PDA

View Full Version : Navy M1 Garand


ropinc
07-18-2012, 10:41 AM
I have a chance to purchase a Navy M1 Garand in 7.62 NATO cal. I haven't seen the rifle yet, but I want to have an idea of value in advance so I don't overpay. Unless it is in very good condition +, I wouldn't purchase it anyway so assuming very good to excellent condition, is there a premium attached to the value of this rifle because it is a Navy 7.62 NATO? Or would the value of it be comparable to that of the average SA Garand in the same condition? Any information, advice, etc. would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

Ed Byrns
07-18-2012, 11:31 AM
Giving a value to a broad spectrum of rifles that fall into that category is somewhat impossible without pictures ,details and condition.
Respectfully submitted
Ed Byrns

ropinc
07-18-2012, 11:54 AM
Unfortunately I won't be able to see it or take pictures of it for about three weeks.

4gun-drill
07-18-2012, 01:07 PM
See if you can get more info from the seller. There are a bunch of "Navy" Garands out there that are nothing more than re-barreled rifles that people try to sell as Navy. It could be a sleeved barrel or it could be a 7.62 barrel. If it is a legitimate Navy 7.62 conversion it should be clearly marked behind op rod as 7.62 and either H&R or AMF. It could also be a match rifle too and in that case it should have documentation.

There are tons of variables here.

aka108
07-18-2012, 05:53 PM
Every old ship I was on had Garands in the ships armory and there were tons on them at the shore stations. As far as I know they were procured thru the Army and there was nothing special about them. No anchors or stuff like that.

fkienast
07-19-2012, 10:24 AM
See Scott Duff's page on the Navy Garands. There is a rarity to these rifles especially the AMF barreled 7.62mm ones.

Phil McGrath
07-19-2012, 08:01 PM
See if you can get more info from the seller. There are a bunch of "Navy" Garands out there that are nothing more than re-barreled rifles that people try to sell as Navy. It could be a sleeved barrel or it could be a 7.62 barrel. If it is a legitimate Navy 7.62 conversion it should be clearly marked behind op rod as 7.62 and either H&R or AMF. It could also be a match rifle too and in that case it should have documentation.

There are tons of variables here.


There were a few award rifles that were awarded with a second barrel, a new in the tube 7.62mm barrel so if the awardee wanted too change out their barrel the rifle wouldn't be marked AMF or H@R.

The Navy Team didn't mark there 7.62mm conversions either, having said that paperwork is everything if there is no paperwork you can contact, Cmdr. Jim Adell USN ret. as he has all the ser numbers or most of them from NSWC Crane In.

4gun-drill
07-19-2012, 09:31 PM
There were a few award rifles that were awarded with a second barrel, a new in the tube 7.62mm barrel so if the awardee wanted too change out their barrel the rifle wouldn't be marked AMF or H@R.

The Navy Team didn't mark there 7.62mm conversions either, having said that paperwork is everything if there is no paperwork you can contact, Cmdr. Jim Adell USN ret. as he has all the ser numbers or most of them from NSWC Crane In.

I have never seen the extra barrels but I have only been in the Navy 8 years so I dont have the experience a lot of other Navy guys do. If they say they got extra barrels I am sure they did. The Crane support guys are great about supporting Navy shooters; just make sure you bring them a case of beer.

You are correct about the markings. I think most Navy Garands that were converted either H&R or AMF were marked so but were standard issue. However, guns that were made as team rifles (A or B) were probably not marked as because they were converted in house. My "B" that I was awarded last year is not marked.

Jim Adell is definitely the guy to talk to about Navy Garands.

Emmett Dunham
07-19-2012, 09:33 PM
There were a lot of barrels that were left over from the Navy match rifles that did not meet the specifications and they went on the market. There was a guy that had purchased fake that had one of these barrel in it on the GunBroker forum. You need to have someone who knows these rifles to look at it before you pay the bucks for it.

Emmett

CMPUser3022
07-20-2012, 11:53 AM
How were the USN SAMCU San Diego conversions marked? I think they used especially made barrels from SA, not H&R or AMF. I'm referring to Bart Bobbitt's article on Navy Conversions. I also don't think there is any documentation on these rifles to prove what they are.

Phil McGrath
07-20-2012, 10:36 PM
How were the USN SAMCU San Diego conversions marked? I think they used especially made barrels from SA, not H&R or AMF. I'm referring to Bart Bobbitt's article on Navy Conversions. I also don't think there is any documentation on these rifles to prove what they are.


H&R and AMF were contractors that did the conversions under Navy contract so they were required too stamp there work. The Navy wasn't, thats why some are unmarked. Any rifle that the Navy converted or SAMCU converted are stampless, Thats why its very important too get documentation from the person selling the rifle or from Cmdr.Jim Adell.

The Navy used barrels made for them under contract from Springfield Armory, Yes there were 2 7.62mm barrels made at SA with 3 production runs, barrel SA#11010457 SPL was made in 5/65 and ended, production resumed again in Sept/65 with barrel SA#11010457 and then ended again in Dec/65.

The last run of 7.62 barrels for M1 rifles from Springfield Armory started and stoped in March, this barrel is marked SA#11686514 3/66. Its these barrels that Bart Bobbitt talks about being a special run for the Navy SAMCU.

Emmett Dunham
07-20-2012, 10:51 PM
I know that the barrels were marked with the measurements they made and the ones that were over specification were not used and they are also marked 7.62. The barrels that were out of specification were sold and a lot of fakes you see will have these barrels in them. There use to be a good artical on line about the rifles but I could not find it and the two items I listed are all I can remember. Its too bad they killed all of the info on the old CMP web site there was a lot of great posts on this rifle there.

Emmett

Phil McGrath
07-21-2012, 12:35 AM
Bart Bobbitt, talks about Don "Mac" McCoy Chief USN ret.as a major player in the SAMCU 7.62 M1 rifles, him and another person that I forget the name of airguaged all of the SA#11686514 3/66 barrels and marked the barrels bore diameter on top of the chamber area using a grease pencle or soapstone, the barrels that gauged NM spec or better were used for Team rifles about 10% of the 3000 made, and the next best were held in reserve for replacement Team use.

Many barrels were sold off on the side, traded for, and in a few cases where they just grew legs and walked off the Navy van at Camp Perry. I know that NWSC Crane still has many more in storage. I have seen a few Air Force Premium Grade rifles with the Navy's 3/66 barrels from the CMP auction page and at the CMP's Western Games rifle sales, so that supports the trade and barter system with the Airforce.

The Navy's 7.62mm M1 rifles and the barrels that they traded too the Airforce Team must of had positive and lasting effect on them, the Airforce contracted with Rock Island Arsenal for there own 7.62mm M1 barrel, it is marked RIA 11686320 SPL 6/69 M118 and has the same 1/12 rate of twist. Springfield Armory closed down in Apr/68.

The barrel that I picked up was new with muzzle/chamber caps and VCI straw down the tube about 2 years ago it had a 81 on top of its chamber so I will assume the bore diameter of .3081 untell someone convincess otherwise. No I didn't ask the seller where or how he aquired it, I was more than happy to pay his asking price of $225 shipped and insured.

surplusshooter
07-21-2012, 01:23 AM
I have also read that the 7.62 MM barrels that were marked SA 11686514 3-66 are the best of the best. Special run, super accurate. Simple question: What does "SAMCU" stand for ? Thanks.

Phil McGrath
07-21-2012, 02:21 AM
I have also read that the 7.62 MM barrels that were marked SA 11686514 3-66 are the best of the best. Special run, super accurate. Simple question: What does "SAMCU" stand for ? Thanks.


That the Navy's, Small Arms Match Conditioning Unit is/was located in San Diego Calf, the Marines have the samething there's is called PWS for Precision Weapons Shop, its location is Quantico Virginia.

jerryjeff
07-21-2012, 03:07 AM
Now we have some real imformation.

Phil McGrath
07-21-2012, 07:24 AM
Now we have some real imformation.


As a side note, probably the last Gov't sourced and pruduced barrels for the M1 Garand came from RIA made on machinery placed in storage from Springfield Armory. RIA barrel production ended with the end of there 03 production.

CMPUser3022
07-22-2012, 03:36 PM
The last run of 7.62 barrels for M1 rifles from Springfield Armory started and stoped in March, this barrel is marked SA#11686514 3/66. Its these barrels that Bart Bobbitt talks about being a special run for the Navy SAMCU.
I have Garand with an SA 11686514 4 66 barrel. It was targeted with an upright T. It also has AA with the cross cannon acceptance at the end of the numbers. At least it looks like the cross cannon acceptance stamp. A large 7.62 is electropenciled in the bolt and, of course, the white spacer. It seems to be out of the date range you mentioned. What does that mean? Jim Adell doesn't have any documentation on this rifle.
These were suppose to be built by the Navy on new, not previously used, receivers at the time. Mine's on a SA 434XXXX receiver, which as it turns out, the Navy had issued to them from SA in the 42 to 43XXXXX range post war. I took a chance and bought this rifle a long time ago because it looked like it was set up right. It was in really beat up stock which I replaced. Fortunately, I didn't pay much for it at the time. So, if I got screwed, it wouldn't hurt that much. These rifles, I'm guessing, were set up in NM stocks with the screwed in lower band, but I don't know that for sure. They may have just been placed in regular stocks. Of course, some were apparently set up as service rifles for training. I've been trying to find out about this rifle for a long time.

