$3.5 million, thoughts

[Rustship]

What do you see wrong Chip? I'm not an expert on Inlands, but I didn't see anything that stuck out.

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.

[ChipS]

What do you see wrong Chip?

I'm not an expert on Inlands either, so maybe some others will comment (to the appropriate degree) on whether the parts appear to be legit. I was pretty harsh in my criticism above and I didn't think at the time that someone here might have purchased this carbine (open mouth and insert foot). Momma said if you can't say something nice then don't say anything at all, but there is point I was trying (perhaps clumsily) to make. I will not go into details (right or wrong) that I think might help the fakers, but since you asked I will respond in general as follows:

In my opinion most of the major metal parts have been blasted and re-parked, over shallow pitting in some areas, excluding the barrel which appears to be a very nice original finish replacement. I do detect front sight removal marks on the edge of the muzzle and the band looks repro to me. The amount of wear on most of the moving parts is not consistent with the "near mint" condition of the whole and the safety and mag catch I am pretty sure are reproductions (and not very good ones). I think the rear sight is a good repro and I won't say why. Why would the barrel/receiver index marks not align on a 'near mint' factory example? The safety/mag catch plunger assembly is the later type not produce until about 3-4 months after the date of the carbine. Why after 70 years are there absolutely no scratches/mars on the butt plate? The stock I believe is a reproduction, or perhaps unissued USGI replacemnt wood, that I believe clearly has been lightly sanded to remove 50-60 years of oxidation and the 'correct' Inland stamps applied. I don't remember a good pic of a key area of USGI stock configuration - maybe on purpose. I don't know about the sling because there are good (real) and bad (fake) features and I would definitely like comments from others on this. I believe there are other problems but this reply is already too long and I may have said too much now.

I think it is a very pretty carbine and quite represenataive of the period. But in my mind it is just another put together piece and not worth a quarter of what it sold for. But, the photos may be deceiving me and my reasoning is not above reproach. My skin got thick a long time ago and I welcome any comments intended to staighten me out if I am wrong. I would not have posted this in the open but I want feedback and hopefully I have not provided any helpful hints that were heretofore unknown to the bad guys. JMHO, ChipS