M1A1 Paratrooper. The Real McCoy? (Pic heavy)

Sledge · July 22, 2016, 02:51 PM

Got this from a good friend of my wife who is moving to California. They can't have it there apparently and offered it to me for an insanely low price. I didn't realize what was sitting on the table in front of me. I've only owned modern firearms to this point. They are good people so I didn't even examine the gun, just wrote a check to help them with the move.

Grab a cold one and get comfortable. Lots of pics and I can only include 6 per post. Opinions/observations welcome.

Sledge · July 22, 2016, 02:52 PM

Sledge · July 22, 2016, 02:54 PM

Sledge · July 22, 2016, 02:55 PM

Sledge · July 22, 2016, 02:56 PM

Sledge · July 22, 2016, 02:57 PM

Sledge · July 22, 2016, 02:58 PM

Sledge · July 22, 2016, 02:59 PM

Sledge · July 22, 2016, 03:00 PM

Sledge · July 22, 2016, 03:01 PM

Sledge · July 22, 2016, 03:03 PM

RickB · July 22, 2016, 04:19 PM

"Rust on the buttplate spring, Pvt. BS . . . pass revoked!"

Looks nice, "almost too nice" says the guy who's been reading for years about the hobby of stripping parts from complete guns and replacing everything with "correct" parts stripped from other guns.
Provenance?

Sledge · July 22, 2016, 07:09 PM

Working on the history but the effect of time passed is a problem.

So far what I know: My wife's friend said her husband is the second owner that she knows of, he got it from his brother (now deceased) in the 1950's, who got it sometime in the 1940's. The owner has alzheimer's and also had a stroke so can't fill in any details unfortunately. The wife and daughter are asking other family members for more details. His best friend and his wife both said he never shot it.

According to the wife the gun sat in her husband's closet since the 1950's and was only taken out to oil it a bit every other year or so. I could tell I was the first to field strip it in decades. Without considering the obvious markings, which seem to validate it (so far), the inside of the action is all similar wear, dust, old yellow grease, etc. The stock wood looks aged the same with wear marks crossing over from one piece to the next. If it was a rebuild why leave the hairline cracked stock on it?

Considering the time frames and that one family owned it I don't think there has been any parts swapping going on but I am no expert on these. Learning fast though.

I'll post any info I can find out since I am very interested in the history of the gun.

Thanks for the input and if it was my gun prior to Wednesday there would be no rust on it.

ps. Since the stock is getting a bit dry what would be your suggestion for its' preservation? Raw linseed oil was the original approved finish correct? Should I rub a bit on the stock and let it dry?

James K · July 22, 2016, 08:10 PM

The term "provenance" means little when it comes to the M1 carbine, if by that is meant a history of the item. All those contract carbines were issued, many were repaired, modified, or had parts replaced through the years of service and many more later.

All that can be said is that the M1A1 stock looks correct and could have been original. Or put on yesterday. I don't see the cartouche, but it often gets obliterated over the years; its absence would mean a stock replaced at some point, something very common but also done in the field.

The only part in real doubt is the safety. I have never seen a safety with that marking; a push button type would have been correct for the carbine at the time it was made, but the head would have been either checkered or plain, not with an "o".

Barring information from a more thorough study, I would say the carbine is a good one.

As a side issue, best check out the handcuffs; they are illegal to own in some states, so please don't get in trouble over them.

Jim

Sledge · July 22, 2016, 08:23 PM

I took a closer look at the safety button. It's not stamped with a letter it looks like a machining mark. I'll try to take some good pics and post them.

kilimanjaro · July 22, 2016, 10:14 PM

Certainly looks pretty good to me.

mapsjanhere · July 23, 2016, 05:22 PM

It's Inland, it's in one of the correct serial number ranges, it got the original sight on it. The only issue is the condition, it looks "too good to be true" for something that didn't go through an arsenal refinish (where they'd changed the sight). But then, it might have spend the war in someone's desk in the states who only carried it on parade.

Sledge · July 23, 2016, 08:25 PM

The family is talking to relatives to get more detail. Hopefully I will find out more soon. I have confirmed it was owned by 2 brothers from mid to late 1940's to present. Not a lot to go on. I was told the uncle of the owner was a physician in WWII not a paratrooper. Still digging.

ps. It has some damage on the grip, a chunk out and a bit of gouging but nothing serious. The stock also has some dings and scrapes but nothing big except the crack starting at the corner where the recoil plate and cap are. This one has the short channel handguard and thin wall on one side barrel channel. I read where they changed that from lack of strength, probably why the stocks cracked a lot prior to the change. Also the grip screw is the shorter one which could cause the grip to split. I can see why they wanted to refurb when they got the chance. From what I have learned there were more than a few improvements that were needed. Some of the problems could apparently get a soldier killed, like the mag release feeling like the safety.

