M1A1 Stock

[usmc-nav]

I recently received this stock and would lke to know the correct carbine for it. It seems it should have the flip safety and bayonet lug. Anything else?

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.

[Garandrew]

I like the crease in the stock, matching the handguard, from the folded buttplate..on my early Inland too!

[frankderrico]

Originaly it would have had an Inland carbine in it. It's hard to tell from your pics if it's an original highwood or low wood. But since it has been through a rebuild, any rebuilt carbine could have been put in it. At most rebuilds evrything was disasembled, upgraded and reasembled without thought about keeping rifles and stocks together. It is a nice and sought after carbine stock.....Frank

[Harlan (Deceased)]

Welcome to our forum usmc-nav. That's a great looking stock! I'd love to have it.

Just in case you're not familiar with the term 'High wood' and 'low wood' I posted a comparison. The High wood is at the top. Earlier stocks had high wood but that area often broke so they started making the low wood version. Many stocks that were originally high wood were modified to low wood configuration at rebuilds. You can often tell if a high wood had been modified to low wood if you look closely at that area.

[frankderrico]

Harlan is right about the rail being a weak spot that often cracked or broke.
The thought was that the highwood would help keep dirt out of the slide area.
Problem was that the right rail needed to be thinner to accommidate the dimension of the slide, thus making it more prone to cracking/splitting etc.
Turned out that the highwood made no differance in keeping dirt and debris out of the slide area so the modification to all low wood was inacted on in service stocks, and all new production were made as low wood.
You can look at the milling marks from the top of the right rail and tell if it was an original or modified low wood. Some modifications are very well done and some are pretty crude. HTH.....Frank

[usmc-nav]

Thanks for the replies and comments. I have a couple of opinions as to the correct rifle for the stock. One is 5.15 - 6.7 million Inland while another says it should be a 6.3-6.7 million Inland to be "correct".

[Bruce McAskill]

The 6.3 million to 6.7 would be correct if your Inland has a type 3 barrel band. The type 3 band didn't come into use till the November 1944 time frame. If you have one with a type 2 band then the 5.1 million to the 6.3 range would would be right.

[usmc-nav]

Thanks Bruce

[INLAND44]

Looks like the nose of the stock has only had the wide Type II or III band on it. Since the hand guard may be original because of the butt plate indent, it would be interesting to know if its 2 or 4-rivet. With the limited info provided, I'd say it would be a 5.1 or higher with Type II band. These can have the early sight and bolt as well as the latter, or a combination. I think if it turns out to be an original 'low-wood', and considering the rebuild stamp, I would go with the earlier carbine from 5.1 and up with Type II band, Type V slide, flip sight and early bolt. That is pure supposition, as a rebuild can be anything and everything. So for me it would come down to what I thought looked best and what I could reasonably obtain. Fortunately, nice 5.1s do pop up for sale from time to time. If all original, the smart thing to do might be to drop it in the stock with no changes.

[usmc-nav]

Inland thanks for your reply. It has the two rivet handguard. Are there any other pictures I can post to determine if an original low wood?