M1 Garand / M1A / M-14 Thread

[been]

Here is mine, CMP SA, Saige EBR Stock (still have original so can return to GI), going to put a scout scope or EOTech on it one of these days.

View attachment 18414

i dont know if i should throw up or like it....it really is OK by my standards though because it was gathering dust and because all you have to do is replace the stock..nice rifle!!

 

[OKMike]

Barrel is stamped SAF6535 448 9 55 A223A, so springfield barrel from sept 55?

 

[Shadowrider]

That stock turned out nicely

Shadowrider I am loving that stick. Wood really looks good.

Thanks!

 

[Perplexed]

Barrel is stamped SAF6535 448 9 55 A223A, so springfield barrel from sept 55?

Yep. That's quite a bit before what I figured was the receiver's DOB, but if the finish on the barrel matches that of the receiver, it could well be the original barrel. Given the rifle's production after cessation of hostilities in both WW2 and the Korean War, it probably saw relatively little service, so it kept its original barrel. If it had been a WW2 receiver, a correctly dated barrel would have been unusual (or someone found one and put it on the rifle in recent years), as they were replaced wholesale after the wars, during the arsenal rebuilds. The "6535" portion is the drawing number, and I believe the "A223A" portion is the lot number.

 

[OKMike]

Yep. That's quite a bit before what I figured was the receiver's DOB, but if the finish on the barrel matches that of the receiver, it could well be the original barrel. Given the rifle's production after cessation of hostilities in both WW2 and the Korean War, it probably saw relatively little service, so it kept its original barrel. If it had been a WW2 receiver, a correctly dated barrel would have been unusual (or someone found one and put it on the rifle in recent years), as they were replaced wholesale after the wars, during the arsenal rebuilds. The "6535" portion is the drawing number, and I believe the "A223A" portion is the lot number.

thanks for the info

 

[coolhandluke]

5.88M would indeed be about mid- to late 1955; it's too bad the post-war M1 manufacturers didn't keep the detailed records as the WW2 manufacturers did. The barrel could well be the original one, especially if the finish matches the receiver. As for the non-SA parts on your rifle, they probably found their way onto the rifle during an arsenal rebuild; once M1 production ceased, the arsenals gathered up whatever parts were available from any of the manufacturers to use in these rebuilds.

I'd love to acquire a 6.0M SA M1, but the prices on those rifles are ridiculous!

Here's a data sheet that I started for the rifle, but haven't completely finished. As far are I can tell the incorrect parts are the bolt, op rod, gas plug, safety, and the hammer spring guide (buttplate is new repro, but I have an original SA that is not installed). I believe that the safety is an SA M-14 refurb replacement which makes me think that it was arsenal rebuilt sometime in the 60's. The finish is uniform on all of the metal parts including the bolt and op rod. Did all receivers and metal parts get reparked during the rebuild process (like your LEAD rebuild)? Is there also a possibility that the HRA parts could have been swapped out by the CMP? I'm not sure to what extent their gunsmiths may "rebuild" service grade rifles.

Thanks for the info on the Duff book mblaney...I picked up Poyer's book after purchasing the rifle, but wasn't aware at the time how much better Duff's books were. I have a couple of the post war books on my watch list on eBay and will be picking one up.

 

[Perplexed]

Here's a data sheet that I started for the rifle, but haven't completely finished. As far are I can tell the incorrect parts are the bolt, op rod, gas plug, safety, and the hammer spring guide (buttplate is new repro, but I have an original SA that is not installed). I believe that the safety is an SA M-14 refurb replacement which makes me think that it was arsenal rebuilt sometime in the 60's. The finish is uniform on all of the metal parts including the bolt and op rod. Did all receivers and metal parts get reparked during the rebuild process (like your LEAD rebuild)? Is there also a possibility that the HRA parts could have been swapped out by the CMP? I'm not sure to what extent their gunsmiths may "rebuild" service grade rifles.

