CMP Forums

CMP Forums (http://forums.thecmp.org/index.php)
-   M1 Carbine (http://forums.thecmp.org/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   Buffalo bbl on an NPM questions (http://forums.thecmp.org/showthread.php?t=4902)

Blockhead 12-31-2009 10:06 AM

Buffalo bbl on an NPM questions
 
I'm looking at a NPM with a Buffalo bbl - were these original to NPMs or it is a replacement. The carbine has early features (Type I band, flip sight, high wood stock). What was the quality of these barrels?

http://i248.photobucket.com/albums/g...ad_75/fi12.jpg

mar53 12-31-2009 12:11 PM

I don't have all my info in front of me, but as I recollect, NPM did NOT make any barrels , but used the government free barrel program - i.e. using barrels from other makers. Buffalo arms did make barrels under govt contract. So that could be in fact correct for your rifle. you will have to check serial # vs barrel date (if there is one), or possibly "War Baby" for the chronolgy at NPM.

Blockhead 12-31-2009 12:31 PM

Thanks, I thought I had read that NPM didn't make barrels, but wasn't sure. Anyone know if they were considered good barrels? I know that they must have met a certain standard to be used by the government, but I also know that the government makes mistakes every once in a while. ;)

hink441 12-31-2009 12:32 PM

I agree that Buffalo Arms barrel could possibly be an original barrel.

Peter100 12-31-2009 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blockhead (Post 36923)
Thanks, I thought I had read that NPM didn't make barrels, but wasn't sure. Anyone know if they were considered good barrels? I know that they must have met a certain standard to be used by the government, but I also know that the government makes mistakes every once in a while. ;)

At the time of manufacture, the primary contractors considered the BA barrels to be the worse. I assume that this is due to the amount of rejects and overall fit and finish. Today it would be safe to say that safety and accuracy would be all within the allowable limits, meaning it survived 60+ years its should be OK today!

hink441 12-31-2009 12:47 PM

Hey Blockhead, that looks like a nice un-messed with NPM. Let us know how it works out for you!!

1bid_1kill 12-31-2009 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter100 (Post 36927)
At the time of manufacture, the primary contractors considered the BA barrels to be the worse.

I thought that distinction belonged to Marlin. I seem to recall reading this in Duff's book but may be mistaken...I know there is a blurb in there regarding Free Barrel Program manufacturers being ranked from best to worst.

NP2650 12-31-2009 01:32 PM

NPM did not make any of their own barrels, but used barrels from several other contractors including Buffalo Arms. I have a late '43 to early '44 U code NPM with a BA barrel. It's a real tack driver, so I'd say the quality is pretty good.

Peter100 12-31-2009 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1bid_1kill (Post 36952)
I thought that distinction belonged to Marlin. I seem to recall reading this in Duff's book but may be mistaken...I know there is a blurb in there regarding Free Barrel Program manufacturers being ranked from best to worst.

Your right about the Marlins, I'm at work and don't have my books handy. My bad. But I believe that the BA were not highly thought of, and that the Underwoods were considered the best. The thing to remember is that the opinion were of the primary contractors who were more concerned with any extra work they would have to perform to get the barrel to fit and pass, not so much with their accuracy and finish(as much as BudOr would allow).

E-7Ret. 12-31-2009 02:41 PM

Nice NPM! Is it first,second,third or fourth run? I have a fourth run(SN 40902xx) with a 10-43 Underwood barrel/ Flaming Bomb.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:53 PM.