Sighting Problems on a late Inland

I mentioned this 6.94M Inland in another thread several days ago.

https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=67560 (From Post #3 on)

I decided I needed to start my own thread and post some pictures of the sights. I bought this one a year or two ago at a local gun shop. It looked fairly original other than being in an SA stock, addition of a flip safety, and a 30rd mag catch. I shot it for the first time in January and had to set the rear sight for 250 yds. to make it hit POA.

In the other thread I said it was set at 200, but when I got it out today for the pictures, it's actually at 250. This made me think one of the sights had been changed for some reason, and I got comments from others suggesting that possibility. So, here are a bunch of pictures of the sights. The staking of the rear is different than on a 5.4 Inland I had in the past, but not a whole lot. The "R" front sight looks normal to me, but I want to hear what you guys think. I do see some kind of a "tool mark" or impression on top of the receiver rail just to the left of the bolt. Could that be evidence of GI tools being used to change out the rear sight or maybe from a barrel change? I haven't seen a mark like that on a carbine receiver before. I expected the sights to be "right on" with this one, and it puzzles me that they aren't. Let me know if you see something in the pics that I'm not. I took several and can post more if needed. Thanks! - Bob

There were times through out Inlands later production that they would run short of adjustable rear sights and would use the old flip sight just to keep the line moving. This was OK with the military as they knew down the road the rear sight would be changed for an adjustable. But the front sight was filed down for the flip sight so now with the adjustable you have to place the rear sight up higher to be able to hit on around the 100 yard mark as the front sight sits too low. If you can find a new in the wrap R marked front sight then you can replace yours and slowly file it down to the proper height. The other choice is to build the sight up with some JB weld and then file it down or leave it as is and just keep the rear at 250.

I thought I could see a chisel staking on the top of the dovetail. If my eyes are correct, that indicates an original flip sight was installed. That would account for the sight problem.

Which side Jim? I've got more pictures, and will take a look. I guess I'm confused on the front sight. It must be me, since there's been 65 or more views and no one else has said anything. I think the front blade is too high as it is! - Bob

Your front sight looks original and almost full height. The dovetail staking looks like type 2/3 to me. Very slight skew on the divots. Type 1 flip sights required the blade to be filed down lower and when replaced with an adjustable sight the rifle will shoot high. If you are shooting low it could be the ammo some is low velocity compared to ammo used to originally sight it in. If not the ammo the front sight blade needs to be filed to zero, carefully. By the way, nice late Inland you have there. I'd hesitate to change anything on it.

What the pics are showing is a brand new front sight. It will have to be trimmed to hit POA at 100m with the 100m setting.

Looks like a possible light chisel mark on the left rear dovetail. Just behind the punch mark....

Jim, I thought the chisel marks (if needed) on Inlands with flip sights were always on the RH side . I've got two of them and they're both "staked" on the right side. One has them both front and rear, and the other one just at the rear. I'm attaching a picture of the one with both. Also, will attach more pictures of the left side area on the late inland. Thanks! - Bob

Attachment 100483Attachment 100484Attachment 100485

"...250 yds. to make it hit POA..." At what distance?
It's the front sight, but you do not file that to lower the POI. Front sights get moved in the opposite direction you want the group to go. I'd be inclined to find a matched set if you can. Vs fiddling with the front blade.
Or you could just shoot it the way it is. Knowing where the thing shoots is most important.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sunray

"...250 yds. to make it hit POA..." At what distance?
It's the front sight, but you do not file that to lower the POI. Front sights get moved in the opposite direction you want the group to go. I'd be inclined to find a matched set if you can. Vs fiddling with the front blade.
Or you could just shoot it the way it is. Knowing where the thing shoots is most important.