Emmett Dunham
07-22-2012, 11:30 PM
http://yarchive.net/gun/rifle/garand_308.html


I found the artical on the Navy Garands and there were scribed with the dimensions of the bore on the barrel. The barrel was marked 7.62 on the barrel under the op rod and there is more in the artical.

Emmett

Phil McGrath
07-23-2012, 12:15 PM
I have Garand with an SA 11686514 4 66 barrel. It was targeted with an upright T. It also has AA with the cross cannon acceptance at the end of the numbers. At least it looks like the cross cannon acceptance stamp. A large 7.62 is electropenciled in the bolt and, of course, the white spacer. It seems to be out of the date range you mentioned. What does that mean? Jim Adell doesn't have any documentation on this rifle.
These were suppose to be built by the Navy on new, not previously used, receivers at the time. Mine's on a SA 434XXXX receiver, which as it turns out, the Navy had issued to them from SA in the 42 to 43XXXXX range post war. I took a chance and bought this rifle a long time ago because it looked like it was set up right. It was in really beat up stock which I replaced. Fortunately, I didn't pay much for it at the time. So, if I got screwed, it wouldn't hurt that much. These rifles, I'm guessing, were set up in NM stocks with the screwed in lower band, but I don't know that for sure. They may have just been placed in regular stocks. Of course, some were apparently set up as service rifles for training. I've been trying to find out about this rifle for a long time.



If your barrel is marked with a Apr 4/66 it would be the first I heard of, so double check on your barrel stampings, mine is marked SA 11686514 3 66 MD61 P M with the DAS all single line, under that its stamped in larger type 7.62 MM, my barrel isn't stamped with H&R or AMF I installed my barrel.

Post some pictures if you can, If Cmdr. Jim Adell doesn't have your ser number in his data base then I strongly suspect that its a put together rifle using a Navy barrel, all of his data is directly from inventory/stocks from NWSC Crane, if the rifle was owned by the Navy it is or was in the inventory and there is a record of it, thats hard too argue with.

I'm sure that the Navy would have loved to build there rifles from the newest parts, but as more and more Sec of the Navy rifles turn up thats just not the case, I'm sure that the Team rifles used the best of what was on hand as long as the parts used were in serviceable condition and met spec, the NM tweeks were also done at the same time.

CMPUser3022
07-23-2012, 10:06 PM
If your barrel is marked with a Apr 4/66 it would be the first I heard of, so double check on your barrel stampings, mine is marked SA 11686514 3 66 MD61 P M with the DAS all single line, under that its stamped in larger type 7.62 MM, my barrel isn't stamped with H&R or AMF I installed my barrel.

Here are pictures:
http://s287.photobucket.com/albums/ll126/straycatcdr/Navy%20Garand/?albumview=slideshow
I don't believe an SA barrel would have been marked H&R or AMF. I am gathering from the Bobbitt article that barrels were requested by USN SAMCU from Springfield. I had read, I can't remember where, that they used receivers issued new to the Navy in the 50's in the 4.2M-4.3M range. I'm not disputing that this may be a made up rifle but all the parts, i.e. receiver, except for the stock are correct.
Jim Adell told me that he has 95% of the Navy trophy rifles documented. Not all. He would have to confirm this, as it has been awhile since I corresponded with him. These, of course, were not trophy rifles.

4gun-drill
07-24-2012, 12:35 AM
So the H&R and AMF barrels were SA barrels, they were just installed by H&R and AMF and are clearly marked as such. The Navy may have used some recievers in the 4.2 range but that is definately not all inclusive. Both of mine are 3.6, and I got them straight from Crane. I also just looked at a list of serial numbers that I have for the MK II Grade A rifles and the range from 800,000 - 3.7 mil; this list IS NOT all inclusive though. Actually it is only less than 100 rifles.

Do you have any more pictures of your rifle? Overall pictures would help, there are a lot of characteristics to a Navy rifle that I may be able to clue in on for you. I am not sure on your barrel though. Three things that stick out to me are the ordnance wheel, the location of the 7.62 MM stamping and the lettering / numbering. Is the barrel marked 7.62 again over to the left? Yours is marked way further right than mine. Neither of my barrels have the ordnance wheel either. The lettering on your barrel is a lot different than mine too. Just compare some of the numbers (1,2,6 and 7). The MD is different too. One last thing that concerns me is that if it were a Navy rifle the handguard would have a heavy coat of fullerplast to seal it. Yours does not appear to be sealed. More pictures would help. Here is a pic of one of my barrels and a link to another thread showing an AMF conversion.

http://forums.thecmp.org/showthread.php?t=21881

http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee205/ltcunningham/DSC_0493-1.jpg

Rolling Thunder
07-24-2012, 07:43 AM
Here are pictures:
http://s287.photobucket.com/albums/ll126/straycatcdr/Navy%20Garand/?albumview=slideshow


4gun is correct, your barrel is a fake. Where did you get it?

