Not mine. It looks to be correct and in really good shape, though not as nice as mine!
U.S. WWII WINCHESTER M1 CARBINE .30CAL SEMI AUTO : Semi Auto Rifles at GunBroker.com
Printable View
Not mine. It looks to be correct and in really good shape, though not as nice as mine!
U.S. WWII WINCHESTER M1 CARBINE .30CAL SEMI AUTO : Semi Auto Rifles at GunBroker.com
It seems odd to me that they would picture it in the auction with the rear sight removed - don't understand why they would do that. If it's "all Winchester original," why show it as being "monkeyed with?" - Bob
Bob, that was the first thing I thought as well. It does look the part but that sight removal is hokey.
Ha! I missed that! It is strange, though.
I thought they were doing it so as to clearly reveal manufacturer and serial #...but, I wouldn't do it.
I bought an Underwood carbine years ago and the gun shop owner hammered the rear sight out so he could see the serial number. I was furious!
Hokey, I haven't heard that in a while. Showing your age there Bill.
Hopefully they hammered the sight off in the correct direction.
I see three problems with it to start. The hammer, the front sight and the repo safety.
Agree with the WU hammer and front sight. Why do you say it is a repo safety?
Photo#10 that sure doesn't look like a type two Winchester band. May be a cut down three as he's not showing the front and the sight has been off.
Safety looks good to me.
One thing that may be wrong about the safety are the tool marks on the face. They should be more like the face of the mag catch, cross ways not circular.
I agree with what has been said about the barrel band, although the picture is not detailed enough. You would think the slide would show some wear also on the side shown. It appears to me to be refinished, but I could be wrong there. The hammer is Underwood isn't it?The neat thing (maybe) is that the serial number is about 1600 away from my 5.74.
The safety is 100% usgi Winchester, the hammer is an Underwood and there is no record of any lateral support on hammers to Winchester. It is documented that Underwood sent hammer springs and pins to Winchester in early 1944. The front site shows no signs of removal so from what I see the band looks ok. If you own a M1 Carbine that the front site is all beat up in the front and rear it more than likely has been removed and messed with. That is a sure way to tell if a M1 Carbine has been restored or parts removed and replaced. The front site on that rifle looks untouched but better pictures and an in person inspection would be the best way to determine if its original or not. Oh well In the spirit of collecting PBI
The safety looked good to me also. That was my reason for asking Bruce his thoughts. Winchester's safety has been brought up before, two and four years ago.
Is this a real Winchester Type III safety?
Winchester Safety Question
Each Winchester I've found has had it's safety. This loose one has been sitting in my parts box for over 20 years. Still waiting it's turn. :lol:
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...afety005-1.jpg
when viewed from the bottom left side will have the two spot welds above the screw hole, not at the same level or below. In photo 10 they appear to be inline or below.
Winchester type2
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...5964c9_z-1.jpg
Inland type 2
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...544607_z-1.jpg
Nice comparison picture, Dave. I was going by the position of the screw hole as I have learned to do. I also enlarged the photo some and got some more detail out of it. The gun is doing well still at just over 900 dollars as I type this.
Look at the coloration of the safety. Then compare it to the magazine release and the trigger housing. It shows no discoloration from use while the magazine release does and matches the trigger housing. I do not think it's original to this carbine. The front sight is not a thumb nail type for sure.
Ah... maybe not original to that carbine because of color and wear. I might agree with that. But I feel it is real not a repo. ThanksQuote:
Originally Posted by Bruce McAskill
I'm with you Jim, the safety is Real!, It's du-lited, that's why it doesn't match the Housing.
Almost 1600.00 dollars for a somewhat put together carbine.. not bad.
Look at picture 32. The receiver has been blasted and the barrel has not. A real good put together.
I believe I have seen credible evidence that Winchester used both types (I call them hi-weld & lo-weld) of unmarked Type 2 bands. This apparently un-messed-with Winchester barrel with lo-weld band is one example. I have heard the unmarked lo-weld band also referred to as an Inland band.Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveHH
Just for general curiosity, what source or sources are you using? I am always open to learning something new. From what I've read, Winchester type 2 bands have the screw hole slightly lower than the two pinch marks. It was the Inland and Standard Products type 2 bands that the screw lined up even with the pinch marks for example. Of course Inland used other suppliers of the type 2 band too.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChipS
ChipS said, "I believe I have seen credible evidence that Winchester used both types (I call them hi-weld & lo-weld) of unmarked Type 2 bands."
I think about 75% above to 25% centered is what I am thinking.
deldriver said, "What source or sources are you using?"
