Go Back   CMP Forums > CMP Sales > M1 Garand
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-13-2019, 06:48 AM
rob30-06 rob30-06 is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 2,865
Default CMP Auction# 5432 - 4.6 Gap with original SA barrel?

Guys,
As most of you know I am always intrigued by the odd stuff you run into when collecting M1 Garands.
Maybe that is why I am drawn to the IHCs. No shortage of weird stuff with this manufacturer.
I am thinking the 4.6 Gap Letter that is currently on the auction (#5432) is one of these unusual variances from the norm (besides just being a Gap Letter).
The rifle has an SA barrel. Many potential buyers would rather see an original LMR barrel I know, but as a collector I think we need to look a bit closer.

[IMG][/IMG]

Is it possible that this SA barrel could be original as built by IHC? Maybe.

First, it is well known that Springfield provided barrels to IHC, so that opens the door to possibility in my opinion.
Of the few I have seen the SA barrels seem to be dated in mid to late '53, though I admit I have not seen that many so far. This barrel being an SA 12-53 does seem to put it in the right date grouping.

The other IHCs I have seen with what are likely original SA barrels seem to show up in the 5.0 & 5.1 serial range, but remember that the serial numbers went from the 4.6 directly to 5.0. So with the inconsistencies seen in production flow at IHC it is not hard to believe a 4.6 receiver would have been done concurrent with a 5 mil.

Another common detail from IHC is the single punch mark they applied. IHC punch-marked barrels right under the rear handguard clip typically between the LMR and the drawing number. As with everything else IHC that is not always 100%. There are many instances where an original LMR barrel is not punched at all, especially early on.
In the same manner of variability I have seen SA barrels where a punch mark was applied in what we think of as the normal location under the handguard clip and I have also seen where the punch is between the drawing number and the date, as in the example on this rifle. I currently have an example of each myself.

I am willing to believe that this is an original SA barrel on the Gap Letter.
Does anyone see anything that would make us think differently?

Rob
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-18-2019, 06:21 PM
YahooMarine YahooMarine is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: VA
Posts: 233
Default

Rob: Good points on the IHC.

I have a CMP IHC from a few years ago that came with an SA 11/53 barrel with the punch mark under the handguard clip. The SN is 5066xxx. I had assumed it was a rebarreled IHC.

Could it be original?

Rich
__________________
Licensed Professional Engineer, Physics Teacher, Marine Corps Martial Arts Blackbelt and Subject Matter Expert
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-18-2019, 06:47 PM
rob30-06 rob30-06 is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 2,865
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by YahooMarine View Post
Rob: Good points on the IHC.

I have a CMP IHC from a few years ago that came with an SA 11/53 barrel with the punch mark under the handguard clip. The SN is 5066xxx. I had assumed it was a rebarreled IHC.

Could it be original?

Rich
A photo would help but your description sounds like it would be an original barrel and, by the way, these are not that common. You may have a real collectable among those that know IHC.

Can you email me a photo? If so I will post it as a possible educational picture.

You can also see another posting I did on collecting all the variants of IHCs I have come into to date. I have one posted like you have, I think.

Rob
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-19-2019, 08:10 AM
Scout706 Scout706 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Georgia
Posts: 473
Default

For the record: all parts from the same manufacturer is NOT the definition of “correct”, or even “original”.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-19-2019, 02:02 PM
YahooMarine YahooMarine is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: VA
Posts: 233
Default

Rob: Here is a pic of the barrel. The handguards are CMP replacements and the stock is a Dupage.

https://i.imgur.com/7Us4sok.jpg

Look original to my IHC?
__________________
Licensed Professional Engineer, Physics Teacher, Marine Corps Martial Arts Blackbelt and Subject Matter Expert
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-19-2019, 04:08 PM
weimar_police weimar_police is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Near Spokane, WA
Posts: 2,098
Default

interesting stuff - thank you gentlemen
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-19-2019, 04:40 PM
USriflecal30 USriflecal30 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Tellico Plains TN
Posts: 145
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rob30-06 View Post
Guys,
As most of you know I am always intrigued by the odd stuff you run into when collecting M1 Garands.
Maybe that is why I am drawn to the IHCs. No shortage of weird stuff with this manufacturer.
I am thinking the 4.6 Gap Letter that is currently on the auction (#5432) is one of these unusual variances from the norm (besides just being a Gap Letter).
The rifle has an SA barrel. Many potential buyers would rather see an original LMR barrel I know, but as a collector I think we need to look a bit closer.