EvansvilleIHC
07-24-2012, 09:18 AM
Yes, the barrel is not authentic. It would be interesting to know where it came from. I have never seen a Navy rifle with this date. It was nice of the counterfeiter to use it though. :))))) Makes our lives easier.

CMPUser3022
07-24-2012, 11:01 AM
I appreciate the information I got from Phil. I think we've highjacked this thread long enough.

Rolling Thunder
07-24-2012, 04:02 PM
I appreciate the information I got from Phil. I think we've highjacked this thread long enough.

Say what? You want to find out about your rifle from your own posted words, you get good information from Phil, you graciously post a photo of your barrel and it's pointed out to you as a fake and now you don't want to participate anymore?

No one is ridiculing you about this, we have all been tricked pursuing these interests.

EvansvilleIHC
07-24-2012, 04:18 PM
As they say in Parliament......interesting discussion.

ropinc
07-24-2012, 08:23 PM
I am the OP. I don't think the thread has been hijacked at all. I appreciate all the posts. This is the kind of information I'm looking for. Keep it coming.

Phil McGrath
07-24-2012, 08:38 PM
I hate too sould like I'm jumping on the band wagon, I think your barrel is not correct. Here are my reasons so take them for what there worth I am not a Garand expert and I'm for sure no Navy Mk2 MOD1 Grade A/B Garand expert althu I was in the Navy, and I only tried out for the shooting team so I guess I'm just a wanna be.

#1. The lettering for the drawing numbers looks to have wider spacing and they apeare uneven in the stamping. 4gun's pic is a mirror image of mine, notice how clean and tight/close the lettering is?

#2. Barrel finnish, it looks like its was polished before in was refinnished, look in the area between the 7 62 it looks very smooth like it was missed when it was blasted.

#3. the steel lot code for your 4/66 barrel is the same as the 3/66 barrel MD61 so I'm not sure thats coshure, the AA could be a deformed or misaligned M for magnafluxed but I don't think so, and the Ord wheel for sure doesn't belong on a barrel made in the mid-60's, that clearly should have been the DAS.

Contractor stamps were a must for anyone other than the Navy, SA sent barrels directly to H&R and AMF they inturn stamped the conversion when the work was completed, this was not just for QC issues but for the safty of the enduser should any safty defects come up in the future. How else would the Navy track the conversion of there rifle if everyone converted them and the work wasn't marked? I guess I don't understand your disbelief on this issue.

I have read Bob Bobbitt's posts, and I have also read from Bill Rica's site a noted collector of cool stuff, there are others that pop-up for time to time that I know were involved in or arround the Navy Shooting Team durring that era as well, all of the info that I have posted is a mixture of information from them.

There are some people that are going too try and make a buck anywhere and anyway they can, Information, documentation and education is the key. At one time or another we have all been HAD. If your happy and paid what you think was a fair price at the time and it shoots up too your expectations now, you should be good to go.

CMPUser3022
07-25-2012, 02:04 PM
I really do appreciate the input. As long as ropinc doesn't mind, I'll reenter the conversation. My question is, why would anyone spend obviously a lot of time and money to fake a barrel that is now not worth more than $300.00 as one just sold for on GB in May 2012 for, and it looked exactly like 4gun's in the last picture above and apparently Phil's. So I'm guessing all in that series looked exactly alike and mine should look exactly the same.

As I said before, I bought this one a long time ago before many people were even talking about Navy Garands, and I only got interested in this one because I had retired from the Navy and it was 7.62mm. So faking a barrel like this doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. The dealer didn't know much about it other than it was suppose to have been bought off a "Navy shooter" and he thought it was in the "correct range". The patina all matched like it had been together for awhile. It has 7.62 electropenciled in the bolt and the correct white spacer.

If it were a $2000.00 Garand, it would make more sense. Believe me, I didn't pay anywhere close to that amount. I've been trying to figure out what it was ever since. I want to be real sure before I think about tearing this rifle down.

CMPUser3022
07-25-2012, 03:03 PM
Another picture:http://s287.photobucket.com/albums/l...view=slideshow. I'm having a hard time creating a link today, but I have 2 pictures available. Previous link I made works for some reason.

3697747 M1D
07-25-2012, 03:03 PM
Use a 30/06 Throat erosion gauge to see if it's a "SPACER" barrel. Also use a cleaning rod and measure the rifling twist. A 30/06 blank that would have the ord wheel will have 1 in 10 twist while the real 1960's 7.62's are 1-12.

Rolling Thunder
07-25-2012, 03:12 PM
I really do appreciate the input. As long as ropinc doesn't mind, I'll reenter the conversation. My question is, why would anyone spend obviously a lot of time and money to fake a barrel that is now not worth more than $300.00 as one just sold for on GB in May 2012 for, and it looked exactly like 4gun's in the last picture above and apparently Phil's. So I'm guessing all in that series looked exactly alike and mine should look exactly the same.

