Where to draw the line?

As mentioned in another topic, there is a line between a collectable/non-shooter and a shooter carbine. On one end, the mixmasters (and the rebuilts) make dependable, durable shooters for everything from plinking to varment hunting to home defense. At the other end of the spectrum are the truely historically correct and museum-rare carbines which are examples an America which we will never see again - these pieces we don't take chances with shooting.

CPM is giving us all great shooters ($600). The auctions are offering rarer (but shootable) examples of things we rarely see ($2,000~$3,000). The estate sales of old war veterans seem to be giving us the "bring-backs" of what really was (priceless).

But where do you draw the line? Shooter vs too-rare-to-shoot

For me, it depends on the condition and if I feel it really is an original. If it is, I tend to put it away because of it's history and value. But, I have a couple that believe to be originals but were obviously fired sometime before I got them so I don't feel I necessarily need to put them away and not shoot them. However, I just bought a Underwood yesterday that gives every indication of being original with correct period parts AND the chamber, bore and everything is so spotless that I'm sure it has not been fired in a very, very, very long time. So...that one gets put up with a few others I have and I will not fire it.

My first carbine is a SG. It was the one that got me into this "mess". T'was a purchase from the widow of a good friend who passed. Was just trying to help, didn't really want the rifle. It's a DCM and I still have the papers. Mixmaster with M2 stock. I have fired it many times, and will not hesitate to do so again, if so inclined. Got a couple of more that are obviously run of the mill CMP's, and would shoot them as well.
But then, when the ante goes up, my reticence to shoot goes dramatically up as well... Some of the rifles are "as Manufactured", and in almost NIB condition.
Now when you get away from Carbines, Lugers, for example, I wouldn't dream of shooting any of them except one. Also my first one, it has a mismatched toggle. It also has the distinction of having two tours over V/N in the back seat of a Navy F4 Phantom. So, even tho I might shoot it, it would be the LAST one I ever got rid of. Long story for another thread.
P 38's, well, parts are not as crucial as Lugers, depending on date of mfgr. I've got a couple of Mauser "byf's" with French star proofs that I would and have shot.
I hear a lot of guys say that they won't have a gun they don't shoot. Well, that's fine. It's their gun. That's why they make Chevy's and Fords. Viva la difference!!! But I just get cold chills when I think of breaking the extractor on an IP.

My .02

jim

Quote:

---

For me, it depends on the condition and if I feel it really is an original.

---

Is there such a thing as "original" in the market place? I was castigated
for suggesting that collectors who search for "correct" parts to unmix their mixmaster was not much different than one who adds a cartouche to their stock for the finishing touch. I say it's fraudelent either way when they attempt to sell it as original. If it's in the confines of ones home, no problem, but out in the market place; please once again, explain the difference to me.:confused:

I had a early inland that came from an estate sale of a retired WWII colonel. Gun was aparently (according to his widow) his drivers, and was imacculate in original finish (cept for minor oprod track and bolt wear), all original parts, one dent and a little rubrash on edge of buttstock ect. was sitting on his wall so long barrel had dust bunnies in it, and everything was bone dry. put some oil in it, and put 15 rounds through it every year till I reluctantly sold it just to give it a little excesize.

They have all been fired at some time. Why not shoot with them? Just don't abuse them. But we all have the safe Queens.

I think most would define "original" as either as it came from the factory or as it was last used/issued. When you speak of adding/swapping the right manufacturer parts, that will only make it "correct" not "original" and it certainly would be fruadulent to try and sell it by representing it as original. There is absolutely nothing wrong for a collector to swap out parts if he wants.....as long as he doesn't mis-represent it as someyhing it's not. But, even then, in many folks opinions you may be altering the history of that carbine by adding parts or even run a risk of correcting something that truly was in a last issued conditon. jmho

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Magyar

Is there such a thing as "original" in the market place? I was castigated
for suggesting that collectors who search for "correct" parts to unmix their mixmaster was not much different than one who adds a cartouche to their stock for the finishing touch. I say it's fraudelent either way when they attempt to sell it as original. If it's in the confines of ones home, no problem, but out in the market place; please once again, explain the difference to me.:confused:

---

I collect carbines; or as a friend put it (with a wink) I collect receivers. Mine are all mixmasters to varying degrees, and I have one of each receiver. I don't see any harm in parts swapping between them. They are mine and some day will be my son's. For example, my QHMC came with a Rockola Slide. You betcha, it went on the Rockola, and so forth. I would never consider representing any of them as "original". For one thing, I ain't trying to sell 'em. Finding the "right" parts to me is part of the challenge. One thing I won't try to swap is sights and bands. That really would be cheating if you removed T3 types and put on T1 or T2 bands or flip sights. Heaven forbid faking a stamp.

The test I apply is, will shooting the carbine materially alter its condition and value? I don't have any carbines pristine enough that occasional shooting will affect their condition in any discernible way, and that includes both the rebuilds and the five that are in "as manufactured" condition but have seen some use.

