Printable View
Greetings all, I recently offered to date a buddy's M1 as I found your "born on" thread. The pictures he sent indicate that the receiver is a '37 production. Is this legit? Did Springfield ever rework numbers? Federal Ord prehaps?
Center number has been erased.
Thanks in advance,
JesseAttachment 26984
That receiver is a Geneseo Ill. work and was never a military item.
Can you fill me in a bit on the Geneseo? This M1 was bought in the late '70s.
Much Abliged,
Jesse
Springfield Armory* became a civilian venture when the name was purchased and the production of rifles began. The date is about 1974. Anyway, they proceeded to make M1s like yours and the numbers were up in the 7 millions. This confused some people that thought there were considerably less M1s manufactured. They were correct. The rifles manufactured were of an excellent standard as far as I know and a friend of mine has one. His is all military parts of all manufactures including a D28290 trigger mech with small hole and no revision numbers. (Early) I know, I found it and installed it for him. They also make M1As and handguns. Yours has the * after the Springfield Armory so it's one of these. I think it's actually an R in a circle but I can't make that on here.
Thanks you so much Jim. I am here to benefit from those who know. If the serial numbers started in the 7 millions, did they decide to start over again at some point?
I have the fullsized pic and it appears to have a T within the circle.
I guess an early gas trap reciever would be too good to be true!!!
Regards,
Jesse
T in the circle means trademark. They continued the numbering from where they left off after Korea. I don't understand the 3 digit number but there's more than meets the eye from what I can make out.
Thanks Jim. The next time he has it apart Ill check out the drawing numbers on the various componants. I am interested to see if there is a drawing number on the reciever.
I have a Springfield M1 with a Feb '44 date. On the right side under the rail it is marked "Federal Ordinance." I have done some research and have found good things said as well as some horrible things about their work. As far as I could tell from my research, they were rebuilt in the early 2000s. Were these the ones built from South Korea parts kits? Your opinion would be appreciated.
I can’t seem to find any signs of re-welding. The repark looks real nice. Should I do a Rockwell hardness test over a certain portion of it where it would have been rewelded?
Where would I find drawing numbers and their corresponding dates?
Again, thanks for your answers and interest in a newbie,
Jesse
The numbers you seek are spilled through the M1/M14 section of this forum. The best way to get the info is state the numbers here and we will define them. Or better yet send pics. By the (rail) I am guessing you mean the Operating Handle? The barrel has the manufacture date on it but if it's a replacement barrel it won't mean much. It's hard to say where the parts came from.
What I'm talking about is the marks at the receiver tail. It looks like something was removed and something was altered. Not welding two halves back together. The U in US Rifle is strange. Below the S there's something. Below the number there's something to the extreme left. And a dot under the number. And the number it's self isn't centered by my eye. Maybe some of these guys own them and can fill in the blanks.
Don't worry about rockwelling a gun. If you think that has to be done it's probably time to get rid of it.
I really appreciate having access to all of this info. Make me think of the German stuff where the records were destroyed (we dont know many RBN numbers, the Russians burned the Prussian Archives, ect).
I think I have been confusing. Sorry.
The first picture was of my buddy's M1 that was apparently made in the 1970's. I wonder if some low serial number rear halves were made to match up with de-milled fronts? Did Geneseo ever reweld? I can try to get him to take a picture of the drawing number under the op-rod. That might shed some additional light on what is going on.
My other comments deals with another M1 that is dated from '44 that was reworked by Fed Ord. This is the one I would also like to know about.
I would like to have some opinions about Fed Ord. I can upload pictures of this rifle's drawing number tomarrow. Prehaps one can date it for me. Im REALLY hoping the front matches the rear. The barrel dates from June '53.
Should I have started another thread on this other M1?
Again, thanks for your help and interest (patience!),
Jesse
Geneseo never did receiver welding as far as I have heard. They made new stuff. The drawing number for the receiver is on the front right leg, the op rod under the wood and the barrel is under the top hand guard.
We definitely need pics of your rifle.
Another thread? I don't know, I'm not to worried. What I'm waiting for is the others to jump in...I wonder where they are?
You may have been able to order special serial numbers from them
Thanks RCS, that low number commercial was bought from Martin B Retting in Southern California circa 1978. Maybe I can send Springfield Armoury (T, gotta remember that T) :D a letter. Its great to know that his is not a reweld, as he remembers buying it as one. So he scores!
