Was wondering if this is real or repo IBM barrel band. If I had to guess, the swivel looks to be real, but not sure of the band.:dunno: Appreciate all opinions. Thanks
M1 CARBINE PARTS - Barrel Band KV P : Other at GunBroker.com
Printable View
Was wondering if this is real or repo IBM barrel band. If I had to guess, the swivel looks to be real, but not sure of the band.:dunno: Appreciate all opinions. Thanks
M1 CARBINE PARTS - Barrel Band KV P : Other at GunBroker.com
WHY? this is geting to be a bit tiresome.
Thanks for the input stu1! Nice to have all the answers, but I hope I never become too smug.
Doesn't look right to me. Not an expert though. I got burned for over a hundred on a repro, so I get real leary of these things unless I can hold it in my hands. Not sure of the seller's reputation. Have seen his stuff before, but never bought anything. If you can get some feedback on his rep, you may get a better idea of the part. I only buy from people who are recommended when it comes to anything that is hard to find. If you get it in your hands I'll tell you a nearly fool-proof way to verify it that I was taught by someone with lots of experience. It will make you much more confident.
Wish we were all as smart as STU1. Must be nice to know everything.
Wear & tear on band and swivel doesn't match. Hmmm.
Dont be put off by a few Buford, 99.9% of the members here on this forum will give you some of the best info out there.
Guys,
Give Stu a break... he enjoys busting balls at times just for giggles.
I have pictures here of a friends original IBM's. The early bands all show 2 large circular weld spots just like the one on GB. On 2 of the bands the weld spots are placed farther back toward the ring that overlaps the front of the handguard, but on the other 2 the 2 weld spots are more towards the front lip of the band just like the one on GB.
These bands look to match the color of the one on GB.
I can't make out his KVB swivel markings well enough to see if they match the one on GB. But all 4 swivels are lighter in color than the bands are.
Could be possible that the band was missing it's swivel and one with more wear was attached to it.
FWIW,
Charlie-painter777
Smug has nothing to do with it and no i don't have all the answers. this hobby has become blighted by people who want to make their carbines back too W.W.2 configueration (and at one time i was guilty of it too) who (and it's just my opinion)are defiling the history of the carbine by doing so and feeding the greed of the humpers who prey on the unsuspecting. deal only with other collectors for parts and stocks and whatever else you want to change your carbine for. the best thing people can do for their carbines and their wallets is simply to just leave their carbines as is. you want an original they are out there buy one or as many as you can afford. JMHO not trying to flame or shame all this "is this real" BS is for the birds, we are our own worst enemies in this hobby best regardsQuote:
Originally Posted by Bufordm1
Stu
PS the band is real the swivel is fake, it's missing something that the real item has.
Good eyes Stu. I was thinking the same.
While I would have not worded it the way Stu did in his first post, I do agree with several points of his second post. I remember reading on another site (posted on the bavarian site I believe??) a statement that about people making carbines into something that they "have never been". Thats kinda where I am at with all this. I believe that there is a big difference between "historical" and "historically correct" and there is also a BIG cash value difference which most people do not comprehend. Frankly, I only have one carbine which I believe is historical - and that is because of its serial number. I see people dumping money into buying (either real or faked) parts to replace absolutely good parts on shooter grade carbines in vain attempts to make those carbines into something that they NEVER WERE. Ok, the genuine GI Bring back from grandpa's closet - $1,000. The 1st carbine produced by NPM - $5,000. Audie Murphy's carbine - priceless. Oh, and that CMP service grade with replacement flip sight, slide and trigger housing is still worth $675 to me - unless it can shoot a 2" group and I'll give you another $75.
Don't get me wrong. These 65 year old weapons are still good WEAPONS. the vast majority of the 6 million made do not have collector (i.e. museum) siginficance. Soooooo, tell me again why we are replacing a perfectly good part with an eariler version of the part - to inflate the VALUE???
Ok, thanks for the soap box and allowing me to hijack the thread.
Man I love these carbines!!!!!!
I agree with tired retired. Historically correct is the last way the Government left them after the last rebuild. While really cool, I sold the RMC Highwood I cut that I got from CMP for my Inland racker because it shoots better in a potbelly! The RMC stock wasn't even on it from a rebuild, but rather from CMP. Type Vi slide, round IO bolt and potbelly. Correct for a late life carbine.
