Printable View
Is there a method to determine if lock bar rear sights are original as mfgd. to a rifle vs. a restoration? Also, is it normal for the rear sight cover to be a lighter or darker color? Should it have the same patina/wear as the rest of the receiver? Thanks.
In determining whether a lockbar is original to a rifle, you might be able to tell by looking at the end of the pinion, where it comes through the windage knob. The originals had the end staked or opened up to prevent the lockbar from coming all the way off. However, it is possible to restake the pinion, so beware. That would be the only way I can think of. As far as rear sight covers, yes, they do often have a slightly different shade of parkerizing, due, in part I believe, to the different heat treatment they underwent. HTH.
The short answer to your question is no. There is no practical way to determine if any sight has been on a rifle was put there during manufacture. The sights were made as separate parts and maded & finished in batches. Even parts made at the same time may have different colored finishes if they were finished indifferent tanks, in different solutions on different days before they were assembled.
Scott Duff's book on WWII Garands has a lot of info on lock bar sights the so-called flush nut or type I, type II, type III, etc. The info he presents matches the s/n of rifles to the month they were produced and to a variety of parts, inclusing sights, that would be expected on a rifle produced in any particular month.
Most Garands were reworked after the war & fitted with the T105E1 sights & modified op rods. Also, many Garands were broken down and reassembled at unit & depot level during & after the was. There was never any concern about returning a particular part to a particular receiver. In that sense, practically every garand is a mixmaster. Still, many Garands show up with the LBs. At the CMP, perhaps 2% of the Garands came with LB sights. Since most of these were Greek & Danish returns, I would consider these "original" to the rifle, particularly if they were the right type for the s/n. The CMP usually replaced only parts that were worn out or damaged, the probability is very high that these sights had been on the rifle since WWII.
The whole concept of an "original" Garand is a will o' the wisp and descends into philosophy. Unless one can certify that a particular rifle is exactly as it left SA as new production, is it original in the sense that it has all the parts it was originally made with? Will just one part changed out later makes in "not original"? If a rifle had a damaged/worn/obsolete sight or swivel or bolt that was replaced by a GI armorer with one of later vinatge, isn't it still "original" in the sense it meets the Army's definition of a Garand? Is a rifle less "original" if one GI part is replaced with another GI part by a civilian? I know many collectors want "original" rifles & do so by swapping parts. Personally, I consider any Garand used & maintained by the US or it allies as "original" but that rifles with import marks on them as "not original".
You can not make an "original" rifle by swapping parts. You can make a "correct" rifle by swapping parts, but a rifle is only original if it still has the exact parts that were on it when it left the factory. A rifle used and maintained by the US that has updated parts is neither "original" or "correct". It is simply a used Garand that has been through a rebuild, commonly known as a "mixmaster".Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirk
Great answers guys, and the discussion is much appreciated. My rifle in question is a Winchester 2.4 million. All parts are correct for this rifle, including the lock bar sight with it's thick apperature. The lighter colored gray sight cover has original finish, but does not have the patina the rest of the receiver has, however wear to the lock bar and elevation knob match the wear to the rifle and stock. Perhaps as suggested, the sight cover did not show patina and wear similar to the receiver due to different heat treatment and finish methods.
Post a pic of the cover to verify it is actually a WRA cover and not from another manufacturer.
Will do this evening. Thanks.
And any other pics of your Winchester would be great. Always like looking at Garand rifles!
Here's the sight cover. Will post a link for more photos.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...tandard-29.jpg
A link to additional photos. http://www.fototime.com/inv/75ADCEBF58A0586
Nice rifle, dbarn. Thanks for the pics; I like drooling over Garands too.
The sight cover looks to be original WRA. It has the typical WRA narrow ribs and the punch mark. The ribs are struck a little deeper than most but probably still WRA. The lockbar looks more like a type III SA than a square Winchester, but there are several variations of WRA lock bars so could be OK. If you can see the pads on the back they should be curved on the inside. SA lock bar pads were straight. The ghost image of the "5" on the receiver is interesting. I think I have seen pics of that rifle before. I have one that also has a similar ghost image but is a different number and smaller in size.
Thanks for the comments guys. Here's a close up of the lock bar, hth. Regarding the ghost number, if you look close there is a four on the other side making the number 45. There has been some speculation that it may have undergone an interchangeability test with Springfield but I certainly have no proof of this. The number is in the finish, almost appearing to be acid etched.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...tandard-30.jpg
Without seeing the underside of the lock bar, it would be hard to say for sure that it is a type III SA. but looking at that last shot of the side edge, and how it looks almost like a casting mark, that is typical SA. Between that and the squared ends, I'd say type III SA. BUT, I wouldn't change a thing. Even if it is, who knows if it is or isn't an original. Sure would be time wise. And some WRA rifles have been observed with unmarked late follower/slide assemblies (which most equate to post-war SA rifles) and there have been some WRA buttplates found on SA stocks. All I'm saying is that the wear and finish looks consistant. I wouldn't touch it. In my book - and that isn't saying much - I'd say original. Who knows what will be turned up tomorrow as to how these things were built and using what parts. I'd sure like to see some shots of the gas lock screw, particularly the inside holes. Do they look flat on the bottom of the holes or are they beveled? Nice rifle for sure!
