I have this late 6.09 Garand...

[Smokepole]

I, too, have a 6.9 mil that has been match graded. It has a NM engraved on the left side of the barrel behind the front sight. It also has a NM op rod, front sight and rear sight. The stock has been very nicely bedded with what apears to be Brownell's Accura-Glass. Since seeing your posts, I have looked very carefully for an AFPG on my barrel to no avail. The barrel has, however, been brightly polished at the rear under the op rod.

I bought this rifle from an individual (an older gentleman) who had given up competitive shooting. The rifle is in "as new" condition.

Any ideas what I may have?

[Calif-Steve]

Army Reserve match teams. The USAR HAD a very active match program 10-15 years ago. No longer true.

[Cosine26]

With the exception of the “AFPG”, marking, the markings on the M1 barrel in picture number one are consistent with markings on replacement NM M1 barrels available from the Springfield Armory for army armorers and thru the DCM for civilians during the 1960’s. . I have, at various times owned six of these and still have one installed on a Winchester M1 match rifle built for me by an army armorer. SA would take standard barrels, proof fire them, run them across the Kollmorgen straightness gauge and the Sheffield Precisionaire air gauge to measure bore run out. If the barrel passed, it was stamped “NM” with individual serfied (sp?)letters. The letters “NM” were not engraved on the NM M1 barrel near the gas cylinder until the completed NM rifle passed all acceptance tests, consequently replacement barrels will not have this marking. After the army converted most of its rifle teams to the NM M14, the USAF elected to stay with the 30 caliber M1 (according to members of the USAF team I have talked with). I would assume that the barrel in question was obtained from the SA and stamped “AFPG” when the USAF armorers built the team rifles. The USAF team members I talked with claimed that the 7.62 M1 was more accurate than the M14. Along about 1967/68, 30 M72 Match ammo was becoming hard to find so the AF contracted with SA to build them 7.62 mm M1 match barrels. There was quite a scandal at Perry one year. It seems that the SA built several hundred 7.62 mm M1 Match barrels for the USAF and about 50 of them went missing. I had the opportunity to shoot a Navy built (by WO Frazer, I believe) match conditioned M1 in 7.62 one season when a Navy commander let me use one. It shot well but seemed to prefer the FA 65 M118 7.62 ammo over the later LC M118 (67 & 68 production). NM M1 parts were available to the civilians thru the DCM up until about 1967 through I never saw and NM Op Rods or Gas Cylinders offered. After the late 1960’s, DOD support of the marksman ship programs was drastically reduced. In the late 1960’s, I changed jobs and later went to Viet Nam so kind of lost touch with what went on after that.
This info is strictly anecdotal and I am sure that there are experts on this board that can provide more accurate info

[Akulahawk]

Cosine, on another forum, Bob Seijas indicated that the NM stamp was essentially a "whole rifle" proof from SA that the rifle met NM specifications. I would imagine that being at the time it was built. It also seems that AFPG is an Air Force only stamping that signifies that the rifle was built to AFPG standard, and met NM standards, even if the barrel wasn't stamped "NM" between the gas cyl rings.

I'm working on getting whatever records the CMP has on my rifle. Given the AFPG stamp and lack of a "NM" stamp, I suspect that my rifle may have been rebuilt/rebarreled. I've read that USAF teams sent their rifles back to their shop to be rebuilt every year. You indicate that those markings are consistent with replacement barrels. If the original barrel had been shot out, I can see the shop doing a rebarrel during the rifle's rebuild.

At this point, I suspect that my rifle is an experienced (shot a LOT) AFPG.

I will continue researching my rifle. If it's not an AFPG, I'll not be all that disappointed, for it's a nice rifle... and it's mine.

I'd be tickled to learn my rifle's history... Someone, somewhere, if still alive, might remember it.

[Joe W]

I, too, have a 6.9 mil that has been match graded. It has a NM engraved on the left side of the barrel behind the front sight. It also has a NM op rod, front sight and rear sight. The stock has been very nicely bedded with what apears to be Brownell's Accura-Glass. Since seeing your posts, I have looked very carefully for an AFPG on my barrel to no avail. The barrel has, however, been brightly polished at the rear under the op rod.

I bought this rifle from an individual (an older gentleman) who had given up competitive shooting. The rifle is in "as new" condition.

Any ideas what I may have?

Unless you are mistaken as to the 6.9 mil. serial number, your receiver may have been made by Springfield Armory INC. not the Govt. SA. The highest known Serial Number for the M1 rifle is 6100499, which is a NM rifle. I hope you ment 6.09 mil. and not 6.9 mil.
Assuming it is 6.09, you may have a SA built NM rifle. I am not sure, but I believe the majority of the 6 mil rifles were NM rifles. If not the majority, a good number were NM.

[Akulahawk]

I think he means "6.09" mil... after the last of the 6.1mil rifles, I think the serials restarted in the 7 mil range when the commercial Springfield Armory began building new M1's.

[Dan Wilson]

I concur, the SA INC. rifles started sn's in the 7 million range.

Dan

[Ramboueille]

I concur, the SA INC. rifles started sn's in the 7 million range.

Dan

Dan,

Actually they started at serial number 1 in the 1970s. BATF told them they are duplicating US M1 serial numbers and suggested they continue numbering somewhere else which resulted in using the 7 million numbers. It's unknown how many they duplicated early but at one time SA Inc. was actively trying to get them back and have them exchanged.

[Akulahawk]

Dan,

Actually they started at serial number 1 in the 1970s. BATF told them they are duplicating US M1 serial numbers and suggested they continue numbering somewhere else which resulted in using the 7 million numbers. It's unknown how many they duplicated early but at one time SA Inc. was actively trying to get them back and have them exchanged.

Makes sense to me... I find it a stretch, though, that they'd get to 6.9 million before the BATFE told them to renumber. So... realistically, the SA, Inc. would have been either a fairly low number or over 7 million.

[Joe W]

Makes sense to me... I find it a stretch, though, that they'd get to 6.9 million before the BATFE told them to renumber. So... realistically, the SA, Inc. would have been either a fairly low number or over 7 million.

I know you are correct regarding SA Inc. starting at 7 mil. Off hand I didn't recall, but I am sure Ramboueille was not implying that SA Inc. produced over 6 million rifles and reached the 6.9 mil. range. before being directed to renumber. My take is that he is just offering some historical information in regards to SA Inc.