It is a shame that Kahr/Auto Ordnance is not doing a better job on their WW2 version. Cheap buttplates that look like they came off a Universal, poor fit on stocks, and not totally GI interchangeable.
I was told by AO customer service they were having problems with subcontractors. They should take a lesson from the Army in WW2. They had the subcontractor thing figured out!
I am in total agreement about changing parts. A quest for what? A semi-original? A good fake? Whatever.
The hobby belongs to whomever chooses to participate. There is no right or wrong way to collect anything and if you want to waste your time, try to steer people on how it should be done. People do things on these webs that make me want to scream and I used to get all wrapped around the axle about it, but no more. It's a waste of time to argue with someone who is the polar opposite of what you think.
I believe that I possess an original Winchester 5.6. I've had it since 1969 and never gave it much thought until I discovered this place. I've been on a 5-6 year learning curve and am still asking questions with people who really have the answers about this piece. The plethora of experts on these boards is troubling, and leads me to a fall back position that's served me well; know WHO to ask. Lots of people are very willing to tell you, most are dead wrong.
Carbine books that are about as researched as a Chinese menu don't help either. I have one that I bought, read once and I don't even know where it is now. War Baby and War Baby Comes Home are almost worn out from use.
Guys you need to try the exciting world of collecting Armitron watches. It is a blast and there is so much to be learned about them. I am thinking of expanding into Timex's what do you guy's suggest.
Seiko's
Seiko's great idea! They have really great name recognition and I believe I can get alot of people interested in them. Just got to figure out how and where I can display them.
PBI, there are several good points/advantages to collecting those.... 1) you don't need an FFL to ship a purchase.... 2) you always know WHEN you are suppose to be at the watch show.... 3) you don't need a fire rated safe to lock them up when there are young children around.... 4) Young children can touch and handke your collection without their parents.... 5) you don't have to worry if the watch hands are made by a specific subcontractor or if the marks are humped.... 6) you can wear an entire display on your arm and save the room for display tables at a show!!!
(Paul, I could have a small-talk conversation about the socio-economic impact of global warming on the price of tea in Southeast China if the situation calls for it....)
I repair them and collect them, I have dozens. Seikos are very good watches, cased as well as a Rolex. I just rebuilt a 1960s Bell Matic, a 27J automatic with alarm. Believe me, there are collectors that are just as selective about specific parts as the carbine bunch. Mechanical Timex watches are called pin lever non jeweled watches. They are not designed to be repaired, just worn until they die.The modern quartz Timex Indiglo are great useful watches for their price range.
I collect Shell Oil pocket watches, have any of those for sale?
Here is one, circa 1940 Girard-Perregaux
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...ellwatch-1.jpg
I'm collecting Pikie Minnows on the side! If the bottom drops out, at least I can use them to feed the family.....
But why are they still so thick?Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveHH
OOPS!
Time for a new thread on a different Forum?
it is because they have a lighting element by the dial. They are made in the PI.
I'm not too interested in quartz watches.
Jim: I recall seeing one of those GPs years ago. Pretty hard to find. A great brand by the way. Very, very popular in the Southern Hemisphere, not seen that often here. Same with Ulysse Nardin. Both command $$$ especially UN.
I have a nice Rolex GMT and have owned several more, but I'm more of a LeCoultre, Hamilton guy. It's an interesting hobby working on miniature machines.
How's this?
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...05/gmtm1-1.jpg
Two well made machines. Both made to last a very long time. I have much respect for any one who has the patience to work on the innards of fine time pieces. The best watch I have ever owned? CASIO!
I have two Rolex watches, one 1958 Mens Watch and the other a 1944 Rose Gold Oyster Perpetual. Both were my dad’s and I wear the Mens Watch everyday.
When a member is just asking if a part looks real, he may have a number of reasons why he's asking.
He could be comparing the part for sale to one he owns or possibly one on a carbine he's thinking of buying.
He might be testing the water to see if a particular seller is on the up and up.
I've asked these same type questions for the same reasons.
When experienced collectors offer up their opinions it helps to bring the 'Humpers' into the light. It brings those nicely done restorations that are being offered up as bring backs to our attention.
Most of us have had that sick feeling after paying pricey sums for a part to find out later it's fake.
We all have extra parts laying around. I wouldn't want forum members, including myself to be nervous about asking others if they thought a part, stock marking,.. etc.. was legit. Your valued opinions save us from offering up a part for sale that we may think is real..... sell it as such.... then later find out we've just sold off a humped part to a fellow collector.
I don't want that hanging over my head. I'm sure others would agree. If they don't agree......we have the makings of a freshly made humper on our hands. In this case the word will spread quickly.
I bought a late IBM with a worn out Blue Sky IBM barrel.
At the time it was useless unless you wanted a worn out example of a imported carbine, that I didn't feel was safe to shoot. After close inspection I found a hairline crack on the bolt lug.
It was a total mixer with many early parts. Some earlier then when this carbine was made.
At the time I had extra IBM barrels. I put the best barrel on it and swapped off the others. I've bought and traded for parts that would have been correct for it when it was issued to the best of my knowledge. Since I was searching for parts....... Why not put IBM parts back in it. The receiver has the late Adj rear sight and it has the late bayo band. It's not a original carbine, it's a restoration project to make a carbine capable of being used again. Not trying to fool someone, just trying to salvage it.
We have our hands full with the Repro parts and their sellers. One whack of a fake CC stamp ruins a vintage WWII stock. I can live with the fact that the stock's markings have worn off over its lifetime in service.
Sellers that misrepresent restorations are no better than out right armed robbers.
There are Moles here on this site collecting all the tid bits of info we post pictures of and also list. These are a concern to all of us.
When we pay these high dollar prices for parts, we truely are our worst enemies.
Just some thoughts,
Charlie-painter777
Excellent post Charlie, Thanks.
Want to add that; I would be the absolute last person to do a restoration and then try to pass it off as original. My search for original parts stems from 4 barreled receivers I got a few years ago from the CMP. The CMP certificates even say "barreled receiver" right on them, so hard to pass off as not being restorations. Some came with original rear flip sights, and some with original type one bands. But none had both. Don't see anything wrong with trying to restore these to original configuration. After all the time and money spent, I'm sure not going to sell them once completed. I will, however post photos of the finished product.
Can't think of a better way to learn about these carbines then to attempt to do such a restoration. Has pushed me to buy all the books, join the clubs, countless gun shows, visit the CMP, and most importantly, ask a lot of questions. The people you meet with like interests are amazing. Lots of fun!
Lets hope we can keep this hobby going for a long time...and not let the humpers ruin it. Need to keep each other abreast of the situation!:)
Can you do a Carbine Club data sheet on just the barreled receiver assembly?
If one was never submitted before on that S/N it will at least give a "ground zero" for future collectors. (I have heard they've been flooded w/ data sheets since the CMP sales started, but it still would be useful to fill it out now and submit it later, I should think.) I've a friend who's a member in the club, and he's recorded some of my carbines in the past few years.
that is all good and fine Charlie, but i find myself in the unique situation of working as a gunsmith,when more often than not i get a customer who comes into the shop and wants to place a nice legit barrel band on his carbine and in the same breath hands me a fake flip sight and i tell the customer "you know it a repro" and then they shrug their shoulders and say "yea, it's an orignal repro" maybe it's ignorance or arrogance on their part? who knows but unfortunately i'm paid to do the deed it is what it is and maybe i feel i have defiled history when i place a piece of crap repro on and otherwise nice rifle that should have been left as it was. i don't have a problem with anyone wanting to restore and original gun that my have lost it's original rear sight along the way or needs a correct highwood stock to make it right no problems whatsoever or helping someone out here or their maybe my point was missed or i didn't make it clear enough for some. if i stepped on your toes bufordm1 that wasn't my intention this 1% of posters on this board is and can be user friendly. regards
Stu
i just mounted a cmp bought , new walnut stock onto an inland carbine, not all original by any means. I got a good feeling from finishing the stock, and putting the gun back to looking nice, not original, and I think anyone who wants to improve the visual looks of a firearm , should feel free to do what they wish to make them feel good about that firearm in the safe. I think we all need to respect the individual right to do whatever we want with our own guns, collectors or shooters and then we all will understand the second ammendment a little more.
jmoore,
"data sheet on just the barreled receiver assembly?"
Absolutely; CC has mentioned that they could use carbine information of all kinds to add to the data base or for even an article in the newsletters. People also sometimes feel a data sheet on a total mixmaster would be useless. Not the case. Information on just the barrel date/type, receiver, serial number, is helpful.