I think I found a winner.

[gtxc01]

Acquired this M1 last week. My grandfather fought on Leyte and Okinawa with the 96th Infantry Division, and after the war collected U.S. and Allied service rifles from the First and Second World Wars. The rifle he always wanted but never found was a WWII Garand. The ones at all the gun shows we went to were post war vintage. I saw this one and snapped it up, as a bit of an honor to him. I just wish he was still here to handle it. After looking through Poyer's The M1 Garand 1936 to 1957 and Duff's The M1 Garand: World War II, I believe that I've found something special. Receiver dates to early November 1944, barrel is dated 10-44. The op rod is in original condition with no relief cut. All parts are Springfield and correct for late 1944 production, the only possibly questionable part would be the bolt, which is a -12 SA bolt. Despite the books indicating this rifle was made a little late for the -12 bolt which was changed in the summer of 1944, I have a suspicion that it's the original bolt for the rifle and was just deep in the parts bin. The only thing about the rifle that doesn't match with most references, is that the chamber isn't bright. Again, I think it unlikely that somebody found a reparked barrel from within a month of the receiver production and put it on this rifle, but I suppose anything's possible. Given the lack of wear on the metal, I'm thinking this rifle must have somehow slipped through the cracks at every turn over the last 68 years. Muzzle gauged at below 1, throat wasn't gauged. Rifle included a correct oiler, type 2B combo tool, and a correct grease pot with YELLOW lubriplate still in it. Anyways, if you guys have any amplifying info, or find something that you think is suspicious, I'd love to hear it. I think that this one is the crown jewel of my collection at the moment, and will likely remain so.

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.

[grif684]

It appears to be a "corrected" rifle, a beautiful one, nevertheless. The rear sight, although hard to tell in your pics, looks to be a reproduction, and the chamber park doesn't match the receiver park, which it should if it had been reparked while installed on the receiver. I'm not trying to pick it apart, just pointing out what I see, I would be proud to own it myself, someone put together a very nice rifle....

[gtxc01]

Grif, thanks for the info. Don't worry about picking it apart, that's why I posted it. There's history in figuring out how it came to be, even if it isn't at the hands of the government arsenal. I suppose by this point in time the odds are greatly in favor of a nice example of these rifles being refurbed/restored/corrected. Out of curiosity, what should I look for on the rear sight to try and figure out if it's a repro? I tend to concur with your last statement, that somebody put some serious time in getting all these parts together to make it look like it's off the production floor (for the most part). In any event, I am quite happy with it. I wanted a WWII representative Garand, and I think it fits the bill. About the only thing that could be better for me would be if it was a few months older, since my grandfather was likely issued his rifle in July of 1944.

[browningautorifle]

I agree with Griff about this rifle being a put together. Just about everything points to it. Doesn't matter though, I have one here I re-barreled to 7.62 and I shoot the crap out of it and just look at the early one I have. That's not fair. This rifle you can shoot without much concern for years to come. Some will tell you to change the op-rod, but if you put in an adjustable gas cylinder lock screw it's cheaper and more to the point. Any way you look at it, you have a nice catch there.

[Phrogpilot]

Most parts, including the receiver, OpRod and barrel look reparked to me...

[gtxc01]

Howdy Phrogpilot, nice to see another 756X here. Are you instructing in the HTs/VTs at the moment? I recently floated with -265 out in Okinawa, and was happy to get a MEU with the good 'ole -46 under my belt.

Do you think it's a repark because of lack of wear, is it a shade thing, etc.? Thanks to all for the info, I'm enjoying the learning process.

[browningautorifle]

It's because all the parts look new.

[grif684]

I agree, the parts all look new, beautiful, just new. The rear sight looks like a repro due to the crisp knobs, which are also very dark, lockbars don't usually look that good, or that black. It does look like all the parts have been refinished to me as well, and doesn't appear to have been fired since, even the bolt looks new. I would rectify that if it were mine, and shoot it. Probably quite a bit. And smile. Definately quite a bit.....Ok, I would smile constantly....

[Patrick Chadwick]

I probably lead a very sheltered life. Which is why I have never seen a parkerized bolt face. Or a parkerized striker tip.

Am I wrong, or did someone go overboard with the (re)parkerization?

[RCS]

most of the revision 2 bolts (if not all of them) had the bolt face and the rear of each bolt locking lug polished - sometime in early 1942 these bolt were parkerized which continued until production ended. The new collectors are starting to note this feature on the bolts from this time period too, especially on the Lend Lease rifles. Early round firing pins were either blued or without finish, later the revision firing pin was also parkerized.

photos show two revision 2 bolts heat lots J9A and RE2 both from mid to late 1941Attachment 41834Attachment 41835