Oh, and thank you for all the photos. They are awesome.
Thanks for the info Islandhopper and kind words, will try and post a pic of the lock screw this evening.Quote:
Originally Posted by islandhopper
Good looking rifle Dbarn. My only comment is the gas cyl lock is post WW2, not unusual, and it certainly doesn't condemn your rifle at all. Tough to find one like yours. :super:Quote:
Originally Posted by dbarn
Thanks, but may I ask why the gas cyl lock would be considered post WWII?
dbarn,Quote:
Originally Posted by dbarn
Unless the perspective of your photo doesn't show it, and it may be me, I can't make out a chamfer on the top front corner like this. If it's there, even better!
Yes, it's there. Always good to learn something new. Had previously thought the post war was distinguished by a hump? Thanks for the info. :)
Difficult to get a good photo the inside hole of the gas lock screw, but hope this helps.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...tandard-31.jpg
Those are awesome photos. Thank you for doing it. Could you tell me, or describe what the shape of the bottom of the holes are? Are they flat or beveled? What I mean, are the side holes angled higher from the outer edge and then slope down to the center hole and also, is the center hole beveled to a point in the middle or is it too rather flat? Thank you again. You did great!
The center hole is milled in a circular motion with a beveled point in the center of the bottom.
The side holes are also beveled to a point but are recessed evenly. They do not angle higher from the outer edge and slope down to the center hole.
HTH, and thanks for asking!
So the side holes are flat on the bottom, but the center hole is beveled? Thanks.
Yes, while all of the holes have the same circular milling patterns, the center bottom hole may be beveled to a point due to the amount of metal removed. The side holes are more flat and still have a slight point but not as pronounced.
Question. Were both Springfield and Winchester made this way? Were there different known mfg. tecniques used to determine which mfgr?
I think the dimensions are pretty consistent, with a little off here and there. But I'm finding that there are differences with the shape of the bottoms of the three holes used to make the single slot. I've got two single slots - one has a very pointed center hole and the side holes are beveled down toward the center hole. This is a very pronounced bevel and makes the bottoms of the side holes look very small. The other single slot that I have is one that I purchased as a NOS item. This one looks just like my other one, except the side holes are pretty flat, with a dimple in the center of each and slight circular milling marks around the dimple. The center hole is the same, with only a very slight bevel toward the center, but the circular milling marks here are more pronounced. The bevel of the center hole on the supposed NOS single slot though is not nearly as pronounced as my other single slot is. That one actually goes to a point. Both of mine have a smooth face, without any rings or milling marks on them. And the bottom is in the white. Both are made from stainless steel as well. I applied some cold blue to the unfinished bottom surface of the supposed NOS screw and it did nothing - which is consistant with stainless steel. Others I have asked have said some of their single slot screws have more beveled bottoms on some of their and some have more flat bottoms. I don't know. I am trying to determine if any of this information would prove or disprove that my NOS single slot is the real deal. More or less comparing if you will. Your informtion is very much appreciated.
Glad to help. Your NOS gas screw lock sounds like it could very well be the real deal. If I may offer a suggestion. Start a new thread and post some photos. No doubt there are many folks here that could help. As for my Winchester, and although it was represented to me as a complete original, it may or may not have some incorrect parts. Regardless, I'm very happy having it in the collection. They just don't come along very often. Best regards,
David
I think you have an awesome rifle. Fantastic! I have yet to try to post photos so here goes. These photos show the screw that I have talked about. Opinions welcome.
[IMGW]http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa291/islandhopper11/GasLockScrewSideSlot.jpg?t=1240428827[/IMGW]
[IMGW]http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa291/islandhopper11/GasLockScrewTight.jpg?t=1240428894[/IMGW]
[IMGW]http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa291/islandhopper11/GasLockScrew1.jpg?t=1240428931[/IMGW]
[IMGW]http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa291/islandhopper11/GasLockScrew2.jpg?t=1240429005[/IMGW]
Islandhopper, posted a couple of more pics of mine in the photo album. hth.
http://www.fototime.com/inv/75ADCEBF58A0586
Great pics guys. I dont mean to hyjack your post but does anyone know where I can find a SA Single slot screw with worn finish?
Thanks
Actually Orlando, I think i hijacked the thread originally (sorry dbarn :)). There are several listed on Gunbroker right now. Other than that, I would post a "wanted" add on the trader forum. I'll bet someone contacts you pretty quick. Another place to contact would be MB Company. Hope that helps.
No problem islandhopper we are here to help each other. Just wanted to let you know, I finally got all of the goop out of the center hole of mine and the center hole is shaped like a funnel. Large at the top and narrowing down to the bottom at a 45 degree angle. It's definitely not a flat bottom hole. When did they stop puting a border around the the top edge of the screw? Is this a Winchester trait?
it is amazing the amount of resource availabe here. :wave:
thanks to all who have contributed to this thread....:beerchug: