Teaser

[jimb16]

Don't know why, but photobucket won't let me post my pictures here!!???
Can't seem to upload them from my computer either??!!!

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.

[jimb16]

no go

[jimb16]

Attachment 118755
My family

The Rock-Ola

[W5USMC]

Hard to tell in your pic, what is the marking on the hammer?

[jimb16]

B/R in a double square. The grease on the receiver and trigger housing make the pitting appear much worse that it really is.

[painter777]

Is it me or does the Picture make the right side of the Hammer look like it has the cut away on the lower side... Like a Type IV M2 Hammer.
I have notes on a contract from Bill Ricca for Bruner/Ritter hammers and it ran from Apr.`44 to July`44. Roughly for 169,000 pieces. And I've seen a lot of B/R M2 Hammers, I have no contract proof they made them..... Maybe just conversions by Springfield post War (?).

The R Frt sight- Rudy Furnace took over the Neidner contract in late 1944 due to them not being able to complete the contract.


The Import marking looks to be when they were using the electro pencil... Nice because it's barely visible. I may have missed it had I not read about Jim saying it was there.
At least what little Pitting there is, is below the Wood line.
Find a lot of Carbines with the same area with some pitting.
Who thinks about wood stocks holding moisture?
Think about those GI's sitting in fox holes for days in jungle rains......
Makes me think of a friend who will not come shooting if it's raining out.... Even if we're shooting modern guns.

I need to dig out my Rock Ola to see it again. I have one more that started out as a project barreled receiver. I've had all the parts collected up and a I cut stock that's been waiting for it. It took so long to gather everything I almost don't want to finish it.......

[jimb16]

Its not cut away. That is just a line of grease on the hammer giving that illusion. I mentioned the import mark in the other thread... I gave the action a grease bath and am letting it soak for a week or two. I'll wipe it off before I take it to the range. I've seen the same pitting pattern on a number of carbines. If they are put away wet and forgotten, that is what happens. Can't do anything to fix it either. Oh well...

[tenOC]

I've got an Inland with Fed Ord import stamp. It's not easy to find and they're so much less visible than the barrel stamped ones. It doesn't bother me.
The rear sight Doesn't appear to be USGI on the Rockola.

[jimb16]

I think the rear sight is ok. One of the big problems with the fakes is the way they put the RR on them. The fakes have a heavier /broader letter and they are too evenly spaced. Plus the pin is flat ended. In this case the pin is rounded although it is hard to see. The staking is very tight to the pin and smaller diameter than the staking on the fakes. It is also fairly deep which covers much of the end of the pin! The bottom of the sight also is very close to the bottom of the dovetail allowing almost no light to get thru. Fakes usually have a good sized gap underneath the rear sight. The spring is also the typical fire blue of the originals. And one more thing, the milling marks on the base are correct for a bar cut with a band saw instead of rounded like a chop saw as used on most of the repops. I have a good selection of originals to compare it to, so I'm pretty confident.

[GotSnlB28]

I think the rear sight is repro too, here is an RR I have: Rock-ola flip sight - what say ye? - The Carbine Collector's Club