From many original 5.7 Winchesters I have and seen.
So to be honest, you should not believe it as fact. Just consider it a possibility until you have a original 5.7 in your hands and you see it for yourself.
But it looks like ChipS and myself believe it to be a real part used by Winchester.
Fact may not be the right word. Maybe a strong reality or something.
If I see a centered band on a 5.7 to 6.6 Winchester, I would not jump to the conclusion that it is an incorrect part.
Years ago I thought all Winchester Type 2 bands were hi-weld and all unmarked lo-weld Type 2 bands were Inland, because that's what Harrison said (please don't laugh). Since that time I have seen numerous photos of Winchester barrels on this site and others, and I have observed several Winchester carbines that I believe were intact, and they wore both types of bands and with no evidence of replacement. Also, I have read posts by learned people whose opinions I value here on this sight, and on others, that surmise both bands as being original Winchester issue. I think the word Bubba-7 was looking for is "probable". We may never know how many of each weld pattern, if any, that Winchester may have asembled or when they did it. But I now believe it is probable that Winchester made, or purchased, and used both types of bands, simply because seeing either of them mounted on apparently original Winchester carbines is just not uncommon. ChipSQuote:
Originally Posted by deldriver
I don't think you can have too many reference materials. Books, FM's, Manuals, Newsletters, People to ask questions. But there is something to be said for hands on experience. I took apart and re assembled four batches of 300 carbines each in 1989/90. Probably only 500 since 1991. I would see some of the integrated parts and run to the book, to see if they were correct or not. Oily fingers do smudge pages. Had to buy a second War Baby.
As Roger says, don't jump to the conclusion that it is an incorrect part.
Hell, part of the fun with this hobby is finding something "new" different then the norm.
Since I own an original 5.6 Win, I pay attention to most stuff I can find on these carbines. The context for BQ's opinions may have been the C marked type 3 bands, I don't recall. He also may not have opined that all of the Win bands were this way. I remembered this because the Winchester bands were the only ones exhibiting this quirk. At the time and on that other board, calling parts and cartouches fakes was absolutely the fun thing to do for a lot of people, even Seth. Most opinions were wrong I might add. This is a good reminder for me to keep my opinions about this stuff to myself, I don't know enough nor have I seen enough carbines to offer anything beyond what I own. According to War Baby, Seymore Smith (among others) made front band assemblies for both Winchester and Inland, it is probably very possible that parts were mixed from the supplier to each Company.
Trust me guys, I've learned to NOT say anything is impossible or possible with the M1 carbine. I am however always open to learning based on (credible) reference materials and many of the people who frequent forums like this one and others. I have a 5.74 Winchester as I've stated already in this thread. It has the band most people who know to expect on it with the lower position screw hole on it. I also have a very late production Standard Products that has a type 2 band with the screw hole even with the pinch marks. None of that means the Winchester couldn't have come with a similar band to what my SP has on it is the point I'm trying to make.
Dave, I have seen BQ make some remarks about Winchester having shortages of the type 3 band. I have a 6.56 Winchester with a SA band on it. It seems like there is a decent possibility that Winchester may have used type 3 bands from different suppliers to make up for their shortages all the way up to the end of production possibly.
It is thought that Winchester may have used some SA made type 3 bands on later production but printed material saying such as far as I know has not been documented as of yet. So if one has a late Winchester with an SA band and the rest is Winchester I would not change it.
Pictures of 5.63 Winchester CMP 2003 "white bag". It has not been cleaned.
Please note the type 2 band and rear sight.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...07503054-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...07503047-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...07503043-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...07503049-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...07503050-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...07503052-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...07503051-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...07503053-1.jpg
Identical to my 5.701.XXX Winny. Nice weapon!
That's great info to have on the barrel band. Also, that rear sight is the same as one my 5.74. My 6.5 Winchester has a milled type two on it with the "H" in shield so commonly found on later Winchesters. Thanks for the pictures!
I have a 1960's NRA sold Winchester, #5,628,117 with a type 3 rear sight by Hemphill, a dark blue round bolt, a small w in the sling well. It does not have a WRA/GHD stamp, only the ordnance cross cannons. The type 2 front band is unmarked an has the high spot welds. All of trigger group is Winchester except the sear which is SW-N [NPM], the op-slide is a type 5, W marked unit.
There sure looks to be a lot of variation in these transitional Winchesters.
Chuck
I have a Winchester made 1170 before yours, in original configuration. I believe that the bolt should be flat, the stock should have the WRA/GHD (with or without W in slingwell), slide should be a type 4, but as you say, there were a lot of variations. By the way, your carbine was built in March of 1944.