As I said before, I bought this one a long time ago before many people were even talking about Navy Garands, and I only got interested in this one because I had retired from the Navy and it was 7.62mm. So faking a barrel like this doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. The dealer didn't know much about it other than it was suppose to have been bought off a "Navy shooter" and he thought it was in the "correct range". The patina all matched like it had been together for awhile. It has 7.62 electropenciled in the bolt and the correct white spacer.

If it were a $2000.00 Garand, it would make more sense. Believe me, I didn't pay anywhere close to that amount. I've been trying to figure out what it was ever since. I want to be real sure before I think about tearing this rifle down.

How about buying 10 (or more) commercial barrels at less that $100 each, then faking the unmarked commercial barrel to USN 7.62 and selling them at $300 each. This is not a one-piece fake production run. Now does it begin to become clearer?

4gun-drill
07-25-2012, 03:41 PM
Use a 30/06 Throat erosion gauge to see if it's a "SPACER" barrel. Also use a cleaning rod and measure the rifling twist. A 30/06 blank that would have the ord wheel will have 1 in 10 twist while the real 1960's 7.62's are 1-12.

This is a good idea. Another idea would be to remove the rear handguard and see if there is a drawing number on top of the barrel. However, it looks like your handguard is "glued" on. To me the date looks like it could have been a 4-56 instead of 4-66. If there is a drawing number on top its not right, but could point to it being a spacer barrel.

From the second picture you have posted I can say with almost certainty, that if it was a Navy rifle, it was not a Team or Trophy rifle. On a Navy match rifle the rear handguard will be relieved quite a bit to keep it from hitting the reciever face and the cut-out for the op-rod is usually removed all together. The bolt will be polished from the lugs forward and will be engraved with the last 4 of serial number and not 7.62.

Depending on what you want to do with it, you can get a correct barrel for it. I know where I can get one at a decent price. Or if it shoots well and it does not bother you then I would just leave well enough alone. If you got a good deal on it, then who cares if the barrel is humped. It may be dissapointing but I bet it still shoots well.

Phil McGrath
07-25-2012, 04:07 PM
I really do appreciate the input. As long as ropinc doesn't mind, I'll reenter the conversation. My question is, why would anyone spend obviously a lot of time and money to fake a barrel that is now not worth more than $300.00 as one just sold for on GB in May 2012 for, and it looked exactly like 4gun's in the last picture above and apparently Phil's. So I'm guessing all in that series looked exactly alike and mine should look exactly the same.

As I said before, I bought this one a long time ago before many people were even talking about Navy Garands, and I only got interested in this one because I had retired from the Navy and it was 7.62mm. So faking a barrel like this doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. The dealer didn't know much about it other than it was suppose to have been bought off a "Navy shooter" and he thought it was in the "correct range". The patina all matched like it had been together for awhile. It has 7.62 electropenciled in the bolt and the correct white spacer.

If it were a $2000.00 Garand, it would make more sense. Believe me, I didn't pay anywhere close to that amount. I've been trying to figure out what it was ever since. I want to be real sure before I think about tearing this rifle down.


I think you should take note I did not say your barrel or rifle was "FAKED" I have issues with the manner that the barrel is marked, it is out of the known range of Navy barrels, onething I have learned with Garands is that its always evolving and this is more true of Navy Mk2 rifles very few have been awarded the more that come too light the more we learn.

I was in the Navy in 87 and left in 92 after Gulf I, and started shooting NRA HP service rifle the M1/M14/M1a's ruled the firing line, when I went too the gun shows Navy Trophy rifles were much sought after and were marked way up, with and without DOC's so there has always been a big demand for them. USMC O65/67 M1's not far behind, The story that aways went with the Navy rifles was that some Navy shooter traded it in on something differnt or new this was how the new seller aquired it. Few people at the time not counting former Navy Team shooters new what too look for or had any idea what questions to ask the seller as a result many rifles legit or faked were sold.

Why would someone fake a barrel? easy, that $300.00 tube just when up in value. Many people look or glance at the drawing numbers and if it matches there golden, right? Nope they often overlook the style, size as well as the spacing of the font, barrel dates or steal lot codes. Now if I take that alterd barrel install it on a rifle I can make the claim and demand a extra premium on the rifle as a whole, I just took a $500. gun show beater M1, screwed on a $300. barrel, I'm going to price it and put it on the table for $2000. or best offer and let everyone eyeball it for awhile, but I will really let it go for anything above $1500. and let the buyer think there getting a good deal I'm such a nice guy. Its a Navy rifle, I can't prove it without DOC's but you can't disprove it either the seller will be quick to point out the barrel drawing numbers as proof that its a legit rifle, the rifle is sold and the faker turned over almost 100% profit, thats why barrels get faked.

