-
Legacy Member
One of those ? please explain Mr Hollinger ?
-
-
11-30-2010 12:51 PM
# ADS
Friends and Sponsors
-
FREE MEMBER
NO Posting or PM's Allowed

Originally Posted by
Doomanis
Thanks for your responses to the thread.
But, Latigo are you sure "A4" is Anniston? And if you are, how and or why? I ask because I can't find any reference to this in any of my research, both internet and several books I have (new & old).
RSC, the stock was "well" sanded during the rebuild and there is only the slightest hint of an original cartouche above the pistol grip (impossible to read). Additionally, I know that the "AN" on yours is Anniston but do you have any idea about the "A4" on the initial posting I put up?
Thanks again guys.
It's Anniston. Base facility codes were realigned and re-identified in 1963 and the codes issued were not similar to the facility's name at all.
Anniston was designated "BA4." Rock Island Arsenal was designated "BO7" to exhibit a few. I believe New Cumberland Army Depot was "AN5." DCM parts were shipped from these various facilities with their new designated codes clearly shown on the invoice and sometimes on the corresponding shipping address of the package.
Receiver rebuild codes (plus a date) such as or similar to:
BA4
BA/4
BA-4
A4 /
A 4
are Anniston. A4 on stocks is the same.
-
Senior Moderator
(Milsurp Forums)
Relax
It is all good RCS. Evidently you were not aware of a discussion we had on this some time ago.
Bill Hollinger
"We're surrounded, that simplifies our problem!"
-
-
Legacy Member
The "Korean vet" may have carried this rifle but not in Korea during the war, at least not with a stock with an Anniston rebuild mark. Buy the gun, not the story.
Last edited by Joe W; 11-30-2010 at 03:07 PM.
-
Thank You to Joe W For This Useful Post:
-
Senior Moderator
(Milsurp Forums)
I have often heard stories about the vet that carried it, hid it in his sea bag and stuffed it in the closet not to be seen for the last 60 years. Examination would reveal, depending on what weapon, late rear sight, type III barrel band, stock with counterfeit cartouche, post war modifications and such, all things that are known to have taken place long after the supposed stashing of it. But still, the tale of "I know this guy who has this.........." and someone buys that story instead of the gun. Man them stories are expensive!
Bill Hollinger
"We're surrounded, that simplifies our problem!"
-
-
Legacy Member
I have an Anniston A4 marked stock just like yours. Same spot. Does yours also have a 4 stamped over an uncircled P? Just curious as mine does. Interesting WRA stock! ...And nice.
-
-
Advisory Panel
(Deceased Feb 2023)
BA4 was Anniston. BR4 was Red River. BK4 was Letterkenny.
I have never seen these markings on a stock, but they are on packaged items for storage/issue.
These marking started pretty late, sometime around the time the system went from 5 repair/maintenance/rebuild levels to 4, maybe earlier in preparation for the change .
Last edited by Bill Ricca; 12-01-2010 at 03:43 PM.
-
-
Legacy Member
I never really understood why these Facility identification markings on rifle stocks were used in the first place. It seems that, as the markings are on the stock, they could only have any meaning while in the rebuild facility. Maybe some form of indicator to armory personel that the weapon has already been through the system ???? It seems that after the weapon is put back in service the mark would mean nothing to anyone, as the stock could be changed at any point. Even the earlier etching on the receiver leg really means little once the rifle is back in service. At least with the facility code on the receiver, if a problem should develop after the rifle is back in service, the rifle could be traced back to the facility doing the last KNOWN overhaul, if need be. I am sure there must be a logical reason but it has evaded me.
Last edited by Joe W; 12-02-2010 at 04:17 PM.
-
Thank You to Joe W For This Useful Post:
-
FREE MEMBER
NO Posting or PM's Allowed

Originally Posted by
Joe W
I never really understood why these Facility identification markings on rifle stocks were used in the first place. It seems that, as the markings are on the stock, they could only have any meaning while in the rebuild facility. Maybe some form of indicator to armory personel that the weapon has already been through the system ???? It seems that after the weapon is put back in service the mark would mean nothing to anyone, as the stock could be changed at any point. Even the earlier etching on the receiver leg really means little once the rifle is back in service. At least with the facility code on the receiver, if a problem should develop after the rifle is back in service, the rifle could be traced back to the facility doing the last KNOWN overhaul, if need be. I am sure there must be a logical reason but it has evaded me.
Joe,
Each facility was reimbursed for each rifle and the marks were evidence that at least each rifle and stock was inspected and/or rebuilt/repaired.
I see two separate inspections here: One for the hardware and one for the stock.
-
Legacy Member

Originally Posted by
Ramboueille
Joe,
Each facility was reimbursed for each rifle and the marks were evidence that at least each rifle and stock was inspected and/or rebuilt/repaired.
I see two separate inspections here: One for the hardware and one for the stock.
Were the facility codes such as the Anniston BA4 ect. used after the 1960's receiver etchings ?? If so I would suppose that these were, for the most part, rifles being overhauled to be shipped overseas as some form of foreign aid or in some cases , eventually, turned over to the DCM. The U.S. military, other than some reserve and N.G. units, were no longer using the M1
rifle. Who was it that was reimbursing the facilitys, in that they are government owned ?? I wish I never thought about this as now I am racking my brain trying to figure this out when I should be getting some sleep.
Last edited by Joe W; 12-03-2010 at 04:45 PM.
-