That said, my favorite shooter is 5.7 million Winchester I got 36 years ago -- parts all original but someone reblued it, so it's obviously not original condition and who cares if it shows more wear.

That would be another good thread topic -- what makes a carbine your favorite shooter? For me it's the feel of the stock, the smoothness of the action, reliability, and of course a reasonable degree of accuracy.

I've got a good number of rare carbines including many lineouts, IPs and UnQualities. They all go to the range from time to time. If I can't shoot it, I don't want it.

Quote:

---

I think most would define "original" as either as it came from the factory or as it was last used/issued. When you speak of adding/swapping the right manufacturer parts, that will only make it "correct" not "original" and it certainly would be fruadulent to try and sell it by representing it as original.

---

Appreciate the replies...My confusion lies in the terms, "correct" & "original".
How could anyone tell the difference if one spends inordinate amount of time and money so as to appear correct, while in their mind they want it to be original. Is that why there is always forum skepticism when somone says they have a "bring-back" from WW11 from their Uncle Willie?:confused:

I believe that "fraud" is probably the correct term, both morally and legally, for changing the condition of an item and then misrepresenting said item in selling it for profit. I think that we have all seen the "one and only" cartouche stamps that have surfaced on some auction boards - in never-ending quantities. Someone is buying them and then strangely alot of stocks show up with cartouches that are pretty darn sharp for 65 years old! I also roll my eyes at the "all-correct" rifle that shows up as "just found in the safe". Yea, I know alot of WWII vets have died in the last few years (including my own father) and some bring backs are surfacing. But how many of those "bring backs" are "all correct"? I have ran a military armory and I can vouch that armorers make mix-masters every time they clean or maintenance more than one weapons at a time. But yet, the rifles and the cartouche stamps still sell. Strange, if it was a Van Gogh painting someone would be going to jail... With that said, I have no problem with people putting a Rock-ola trigger on a Rock-ola trigger housing for their own edification and when they are open about doing it... I don't think twice about putting a Pacmyer grips on a pistol. Just don't try and convince me that the entire Rock-ola "correct" rifle has been laying in Grandpa's closet since 1943.

And while I am on a soap box, I will point out another of my confusions.... The M-16 was a really messed up weapon (for several reasons) when it was first used by our troups in the 60's. Over the years, and several major modifications, it has turned into a dependable weapon. While we all know that the M-1 Carbine was a very good CARBINE (pistol substitute) when it was introduced, it was given several upgraded over its years of service to make it more dependable and mechanically sound. By the end of WWII and the Korea the rifle had better sights, stronger op rod, a bayonet lug/ban type that actually made it more accurate, and other mechanical improvements. With that said, I do not understand the desire that alot of people have to "de-upgrade" their carbines... does that make them more "original" when someone removes the armory rebuild upgrades? Are they more accurate when you put a replace a step sight with a flip sight? Now those thinks I do not understand....

Of course, my opinion and $0.25 will not buy me a cup of GI coffee!

There is a BIG difference between original and correct. The only way to establish a Carbine as original is to have been there and picked it up with your own hands when it came out of the factory where it was originally assembled and to be able to verify that no one else had it in their posession at any time without you having been there, even then there is room for doubt. Other than the above, it can only be correct, not original. JMHO
Chuck

A few months ago I started with several mixmasters and now have all nearly "original" carbines by trading parts and buying only a few. Being a newbie I asked and have taken the advice of those who said "leave the T3 barrel bands, flip safeties, and adj sights alone" etc. Most fun I've had in years. Fully intend to get some more ASAP. And when wx breaks I'll give them a try on the range to see how they match up with my "correct" Win.

OT, kinda, CMP has an unissued H&R Garand up for auction, does the lucky winner take it to the range and try it out?.....Frank:dunno:

I would

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frankderrico

OT, kinda, CMP has an unissued H&R Garand up for auction, does the lucky winner take it to the range and try it out?.....Frank:dunno:

---

To me, that's like having a Sherman tank come out of mothballs. You don't take it 4-wheeling, but you got to take it to the parade and show it off to everyone! Those are the kind of things that you respect, take care extra care of and shoot it with as many people possible watching.

Hey Ed, I agree.....Frank

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tired Retired

By the end of WWII and the Korea the rifle had better sights, stronger op rod, a bayonet lug/ban type that actually made it more accurate, and other mechanical improvements. With that said, I do not understand the desire that alot of people have to "de-upgrade" their carbines... does that make them more "original" when someone removes the armory rebuild upgrades? Are they more accurate when you put a replace a step sight with a flip sight? Now those thinks I do not understand....

Of course, my opinion and $0.25 will not buy me a cup of GI coffee!

---

This is a very good observation. The flip sight and type 1 barrel band are definitely rinky-dink and with the rotary safety at least you won't drop the magazine by mistake. "De-upgrading" just produces an inferior rifle that is also inauthentic.