I didn't say your rifle or barrel was faked but its does raise a few questions, better pictures of the whole rifle would help and what is the gas port size, does your barrel have chromed pads?

CMPUser3022
07-25-2012, 04:57 PM
I always thought it was a service grade. It came without the original stock. The stock it has is one I put on it. I'll have to measure the twist. Sounds like a good idea. If you would, define a "spacer" barrel and what I would be looking for with a .30-06 throat erosion gauge.

CMPUser3022
07-25-2012, 05:37 PM
I'll take more pictures of the barrel. Probably not tonight. I'll have to do a little minor surgery on the rifle without taking the barrel off. Wow, if this is a fake, it's really sophisticated.

Phil McGrath
07-25-2012, 06:20 PM
The Navy, or I should say H&R stuffed a bushing into the original 30.06 chamber and rereamed it for 7.62 headspace. The only way your going too know if thats done is to mismount the barrel and section the barrels chamber excessive T/E will give you a good idea if its a insert.

About the only 100% way to tell is mark a cleanning rod and count the twist rate, std 30.06 barrel will make 1 turn in 10 inches and a USGI 7.62mm barrel will turn 1 is 12 inches.

3697747 M1D
07-25-2012, 06:48 PM
HP labs created a spacer/bushing to convert 30/06 chambers to fire shorter7.62 x 51 rounds. Great idea on paper not in the real world. The first thing wrong is the throat is still at 30/06 length,firing a 7.62 round the bullet jumps nearly 1/2 inch before it hits rifling. If you use a 7.62 TE gauge the handle will hit before you get to the throat if it is a converted 06 barrel. The off chance that someone found a ord wheel marked BLANK barrel and cut a 7.62 chamber can still be ID by the twist rate. If you find a 7.62 throat and 1/12 twist it will take more work to figure out what you really have as already noted above.

Phil McGrath
07-25-2012, 08:27 PM
HP labs created a spacer/bushing to convert 30/06 chambers to fire shorter7.62 x 51 rounds. Great idea on paper not in the real world. The first thing wrong is the throat is still at 30/06 length,firing a 7.62 round the bullet jumps nearly 1/2 inch before it hits rifling. If you use a 7.62 TE gauge the handle will hit before you get to the throat if it is a converted 06 barrel. The off chance that someone found a ord wheel marked BLANK barrel and cut a 7.62 chamber can still be ID by the twist rate. If you find a 7.62 throat and 1/12 twist it will take more work to figure out what you really have as already noted above.


Aahh I don't think HP White had anything too do with the design of the chamber bushing or there instalation into rifles, that idea came from the Navy and it was requested too Springfield Armory for development. HP White is a civilian lab/testing facility that conducted the feasability study.

If you like too read its rather dry, REPORT OF EVALUATION ON NAVY CONVERSION OF RIFLE U.S.CAL.30,M1 TO FIRE 7.62MM AMMUNITION BY MODIFICATION TO BARREL. by U.S. ARMY WEAPONS COMMAND, SPRINGFIELD ARMORY, SPRINGFIELD MASS. 30 OCTOBER 1964.

On a side note the Navy, also converted a rifle as high as ser # 6090632.

3697747 M1D
07-25-2012, 09:10 PM
I stand corrected on the origin. :eek:

CMPUser3022
07-26-2012, 01:06 PM
More photos. One of the TE gauge shots is with an M1 .308 gauge, the other is with .30-06.http://s287.photobucket.com/albums/ll126/straycatcdr/Navy%20Garand/?albumview=slideshow

Phil McGrath
07-26-2012, 03:36 PM
Like I said, I have never said your rifle or barrel was "Fake" there are some very odd extra stamps that shouldn't be were they are, and I've raised those questions. I think most everyone would be better surved if they keep a open mind and never say never esp about a Navy Mk2.

After looking at all the pictures again I will say at least your rifle is a "Posable" Navy Mk2 MOD1 untell more Navy rifles turn up with the same markings or barrel date there could be many more out there they just haven't popped up on the internet. But again I think I should say I'm no expert on Navy rifles either, my opinion and $1.25 also gets you a lg. coffee.

If your happy and paid what was a fair price, great. If your happy with the rifles current accuracy even better.

Anotherthing, I know its your rifle but you really need too give it a good scrubbing and chamber cleanning with a M14 chamber brush, it looks filthy.

I sent Bill Rica and e-mail, if he has any info too add maybe he'll chime in, I know he would like too see a 4/66 barrel as its out of the known range.

CMPUser3022
07-26-2012, 06:00 PM
Thanks Phil:
I just measured the twist. I'm not 100% sure but I think it's 1:12. I'm going to measure again, however. Roger on the chamber. Thanks for e-mailing Bill Rica.

