Go Back   CMP Forums > CMP Sales > CMP Bolt Action Rifles
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 06-30-2018, 04:52 PM
jarhead2007 jarhead2007 is offline
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Surf City, NC
Posts: 360
Default

Cplnorton: I am sure you saw the rifle before because I bought it from a forum member . I have been reading a lot of your posts along with Kaliman (hey buddy-1911 shoots great and has a set of grips from wood I retrieved from Belleau Wood a couple years back) and Tim's research. You all have taught me a lot, and you bring up a great point on supply/demand when it comes to the real deal Marine Corps rifles.

From my perspective, I don't know if the barrel was put on by a Marine or Navy armorer. All I do know is that the rifle went through the Philadelphia Naval Weapons Depot in between 1938 and 1939, that is the best indicator, other than documentation, that the rifle was connected to the Marine Corps at one time or another. Obviously my imagination and personal connection want to place it in a Marine hands in the battles of lore, and that is good enough for me. I also grew up four miles from the Philly depot, so that makes it even more special.

What I can tell you is that I had that rifle on a Marine rifle range in Camp Lejeune and it holds black at 1000 yards if the guy behind the trigger does his job. A story for another time.

S/F gents!
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 06-30-2018, 08:26 PM
Kaliman Kaliman is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 431
Default

Glad it's shooting well! Did you wind up putting a new barrel in there?

SF MAC
__________________
3rd Battalion, 5th Marines '10-'13
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 07-01-2018, 04:56 AM
jarhead2007 jarhead2007 is offline
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Surf City, NC
Posts: 360
Default

Still has the original barrel! Pitting showed up a bit more after a healthy does of hoppes over night, but it still holds 3 inch groups at 15 yards. I think I am going to let the copper fill in the pits as much as possible, aka shooting the ******** out of it as intended.

I am probably going to have it professionally reblued and fit it with a NM barrel and bushing cuz I can and it is not going to be sold by me. I know someone may give me a hard time for re-bluing it, but it was never intended to be a collectors piece for me, so I see it as depot level maintenance so it can remain a combat pistol for a long time. No other physical changes to it though, it is a great simple, dependable, pistol. I shot a combat pistol match with it before I deployed, and it held its own against 15 round mag 9mm modern guns just fine.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 07-02-2018, 12:02 PM
John Beard John Beard is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sweet Home Alabama
Posts: 2,543
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bodydenny View Post
I know the common wisdom is that most later USMC barrels were not used,but I recently came across a 10/43 USMC "S" barrel with wrench marks on the barrel. Significant or old news?
Old news. The Marines sporadically installed barrels with dates through the end of 1943. Jarhead2007's rifle, for example, is not unusual.

J.B.

Last edited by John Beard; 07-02-2018 at 12:21 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 07-02-2018, 12:20 PM
John Beard John Beard is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sweet Home Alabama
Posts: 2,543
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jarhead2007 View Post
I have a 1903 with the rockwell hardness test punch mark before the serial number. No discernible vice marks on the barrel, stippled buttplate, BF bolt, oneida rear sight, and .36 numbered front sight. Had a scant stock that i replaced with a finger groove stock. Forgot to mention that my barrel is marked USMC Sedgley 12/43. SN is 900XXX dated June 1918ish
Your brief description indicates you have an authentic USMC rifle.

J.B.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 07-02-2018, 12:45 PM
Kaliman Kaliman is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 431
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Beard View Post
Old news. The Marines sporadically installed barrels with dates through the end of 1943. Jarhead2007's rifle, for example, is not unusual.

J.B.
Any documentation to this or just observation? Because unfortunately with observation, these things can be pretty easily faked. And like Steve said, I've never see a 43 or 44 barrel that seemed legit.

Just my $.02
__________________
3rd Battalion, 5th Marines '10-'13
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 07-02-2018, 01:51 PM
cplnorton cplnorton is online now
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Van Wert, Ohio
Posts: 1,432
Default

I've seen a lot of them. But all that I have seen just strike me as a collection of parts thrown together and what really stinks is most Marine traits are really easy to hump up if someone had the desire.

Unfortunately the only documents at the archives 1943 and up are the Commandant files which we have all those, but I do not remember seeing any mentions of mass rebuilds past 1942. In fact by 1943 the Marines start looking for places to dump the m1903s and get rid of them. So i question how much they would have been rebuilding if they were already just giving rifles away for free at the same time.

We really need the quartermaster files 1943 and up to find the complete story. But we even filed freedom of info requests to get to them, thinking they were somewhere in storage and it seems they don't exist anymore. the Freedom of Info supervisor at the Archives hated me. He wrote me a "nice" letter on the amount of requests I filed. lol

We do have copies of the Sedgley barrel orders for 1941 and 1942. So those we do have the contracts on. But we do not have one mention of the 43/44 contracts. But those if they exist would probably be in the quartermaster files.

I would also love to see the Navy files 1943 and up. Maybe there is a clue to the late sedgley barrels in there. Or even the Army Sedgley contracts for the late WWII timeframe. It seems the Army ordered some barrels late off Sedgley. Maybe there are clues in there as well.

I would love to find one that was a classic rebuild. Where everything looked right. But at least right now of the ones I have seen, I remain skeptical on the their usage.

Last edited by cplnorton; 07-02-2018 at 02:46 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 07-02-2018, 03:49 PM
jarhead2007 jarhead2007 is offline
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Surf City, NC
Posts: 360
Default

Mr. Beard, your assessment carries a lot of weight with me, and I definitely got a little proud when I read your post. CplNorton brings up great points as a researcher as well. Kaliman is right, people can easily throw on a stippled butt plate, numbered front sights etc. Without papers or the dude it was issued to last, we will never truly know.

I offered the rifle up as a data point, the validation is nothing more than personal interest. I read the USMCweaponry.com and saw that there were a lot of Remington small parts on the later Marine Corps Rebuilds in the Philly depot. There were more than a few small parts on the receiver group that were Remington. I swapped a couple out like the trigger for a serrated one for personal shooting preference, as well as the cutoff I think, that one was for function more than anything else, the Remington was a bit loose.

Anyhow, I really appreciate all points and interest. It is one of my favorite rifles (constant toss up between that and my M1, that will last a long time), and I shoot it all the time. If any of you are near Camp Lejeune hit me up and you can put it through its paces.

S/F
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 07-02-2018, 04:39 PM
cplnorton cplnorton is online now
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Van Wert, Ohio
Posts: 1,432
Default

Hey thanks Jarhead2007 for the kind offer. I wish I was close, that would be a lot of fun.

I love taking these old rifles out and putting them through the paces, and there is no better company than another Marine to shoot beside.

Semper Fi Sir!
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 07-02-2018, 08:22 PM
John Beard John Beard is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sweet Home Alabama
Posts: 2,543
Default

One has to assume that, if the USMC placed a contract for replacement barrels with deliveries spread out over six months, they had every intention and plans to use some of them.


J.B.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:57 PM.