Printable View
Hello,
I am considering making an offer on this Inland M1 Carbine.
I am looking for a collector rifle as opposed to a shooter.
I would like to know to what extent it looks correct vs Frankenstein pieces.
I am especially concerned about the rear site as I understand that dealers tend to replace them with foreign remakes.
Also, any thoughts as to value - I am trying to figure out how high I offer as a max (if it is in fact worth bidding on).
Thank you in advance.
The popcorn-eating emoticon would be good here as I'm sure there is going to be some discussion. The 'X' alone is probably worth about two large theater bags of popcorn (not the ones you buy - the BIG ones they load the fake popper with). I don't know enough to comment on any aspects of it except it appears to have been refinished, at least to me. The pictures really don't reveal much. Good, clear pictures, but conveniently dark in critical places if those places are even shown. I think you would pretty much have to have this one outside in the sunlight with a magnifying glass. And the knowledge of what to look for.
I think I've seen that one before someplace - at least an example with a similar fit between the receiver and recoil plate. None of the sought after stock markings are shown - and to me it appears to be aftermarket, as well as the handguard. The metal parts show the familiar and "desirable" enhanced green finish with the usual lint around the rear sight. I too, think the pictures are hiding more than they are showing. I don't think Inland built it as it's being represented in the photos. - Bob
Here are some more photos
more photos
additional photos - last ones.
Anton, this listing is already at $1325 and for all the issues, its already over priced starting with the sanded stock. And, that might not be the opinion you were looking for, but its mine FWIW.
That is what I wanted to know.
It is not a matter of looking for a particular opinion.
I wanted to know whether to bid on it.
BTW, what are the issues with it?
What is wrong with it (other than as you said the sanded stock).
I would like to learn for future reference.
would need some close ups of all angles of the rear sight to make a judgement on that part.
Anton, First off, the sellers pics are pretty good, i.e., no blurring or fuzzy pics. He presents it well, but how knowledgeable is he? The stock has obviously been sanded, and I'd question the markings on the inside of the HG. That stock never came on that gun, you can tell by the mis-alignment of the recoil plate to the receiver. The rest of the gun is nice, it would appear that gun has never been re-finished. The FS and RS are unclear by the pics as to originality because of the lint or dust/dirt in the places you'd want to inspect. The unanswered question is what are you looking for? There are different levels to a "collector". If, price is no issue, then that's not the gun for you. If you have limited funds then you've limited yourself on what is going to be available and to what degree you'll accept as being original, according to price.
So it sounds like you are saying that the gun may be correct but not original.
Also you cannot tell if the rear site war replaced.
Thank you for chiming in.
It looks too 'crisp' and the sanding marks on the stock are a red flag on a carbine that is supposed to be original. The stock was also dyed after sanding and treated with Boiled Linseed Oil. it looks great, but it wasn't done while it was in service. The Ordnance mark on the RH side looks like the right size, but it may have been stamped after the sanding job. It just doesn't look like its been there for over 70 years. Typically they will have built up dirt/oil in the lines and look like an ink drawing. I mean, I could go on like this this for a few thousand words and I'm not even a collector. But it is still a very 'pretty' carbine. if it were to be used in a war movie, those Hollywood guys know how to make even a rubber gun look 'right' - maybe you could get them to rough this one up. :) But do you want to pay good money for an obvious remanufactured artifact?
Thanks for your help.
I decided to pass.
Price went over $1,600.
Too rich for my blood with the issues that you all pointed out.
Now I have a line on a M1A1 Carbine.
Anton, if $1600 was too rich for you.........wait till you see the price on a M1a1. Good luck
I tend to think it has been refinished. There are certain and easily identifying traits found on Inland carbines that aren't here because it was most likely redone. Also, if one wants to get picky, the slide is way too early for this serial number. This carbine would have a L-379. I've seen worse put together carbines though. And yes, the stock has been heavily sanded.
Hmm, just noticed the seller. He sells nice stuff or iffy ones with varying degree of issues from the ridiculous to more innocent. He sells a lot of items for high dollar amounts so somebody likes him.
You can do better in this case. Just be patient and something else will come around.
Anton, if $1600 was too rich for you.........wait till you see the price on a M1a1. Good luck
I meant too rich for what I was getting.
The few carbines I have seen in person near me the last year asking price was between 1000 to 1600. This is for well worn mix masters some with import marks. People with carbines for sale walking into shows see the insane asking prices for these guns and think they have something worth the same number. My question to you all, does this not make a well done restoration , done with a real usgi parts worth more than shooter grade rebuilds?
I have been interested in carbines for a long time. My opinion is that fewer than 1 out of 100 of these early featured carbines for sale is an unmolested example. They are very scarce . Personally , I wont pay that kind of money for something I cant feel and touch ahead of time. A lot of these sellers on GB are listing these guns with a "as is no returns" policy. Not for me. Glad my serious collecting days are behind me.
A shooter-grade rebuild, if done by the government with no tampering later on the civilian side, is pretty much going to be more valuable than one that has obviously been messed-with. Don't lose sight of the main concern which is authenticity. That means in the exact same configuration it was when it left government custody - no sanding, refinishing, correcting or anything else. Originality and authenticity - two big words in military surplus weapons.
I think the biggest issue is the stock: Sanded, and I doubt if it is original to the carbine (or even original, for that matter). I have almost never seen a GI stock fit a carbine so poorly. While in good shape, to me, the wear of the metal is more than the wear on the stock.
I can't tell, is the punch mark in front of the rear sight down to the white, or the same color as the receiver?
Just noticed this post. IMO, the carbine is a restoration and not original, as manufactured. The rear sight should have a finish that matches the receiver. It doesn't. The trigger should be blued. It isn't. The bolt finish looks wrong. That was from a quick look at the pictures.