I've heard of M-14 parts turning up in a M1 Garand, since some parts of the trigger assembly are fully interchangeable between those two rifle designs. After looking over your data sheet, and the comment you made about the metal parts having a uniform finish, I'd be inclined to think you have an arsenal rebuild. The SOP at the arsenals was to rebuild a rifle, then send it on to the parkerizing station, though sometimes there were exceptions. The rebuild process wasn't a rigid one. As for the CMP changing out parts, they do that only if a part is obviously broken or so worn out it doesn't perform properly (or where they're putting together a Correct Grade). After M1 production ceased, many of the parts from the different manufacturers were brought together at the arsenals and used as part of the rebuild process. So it's not at all unusual to find HRA or other manufacturer parts on an SA rifle that's been through the rebuild process, though HRA parts would be more common since in the 1950s and 1960s they had a larger supply of new HRA parts than they did WRA or IHC parts. If the finish matches on all the parts, I'd say it was a rebuild; if the HRA parts don't match, then it could be a sign of a later replacement.

But I'm hardly an expert, so I could be totally off-base with my comments. Duff's books are an excellent source, as is the CMP forum where the M1 is concerned.

 

[Shadowrider]

Well these posts have me wondering about mine. The finish is what I'd call pristine for an M1. It may or may not have been reparked. I say that with the barrel wear numbers in mind. The finish is pretty much perfect on mine except that you can tell it has been fired some. The small bearing surface on the topside back of the bolt has some shine and it's corresponding surfaces on the inside top of the receiver you can tell has some use, as do the locking lugs. But beyond that it's very close to new from what I can tell. I haven't disassembled the trigger group so I can't say how much finish wear it has on it's working surfaces. But everything seems to be in fantastic condition on mine. Does anyone know if they reparked everything as SOP at arsenal maintenance? I'm assuming that mine has been due to the utter lack of handing marks on the outside metal. It does have some scratches on the gas cylinder but they are very extremely minor and it's still very black in color.

Coolhand where did you get an electronic form like that? Is an Excel template available for purchase?

 

[coolhandluke]

Shadow, I would think that it was reparked during an arsenal rebuild and saw little, if any, use afterwards. The quality of metal finish on your rifle looks like what you normally run across on a service grade special rifle. CMP's website says that service grades will have metal that typically exhibits worn and mixed colors of the parkerized finish. The metal on your rifle is special or collector grade quality so you definitely lucked out. The finish on my rifle is uniform, but probably only 80%.

If you can shoot me your email address in a pm, I can email the form to you.

 

[Perplexed]

OK, I spoke with a friend who was involved in the arsenal rebuilds circa 1966, and here's what he had to say about the topic of finishes and rebuilds:

Rebuild standards varied over time and at each rebuild facility. Amongst the earlier rebuilds ,and by "earlier" I mean for you to understand as "Pre-Korean War", little effort was made to re-parkerize all parts. If the part was serviceable, it went into the rifle.If it was serviceable and had a below spec finish, it was refinished. Later, with the advent of more automated mass immersion parkerization machinery, more small parts were routinely re done. Also, keep in mind that standards varied over time and by facility. What was SOP in ,say, 1954, had changed by ,say, 1957 as materials, methods and costs changed.... To say what is "correct" or "incorrect" depends on the time period that the rifle was rebuilt and which facility was doing the work. Even in parkerization done by mass production methods, the finish,tone ,color and appearance may vary as the parkerization chemicals age in the bath or as fresher chemicals are added to the solution. Sometimes this results in a quite dramatic color change-sometimes not.

So there's no simple answer that will fit all rifles. It'd have to take an inspection of the rifle by someone "in the know" to determine whether or not a given rifle was a rebuild, and even then, there will be different shades of certainty in the answer. That having been said, if you got a WW2 M1 straight from the CMP that was billed as a Service Grade, and the finish was uniform across all the metal, it would probably be safe to assume you've gotten an arsenal rebuild, especially if the barrel was post-war dated. Now if it's a post-war M1, determining whether or not it's original or a rebuild gets fuzzy.