---

Shooting it "the way it is" works, but I'm more interested in finding out why this carbine needs the rear sight set at 250 yds to hit where it's aimed. My shooting distance is 25 yards and I use the 25 Yard M1 Carbine Target from the TM when trying out a "new to me" carbine. The ammo I used is Remington 110g MC. What do you mean by finding a matched set? If you mean a set from another gun, you'd end up with (2) guns that need some "fiddling," wouldn't you? I doubt that both sights have been changed on this carbine, but one or the other may have been. If so, which one shows more evidence of it? By appearance, the rear one may have been swapped, or at least moved slightly to the left and then re-staked. The way it shoots points to the front sight being replaced, but why wouldn't it have been targeted? I'm still waiting for someone to comment on the "tool mark" shown on the left receiver rail. Thanks! - Bob

Bob none of your photos show the left side of the receiver.

On the top of the left rail, Bruce. Looks almost like a mark the jaws of a lathe chuck can leave on a work piece. Possibly from a fixture or vise used in the milling process?? I was also thinking it could have gotten there from tools used during a barrel change, or some other GI carbine tool such as for changing the rear sight. - Bob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by USGI

Jim, I thought the chisel marks (if needed) on Inlands with flip sights were always on the RH side . I've got two of them and they're both "staked" on the right side. One has them both front and rear, and the other one just at the rear. I'm attaching a picture of the one with both. Also, will attach more pictures of the left side area on the late inland. Thanks! - Bob

Attachment 100483Attachment 100484Attachment 100485

---

Chisel staking could be on either side. It depended on which side was loose. A few of them were staked on both sides! My Inland X-suffix is staked on the left.

I doubt that the sight was factory installed. There were six stake marks on this sight two of which are almost in two others The vast majority of factory punch marks are done on the right side and just two punch marks. But someone sure wanted to be sure this sight just did not have a chance to move.

Bruce, I agree about the rear sight staking on this carbine. Was it you that posted awhile back about the differences between Type 2 and Type 3 rear sights in regard to the area on them meant to be used for staking? It seems like it was in reference to information in a CCNL, but may have been something I read over on the CC Forum. Can you think of a reason why this carbine has nearly a full height front sight on it? Your earlier post sounded like you thought I needed to add height to it, but that would be going in the wrong direction. I have several other pictures of the front sight (different angles and lighting) I can post, if it would help. Thanks! - Bob

The rear sight could have been restaked at a later date, that would explain the divot patterns. Also, original sights were not always staked the way some newsletter, book or online site says they were. Securing the sight to the dovetail, adjustable or flip, was the most important thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jakester

What the pics are showing is a brand new front sight. It will have to be trimmed to hit POA at 100m with the 100m setting.

---

There it is. I can't believe the discussion continues as if the question were not answered. Look in your carbine ordnance manuals to see exactly how to trim the sight blade at a slight angle. You need to do this so the carbine will be correct and shoot 'according to the book' at 100 yds with the rear sight on '1 - 1.5'. It can be as much as 12" high at 100 and still be approved. Look up the 100 yd target - the impact zone is 16" wide and 12" high with the aiming point on the lower center line. So, to target the carbine like it was intended to be, 'ideal' would be on the center line and 6" high. Once you actually know what you're doing, things get so much easier....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by INLAND44

There it is. I can't believe the discussion continues as if the question were not answered.

---

The actual question was not how to sight in a carbine, but how this carbine escaped getting sighted in. The sight doesn't appear to be a recent addition. I'll check the blade height, but it does appear to be close to "new" dimensions. It's not exactly what I would call a new sight, though! - Bob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by USGI

how this carbine escaped getting sighted in.

---

I think the suggestion of it having a flip sight originally and then the adjustable one being fitted makes most sense. That would account for it. Why it wasn't re-patterned, well if it was fitted after the military, then that would do it. There's no way to tell if it was civilian fitted. At this age, it's just guessing...

Thanks, Jim. A few are suggesting the front sight is "new" - as in, it's been replaced. It doesn't look like it to me, but it's not important enough to argue about. - Bob

A bit of a story to help illustrate... I bought a Danish return a dozen years back and attempted to sight it in. It shot right of POA at 25 and when adjusted, the error was back at 100. When adjusted, the error returned at 200. Now go back to 25 and you shoot far to the other side. I thought the sights were out of index and went home to index the barrel. When I cam back, the same thing happened but started at a lower point. I was up to the range and home four times that day. Turned out the barrel was bent, way back where it's thickest. That didn't happen anywhere along the way, the barrel was brand new and a 1960 VAR issue. Every time the gun went out to be zeroed it was wrong so back it went and reissue a new one. That's the easiest thing to do. I had to remove it and use a hydraulic press and make a straightness gauge to sort it out. About six inches forward of the breech, the gauge wouldn't pass...that was from the factory.

When they finish the barrels they go to the heat treating ovens and they droop after heating. They have to be straightened by men paid to do that very thing. All of them...except this one. Brand new in 1960 and never right.

Although not acknowledged I stand by my original post. The front sight on the carbine is original and was filed slightly presumably in the factory. I don't see any evidence of this rifle ever having a flip sight. I have owned a few late original Inlands and the front sight is a similar height. Try some USGI Lake City.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GotSnlB28

Try some USGI Lake City.

---

What vintage? I've got 40's, 50's, and 70's? I've been shooting carbines enough that I don't think I'll see any difference at 25 yds. Thanks! - Bob

A simple rule of thumb for adjusting the front sight is that you always adjust INTO the error, not in the opposite direction. If it shoots high, you need a higher front sight. If it shoots low, you need a lower front sight. I filed a nos replacement on an original Quality Hardware with flip sight several years ago. Someone had cut off the sight "wing" protectors so it needed replacing. I took another Inland i have that's perfect and checked POA at 25 yards, then carefully filed the front sight on the Quality Hardware until it was shooting to the exact same point. It's now perfect. Always use the ammo the weapon was designed for to make these alterations if necessary. That holds true for ALL military rifles.

OK, I just checked the height of the blade on my front sight vs. a new one, and found that the blade has been filed down maybe .010"-.012" - that would probably have raised the POI about 2" at 100 yd. or 1/2" at 25 yd. - Bob

GIUSBOB,
Here is a NRA sale Inland 5,093,600 from Erie Army Depot 1963.
Front sight has never been touched.

Notice this sight was made like a A Frame?
Having no vertical back side.

FWIW

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC08833-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC08827-1.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by painter777

Front sight has never been touched.

---

I know what you mean by "never been touched," but it'd be hard to explain that gouge at the top of the blade to a layman. Now I'll have to go see if I can take a picture of a sight at that angle, and make it look like an A Frame! I've seen other "N" sights machined similar to this one, without the appearance of the blade as sitting on top of a narrow rib. This one is way different than any I've ever owned. - Bob

GIBOB,
Just for kicks..... Before doing anything to your frt sight

Try pulling the barreled receiver and rehang it into the recoil plate. Shoot twice to check impact.

Pull apart B/R like above then with plate screwed down a 1/2 turn, Rehang and shoot twice to check impact.

Again pull B/R Now with plate screw backed up 1 full turn, Rehang and shoot twice to check.

Any Changes ?

Hey, remember I shoot from an old rickety lawn chair, sitting on uneven ground in a gravel pit. Can't see very well either, so maybe rearranging the chair would help, too! At the rate I'm getting things done lately, it's going to be awhile before my next shooting trip, but will let you know if I see any changes using your suggestions. Getting ready for the Oregon Arms Collectors Show in the morning - need to get up at 5 AM. - Bob

Attachment 100632Attachment 100633Attachment 100634Attachment 100635

There might have been more, but I just saw (2) carbines on display at the OAC show Sunday morning. Both were Inlands with upgrades and a few mixed parts. One was on a vendor's table and priced at $1275. The other was carried in by a guy (wife was with him) and was asking about the value. It was his first carbine and purchased recently at his LGS. The only thing he had done so far was carefully clean and re-oil the stock. It was an IO Type 3 with a faint rack number on the grip - stock looked nice. A "carbine buddy" of mine disassembled it for him and we both told him the markings we saw on the various parts. We gave him an estimate of the value being at least $750-$800. He and the wife both looked pleased to hear that. He hasn't fired it yet and wants to keep it. Said he paid $240 for it, because "that was the price the gun store had on it." So, the moral of the story is, there are still deals on carbines if you look in the right places! Charlie, here's my best tries at making my Inland front sight look like the "A-Frame" you pictured above. Over on the CC Forum, Dan and others have a thread on Niedner sight markings - explaining that the rib behind the blade was sometimes machined off to change (or repair) a previous stamp job. Sounds good to me.

On that target I pictured above, I loaded a mag with 10 rds. of Remington MC and fired the first 3 with the elevation set on 100 yds. When I saw it was hitting low, I went to the 250 yds. setting and fired the rest of them. I think I went a few clicks on the windage at the same time, but in the wrong direction. This was the first time I had shot the Inland and the first time for shooting any carbine for nearly 5 years. - Bob

GIBOB,
Gotta ask..
Is that the RUN FORREST GUMP RUN 51 Ford ?
IIRC The first Gen F series, 239 CI Flat head? About a 100hp.
Still a 3 speed column ? 5 Star cab, 6-1/2' wood bed.
Real nice honest looking truck my friend. Have you ever priced out bits and piece parts for one lately? Like that Grill that I believe was only used for a couple years. Very costly now days!

I did a 57 Ford panel wagon back in the late 70's. Spent so much on it by the time I was done I had so many offers to buy I ended up selling a year later. But needed the money for a boat to race.
Before that was a 1954 Dodge 5 window and a 62 Chevy step side short box I drove up from Muscle Shoals, Alabama.
After getting in to Hydro racing I couldn't afford or had the time to do any more.

Plenty of good memories from those old rides. Enjoy yours !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by USGI

The actual question was not how to sight in a carbine, but how this carbine escaped getting sighted in. The sight doesn't appear to be a recent addition. I'll check the blade height, but it does appear to be close to "new" dimensions. It's not exactly what I would call a new sight, though! - Bob

---

Oops. Okay, I'd say it had the 'wrong' sight on it after the rebuild and somebody 'corrected' it but didn't bother to sight it in. Yes, I agree, its not really a 'new' sight because they have really high, pointed blades. This one has been adjusted but just not for the rifle its on now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by INLAND44

Oops. Okay, I'd say it had the 'wrong' sight on it after the rebuild and somebody 'corrected' it but didn't bother to sight it in.

---

That's OK about the oops! After all, this thread actually started off in a different one and continued on here. Question: Why would they have pulled the sight during rebuild? Possibly may have been damaged in some way? Thanks! - Bob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by painter777

GIBOB,
Gotta ask..
Is that the RUN FORREST GUMP RUN 51 Ford ?

---

Probably pretty close! Remember Fred Sanford's red one? Sounds like you know your Fords! This one is a '52 though, not much difference, and it does have '51 headlight rims. You're right on the rest of it, except it's a 4-Speed with the straight cut gears, and no synchros. Found it in a barnyard for $75 in 1973 and have driven it about 55K miles since. It was my daily driver for the first ten years. Parts were cheap then. I also had a '57 Tudor in the 60's that I put a '63 427 in. Sold it for $800 in 1968. Before that was a '47 Coupe with a big Flathead that I finished when I was 16. Yep, good memories of all of them - for sure! Thanks! - Bob

Just checked on the Forest Gump pickup. It's a '52 F1 with one headlight rim - the '52 version. Charlie, do you know what the difference was on the headlight rims? It was war related.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyCGEHYvgsU

I don't know. I have gotten confused. All I can say is you're shooting low so you need to lower the sight blade to get that muzzle up. If you do this with the rear sight on 1, everything will be indexed if you ever need to put the rear sight on 2 or higher.

Are the OE 1952 headlight bezels not Stainless? Just painted to conserve the steel ?
Most I see of the 52's have the Chrome/Stainless rings, maybe not correct per 52. Just easier to find when doing a restore.

