Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Chadwick View Post
It's nothing to do with being a new guy. So please do not take it personally. "Tough" tends to have a negative flavor - I would prefer "rigorous". And the rigor is in the interest of your wallet!

You did the right thing in coming to this forum, as the collective eyeballs of forum users will often pick out aspects that a single person might overlook. But to make use of that collective experience, photos are of the essence.

And please beware of the word "original". The swapping out of parts to create what is presumed to be an original configuration for a particular date or number range is so easy that it is not possible to guarantee that a rifle is original (in the sense of being the same assembly of parts as left the factory) merely because the parts match the approved configuration. In this matter one must be rigorous - even tough - and inspect the rifle minutely for signs that parts have been retrofitted. This is often revealed by differences in wear, scratches, dirt etc. All aspects that require no particular knowledge of the type of rifle, but a sharp eye for material inconsistency.

So in the end, even with the best photos, no-one will be able to guarantee that the rifle is original. All we will be able to say is that (hopefully) nothing is visibly wrong. Considering that the price that the seller is looking for is 8 times the price of my 1943 original-enough-for-me Garandicon, you certainly should be rigorous in evaluation - of the rifle and the seller!

At the price level that you are considering, one should a) have the rifle examined by an acknowledged expert and b) obtain a written guarantee from the seller that he will take back the rifle and return the money if the rifle is subsequently proven not to be as he claims. Remember the old saying: verbal claims are not worth the paper they're witten on!
Thank you Patrick, great advise! I understand the extreme difficulty of authenticating a rifle as "Original." Which is why I have not yet purchased anything. Good pictures will be a start and I would be willing to send the rifle to a expert to get a opinion. Scott Duff does not do this any more, do you know of anyone else who does? If so please let me know. I am trying to talk to as many knowledgeable individuals as I can before making a purchase. Again, the seller and I have not talked about a confirmed price yet, I will not be interested unless he is willing to come down considerably. I still haven't even seen any pictures so the rifle may be no good.

I really do appreciate the opinions on value but at the same time I believe many I have spoken to have been buying M1s since the 1990s and are not aware of the value these rifles now have or a outraged by what they sell for today. You said this rifle is priced 8 times what you paid for a 1943, that's $500. There are no M1s for sale for $500. Unless you are willing to sell your rifle for a profit? I'd give you $700 for it? See what I mean. Prices have changed. I don't want to get ripped off (which I understand anything near $4,000 is too high) but I understand that am not going to pay 1997 prices. This was why I posed this question here so that those who still go to the big gun shows and buy and sell these can tell me what they are seeing nice M1s sell for. I hope this makes sense. Thanks