Rarest of the rare

[geberl]

This should give you a good laugh, probably the worst example of a forgery I've ever seen, couldn't believe it, check out picture #26. An NFR marked Danish Beech stock, wow, now I understand why it is $1500, its the only one in existance.

http://gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewIte...Item=132623941

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.

[Ramboueille]

An NFR marked Danish Beech stock, wow, now I understand why it is $1500, its the only one in existance.

http://gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewIte...Item=132623941

No, he probably has more.

[geberl]

Good point, but honestly I couldn't believe it, I read the description then turned to the photos. I immediately saw that it was a put together, then once I recognized the stock and saw the cartouche I started to laugh. Unbelievable, wow not even a remotely educated forger did this one, I had to send the guy an e-mail to see what he'd say.

[duggaboy]

wow, where did this guy get the beaters? my pawn shop has better for half the price. did this guy reply to your PM?

[geberl]

Not yet, still waiting, he did have a few decent Garands not long ago but they sold. He had two SA's with decent HRA wood that he sold for $699, wasn't a bad deal considering the condition of the stocks and barrels. I had considered buying one of them so I marked his listing so I could go back to them. When I saw his latest example it really had me laughing, he's claiming he bought it that way. I don't know if he did or if that will be his excuse, I've seen some really bad examples but this one takes the cake. I'm not one of the "experts" but I've been playing with Garands for about 20 years and this is the worst example of a forgery I've ever seen.

[Calif-Steve]

Is the seller a pawn shop? If so, educating him means better fakes coming our way! Fake, fake, fake.

[Kirk]

I don't know what the Harrison book says but Duff's book on WWII Garands shows:

A 3.798M receiver dates from June 1945
The 1-SA-5 45 barrel seem correct
Bolt would be a -19 so it seems OK
TG would be stamped - OK
Production of -7 hammers ended in Jan '45; a -8 was mde for a couple of months but by Mar, the -9 was standard. Still, a -7 is in the realm of possibility.
Trigger housing would be a -18; the -14 ended in Feb & a-16 was used for a ouple months.
A -9 op rod is correct, not a post war type he lists.
The Type II lock bar sight he shows was replaced by the Type III by S/N 3.0M
Of course the stock is wrong!

[AKA Hugh Uno]

and no surprise, no reply. he knows it's bogus and is just another sleazy SOS.

[geberl]

Kirk,

Yea some of the parts are "correct" for the period but honestly look at the rifle there aren't two parts on that rifle that was on it five years ago. I've seen alot of blurred lines when it comes to "original", "correct", "restored" but this one is the winner. He hasn't responded yet, maybe he will on Monday, wait and see but I doubt it.

[Bill Hollinger]

Very sad.