I finally found a nice Rock-Ola!!!

[frankderrico]

Ron, this is the acceptance stamp on Quality to compare with, hope that helps.....Frank

[RonJon]

BrianQ,

You wrote: "The shape of the acceptance stamp, which is often called the ordnance wheel, is different for each carbine manufacturer. Rock-Ola used a very distinctive style ordnance wheel that is vastly different than any other manufacturer."

They are both the same size Ordnance Wheels (7/16"). And if you can tell from my pictures which one of these it matches (from Pg. 315 of Ruth's "War Baby") then you have better vision than I (but I'm leaning toward the Rock-Ola one since the back end of the cannon @ about 4 o'clock looks to me to be squared off as it is in the Rock-Ola diagram in Ruth's book).




Unless you can come up with better "proof" than you have provided, I'm going to go with the FACT that my stock is an original Rock-Ola, because I have provided you with documentation on EVERY POINT of this debate and you have only given your verbal opinions.

With all due respect, I'm getting fatigued with this discussion so I'm now calling for it to be closed.

frankderrico,

Thanks for your picture. Yours matches the QH diagram in the above scan from Ruth's book, "War Baby".

RonJon

[INLAND44]

Up to 12" high at 100 was within spec. By the way, that carbine was a great buy!

[ScottR]

Ron, we are trying to provide you with information, some of which is not in the books. I hope you are hear to learn. The cross cannons in Franks picture and the one in the book is not the early Quality Hardware cross cannons that I spoke of. Look at your stock and tell me if the CC is upright(cannons are facing up). Or is the CC horizontal(cannons are facing forward towards the front of the rifle. How far away is the CC from the oiler cut out?

Scott

[BrianQ]

The portion at four o'clock would be the top of the left cannon and is squared off on All acceptance stamps. Rock-Ola stamps are turned 90 degrees clock wise from most other acceptance stamps. Something neither one of the books you are using shows.

Here is a Rock-Ola pattern acceptance stamp oriented properly with the oiler slot to the viewers left.



You might want to lean back the other way.

[RonJon]

Ron, we are trying to provide you with information, some of which is not in the books. I hope you are hear [sp=here] to learn. The cross cannons in Franks picture and the one in the book is not the early Quality Hardware cross cannons that I spoke of. Look at your stock and tell me if the CC is upright(cannons are facing up). Or is the CC horizontal(cannons are facing forward towards the front of the rifle. How far away is the CC from the oiler cut out?

Scott

From page 13 of J.C. Harrison's book, it looks like #14:


...and the center of the ordnance wheel is 9.5 cm (about 3 3/4") forward of the oiler slot.

[dbarn]

Unfortunately there are many mistakes in Harrison's book. Number 14 has long been recognized as an error and is not found on legitimate RMC stocks. It's pattern has been duplicated by the fakers as well. The vertical RMC cartouche above posted by Brian Q, would be correct. RMC made many stocks for different prime contractors. They were known for their stock making expertise. I have an early QHMC with RMC in the sling well and the larger crossed cannon acceptance stamp on the right side next to the I-Cut.

[JimF4M1s (Deceased)]

dbarn is right on about Harrison having many errors. But it is still a reference so it was added long ago to my library. Maybe whoever is making the stamps found it easier to use a mylar template, who knows.

What we do know is BrianQ posted the correct marking.

[RonJon]

Unfortunately there are many mistakes in Harrison's book. Number 14 has long been recognized as an error and is not found on legitimate RMC stocks. It's pattern has been duplicated by the fakers as well. The vertical RMC cartouche above posted by Brian Q, would be correct. RMC made many stocks for different prime contractors. They were known for their stock making expertise. I have an early QHMC with RMC in the sling well and the larger crossed cannon acceptance stamp on the right side next to the I-Cut.

So I guess Larry L. Ruth's "War Baby" is incorrect as well?:

This is from Pg. 400 of "War Baby" where he is documenting the Rock-Ola stock group. The first and second examples each talk about the Stock, Type A, Variation 1. This variation had the 'I'-shaped oiler aperture (same as I have), However, the first example tells of the CC logo plus 'RMC' framed vertically in top of square (as BrianQ's example shows); but the second example varies only in leaving out the "vertically" orientation that was in the first example.

The first example ranges from start of production through ~ half of the 1st S/N block; and the second example was used from ~ the middle of the 1st S/N block.



I submit to you "experts" on the carbine that mine is one of the stocks mentioned by Bruce Canfield in the following (from Pg 256 of Bruce Canfield's book on the carbine):



Or are you guys also "hear (sic) to learn" resistant as I was accused by ScottR, above?

RonJon

[dbarn]

Probably where Harrison obtained his information from. War Baby is not without errors. War Baby has not been revised for sometime and is due for some needed updates. The best source for updated information is the Carbine Club. They have ongoing data and years of data sheets. Rock Ola used a one piece stamp. You have a nice desirable 6 million Rock-Ola. Your stock while made by Rock-Ola, was not used on original Rock-Ola mfgd. carbines.