Good Photo study of welded receiver

[Mark in Rochester]

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/Vie...Item=128826090

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.

[mparsons]

Is the guy blowing smoke or does he really believe he has something?

[Bill Hollinger]

The drawing number is a post war while the serial number is mid 1942. WOW! Here is what I sent the seller:

"Sir, I think the reason this rifle was not shot is because it is a reweld. Look close at the receiver under the clip latch and on the right side in the slide groove. This rifle would probably be unsafe to shoot. You are taking quite a chance selling it without disclosure. Please understand I am not trying to be a jerk in any way but you should reconsider the sale of this rifle. Do not take my word for it, have a gunsmith look it over.

Also, the serial number for this Garand is a mid 1942, the drawing number on the front right leg is for a later post WWII Garand. This is easy enough to check."

[Griff Murphey]

Mark, very sharp eyes. Usually a welded repaired receiver will have uneven bright spots where the weld is. As well they often have major color variation, which this rifle does NOT have. In the 1960 time frame many of these rifles were built up because "real" M-1s were hard to come by. I own one Elmer Ballance sold through his L.H. Guns, and I still shoot it. The safety issue is open to interpretation but the failure to disclose that this is a restored, scrapped receiver is just not ethical. If you don't know who did the restoration you can't be sure of reliability or safety. With the recent availability of CMP receivers these old welded restored guns have lost a lot of value, to say the least. Certainly it's not worth $1100.

[chriskat]

it's up to $1200 right now. The weld certainly seems fairly obvious. Looks like he may have added a grenade launcher to sweeten the deal.

Has lots of really big pics making the weld easy to see. Looks like they may have been added later though.

I wouldn't pay $1200.

[Chilly]

Trigger guard locking lugs pretty well worn for an unfired rifle.

[Devil Dog]

This one is interesting. The seller makes no definitive statements. Only says things that he "was told" or facts he "thinks". Surprisingly, he takes TWO pictures clearly showing the welded areas. It seems he is trying to point out the welds. My opinion is that he knows, quite well, that the receiver is welded. Perhaps showing the welded areas makes him feel better while screwing someome. Also surprising is his wllingness to accept a "three day return".

[mack]

Considering the escalation of prices in recent months of anything associated with military rifles ($2K for a correct the other day at a show, $1200 for put-together AR rifle, $600 for a Cetme rifle which sold at that price and more than $400 for a Russian SKS) and particularly semi-autos, the $1200 price tag may not be out of line for a even welded receiver. I can't imagine selling much of anything Garand for less than $1K considering the likelihood that we may never be able to get them again once the new assault weapons ban goes through (and it will pass immediately when presented).

[Bill Hollinger]

"Thank you for your opinion. I certainly do not think it is a re-weld.
On the inside of the receiver the surface is perfectly smooth. I see the
roughness in the slide groove, but I think it is just a low spot in the
forging that when the metal was machined, was not milled off as much as
the higher surface. As I would guess you are aware, there are +/-
tolerances that are acceptable on any manufactured part. Although the
photo shows a rough spot, it is very minimal when you are actually
looking at the part. I have been surprised how much easier many of the
details appear in the photos, compared to trying to see them first hand.
Any how with all that said, I will get a second and even third opinion
as there are two great smiths close by.
As for the date of manufacture, I agree that the receiver was built in
the 40's. I thought it was 1943. On the "receiver front right leg", I
believe there is a number corresponding to 1943 and also 1951, which I
think is when the receiver was brought back and reworked matching the
1953 barrel. If I have that wrong, perhaps you could explain the front
leg numbers to me.
Thank you,
Steve"

And my reply back to him:

"Steve, the six digit serial number of 924,419 you have is October of 1942. The correct drawing number for that serial number is D 28291-17 with a heat lot number of R29. The drawing number on the front half of your receiver is D 6528291 43 with a heat lot number of A 51E. The 43in your drawing number has nothing to do with a date. It is merely a revision number within the drawing number. A revision number was used to show that the receiver or whatever part had gone through that many revisions/changes from when it was first designed. However slight the revision or change was, got it a new revision number.. The "65" series drawing numbers are all late 1948 or 49 into the 50s. Your receiver is most definitely a reweld. The front half was married to the rear half of an early WWII receiver. Again, all of this is very easily verified.

I have a number of WWII M1 Garands and have been collecting them for a great number of years. I would not tell you these things if they were not true. Your auction is being watched by a very large group of collectors and all want to see you do the right thing in regards to this rifle. Advertize it for what it is. If you didn't know it was a reweld when you listed it you sure know now. Thank you for the response."

The only thing I put in the reply that I thought of after that may be incorrect was the dates of the 65 series drawing numbers and the heat lot for the six digit serial number.

[slamfire1]

While this "Winfield" Tanker receiver was not dangerous, the operating rod dismounted, and you could unscrew the barrel by hand.











Weld Inspector