Should I Have Passed On This Inland?

[jond41403]

I also believe the old auction picture reads 158 3 because I can see the same characteristic dip in the top of the five as I see in Bob's picture. Where it's an elaborate number 5, the top of the five dips down like a smile on a smiley face, then has a straight back, then circles out and curls back up almost touching the straight back of the five but not quite, there is a tiny space there with no ink which is also present in both pictures of Bob's and the auction. Since the numbers are so elaborate, I would imagine a number six would also be very curved at the top if that makes sense.hth. but Bob's stock definitely has a number five, I would literally bet my house on it haha!That's how sure I am. I just want Bob to record the correct numbers for his records

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.

[USGI]

Jon - you've almost got me convinced, but I'm thinking the heights of the numbers in that first group of (3) would've all been about the same. For example, a 5 would be about as tall as the 2 or 8 shown next to it - I can see a faint curvature on my 6's that extends to the same height as the other numbers.


Is your house paid for, and can you get a picture of it? Just Kidding !!!!!

Those numbers are so faint it's a wonder they can still be seen at all - I'm happy they're there, even if I can't read 'em! Being stamped directly over the milling lines doesn't help any either. - Bob

[USGI]

My goal was to get the sling and oiler removed and still have the sling capable of being reinstalled. To do that, I needed to drill out the rivet and replace it with a post (barrel) screw. The rivet turned out to be hollow steel about 1/8" in diameter with brass caps. When I started drilling, the cap came off - then it got really tough to get the rest of the rivet out without ruining the leather.

The smallest post screw I could find at HD was 3/16" x 1/4" so knew I would have to shorten both pieces to get the length down enough to tighten against the leather. Even though the leather was nearly 1/8" thick just a few inches from the riveted loop, I found that I needed to shorten the post to a length of about .170" to match the leather at the loop. The (double) thickness of the leather in the area where it comes in contact with the oiler when installed on the gun, is about .235" - that's why the loop at the end of the sling has to be taken apart to remove the oiler. I used a 3/16" hollow punch to increase the size of the original rivet holes.

The oiler didn't look like it had been out or had the cap off in a long time - an original leather washer was still in there! I'll probably put on a GI sling, but at least I was able to save the "Veteran" one!

I'll attach a few pictures. - Bob

[jond41403]

You may be absolutely right Bob, probably looks a lot clearer in hand as well but for what it's worth since I don't know how to take a picture and draw on it I tried my hand at drawing it freehand of what I'm seeing to see if anyone else can see the same thing.

[jond41403]

I also notice at the ends of some of these numbers is a thicker ball like end. In the auction picture, the number three is very clear with these thick ball like ends. Your number six seems to have a thick ball like end at the bottom which is why I thought it's the bottom end of the number five. You probably seen these style numbers on a million more stocks than I have so I'm sure you're probably correct about it being a number six but on my screen, it sure looks like a number five. The auction picture looks more like a six to me than the picture of your personal stock Bob, because the tops of the numbers are more cut off looking to me in the auction picture. On this picture, these are the two points that I thought matched on both yours and the auction picture

[USGI]

You probably seen these style numbers on a million more stocks than I have.

Jon, your estimate is a little high! Don't know how many you've seen, but my total is probably a half dozen or less. Before I replied earlier today, I was able to visualize your pencil drawings in my mind as I studied your earlier posts. You've done a good job!

I've got pictures from lots of old auctions and threads stored away, so hopefully can find more legible examples with that same style of numbers. It would probably help if I took time to search through some older threads here and on other forums, too.

Thanks for spending extra time to help us all learn more about these old Carbines! - Bob

[USGI]

Charlie, I think I have an Inland with one of those bands and looked up the maker one time. Can't remember right now but will take some time this evening and see if I can find it. Just realized I showed the wrong Inland receiver pics to Dave HH in an earlier reply to this thread - so need to figure out if I can fix that, too! - Bob

[W5USMC]

Sorry Charlie.

[DaveHH]

Mine is American Swiss, most are so light that you only see the triangle.

[USGI]

I'm sure you're probably correct about it being a number six but on my screen, it sure looks like a number five.

I can't tell for sure what that number is, but found pics of the stock on my 476K Inland (undated barrel) and it appears to read "147 3". Still would like to find another one with a definite 5 to see if the style matches your drawings.



Now I'm wondering if the date codes on the stocks were stamped at the time they were finished and passed inspection, or if it was done at the time the actions were installed in them. I'm thinking it must've been when just the stock was completed, since the date code is a lower number on my 476K than the "158 3" we saw on the 426K (Gunbroker-2016) Inland.

Another observation I've made is with the numbers stamped on top of the barrel near the receiver ring. I have (3) 6 digit Inland carbines. Maybe it's common knowledge, but I noticed those numbers increase along with the s/n's.

408K (5)
476K (7)
755K (8)


Charlie and Wayne, What do you think about the Inland butt plates? - Bob