SA-52 at auction

[nunya80]

Verified with McClain with a letter. I’d say the guy who sorted them out and built the database is as close to an expert as you’ll find. Verified ex m1c. Ro wall, that beautiful. We should move this thread to the main garand page... good info.

[krdomingue]

Originally Posted by Trepang

I am new to Garands so forgive the dumb question - Am I reading the numbers on that SA-52 barrel correctly - is that a 1955 barrel on it?

You are reading it correct, which would imply it was rebuilt again in the later 50's. It is a real mixmaster, but with some very interesting parts. It has a grooved handguard clip and lower band, and an older style op-rod catch.

[Trepang]

Originally Posted by krdomingue

You are reading it correct, which would imply it was rebuilt again in the later 50's. It is a real mixmaster, but with some very interesting parts. It has a grooved handguard clip and lower band, and an older style op-rod catch.

Thanks, I appreciate the info.

[dogboysdad]

Originally Posted by Herrmann

Permit me to boast: I have an SA 52 with 52 barrel, JLG stock and WIN receiver!
(My collection favorite.)

My WRA SA52 also has a 1952 barrel, SA open box stock, and the receiver was likely made in the first few days of WRA production.

[krdomingue]

I have been looking at the SA-52 plugged M1C for a while now, with goal of getting one as correct as possible. (My definition of correct is JLC stock, late 1952/early 1953 SA barrel and mostly early post war SA parts.) There have been several quality one on the auction sight, but I kept getting wildly outbid. It didn't help that this thread is pointing their existence out. I finally decide it would be a lot cheaper to bid on a barrel receiver and build the rest out. Got what I wanted. Just now need to source out the rest. Fortunately I have several of the parts already.

https://photos.google.com/share/AF1Q...tueVlRTG9sRUZB

[col b]

Originally Posted by krdomingue

For the most part, these plugged M1Cs were never functioning rifles prior to being plugged. SA had a bunch of M1C receivers with mounts already installed at the end of the war. They sat on a shelf until the Korean war, at which time some were built into M1C sniper rifles and some were plugged to make much needed m1 rifles.

Very interested in "M1C staking" where did you get the info that the "depot stores" M1C receivers had mounts already installed at the end of the war?

[krdomingue]

Originally Posted by col b

Very interested in "M1C staking" where did you get the info that the "depot stores" M1C receivers had mounts already installed at the end of the war?

Now that you asked the question, I might be remembering wrong. Page 31 Collection the American Sniper Rifle 1945 to 2000, Joe Poyer refers to 1,500 M1C rifles being withdrawn from storage. So it looks like the plugged may have be decommissioned M1Cs.

But I want to say that I read it some where, but I don't remember where.

[CHARLIE699]

No expert here,. Always a student. My own plugged C is SA-52 marked. Outside of the '52 dated SA barrel, it appeared to be in mostly WW2 configuration. Still had SA/NFR wood & lockbar sight. Whether it went through complete rebuild or not? Don't know. Can't speculate. Was the process at SA in 1952 to rebuild/refurbish/update to then-current spec? Or did some receive minimal updates? Granted, my rifle spent many years in Government hands between 1952 and when I purchased from CMP. Parts retained, replaced during that time,,,,who can guess. I left it as I bought it.

[col b]

Originally Posted by krdomingue

Now that you asked the question, I might be remembering wrong. Page 31 Collection the American Sniper Rifle 1945 to 2000, Joe Poyer refers to 1,500 M1C rifles being withdrawn from storage. So it looks like the plugged may have be decommissioned M1Cs.

But I want to say that I read it some where, but I don't remember where.

Let me say up front that I am no fan of Poyer reference Carbines or M1s. There is conflicting information all over the place and I have not decided between myth, conjecture and fact. But, if bases were installed on all WWII produced M1C receivers, why did the GCA find so many '51 program M1C builds that lacked any WWII receiver staking at all? If you look at SA-52 M1C plugged receivers, you will see the same phenomenon. Some with WWII staking evidence and some with no receiver staking and "screw only" staking. For the "WWII assembled" staking to be true, screw only staking would have to have been adopted much earlier than the '51 program to have those receivers as part of the "depot stores" pile. Could that have happened? Of course. After all, if you have ever milled a Rockwell 60+ receiver, you know that pre heat treat staking is going to look different than post heat treat staking......but no one to date has signed up for what staking actually looked like post heat treat assembly. Who actually did the staking? The GCA article said G&H staked "all WWII receivers" and SA "had to take them apart to heat treat." Really? If G&H "installed" the bases, to include staking, then all M1C receivers should look like depot overhauls with "staking removal" evidence for all M1C receivers assembled after the separate heat treat process began. Not to mention, why did serialization by G&H even begin? So, SA would have marked bases to go by? If this doesn't make any sense to you.....join the club!