I, too, have never understood the need for flip sites and Type I barrel bands. To me, a USGI carbine that has been de-upgraded is about as original as one of that new Kahr commercial carbines with "early" features. To each his own, though, that's what's great about America.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Magyar

Is there such a thing as "original" in the market place? I was castigated
for suggesting that collectors who search for "correct" parts to unmix their mixmaster was not much different than one who adds a cartouche to their stock for the finishing touch. I say it's fraudelent either way when they attempt to sell it as original. If it's in the confines of ones home, no problem, but out in the market place; please once again, explain the difference to me.:confused:

---

Rifles were freely dismantled, then rebuilt as mixmasters. To undo the mixmaster nature is OK, as long as it's not said to be "original".

On the other hand, an inspector cartouche is another animal entirely. It was a mark put on by the government inspector. Restamping an inspector's stamp is akin to counterfeiting.

Apples and oranges, and pretty clear to me.

Quote:

---

On the other hand, an inspector cartouche is another animal entirely. It was a mark put on by the government inspector. Restamping an inspector's stamp is akin to counterfeiting.

---

Deep down, I know you are right. However, I sometimes feel there is a "rush to judgement" on what is fake. By viewing a photo and w/o personal examination we become instant experts. For example, on this forum there is always the guy who asks if this eBay item (cartouche) is fake. Invariably, if the cartouche appears to have a "hard-strike" or fresh; that's usually accompanies a damning indictment. Nothing else and the poor seller gets an F.
As if a faker-moron wouldn't think that "lighter" would be better if passing it off for original by careful blending. The bottom line is that there are many stamps/dies out there that are so good that only a true-expert and personal examination are necessary to determine a credible outcome.:(
Anyway, just IMHO.....

Quote:

---

To me, that's like having a Sherman tank come out of mothballs. You don't take it 4-wheeling, but you got to take it to the parade and show it off to everyone! Those are the kind of things that you respect, take care extra care of and shoot it with as many people possible watching.

---

My feeling is... If you want a Sherman tank to drive around, sell the brand new one to someone who will keep it in it's current condition, and then go out and buy one that has been driven and use that one. You'll also pocket a good amount of cash because the brand new one will command a higher price based on condition alone.

Maybe you folks don't get it. The better the condition, the higher the value. Why do you think CMP is getting those big dollars for the NIW Garands? The guy who goes out and shoots that Garand has either more money than he knows what to do with, or he isn't too sharp.

I personally have two CMP carbines that I shoot. The other ones stay in the safe. Just like money in the bank.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Faulkner

I, too, have never understood the need for flip sites and Type I barrel bands. To me, a USGI carbine that has been de-upgraded is about as original as one of that new Kahr commercial carbines with "early" features. To each his own, though, that's what's great about America.

---

I agree. While de-upgrading results in an inferior rifle, there are lots of reasons why someone might want to do it -- a re-enactor might want de-upgrade a CMP rack grade Inland with repro parts to avoid banging around an original, somebody might just want to try the original configuration to see what it's like, some people (myself included) like to play armorer -- who knows. It's a free country and if it's your rifle you can do what you want with it. Besides, you can always re-upgrade if you save the parts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Magyar

Deep down, I know you are right. However, I sometimes feel there is a "rush to judgement" on what is fake. By viewing a photo and w/o personal examination we become instant experts.

---

Could not agree more with that fact. The furthest I will ever judge is when a seller seemingly posts blurry pictures of the stampings. If they know it is worth a few bills, then they darned well know that the stamping pictures should be clear as a bell.

Maybe that is a point to focus on. The seller knows that the "mark" he is citing is why he is asking such a high price. Common sense (which I admit that I sometimes lack) says that you would use the clearest, well-lit picture to showcase that value. Makes sense. On the other hand, I have seen several clear attempts to pass a forgery off as something it is not. That goes for both on line and even at gun shows (you know the ones where they kinda don't answer questions and then start stating "facts" that ain't in no history book).

The other side of the coin is when one of us go as far as bragging about what a great deal we got off of an old widow or at a garage sale because the uninformed seller didn't realize the real value of what they were selling. My hat is off to the few of us who clearly stated in their posts that they offered a better price to an uninformed seller once the value became evident. I wish their were more people like that in the world.

I started this post with a question of where the line should be drawn. The real intent was to start a conversation (which we now have) about the values and priorities on which we place on these 65 year old pieces of metal that we all purchase for one reason or another. Everyone of these rifles is distinctively unique because of individual marks, manufacturers, condition and where it has been over the last 65 years. I think all of our collective opinions are coming together to a better point over "value". Its not if the carbine is "de-upgraded" or placed back into its original condition. Its not dollar's worth of the metal or the stock. Its the value that we all place on honesty. We like knowing that the rifle we are buying, holding, shooting and selling has an honest history. We also like knowing that the person we are dealing with in those transactions is there because they honestly enjoy the rifles for the same reason we do - and that they are not trying to trick us over something as simple as money.

I think my line that I want to draw is the value I place on honesty. Terms like "original" and "all-correct" can be debated. All I ask is that you tell me the truth about the rifle so that I can enjoy it for what it really is - a piece of history that our fathers used to make sure that their children were safe.

Thanks for the soap box.