Very interesting transformation and I can see why there are so few originals. Hopefully this is one but not done investigating yet.

James K · July 23, 2016, 09:49 PM

FWIW, they later changed the safety to a rotating one to keep users from pushing the magazine release when they intended to release the safety.

My concern on that carbine is the lack of markings on the stock; that usually indicates stocks issued for replacement or to make up M1A1 carbines in the field rather than ones originally installed at the factory. Not a big deal, but dollarwise it does make a difference.

Jim

Sledge · July 23, 2016, 10:38 PM

Thanks James. You mean the markings on the handguard? There are no marking in the channel but there is a very faint OI on the rail. I can't make it show up in pics. The stock has the OI at the end of the channel but it is a lot clearer. I almost missed the circle P at the back since it only shows up with side light and a flash. What else should I look for on the stock? Appreciate the input.

James K · July 23, 2016, 11:53 PM

No, the OI stands for "Overton for Inland". Most carbine stocks and handguards were made by the Overton company (O) as a subcontractor; the second letter would be the prime contractor. (The other major supplier of wood for carbines was a company named Hillerich & Bradsby, of which you might have heard in connection with other, less serious, contests.)

The markings on the stock I was referring to were the Ordnance symbol, inspection cartouche and the stock maker's marking on the grip. Those absences indicate that stock was not installed at the factory, but in the field. It could have been a replacement, or installed because of a need for paratrooper carbines at a particular time. Or as a replacement by an owner after the war to make the carbine look "sexy".

Jim

Sledge · July 24, 2016, 12:25 AM

I'm missing something in the translation somehow. I used the page below to get a handle on what I was looking for and it sounds like you may be referring to the second run stamps as shown in the second run table. http://www.uscarbinecal30.com/modelM1A1.html

Here is the first run table. The formatting of the table didn't copy well, sorry.

Part Manufacturer Description
Forestock: S.E. Overton Walnut Highwood; OI stamped inside stock at rear of slide opening
Hand Grip: S.E. Overton Walnut; OI stamped in bottom of grip
Hardware: Royal Typewriter
Final Assembly: Royal Typewriter
Final Inspection: S.E. Overton
M1A1 Carbine Assembly: Inland Mfg.
Test Fire Proof Inland Mfg. a large circled P on rear of forestock(discontinued during the latter part of 1st run)
Ordnance Acceptance Markings: Inspectors at Inland Mfg. Ordnance cannons stamped on bottom of grip

kilimanjaro · July 24, 2016, 11:26 AM

Isn't that a crossed cannons mark in the third photo of your Post No. 8?

Sledge · July 24, 2016, 04:21 PM

Yes the crossed cannons stamp is on the bottom of the grip with the OI stamp. That is the Ordinance stamp that was put on at the factory during final testing and approval correct? Still learning here and a lot to consider. So far still looks to be first production.

Hey Jim thanks for the alert about the handcuffs I had no idea they were illegal in some states. Heck we are now an open carry state. But no one does. Everyone has a permit to carry concealed. The left predicted a bloodbath. Never happened of course. We are safer now than ever. But that is another thread eh?

**Mike Irwin** · July 25, 2016, 10:37 AM

I suspect not.

The tell?

The barrel stamp... Inland MFG.

I believe original production guns were stamped Inland Mfg. Div., as they were a division of General Motors at that time.

A few years ago a new start up called Inland Mfg. started making new, but authentically styled and marked, M1 and M1A1 carbines.

The markings on the new guns are virtually identical to the real McCoy, but are slightly different in a few places.

I think you have one of the new production guns.

Did your friend say when he got it?

July 22, 2016, 02:51 PM	#1
Sledge Member Join Date: July 17, 2016 Location: Gulf Coast Posts: 28	M1A1 Paratrooper. The Real McCoy? (Pic heavy) Got this from a good friend of my wife who is moving to California. They can't have it there apparently and offered it to me for an insanely low price. I didn't realize what was sitting on the table in front of me. I've only owned modern firearms to this point. They are good people so I didn't even examine the gun, just wrote a check to help them with the move. Grab a cold one and get comfortable. Lots of pics and I can only include 6 per post. Opinions/observations welcome.

July 22, 2016, 04:19 PM	#12
RickB Senior Member Join Date: March 1, 2000 Location: Boise, ID Posts: 8,518	"Rust on the buttplate spring, Pvt. BS . . . pass revoked!" Looks nice, "almost too nice" says the guy who's been reading for years about the hobby of stripping parts from complete guns and replacing everything with "correct" parts stripped from other guns. Provenance? __________________ Runs off at the mouth about anything 1911 related on this site and half the time is flat out wrong.