4gun-drill
07-26-2012, 07:17 PM
I agree with Phil that it is tuff to say without a doubt wether or not anything can be determined to be authentic or not without personally viewing and inspecting the object; in this case the rifle we are all talking about. However, I think that we also have a responsibility to point out obvious "anomalies" not only to educate other members here but to prevent questionable articles as being "close enough" to call legit in the future.

Now by no means am I an expert on Navy rifles (or any Garand for that matter). I stated earlier that I have only been in the Navy 8 years and I meant ONLY. The hay day of the Garand in the Navy was well before my time. However, I have personally been awarded several trophy rifles and have seen many more. So, I can only describe my rifles and others that I have observed and are documented to be authentic.

However, I think that in this case all we can do is look at the evidence that we have at hand and unfortunately, I dont see how this could have been a Navy 7.62 rifle. It may have been a Navy rifle but I dont think the Navy put that barrel on. Here is why I have come to my conclusion; anyone here is welcome to thier own conclusion.

1. The lettering and numbers are almost all different than what is seen on known Navy barrels. Plus the lettering is kind of sloppy and not evenly spaced.

2. The date of 4-66, to my knowlege has not been observed before on Navy 7.62 barrels. It could be a super rare, previously unknown barrel but that is not as likely.

3. The 7.62 marking is also in the wrong type of numbering / font and not in the normal location. Plus, the 6 in the 7.62 appears to have been double struck. From barrels that I have observed the 7.62 looks like it was a "roll mark" with the 7's almost aways being deeper than the rest. If it were a roll mark it would be almost impossible for the 6 to be double struck. I think the AMF/H&R markings may have been stamped, not sure on that one.

4. It would have to be team gun or a AMF/H&R conversion. Since it is not marked AMF/H&R then it would point towards being a team gun. However, it displays no other indiactions of it being so. From the pictures I have seen the bolt is not polished, nor does it display the last 4 of the serial number. The rear handgaurd has not been modified, and it does not have the thick coat of fullerplast that is usually found on team rifles.

5. The ordnance wheel should not be on a barrel manufactured that late. I think they made the switch from the wheel to the DAS sometime in 1953 so why would they just throw one on there over a decade later? I think this was probably added by someone to make it "look" better. Plus it is HUGE!

3022, Please dont take offense to this. I am just stating what I can see. If someone can find a way to authenticate your rifle I will be happy for you. Like I said before, if you got a good deal on it and it shoots well then thats all that matters.

Maybe the CMP will be selling Navy MKII Mod 1's in the future and you can pick one up then (hint, hint).

CMPUser3022
07-27-2012, 11:24 AM
Thanks 4gun: No offense taken. When people are honestly trying to educate instead of simply flame another member, I can participate. I've been on the receiving end of both situations on this forum.
I've been collecting for well over 50 years; and, if I have learned anything, I've learned that there are no absolutes. I'm simply trying to find out what I have.
As I stated, I put on the stock myself. The stock that came on it was not in good shape, and there was nothing special about it. So please don't judge the rifle by the stock. I always thought this was a service grade rifle. One built for training purposes; not necessarily for competition.
If you don't mind, please explain what a Team gun is and how that would affect the rifle build.
Right now, I'm thinking this barrel was originally a 7.62mm. Whether it is actually a Navy build is or if the barrel was made by Springfield is questionable.
Thanks again to everyone for your help.

Phil McGrath
07-27-2012, 01:30 PM
The lack of the H&R or AMF stamps sugests that it could have been installed by the SAMCU or on the Navy Van for Team use. If the barrel was installed for team use it is safe too assume that the rest of the NM work would have been completed, unitized front handguard, glass bedding, trigger job,install NM sights and all the fine fitting tweeks at the same time so the rifle would have been Match ready. 4gun mentions Fullerplast being used on the handguards, I'm not sold on the fact that the Navy treated all the NM Mk2 rifle stocks or handguards with it, it is/was some nasty stuff and took awhile for it too set up and cure. Maybe for there very top shooters too give them a leg up, but I don't think it was done on every Team rifle.

There's also the posibility that a Team Member or anyone with a conection too the Navy Team could have had there weapon upgraded as a practace rifle/fun gun or as a later full NM build rifle, with barrels available and all the tools with trained personal arround a barrel swap is a 10min job who cared back then, there were times thou when hard parts were hard too get even for the Service Teams so the rest of the NM goodies were unibtainium for a time, parts were traded at times thou. Ammo wasn't a problem either it was availible and consumable so a cheap practace rifle with free ammo is a posibility as well.

Bill Ricca
07-27-2012, 04:36 PM
I have never seen a 4-66 barrel either. However that does not mean it never existed. SA production appears to be just 3/66, but possibly a small amount was done the next month.

