"correct" M1 - does it really need to be 100% correct

[Stunng23]

When making a Garand "correct" do 100% of the parts have to be correct?

Does it matter the year and/or manufacturer to be 100% or not, as certain ones might be near impossible to economically obtain?

If something less than 100% would be ok, which parts could be low priority or not too much of a concern for most people?

[dnmccoy]

If its not %100 correct then its not %100 correct

[Stunng23]

Originally Posted by dnmccoy

If its not %100 correct then its not %100 correct

yes, and do you have any answers to my questions?

[Hunter Mag]

Gas cylinder lock screw, many different markings and no specific date records were kept that I know of. Single slot were the early ones but that's about it.
Rear sight cover and the base also are low priority and rear handguard clip.

Major parts like trigger group, OP rod, bolt, barrel, gas cylinder and the lumber are most important.

[Ripton]

When someone says 100% correct that's what it should mean, all parts correct for the era. If you are building it for yourself then of course it is whatever you are happy with. There is a lot of incorrect info out there, so if you are spending on parts, check and double check, if that is important to you.

100% Correct/Corrected Vs. 100% Original, that's a different story.

[dnmccoy]

Originally Posted by Stunng23

yes, and do you have any answers to my questions?

Im really biting my tongue, but the question you ask makes zero sense.

How can you have a %100 Winchester rifle if it has a HRA stock on it. How can you have a %100 IHC trigger group with a Winchester hammer.


Anyone with any common sense knows you buy the rifle and its parts, not the story.

If you came to me with a rifle and told me it was correct I would expect a correct balance of parts.

[Stunng23]

Originally Posted by Ripton

When someone says 100% correct that's what it should mean, all parts correct for the era. If you are building it for yourself then of course it is whatever you are happy with. There is a lot of incorrect info out there, so if you are spending on parts, check and double check, if that is important to you.

100% Correct/Corrected Vs. 100% Original, that's a different story.

I guess we need define terms. what term is the right one or are they both the same, "correct" or 100% correct ? If not, then what?

I ask because I see a lot of "correct" being used, but then I see obvious parts that are not correct on the rifle

[Shomway]

What rifle are you thinking of "correcting"? Some are easy and others are expensive.

[krdomingue]

That is personal preference. I have made my Post War rifles as correct as I can, but to be honest, if it isn't numbered or easily identifiable, I might have something wrong. Still sourcing the correct trigger group for my 3-43 SA. I haven't worried about my Winchester because it doesn't have the correct barrel and it would be too expensive to make it correct. But if I run across a Winchester part it ends up on that rifle or my Win M1D. I did buy a correct 1942 SA a few years back, but I am reluctant to spend big bucks to get a correct early SA or Win. I prefer to play the "luck of the draw" lottery with the CMP mail order a couple of times (or more) a year. If nothing else, they makes a good source to trade parts off of.

[Stunng23]

Originally Posted by dnmccoy

Im really biting my tongue, but the question you ask makes zero sense.

How can you have a %100 Winchester rifle if it has a HRA stock on it. How can you have a %100 IHC trigger group with a Winchester hammer.


Anyone with any common sense knows you buy the rifle and its parts, not the story.

If you came to me with a rifle and told me it was correct I would expect a correct balance of parts.

no need to bite anything. having a conversation 1 key stroke at a time is the worst way to communicate and all sorts of miscommunication is going to happen. so what does "balance of the parts" mean, all of them or 99% or what? see, you brought in a new phrase that has me a little confused.