I wonder if the introduction of wood beds near these dates was a way to save steel for a possible long war ??
I did notice a few more things different between the 51 vs the 52. Mostly that the 52 has the longer hood nose.
Amazing what were 'Options' back in the day.

I should have asked all per your truck via PM or in the Watering Hole......... too late now, I think we're about wrapped up.
Enjoy that double clutching..... On a good day I could synchro my ole Dodge.

Charlie, my original '52 headlight "doors" (Ford's name for bezels or rims) were "argent painted steel," kind of a silvery gray. Mine were rusting, so I got the chrome plated ones from of a '51 that a neighbor was parting out. The trim "spears" on the sides of the hood are stainless. The Five Star "Extra" Cab models have additional trim on the hood sides, plus stainless trim around the windshield. Mine never had hubcaps when I got it, but my understanding is that '52 hubcaps were also argent painted steel rather than "bright plated" as used on '51 models. The '48 to early '50 beds had wood over steel, I believe. I understand there was a nationwide steel strike going on in '52 as well as the defense related restrictions to conserve scarce metals. The molding on the nose of the hoods are chromed on a '51 and painted (body color) on a '52. On the '52, they went back to the separate FORD "block letters" that had been used from '48-'50 -just below the molding. Yep, shouldn't have got off topic - but interesting to "talk" about. This stuff is like carbines though, always variations in trucks coming from different plants with different sub-contractors, older parts to use up, etc. - Bob

Oh, the front hood molding is completely gone on the Forest Gump pickup.

Still Original paint ?
If so which is it........ Meadow Green or Glenmist green ??
81,537 F1 Pick ups made in 52.

I don't remember if these 'Options' came in 51 or 52:

Five Star standard Cab and the deluxe Five Star Extra Cab. The Five Star Extra Cab added extra-sound deafening materials, more foam seat padding, two-tone seat upholstery, both doors get locks and armrests, dome light and passenger side sun shade.
I believe also offered was a passenger side windshield wiper.
I do remember now that the steel beds came with a wood sub floor. And for 52 (I believe) a rear bumper was offered along with a right rear tail light.
Front bumper had the extra supports removed.

I remember my first wiring job...... putting a steering column turn signal unit on my Fathers 53 Dodge stake bed.... 1-1/2 ton (?)
My 54 Dodge was a 12 volt positive ground. Burnt my share of regulators out before learning how to do them correctly. Left hand lug nuts on port side.

Lastly the 57 Ford panel wagon I did to use as a paint truck for work. But it came out so nice I couldn't bare the thought of messing it up hauling sloppy paint tools and sprayers.
It was like this, nothing chopped or lowered with Mickey Thompsons on Baby moons wearing a Forest green body paint outlined lowers with a grayed silver. Same grayed silver inside. Chrome grille and bumpers..... I'd better stop before I go looking for the old pictures.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...68e9e2_z-1.jpg

I'll tell you about the Chevy 62 step side another time, :surrender:
Enjoy your weekend....

I'm late getting back here regarding the Ford "stuff." Our gun club had a show Saturday that I needed to get ready for. I took a few extra carbine items and my 5.6 Winchester for display only. It's the nicest carbine I own and have no plans to sell it, ever. It drew a lot of interest and I'm glad I took it along - turned out it was the only carbine at the show!

Charlie, the color code on my pickup's data plate shows Vermillion, but it left the factory Meadow Green. I straightened a few dents and gave it an amateur (me) paint job about 1975. Mine had one sun visor, one tail light, one door lock, one outside mirror, and vacuum wipers. I added an electric wiper motor, sun visor, and dome light from an "extra" cab model. I think it depended on individual state laws on whether both wipers and both tail lights were required to be legal at that time. I believe the "extra" cabs also included the fresh air heater. Mine just has the recirculating heater. I have the "home made" rear bumper. As far as I know, there's no difference between '51 and '52 front bumpers - mine is from a '51. Not sure what you mean about the bumper supports? Is that MI "lingo" for bumper guards? I know that you guys call Forklifts or Lift Trucks "Hi-Lows." - Bob