I cannot tell from all those pictures. Some things are different and you will find a different appearance.

I will say this. I was at a show in West Springfield around 2002-2003 and saw 3 nice M1D barrels. My brain was weak. My friend showed me something I already knew, but was not thinking of it. The M1D barrels had the hand guard slot, which never existed on real barrels. After he pointed that out, I saw the chrome coating on the hole had marks underneath, showing the barrel was slightly used and re-chromed. The part marking were 100% correct and I could not understand why I could not see the markings were changed. Later that day I fellow told me that with modern technology they can fill in the old markings and put in new markings, and the eyes will never be able to notice the changes. Naturally there are tools which will expose the change.

4gun-drill
07-27-2012, 04:48 PM
With regard to Fullerplast being used... I obviously cannot say that every MK2 MOD1 was sealed with FP. However, I do believe that they were all sealed. I say that they used FP because Don McCoy told me that is what they used. However, these rifles were probably built and rebuild after Don retired so they may have switched to a different product at some point. FP is some nasty stuff, no doubt about that. I recently built a M1A for match shooting and I used FP. When I was glassing the stock I walked away and forgot about it for a while. I had to use a small chisel to remove some excess and I put a small scratch in the FP finish. I touched it up with Tru-oil and you cannot see the difference. I think the in future T-O is the way I will go.

3022,

When you said you added the stock, I did not realize you meant the stock and handguards. Sorry for the confusion.

CMPUser3022
07-27-2012, 09:00 PM
4gun: I replaced the whole thing. The stock and hand guards that came on it looked like they had been at sea awhile (or in the sea awhile.) I still have them, but they were nothing special.
Bill, thanks for your comments. Do I remember correctly that you had an article on gas port sizes sometime in the past? If so and if you can tell from the picture, does the gas port look correct for 7.62mm?

Phil McGrath
07-27-2012, 09:22 PM
Your barrel should have a gas port of .1065

3697747 M1D
07-28-2012, 12:10 PM
So where are we in this thread? Has the OP found an answer to his original question? What is the feeling on the unknown barrel? Anyone have any updates on Don Mccoy?

Phil McGrath
07-28-2012, 03:16 PM
So where are we in this thread? Has the OP found an answer to his original question? What is the feeling on the unknown barrel? Anyone have any updates on Don Mccoy?

I think its run its course, I don't no If the OP found his answer it did spin off into another area, the feeling is never say never with a Navy Mk2 is it or isn't we will never know unless more pop up there is too many "what ifs". Update on Don "MAC" McCoy is that he passed away a few months back I think he was 92yo.

CMPUser3022
07-28-2012, 03:17 PM
The barrel is a definite maybe. It's not ruled out as a Navy barrel. Hopefully, others like it will show up.

ropinc
07-28-2012, 03:56 PM
OP here. The thread and other sources gave me enough info to determine that the "Navy" Garand was no such thing. The owner told the auction house that it was a Navy and the auction company advertised it as such. I finally got a chance to inspect it. The barrel is marked Arlington, VA 7.62 mm under the op rod where the SA etc. markings should be. I'm guessing that it is a Blue Sky import that was rebarreled and refinished before being sold. There appeared to be some other markings on the barrel in the same location but they were so light I couldn't read them but it definitely isn't a USGI bbl. in my opinion. I've seen other Blue Sky imports but they all had USGI barrels. Has anyone seen an M1 with a Blue Sky 7.62mm barrel installed? The stock is in rough shape and looks like someone tried to refinish it with Tru Oil but did a lousy job. All in all kind of a let down after getting my hopes up. Thanks to all who have contributed to the thread so far.

Phil McGrath
07-28-2012, 04:05 PM
OP here. The thread and other sources gave me enough info to determine that the "Navy" Garand was no such thing. The owner told the auction house that it was a Navy and the auction company advertised it as such. I finally got a chance to inspect it. The barrel is marked Arlington, VA 7.62 mm under the op rod where the SA etc. markings should be. I'm guessing that it is a Blue Sky import that was rebarreled and refinished before being sold. There appeared to be some other markings on the barrel in the same location but they were so light I couldn't read them but it definitely isn't a USGI bbl. in my opinion. I've seen other Blue Sky imports but they all had USGI barrels. Has anyone seen an M1 with a Blue Sky 7.62mm barrel installed? The stock is in rough shape and looks like someone tried to refinish it with Tru Oil but did a lousy job. All in all kind of a let down after getting my hopes up. Thanks to all who have contributed to the thread so far.

Short answer, No.

3697747 M1D
07-28-2012, 08:56 PM
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=297951054

This is listed as a 7.62 but it's probably a commercial barrel and is probably like the one that started this thread.




ps to Phil, I had heard a rumor about Don but hadn't verified it. Thanks for the update.