and H & R 595. Winchester 795 with IHC 1000 to 1100 then their are 3 different IHC and 2 winchesters I got the wincester carbine cause luck of the draaw and got a winchester garand from the DCM back in 87 came fresh from rebuild with barrel and bolt and a sanded WW2 stock
Pay no nevermind that Winchester M1 rifle parts are about the roughest or crude-est(?) looking components ever made for these weapons. They apparently learned from their WWI experiences and went from some of the nicest looking rifles made to just good enough to pass gov't inspection. Not faulting them, they were running a business to make money. Didn't work out at all w/ the M14, though!
Early Winchester (1941) fancy walnut is best you will ever find on a WW2 M1 rifle.
Agree, early Winchester walnut is really nice wood. My WRA WB marked (faintly) stock on my '42 Winchester.
Don
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...3/WinM1c-1.jpg
Agreed, my 1944 2.4 million appears to be sap wood, a lighter yellowish color on one side. The front hand guard has a nice contrasting grain however. It's also a pretty beefy stock. Regarding the metal, there are quite a few cosmetic, rough exterior milling areas, but it appears to have never affected function. They are smooth where it counts.Quote:
Originally Posted by RCS
If I decide to sell ( or trade) my 2.4 W-W parts gun, what should a FAIR price?Quote:
Originally Posted by dbarn
Mmmm, didn't consider the stocking aspect! They must have had stores of fine wood sacrificed to meet the high production demands of the new contract. Again, I'm not faulting them their decision to leave rough finish on some parts, it's just peculiar that the "ugly" duckling gets most of the "love".
Still, the metal work on a Pattern 1914 or M1917 is of finest sporting rifle quality. They were the only P'14s considered to be of high enough consistent quality and accuracy to make sniper rifles.
When I was a high school ROTC kid 46 years ago, I would look at those receiver heels in the racks at Arlington Heights High School. I never saw anything but Winchesters and SA's. There was just something about that name, written out in script, just like on a '94...: WINCHESTER.
So I had to have one. I am one of those who tends to want to leave the gun as close as possible to how it came when it last left military use... so I don't shine up the stocks nor do I get fanatic about changing parts to "correct" manufacturer. The fact of the matter is that the military did NOT care and the reality is that a "correct" grade is either an unissued one or the one-in-a-million that never broke a part, was never in a GI cleaning party, or never went through an armorer's van. Or the CMP or another person put it together...
It would depend on how many Winchester parts, original finish, and TE and ME. If just the receiver there may be a slight premium for some one who wants one. Maybe $650-850. If more Winchester parts then north from there. To maximize your dollars, you would probably do better to part out.Quote:
Originally Posted by ap3572001
Its just the receiver. Other parts are mixed. 650-850 sound about right. I am new on this forum, how do You list for sale?Quote:
Originally Posted by dbarn
Go to main forum page and scroll down to "Gun Shopper" in blue. Post on the "Want to Sale" page. Take good photos and or post a link.
[QUOTE=dbarn;111228]Go to main forum page and scroll down to "Gun Shopper" in blue. Post on the "Want to Sale" page. Take good photos and or post a link.[/QUOT
Thank You .
The OP was asking about why Winchester Garands seem to command higher prices--in general-- compared to the other "brands" and I was simply pointing out that I had encountered quite a few Winchester collectors (to clarify: Folks who collect ANYTHING with the Winchester name on it) who purchase Winchester M1s & carbines at inflated prices. Obviously, more money than brains, but there used to be a bunch of them around. Maybe not so many any more.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie59