See anything unusual? Follow the link:
http://gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewIte...Item=125701074
J.B.
Printable View
See anything unusual? Follow the link:
http://gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewIte...Item=125701074
J.B.
Why would an 8/30 dated barrel have a non-fluted, WWII-era FRSB?
Both the barrel and receiver markings appear pantagraphed.
Hey J.B.,
Someone turned a low numbered receiver into a high numbered one?
LB
The serial number is sharp, the rest looks like it was sandblasted near to oblivion. The "8" looks odd.
Jim
Hey Jim,
Wonder what the prize is?
LB/Robert
The stock bolts/screws are not correct? Figure it has to be some small detail.
J.B., you should make this a regular thing, fun.
Lancebear
The fixed base does not have lightening cuts possibly indicating a WWII rebuild, but no punch mark on ledge.
BEAR
The stock bolts/screws are set in too deep on the left and are off center on the right of the stock.
LB
It appears that Gun Broker is "down" ......
Resp'y,
Bob S.
The first thing I noticed is that the markings on the barrel do not look like barrel markings I have seen on post-WWI '03 barrels - the lettering (both size and "font") looks different. Also, look at the "rings" on the barrel - much like a High Standard replacement. I smell a rat!
ok...
this is a turd for sure, Johnnys right, someone did the barrel and reciever, heres my take.
the rifle was heavy buffed and blued at one time, likely semi sporterized, likely not a lownumber, they are pretty hard, and that type of engraving is tough to do on them.
look at the cuttoff, it was buffed so hard you cant see the OFF or ON.
parkerizing is NOT, GI. and likely a home job, very thin and blotchy.
too light in color.
stock has a repair at the rear tang area, that tells me, it has recoil lug issues, and was likely shot with no rear tang bushing, or a loose one.
most stocks with this type of damage were not repaired by the military, and only replaced.
this is not a GI repair. and a bad one at that. i dont really go over and nit pick the parts on the rifle, as its a POS.
if it was a genuine rifle, with original finish, fair stock, ect, his starting price would be great.
as it sits, its worth the some of the parts.
id check the receiver with a file and see if its DHT, or NS. if its NS, it would make a shooter.
NOT with that stock, it will need repaired correctly, before its shot again.
step away from this one..its got issues we cant see for sure.
oh my gawd, i just went back and looked again.
the last picture shows a gap in the sight base, and receiver, but look at the epoxy that oozed out from the receoil lug repair..nasty nasty nasty..
no matter what kinda bow you put on a turd, its still a turd.
Each barrel is 12 years apart from the subject barrel. Flaming bomb is different on all three but the subject barrel is quite a bit different.
Oh, I just found this barrel in Brophy's book. Flaming bomb matches the 1942 barrel.
BEAR
Serial number is quite nice, too nice? All other lettering is beat to death. A low number that has been re-numbered? Possible.
The serial number has had the first "1" added to make it look like a high number. The SA folks took considerable pride in centering that number when they set up the jig. I don't think the number is pantographed or fake, except for that first "1". FWIW, that was quite common at one time, and that one is pretty well done compared to most.
It looks like the receiver might even have been a salvage job; it was probably heavily rusted or even burned, then sand-blasted or wire brushed and given a dose of modern heavy Parkerizing. It could also have been a "sporterized" gun, heavily buffed and blued, then buffed again to "restore" it. The finish is not only wrong for a 1920-era rifle, it is even wrong for a WWII refinish.
Then we have a poorly fitting stock, probably a repro, with no markings or cartouches, with what looks like a repair behind the bolt. All in all, a rifle to be avoided.
