M1 Garand Lower Band Pin Question(s)

Hi all,

I apologize for the slight influx of threads I've been creating ever since I've joined the forum, it is all just to gain more insight into the M1 Garand as I delve more into collecting.

I see that on many auctions for these rifles, they make a noticeable claim to the pin still being in place on the lower band. What exactly are the implications of this? Does this simply mean that it was never disassembled (the barrel + front handguard section) of the rifle? Is it a negative connotation if it missing?

Furthermore, when and where would the lower band pin be removed if this was the case?

Apologies if there are any misused terms.

Thank you!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ms15710

I see that on many auctions for these rifles, they make a noticeable claim to the pin still being in place on the lower band.

---

So what? Why shouldn't it be in place? After all, one can readily dismantle the whole assembly and replace it.

The fact that a pin is still there proves nothing, other than the simple fact that a pin is still there!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ms15710

Does this simply mean that it was never disassembled (the barrel + front handguard section) of the rifle?

---

That is what they want you to think - without actually making a claim that might be disproved later!

The issue is not whether the pin is in place, it's whether it shows signs of having been removed or replaced. That is a strong sign of originality, you can't rebarrel a receiver without taking it off. The best telltale is undisturbed original staking.
Attachment 123406

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bob seijas

The issue is not whether the pin is in place, it's whether it shows signs of having been removed or replaced. That is a strong sign of originality, you can't rebarrel a receiver without taking it off. The best telltale is undisturbed original staking.
Attachment 123406

---

Interesting, thank you!

In this regard, if the pin is missing but there are no signs that it was removed, does this mean anything?

Is it possible that they could just fall out on their own?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ms15710

Interesting, thank you!

In this regard, if the pin is missing but there are no signs that it was removed, does this mean anything?

Is it possible that they could just fall out on their own?

---

It's unlikely that a lower band pin would fall out on its own because they were staked in place. As you can see in Mr. Seijas' photo above, there's a bit of metal that's disturbed on either side of the pin. That was done so as to prevent the pin from coming loose and falling out. I've never seen a truly original, unmolested example that didn't have the pin in place. I suppose anything is possible, but I'd be highly suspect of such an example that claims originality but has a missing lower band pin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jersey Devil

It's unlikely that a lower band pin would fall out on its own because they were staked in place. As you can see in Mr. Seijas' photo above, there's a bit of metal that's disturbed on either side of the pin. That was done so as to prevent the pin from coming loose and falling out. I've never seen a truly original, unmolested example that didn't have the pin in place. I suppose anything is possible, but I'd be highly suspect of such an example that claims originality but has a missing lower band pin.

---

Thank you for the reply!

I would assume as much that there’s no feasible way it would fall out on its own with indented metal to keep it in.

Moreover, is it safe to assume that on these completely undisturbed rifles the staking is only on one side of the lower band? And evidence of disturbed metal on both sides is rather suspect?

I am just on the lookout for an all original rifle, and am taking all of these details into consideration so I know exactly what to look for.

Well Bob, maybe it’s just my eyeballs, but the “staked” region in that photo looks very untidy. The few examples I have of staking show one clean dimple from a punch. That area looks as if it had been struck at least twice - first at 8 o’clock and later at 9 o’clock. As it might appear if, for instance, the pin had been driven out, replaced, and then staked again.

It is noticeable that the position of the head of the pin in that photo is rather deep. Which would happen if, just maybe, the pin was driven in flush on the other side.

To form a clearer opinion, one would need to see a good close-up photo of the other side.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Patrick Chadwick

but the “staked” region in that photo looks very untidy

---

I had one of the LL rifles that still had it's solid pin and looked exactly like that. Looks like they used something with a chisel point. It's the "Solid pin" that matters too. They changed to roll pins about 1952(?) I think.

I think it might be useful at this stage to consider the following:

To claim that an object is “untouched” - whatever one takes that to mean - is an attempt at a negative proof. After all, the objects in question were all “touched” extensively - in manufacture and proofing. Apart from the extremely rare cases of rifles still sealed in a factory wrap, after distribution and unwrapping, rifles were handled, used, and maintained.

It may be possible to demonstrate that a rifle has been altered from its “out of the wrap” configuration - a positive proof.
But in the days of mass-produced components that do not require any individual fitting, it is hardly possible to prove that no components have ever been replaced - a negative proof.

Nevertheless, since so many collectors often place such an astonishingly high value on this presumed “untouchedness”, it is not surprising that sellers will do their best to suggest it - although they cannot prove it.

Recourse is thus taken to insinuation, conjecture, hypothesis - anything but a firm guarantee…

Because that is impossible.

Bob and Jim, with regard to the photo, my point is that if it has been struck more than once, how can one tell whether the second impact was made immediately after the first (because the first wasn’t firm enough) or fifty years later - after removal and replacement of the pin?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Patrick Chadwick

how can one tell

---

I can't.

The photo was meant to illustrate staking, not to assert originality. It's the most recent one I had for an article. Whether the pin has been removed is a matter of opinion. Scott Duff is good at it, he's had a lot of experience.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ms15710

Thank you for the reply!
I would assume as much that there’s no feasible way it would fall out on its own with indented metal to keep it in.
Moreover, is it safe to assume that on these completely undisturbed rifles the staking is only on one side of the lower band? And evidence of disturbed metal on both sides is rather suspect?
I am just on the lookout for an all original rifle, and am taking all of these details into consideration so I know exactly what to look for.

---

You're welcome, happy to help!
Correct. Once a pin is staked in place it's typically there for good unless a rather considerable amount of effort is used to remove it. Often this would mean using something pointed to get between the staking and defeat it thus driving the pin out one side or the other.
The staking was done on either side so as to prevent the pin from being driven out either direction. The only pin that comes to mind which could be driven out in one direction only is the one that retains the front sight base on the M-16-type rifles. That's a tapered pin, which was only staked on one side.
An all original rifle SHOULD come with proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the rifle's actually original. This is actually quite rare, and many just come with stories. That said, buy the example for the proof that you uncover through dedicated research and consultation, and the proof that it's presented with. As they say, "buy the rifle, not the story!"
Cheers,
--Brian

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bob seijas

The photo was meant to illustrate staking, not to assert originality. It's the most recent one I had for an article. Whether the pin has been removed is a matter of opinion. Scott Duff is good at it, he's had a lot of experience.

---

Is it possible to reach out to him about something like this? Or does he rather be left alone than be pestered by requests/comments from the community on these types of issues regarding their specific rifles; similar to how so many come to Rick B. with concerns about their stocks. I would personally like to reach out to him about something I discovered, but I would rather not bother him if he does not want the attention.