Nearly complete NPM M1 from the early fall of 1943

[ewall]

[new2brass]

One thing did catch my eye, the milled rear sight. I don't know if I have ever seen what I thought was an original NPM with an adj rear sight.

Do not think anyone suggested rear sight was from factory.
Though rear sights were replaced during rebuild they were also replaced in the field. If this is the case I would expect stake marks.

Another thing that was common in 60s and 70s was for owners to upgrade there firearms.
A good indication would be lack of second set of stake marks.

Back then newer was better.

Check out Jack Gordon Fire Arms ad in this article

The Good OL Days - The Carbine Collector's Club

[tenOC]

Really hard to find hammer there. Thanks.

[ewall]

There are two stake marks at the sight. I'll post a picture. That is why I'm confident the sight was changed from the original flip type sight.

Here is my Data Sheet for review. There is a period stamped after CAL(.) before 30 on the receiver. I missed that on the Data sheet.

[/URL]

---------- Post added at 08:51 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:46 PM ----------

Dual stake marks at rear sight.

[/URL]

---------- Post added at 09:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:51 PM ----------

Really hard to find hammer there. Thanks.

[ewall]

There are two stake marks at the sight. I'll post a picture. That is why I'm confident the sight was changed from the original flip type sight.

Here is my Data Sheet for review. There is a period stamped after CAL(.) before 30 on the receiver. I missed that on the Data sheet.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...86F81343-1.jpg[/URL]

---------- Post added at 08:51 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:46 PM ----------

Dual stake marks at rear sight.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...6B51174F-1.jpg[/URL]

---------- Post added at 09:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:51 PM ----------



https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...2FDDD3FC-1.jpg

Regarding my Data Sheet, it's incomplete regarding the non active boxes on the form. When filling it out on my computer I forgot to transfer all of my hand written notes and inactive box responses. Let me fix this and repost. My apologies for posting incorrect information. I'll straighten it out later today. To avoid confusion, I'll remove the image and insert the correct form, so it will remain in the same spot in the thread.

[imntxs554]

Regarding my Data Sheet, it's incomplete regarding the non active boxes on the form. When filling it out on my computer I forgot to transfer all of my hand written notes and inactive box responses. Let me fix this and repost. My apologies for posting incorrect information. I'll straighten it out later today.

Your doing Good Ted...Your Still out Hunting Ducks ?

SF

[ewall]

Your doing Good Ted...Your Still out Hunting Ducks ?

SF

Not today, but cleaning ducks, yes. I normally hang my game for 4 or 5 days after a hunt, provided it's cool enough. And it has been. A hung duck is simply more tender and flavorful without question. My Son and I are heading to the goose pits later this week. If we are successful, I may be cooking Christmas Goose for the family. Two nice honkers ought to do it! Not sure the Grandchildren won't turn up their noses, so that might be a really bad idea...

[ewall]

Corrected and updated Data Sheet



---------- Post added at 12:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:27 PM ----------

[ewall]

Do not think anyone suggested rear sight was from factory.
Though rear sights were replaced during rebuild they were also replaced in the field. If this is the case I would expect stake marks.

Another thing that was common in 60s and 70s was for owners to upgrade there firearms.
A good indication would be lack of second set of stake marks.

Back then newer was better.

Check out Jack Gordon Fire Arms ad in this article

The Good OL Days - The Carbine Collector's Club

You were right, there is a chisel mark front and rear on the "left" side of the receiver at the sight dovetail. Look closely and you will see them...

[ewall]

The gun shoots fine! I ran 75 rounds through it this morning and each of the 15 round magazines performed perfectly. The one 30 rounder I cycled had two failures to feed, but the rifle clears easily by rotating the gun 90 degrees and simply dropping the round onto the shooting bench. I was not surprised after reading about the issues with the larger capacity magazines.

I started with 3 rounds at 7 yards aimed at the center of the target just to see where the rifle was hitting. Then moved to 10 yards and put 6 or 7 rounds on the target. After all the moving of the sight that I did while cleaning I just moved the sight as close to the centerline of the barrel and front sight. I never moved the sight this morning, I got lucky.



I then moved the target out to 19 yards and fired the balance of the 1st 15 round magazine at the target center. After that I just placed 1" diameter circles on the target starting at the upper left hand corner and them moved counterclockwise around the target. The two offhand groups were shot with the 30 round magazine at 19 yards and then finishing with 14 rounds at 10 yards.







The 15 rounds at the bottom center was with 2 mags from my RIA Baby Rock .380 carry pistol.