Here is the pic of the WWII dated M1. Drawing number (I think thats what it is) D28291 32. Over that number is a loosely stamped O 6 2 E. The serial number is 25XXXXX. Again, no sign of welding, Im just trying to figure out what Fed Ord did. You can see the Fed Ord stamp in the side of the clip guide. Most of the small parts have quite a bit of pitting, but the parkerizing is pretty.
Thanks for all the imput, JesseAttachment 26988
This a a gas trap receiver imported by Federal Ordnance. They were just complying with the law in marking an imported receiver. This one has the square notch receiver cut, and the seventh round modification.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../2rx8kzk-1.jpg
Thanks Johnny, Im feeling much better about this. When I saw "El Monte" California I was getting sick to my stomach thinking about National Ordnace as I know of all the horrible problems they had making and rebuilding M1 Carbines (got burned on one of those when much more ignorant, notice the "more").
So, they imported back from overseas? Pacific, Europe? Is there any way to tell? By the way, the gastube bayo lug fits an US bayo loosely. Like the tip move 5/8 of an inch loosely. But a k98 Seitengewehr I bought as a "Norwiegian modified for a M1" fits perfectly. Might that give the answer?
Does anyone know the date of the importations?
Attachment 26989
And Johnny, very funny showing me a REAL gas trap rifle!
Thanks,
Jesse
The 2,5xx,xxx number gun seems to be correct. That is, serial number matches the drawing number and revision. The other code is the heat lot. Your gas cylinder lock screw relief valve is usually sloppy with M5 bayonets. Not to worry. The modified 98 bayonet is kind of hard to find. I haven't seen too many.
Thanks for checking on the drawing number for me Jim.
I think I need to find a drawing for the gas tube. I dont have any M5 bayonets. I have several M1s; some '42 dated cutdowns and a 10" uncut. All are really loose. I can compare slot dimensions from the k98 and the M1. It will have to wait untill I get home though. If the gastube was modified for a k98 slot, would that make it likely a re-import from Norway? Or would Fed Ord have done everything in batches do you think? Sort of like the RC k98s? Or do I have an undersized bayo lug that somehow made its way out of the scrap pile and wound up on my rifle? Now Im thinking back to Nat Ord. Conjecture is fun. Maybe only for me cause its my rifle.
Anyway, Hessian Antique had a bunch of the M1 Modifieds about 2 years ago. Mine is a '39 unsharpened that had a bea-U-tiful reblue job. They came with scabbards (also modified for web gear) for $65. The blueing didnt take much to the brazing bronze though. Should have bought two, right?
Jesse
Quote:
T in the circle means trademark. They continued the numbering from where they left off after Korea. I don't understand the 3 digit number but there's more than meets the eye from what I can make out.
Jim,
When SA, INC. Geneseo, IL., started production on new cast receivers, they were duplicating military M! receiver serial numbers. BATF told them early-on to start a 7,000,000, well after military M1 serial numbering was over. It's unknown how many 3-digits were made, perhaps 500 or so.
That's the first I heard of it. Thanks for the info.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramboueille
Jesse, I can't tell if your gas cylinder was modified or not but I thought they would have done the bayonets. Maybe not. You can get replacement parts easily through our WTB here. Make sure you state what you have and the guys will come forward with proper parts.
Ramboueille,Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramboueille
So Geneseo started duplicating original M1 reciever numbers by starting over with low numbers and then forced to go to 7M?
Also any idea on what the steel would have been on the earlys? Triple alloy like an 8720, 8740?
Jesse,Quote:
Originally Posted by jesse_
Yes.
Unknown what steel they used for the new receivers. I know that a year or two after the directive to use the 7 million block, SA, INC. tried to buy back the 3 digit receivers. A small group of us had already bought several of them and on a routine phone call to SA, INC about obtaining some parts for them, they asked what our serial numbers were and made an offer to buy them back. I don't remember what the offer was. None of us returned them.
Unless someone has knowledge of where the rifles came from, there just wouldn't be any way of knowing. The barrel that was in the rifle was not British proofed, so that eliminates that one.Quote:
Originally Posted by jesse_
Thats a great story Ramboueille, I cant imagine anyone wanting to sell his. I also cant imagine getting this insight anywhere else so thanks to you and everyone else who was willing to share with me.
Johnny, thanks for the imput about the proofs. It looks like Im going to start getting REAL familiar with proofs (German proofs are more interesting though).
My buddy paid $275 ca. 1978 (before I was born). So it really only has value as a shooter or the sum of its parts?
Does anyone have thoughts about the Federal Ordnace rebuilds?