Jim
Receiver looks original? The serial number is too low on the receiver, is running down hill, and the 3 looks like the top has been squashed down. Compare the receiver to an original receiver to see the differences.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...3/1h2sdk-1.jpg
also look at Johhnys pic real close. see how the lettering is smooth inside the stamps? a pantegraph will leave small chatter markes,
you can use another form of engraving to get it right, but the rifle in question wasnt done that way.
also , notice how well the sight base fits on the one Johhny has pictured? look at the one in question,,
another side note,,,
Johhnys rifle has no punch mark on the receiver edge, nothing to do with the other rifle, just noticed it.
though its not on my list, id say Johhnys rifle is a NM..
what is "nearly 100% of original parkerized refinish"???
http://gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewIte...Item=125712481
i wanna know when Winchester rebuilt 1903,s???? same lame engraving on the barrel.
and yet another,, didnt know RIA made barrels in 1922
http://gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewIte...Item=125858427
I would say that it is an ersatz '03, but have no idea who made it. The reciever looks to be a cheap knock-off of the '03 and the font, depth, etc of the lettering is just plain wrong. Poor fit of the FRSB to the receiver, as well as the other parts. The floorplate looks like it could be zinc. Not sure what to say about the stock. Cocking piece, safety, mag cut-off all are crudely made and not SA or RIA.
Also too; ~ the 1123696 falls in a s/n range that seems to be allocated mostly to MK I rifles.
The barrel is legitimate. RIA did indeed make barrels in 1922.Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckindenver
J.B.
No 'Proof ' punch mark in the 'bomb' on the barrel.Quote:
Originally Posted by John Beard
hmm, thought that the later RI,s were assembled by SA..see, you learn something everyday.
That just means the barrel was made and used before the practice of prick punching began.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Haas
J.B.
Hey J.B.,
I'm about out, it's a Finnish M-39 stock that somebody turned into an '03 C stock? Crazy...just a guess.
LB
Other than being extensively patched and repaired, the stock appears legitimate. Johnny Peppers and others pinpointed perhaps the most unusual characteristic. And in giving appropriate consideration thereto, one should recognize that the receiver has probably been annealed. :ugh:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lancebear
J.B.
The flaming bomb on the barrel doesn't look right, here is an example.
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/Vie...Item=124096768
As I mentioned before, look at the two "8"'s.:madsmile: They are not the same. Something stinks.:nono:
Jim
draw an 8 with a pen. youll get the same look. a stamped 8 wont cross over itself.
a engraved one will, thats done by a trophy engraver, and not a tool and die maker.
thats the differance in a 20.00 job, and a 125.00 job is :}
Why would anyone go to that much trouble to buld such a crappy rifle for so little money?:confused:
Jim
The 8 on the barrel in question looks like you were taught to make an 8 in the 1st or 2nd grade with a single stroke, while an original Springfield 8 looks like you were taught in mechanical drawing with one flattened 0 stacked on another flattened 0.
Does anyone have an example of a barrel near the barrel in question? Even the ornance bomb doesn't look like any example I have.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../1znbip4-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../333zlf8-1.jpg
Both these rifles are B.S. Gawd only knows why someone would go through all that for nothing. Barrel was probably sporterized & some pothead tried to bring it back to life. The stamps on the second rifle are the cat's azz though. I guess preschool gunsmithing must be back in class? Who knows maybe someone will buy em!
This is what it should look like.
by looking at all his other auctions, likely he,s a dealer that is selling an estate, and really doesnt know the history.
though i dont know him, i think he,s trying to give a fair disc, of the weapon, and may have some experiance with 03,s just enough to be dangerous.
he does have some other interesting items, i actually thought about the RR 1911A1 he has, but his opening bid, is more then the pistol is worth for a reblue.
i figured about 650.00 tops, he wants 1200.00 or something like that.
Steven,
You anywhere near Garber?
Jim
Not to go off topic but I thought it was the Duke, John Wayne that initiated the practice of "prick punching" in his movies.....I just thought springfield and the others modified it to their weapons :pQuote:
Originally Posted by John Beard
Jim
I am 40 miles NW of Garber. How does a fellow from NC know Garber?
I spent a lot of time in Garber. I had a girlfriend who lived there.
Jim
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckindenver
I think you might be right about the estate thing, and he does have some interesting stuff mixed in with the bad. That "AS IS-no refund or exchange" isn't helping though.
Johnny,
I will go dig out & take a look in my BBTs.
Don