Inland question

I have an Inland that is almost new. It is a 5.4 with the late bells and whistles that checks perfect in Chris' CC article on those numbers. One of the things that I've noticed over the years is that the rifling is almost absent. it is very shallow when compared with both Win and NPM (IBM barrel). Yet it shoots fine.
I've read all of the War Baby books and one of the things that is mentioned is that Inland at some point was (I'm assuming here) having a lot of barrels rejected. They presented a series of tests to ordnance that apparently proved that these rejected barrels were in fact fully usable and Inland was allowed to use these rejected barrels which now met standards. Am I correct in my assumption? Does that explain the shallow rifling? They were obviously a forward thinking company when you consider their quality, but I always had a feeling that they were building a product that was intended for a specific service life as any of their other products did.
Dave

I hate to mention "bullet test" again, after we "beat it to death" recently, but does it look pretty good? I no longer have my 5.4 (which was very similar to yours) but remember it showing about 7/32" of bullet when checked with 60's M2 Ball. - Bob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaveHH

the rifling is almost absent

---

I don't recall if that barrel would have been Broach cut Or if Inland was using the Button reaming yet.

Maybe ? possible a Brand New cutter was used, that left less rifling, then with wear came closer to spec?

A complete WAG...

The barrel looks like a 45 ACP barrel very shallow rifling, The bullet test w/AP 1/4"

Dave,
IMO, If they could get that barrel to hit, it was accepted, Critical time for production.

Here's a S'G' BA barreled Blue Sky that looks to be Damn near a smooth bore. As you can see it swallows a M2 round to the Brass. But shoots better then I'd of ever dreamed possible after looking down the bore. Go figure..... This was my first time out with it, bought sight unseen. Creeping longest trigger pull of any Carbine I shoot. CAST Hammer.


https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...kvdwbybd-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...e509zha9-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...l8ojeos3-1.jpg

To read and see my hold:

https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=61219

If it shoots fine note the shallow rifling as a fact and enjoy it!

Here's a muzzle picture of the 5.4M Inland I mentioned in post #2. The rifling looks kind of shallow on that one, unless I've forgotten what they're supposed to look like. :dunno: - Bob

Quote:

---

I don't recall if that barrel would have been Broach cut Or if Inland was using the Button reaming yet.

---

Too early for the Button rifling. That would have been in the 6 mil range. Barrels with the button rifling would not be marked near the muzzle with a date or name but would have I-BR on the top of the barrel, near the breech. The documentation indicates that only 5000 button rifled barrels were made.

Thx Chris,
That saved me from looking back thru the paper stack.

Went back into War Baby 3 to seek clarification and one page 940, It mentioned Inland testing barrels with a too large bore and being allowed to use them since they worked. There were apparently quite a few barrels with issues pertaining to gas fixtures not fitting well. I think this was where they used white lead to seal the poorly fitting gas units. I seem to remember Mr. Doerfner mentioning something about barrels. I'll find it since I constantly read all three WB Books. I had no idea that Inland had machines to wear in finished carbines opening and closing them over and over again. What a great idea! What an extra step to assure quality function.

I don't want to have people assume that I'm saying this carbine is a poor example or not as good as it should be. Over the years I've shot it not a lot since it is in such good condition and appears to be as built. It shoots at 100 yds same as the Winchester which has a tighter barrel. And not as good as the NPM which has a more worn IBM barrel.
Thanks for the input guys.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaveHH

It mentioned Inland testing barrels with a too large bore and being allowed to use them since they worked.

---

This is more or less what I meant by saying built at a time where the carbine was deemed critical.
When you take in to account how nice the condition of this carbine is in.
You'd expect more wear and tear on the Carbine if the bore was worn so much from being shot.
Surely during production if it held target, it was packed and shipped.
Interesting though, now you'll have us all looking inside the barrels in this range on thought to be original barrel to receiver Inland.
Now gotta wonder about Inland barrels made near this date.... That were sent to other Primes ?
More homework.

By this time I doubt Inland was shipping barrels to anyone else since only them and Winchester were still producing carbines, of any volume that is.

It seems to me if that barrel shows 1/4" on a bullet test of the rifling, it's very close to "brand new" specifications. Otherwise if the grooves were "shallow," wouldn't a bullet have a hard time passing through it without creating excess pressure? Now, I might have to pull my 5.4M out and see if I can get a measurement with a dial caliper. Got to get out there and plow my driveway again - Winter is finally arriving here! :dancingbanana: - Bob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by deldriver

By this time I doubt Inland was shipping barrels to anyone else since only them and Winchester were still producing carbines, of any volume that is.

---

Yea your right Del,
My mistake,
I'm still thawing from spending most of last night trying to get my son's Natural Gas flowing in his 3 story house. I never knew Nat Gas could freeze. The line below the gas meter on his and the better part of the block he lives on all had the same issue. Gas co said moisture has got in their supply. I did what one of them advised: I couldn't use any flame, so wrapped it in that water pipe heat tape, 2-500 watt work lights and covered with a tarp. Waste of time as they needed to purge the supply lines with some type of 'Anti Moisture Additive' (Their words).
I hauled wood from home and split it over there. So glad my son and DIL didn't take my advise and put in a Nat Gas Insert after they bought the home.
Froze to the bones and major brain freeze after -21 wind chill.
Gas back up and running at 3:45pm today
This was all after having a Furnace Repair Co charge over $600 for furnace repairs earlier Friday with no results, then told by Gas co they had a pressure issue :bitch:

DaveHH, Sorry so Off Topic :surrender:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by painter777

I'm still thawing

---

Hat's off to you Charlie, well done.

No problem Charlie. Out here in the PRK they won't let people heat their homes with wood. A few dozen people with breathing problems force a quarter million to stop burning. Every problem must be solved. They pass 900 new laws every year. There are millions of perfectly good firewood trees on the stump after the two giant fires, and wood would be less than the $400 a cord it is now. Things are going to end badly here if the progressives keep this up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaveHH

Out here in the PRK they won't let people heat their homes with wood.

---

One of those movements is just starting to pass gas here also. It's the next ville but that's too close for me.

It begins slowly when they start having meetings about it and then some semi-scientist decides that it must be a serious problem.