I have other questions like getting erosion gauge blueprints so I can make my own. Thoughts on where I should ask? I dont know how much I could actually add to this forum, but I have old manufacturing articles (some as early as 1905) on firearms if anyone is interested. Also snippits on materials used eg. National Emergency Steels; many single alloy steels used large perentages of nickle, chromium, ect, while small additions of several alloys produced better steels.
I should think you could buy a set of gauges easier than making them. It's not the machining, it's the hardening that would be difficult...
Ah, yes, quite correct. But I usually use a 17-4 PH stainless in the H900 condition thats comes between 42-47 Rc. I have some rod in the shop right now thats at the top of the scale. Do they need to be harder than that?
I hard turn all the time so Its not a problem for me. I can make them on the screw machine if I need to make several. If I dont need the ductility I can soak it again and while brittle they will come out around around 55 Rc.
No, that should be hard enough. The last time I tried to turn something like that(I think it was stainless) it screamed through the whole thing. I would have to precision grind. I should get a set of those gauges too but it's not like I'll over use them. The problem is around here NO ONE has a set to borrow. I think they would probably cost me about $100 CDN to get.
Greetings Jim,
Yea, I have an old '49 Southbend model A that would squeel on me too. I have at my disposal an entire shop full of high end CNC machine tools (dual spindle lathes, dual spindle screw machines, 5 axis mills). I use Utilis brand inserts that have a 1 degree wiper and a .008 radius. They are PVD coated and Utilis has a way of coating that doesnt round the edge much, maybe .0002". About the ideal edge hone you would want on a fine finishing carbide tool anyway. So for us "hard" is relative.
Did the DOD have prints of the gauges? Is that something anyone has? Or would they only have go/no go for use of the armorers?
I also have a "vision" system. That means I can put a part on a lighted stage, look at it at up to 4 power, and have a cross-hair super imposed on a video screen. The stage (12"x18") moves in X, Y, and Z and feeds back to a computer. In .00001" resolution. I can create features in a DXF format from a tangible part. So if I can see the feature I can make a rendering of it (grooves and such that are difficult to measure with gauges).
But if course if there is nothing to measure... :D
Regards
Jesse
Someone here is going to have a set of line drawings for gauges. Maybe you can just ask on the general discussion forum...
Done.
Thanks Jim
I have no way of documenting this, but my recollection is that the first 500 receivers SA Inc bought were made by Lithgow in Australia. I've never handled one, but I would expect the receivers to have been stamped with the importers markings. Quality was so poor that they found another source for their receivers. Even with better quality receivers (using mostly used USGI parts), sales were poor because CMP opened the floodgates on genuine USGI M1 rifles.
If I were to buy any M1 rifle of unknown quality, I would pay a gunsmith familiar with USGI rifles to perform a "technical inspection". A "US service trained" armorer would have the gauges, tools, & knowledge necessary to evaluate an M1. Fulton Armory charges about $90 for this service, YMMV.
Wow Neal,
I am going to get a chance to inspect that rifle in about a month or so. It has around 2500-3000 rounds through it without any noticeable problems.
The owner told me that he kept checking in with Martin B Retting (Culver City California-still in business) for several months before they finally arrived. He said he paid $275 for it in 1978.
The machining looks pretty nice (except that scar under the serial number), but as a machinist myself I know that nice finishes say nothing about heat-treat, dimensional tolerances, ect. When you mention "poor quality" do you by any chance remember what the issue was?
By the way, we younger guys are glad those with experience are willing to share.
Regards,
Jesse
If you were to search around here a bit there was a thread in which we discussed that very thing. History has a habit of repeating it's self here about every six months or so...
I hear you Jim. Im a guy who works a lot to keep ahead in this economy and doesnt have as much time to peruse this excellent site as I would like. Armed with " Austrailian, garand, and Lithgow," I found much info (there was good info on the defects involved in the manufacturing), but I had a difficult time telling whether the comments were concerning recent production or the 70s production.
Regards,
Jesse
I wasn't aware of any SA Inc M1 rifles produced recently. SA Inc didn't give out a lot of information about their suppliers, & the M1 rifles were made before we had the Internet. I'd be surprised if they actually made more than 1 or 2 thousand rifles.
My buddy had a SA Inc catalog from about 4-5 years ago and they offered a M1 in a crate with some tribute to Iwo Jima on it. Am I out of my mind? :confused: Did none of them get delivered?
So if I get it correct SA Inc made several thousands in the early-mid 70's and then CMP released thiers?
Thanks,
Jesse
That's about right. The commemorative models were something else again. We've had entire threads examining them here.