My M1A1 carbine

[lboos]

I finely got one, well most of it, please tell me what you think, good or bad.
I want it to look like it did in 1943, I know their is a lot wrong with it. the things I see right off is the frt. and rear sights are wrong, the barrel strap is wrong [I cut off the bayonet lug off until I can find the correct type 1]. I think someone replaced the leather and used the wrong rivets, the hand guard is not correct it has four rivets not the two rivets. [I have a correct two rivet hand guard for it].
The good things I see is that it is a Inland, it is in the right sn. range for a M1A1, most of the parts are Inland parts, and the gun itself is in very good shape.
Thank's for looking.

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[INLAND44]

What are you going to do with the sight bridge since it has the stake marks for the adjustable sight? The stock nose is also going to have the mark of the type III band, and the barrel may have a worn place where the snout of the bayo lug rubbed. There are many more problems in 'correcting' a rebuild. Not to say they are not solvable, but sometimes it gets expensive.

[lboos]

Thanks for your thoughts Inland,
I know it's not an untouched M1A1 used at Normandy, but it's prob. as close as I will ever get to owning a very small part of WW 2 history, I just do the best I can with what I have and can afford, but you are right, their's a lot of prob's. to make this gun look like it did in 1943, but I kinda like it. thanks for your comment's .

[Bill Hollinger]

The metal on the folder looks the part although the leather has been replaced and the rivets are way off. The hand guard is a four rivet type, too late for the serial number. The staking has already been mentioned as has the type III barrel band footprint.

[RCS]

the stock has the RIA rebuild stamp and I would doubt it is a "hi wood" stock. Early stocks that I have seen had the circle P in the back not side. The pistol grip also has marks
which would indicate early or later too.

Sometimes it is better not to change things and put it back with the adj rear sight and with a bayonet lug. The later bayonet lug often leaves a shadow on the barrel and once
removed is easy to spot

[lboos]

I thank you all for your advice. Would it be best with all these prob's to just leave it alone as RCS says and put the rear adj. sight and a newer bayonet lug and frt. sight back on and the four rivet hand guard and leave as a Korea-Vietnam ere M1A1 ?
Maybe I was wrong on the WW 2 era. what would you guy's do with it ? just asking for some advice, Thanks for any help.
RCS, That sure would be a lot less trouble and exp.

[INLAND44]

I thank you all for your advice. Would it be best with all these prob's to just leave it alone as RCS says and put the rear adj. sight and a newer bayonet lug and frt. sight back on and the four rivet hand guard and leave as a Korea-Vietnam ere M1A1 ?
Maybe I was wrong on the WW 2 era. what would you guy's do with it ? just asking for some advice, Thanks for any help.
RCS, That sure would be a lot less trouble and exp.

I meant, no, you were not wrong.

[browningautorifle]

I'd put it back to what it was and keep it.

[Patrick Chadwick]

Long-time readers will know that I have a very conservative attitude to "correcting". I will do whatever is necessary in the spirit of "long-term maintenance" to make my rifles perform well. But swapping out components merely to make a gun appear "correct" is, IMHO, falsification, and even if the (presumably) well-meaning perpetrator does not intend it to be so, produces a de-facto fake when the gun is passed on, as one day it will be.

I shoot a 1944 carbine which seems to have been through an overhaul (as were many/most rifles in long active service). The shaft is warped, so that I had to file around on the front end to stop it bending the barrel. It would be tempting to swap the stock for an unwarped one, and - hey! why not a "correct" one while I'm at it? - but since I have won the 50-meter championship in Hessen twice with this tatty original, any change would be non-functional, and therefore not necessary.

The aim of armorers and arsenals it to produce guns that function properly. Not to produce nicely matched sets of components to delight collectors.

How many "100% correct" carbines are there out there now? Probably a higher percentage that at the end of WWII.

Leave it alone and resist the urge to slide into fakery.

[cali201]

it is one thing to "correct" a carbine with no barrel band shadow or adj sight stake marks for your own pleasue but when they stand out like they do on this carbine it would be a distraction of sorts. Best to keep the adj sight, barrel band w/bayo lug on it. It is part of the carbine's history, nothing wrong with that. Lots of M1A1 carbines went through the rebuild process (RIA stamp) and were upgraded to those parts so having it with those parts in that stock will still be "correct" for it.