1 Attachment(s)
Un-modified rear handguard, what does it mean?
Hello gentlemen.
I am kind of new here and to Garands in general, so please excuse me if this is stupid but:
I recently purchased a M1 made by Winchester, serial 23508XX. I have some books on the M1 (Scott Duff's red book + Reisch&Poyers book), but I cannot get an answer on the rear handguard. It seems it does not have the relief cut to prevent binding of the oprod. I attached a pic, maybe you can tell me something about it? Also, the rifle has mostly older parts (older, single slot gasplug, uncut op-rod, follower etc), but I suspect it is a put-together rifle. But most (all but the safety, an early SA) parts are WRA stamped, so I guess that is good.
Could this indicate the rifle was never "updated", or is it possibly a repro? Sorry for the blurry pic, I should learn to take better pics :o
Thank you!
Un-modified rear handgaurd, uncut op-rod
Hello Beginner: Good luck with your new Garand, they are great rifles. You say your operating rod is uncut? . I would research a little more about your operating rod. It is my understanding that firing a rifle with an uncut operating rod can be dangerous. And also, these early uncut rods can be valuable and are prized by collectors. It may be a good idea to get a new rod from somebody such as Fulton Armory. There are a number of other reputable dealers who sell M1 operating rods. They are listed on the internet and many of the books on Garands have a list of outlets who deal in Garands.
Un-modified rear handgaurd, uncut op-rod
Sounds like you got a nice rifle! Shame that parts ordering is an issue. You mentioned a few books, a great one is "The U.S. .30 Cal Gas Operated Service Rifles, A Shop Manual" by Jerry Kuhnhausen. It covers the M1 and military and commercial versions of the M14. It is geared towards gunsmithing. If your are a gunsmith or a machinist it is packed with technical data.
To add just a little, here (again) ...
OK, paul1440 is right on - uncut oprods are not deadly. They just aren't. Thank you paul1440 for a great explaination.
I would like to relate a bit of my epxerience on this topic, though. A very long time ago when I was first starting out I tripped over a really cool WRA Garand that was mostly straight, but had been chromed (I actually put it on a table at the OGCA show where I was sitting with the very same Walt Kuleck of whom paul1440 speaks. I brought two display rifles and set it next to a very nice WRA 101,xxx restoration with a flat buttplate and flushnuts and an RS stock and everything. We had a ball watching people walk up and found it very interesting that these two rifles side by side were able to indicate exactly what level of collector we had on our hands - if they noticed the early rifle they were quite advanced and were asking if it still had the keystones inside, while the shiney rifle was almost always attracting the very newest of enthusiasts! We had a ball just talking to folks). Anyway, the chrome rifle had been fired quite a bit after it had been chromed and anyone who knows about chroming knows that the process will cause something called hydrogen embrittlement to the steel which can be, well, ... not good for parts that are under such stresses that occur when a firearm is discharged. All new to me, I looked it over closely as I started learning more and upon very close examination I noticed that the oprod had a crack! But, it was not in the place where you might expect and where some of the more alarmist statements might have us thinking - nope. It was in fact, at the bolt lug groove where the bolt lug travels and travelled around the top of the rod to the front of the oprod at the 'hump'. What initially looked like a bit of discoloration in the chroming was actually a hairline crack in the underlying steel. As for the elbow under the barrel where rods got modified - that was fine ...
Sure this may be but one example, but it is a pretty telling one as far as I am concerned, and it reinforces exactly what paul1440 and others have been having to say for a long time now - firing unmodified oprods just isn't problematic (but now firing chromed ones might be a bad idea, ...). I always found that interesting.
I am going to throw a monkey wrench in this thread a little bit, however - the original post shows a picture of a rear handguard that is suspected to be uncut, but it looks to have been sanded heavily.
https://www.milsurps.com/attachment....5&d=1292746538
From the picture, the wood is substantially lower than the rear handguard clip which is a good indicator (and someone who is a bit ham-handed has removed and chipped the wood around the clip - this is unfortunately very common as they can be a devil to remove after all these years). The handguard behind is much thicker and you can see that the clip is nicely nestled in the groove of the wood as it should be, while on the front handguard that clip is quite a bit above the wood (nice arched clip though). While the name for it is a 'no-clearance cut' it is a bit confusing in that it does not mean the total lack of any mark - no clearance cuts just have a different type of mark.
At this point, if it has been sanded, it is very hard to say whether it may or may not have originally been a no-clearance cut rear handguard or not. Usually, no-clearance cut rear handguards will have the shape of the oprod handle because the wood is actually in the way - this one has no indication whatsoever. While this is possible, the fact that it is also low at the clip is more an indication of sanding than anything. When they have been sanded to either clean up their appearance or to try to duplicate a no-clearance cut they will sometimes not experience the interference any longer, as this one seems to show.
It takes some time to understand the difference, but even more confusing is that some clearance cut handguards will be thick enough that they will actually have the oprod smash mark on them making them look like no clearance cut also, and it is not until you can look at them more closely that the clearance cut is revealed.
Here is a picture of a very early SA no-clearance cut rear handguard that has been lightly sanded - from this view you can see that the stamped clip is a little bit proud of the wood when it should be in a groove and not proud at all. Milled and milled/grooved clips can be a bit taller (especially in the middle where they crown) but the edges of the clip should still not be above the wood.
http://www.fototime.com/%7BDEA8F568-...dyn=1/0009.jpg
From this view you can see that the edges have been slightly removed by sanding, though you can still very clearly see the shape of the oprod from impacting the wood upon cycling.
http://www.fototime.com/%7BCB9B3F5F-...dyn=1/0015.jpg
Here are a few more - some sanded and some probably not so. The bottom one is the one I was showing above;
http://www.fototime.com/%7B8CFCE1C3-...dyn=1/0012.jpg
Hope this helps a little bit.
Un-modified rear handgaurd, uncut op-rod
Great post paul 1440, very informative! I think a point to be made is this: Yes, possibly the idea of them them being dangerous is overblown. However it is obvious that a problem did exist and it was dealt with. I would like to get the opinion of other members about field stripping Garands, not National Match Garands just plain as issued Garands. I have talked to Garand owners who think that it is not only not needed to field strip and clean them after firing but downright harmful to the rifle in the end due to wear and tear. Only the bore should be cleaned after firing and field stripping should only be done from time to time. I would agree with this if you were going to fire the rifle again within a few days, but if it is going to sit a while, a field stripping and cleaning is appropriate in my opinion. I would be interested to hear what other members have to say on this issue. What is the general consensus on this?