[IMG][/IMG]

Is it possible that this SA barrel could be original as built by IHC? Maybe.

First, it is well known that Springfield provided barrels to IHC, so that opens the door to possibility in my opinion.
Of the few I have seen the SA barrels seem to be dated in mid to late '53, though I admit I have not seen that many so far. This barrel being an SA 12-53 does seem to put it in the right date grouping.

The other IHCs I have seen with what are likely original SA barrels seem to show up in the 5.0 & 5.1 serial range, but remember that the serial numbers went from the 4.6 directly to 5.0. So with the inconsistencies seen in production flow at IHC it is not hard to believe a 4.6 receiver would have been done concurrent with a 5 mil.

Another common detail from IHC is the single punch mark they applied. IHC punch-marked barrels right under the rear handguard clip typically between the LMR and the drawing number. As with everything else IHC that is not always 100%. There are many instances where an original LMR barrel is not punched at all, especially early on.
In the same manner of variability I have seen SA barrels where a punch mark was applied in what we think of as the normal location under the handguard clip and I have also seen where the punch is between the drawing number and the date, as in the example on this rifle. I currently have an example of each myself.

I am willing to believe that this is an original SA barrel on the Gap Letter.
Does anyone see anything that would make us think differently?

Rob
Maybe not? From the very first issue of the GCA Journal, Winter 1986, by Bob Seijas..The gap letter IHC/SA they witnessed had LMR barrels dated 4 to 7-53, which corresponded to the 3 months of production halt. They did note that all but "one or two" of the guns they saw had LMR barrels (listed at least 9 different ones in the article) . Scott Duff's book has one listed with 6-53 barrel. Maybe 12-53 is too late, but it's surely interestingly close...

It seems IHC was having receiver issues, hence those made by SA, but did they have issues getting barrels from LMR that they needed SA?

Last edited by USriflecal30; 11-19-2019 at 04:46 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-19-2019, 05:30 PM
rob30-06 rob30-06 is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 2,865
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by USriflecal30 View Post
Maybe not? From the very first issue of the GCA Journal, Winter 1986, by Bob Seijas..The gap letter IHC/SA they witnessed had LMR barrels dated 4 to 7-53, which corresponded to the 3 months of production halt. They did note that all but "one or two" of the guns they saw had LMR barrels (listed at least 9 different ones in the article) . Scott Duff's book has one listed with 6-53 barrel. Maybe 12-53 is too late, but it's surely interestingly close...

It seems IHC was having receiver issues, hence those made by SA, but did they have issues getting barrels from LMR that they needed SA?
In discussion with Wayne I do not believe these barrels were provided as a reaction to IHC having trouble but more likely just sharing an excess inventory. keep in mind that IHCs barrels were made by LMR and they were not known for having any problems.
Most SA barrels seem to show up in the 5 & 5.1 range, but as you indicated, problems could easily explain a Gapper getting into the mix.

When it comes to barrel punch marks I have been studying these on IHCs and finding LOTS of variation, even on the LMRs. Variations occur not only in the location of the punch, but also in the lack of a punch and even multiple punch marks.
The SA barrels do seem to run from mid to late '53 though.

Without trying to take anything away from those that came before us in studying these things, I find that more new data can lead to better understanding.

neat stuff for sure,
Rob

Quote:
Originally Posted by YahooMarine View Post
Rob: Here is a pic of the barrel. The handguards are CMP replacements and the stock is a Dupage.

https://i.imgur.com/7Us4sok.jpg

Look original to my IHC?
That punch mark and in the location it is in is VERY convincing to me. I have one very much like it.

Rob

Last edited by Big_Red; 11-21-2019 at 09:43 AM. Reason: Combine consecutive posts
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 06:17 PM.