July 23, 2016, 05:22 PM	#17
mapsjanhere Senior Member Join Date: August 6, 2009 Location: Albuquerque Posts: 2,832	It's Inland, it's in one of the correct serial number ranges, it got the original sight on it. The only issue is the condition, it looks "too good to be true" for something that didn't go through an arsenal refinish (where they'd changed the sight). But then, it might have spend the war in someone's desk in the states who only carried it on parade. __________________ I used to love being able to hit hard at 1000 yards. As I get older I find hitting a mini ram at 200 yards with the 22 oddly more satisfying.

July 23, 2016, 08:25 PM	#18
Sledge Member Join Date: July 17, 2016 Location: Gulf Coast Posts: 28	The family is talking to relatives to get more detail. Hopefully I will find out more soon. I have confirmed it was owned by 2 brothers from mid to late 1940's to present. Not a lot to go on. I was told the uncle of the owner was a physician in WWII not a paratrooper. Still digging. ps. It has some damage on the grip, a chunk out and a bit of gouging but nothing serious. The stock also has some dings and scrapes but nothing big except the crack starting at the corner where the recoil plate and cap are. This one has the short channel handguard and thin wall on one side barrel channel. I read where they changed that from lack of strength, probably why the stocks cracked a lot prior to the change. Also the grip screw is the shorter one which could cause the grip to split. I can see why they wanted to refurb when they got the chance. From what I have learned there were more than a few improvements that were needed. Some of the problems could apparently get a soldier killed, like the mag release feeling like the safety. Very interesting transformation and I can see why there are so few originals. Hopefully this is one but not done investigating yet. Last edited by Sledge; July 23, 2016 at 08:33 PM.

July 24, 2016, 04:21 PM	#24
Sledge Member Join Date: July 17, 2016 Location: Gulf Coast Posts: 28	Yes the crossed cannons stamp is on the bottom of the grip with the OI stamp. That is the Ordinance stamp that was put on at the factory during final testing and approval correct? Still learning here and a lot to consider. So far still looks to be first production. Hey Jim thanks for the alert about the handcuffs I had no idea they were illegal in some states. Heck we are now an open carry state. But no one does. Everyone has a permit to carry concealed. The left predicted a bloodbath. Never happened of course. We are safer now than ever. But that is another thread eh? Last edited by Sledge; July 24, 2016 at 04:26 PM.

July 22, 2016, 02:52 PM	#2
Sledge Member Join Date: July 17, 2016 Location: Gulf Coast Posts: 28

July 22, 2016, 02:54 PM	#3
Sledge Member Join Date: July 17, 2016 Location: Gulf Coast Posts: 28

July 22, 2016, 02:55 PM	#4
Sledge Member Join Date: July 17, 2016 Location: Gulf Coast Posts: 28

July 22, 2016, 02:56 PM	#5
Sledge Member Join Date: July 17, 2016 Location: Gulf Coast Posts: 28

July 22, 2016, 02:57 PM	#6
Sledge Member Join Date: July 17, 2016 Location: Gulf Coast Posts: 28

July 22, 2016, 02:58 PM	#7
Sledge Member Join Date: July 17, 2016 Location: Gulf Coast Posts: 28

July 22, 2016, 02:59 PM	#8
Sledge Member Join Date: July 17, 2016 Location: Gulf Coast Posts: 28

July 22, 2016, 03:00 PM	#9
Sledge Member Join Date: July 17, 2016 Location: Gulf Coast Posts: 28

July 22, 2016, 03:01 PM	#10
Sledge Member Join Date: July 17, 2016 Location: Gulf Coast Posts: 28

July 22, 2016, 03:03 PM	#11
Sledge Member Join Date: July 17, 2016 Location: Gulf Coast Posts: 28

July 22, 2016, 07:09 PM	#13
Sledge Member Join Date: July 17, 2016 Location: Gulf Coast Posts: 28	Working on the history but the effect of time passed is a problem. So far what I know: My wife's friend said her husband is the second owner that she knows of, he got it from his brother (now deceased) in the 1950's, who got it sometime in the 1940's. The owner has alzheimer's and also had a stroke so can't fill in any details unfortunately. The wife and daughter are asking other family members for more details. His best friend and his wife both said he never shot it. According to the wife the gun sat in her husband's closet since the 1950's and was only taken out to oil it a bit every other year or so. I could tell I was the first to field strip it in decades. Without considering the obvious markings, which seem to validate it (so far), the inside of the action is all similar wear, dust, old yellow grease, etc. The stock wood looks aged the same with wear marks crossing over from one piece to the next. If it was a rebuild why leave the hairline cracked stock on it? Considering the time frames and that one family owned it I don't think there has been any parts swapping going on but I am no expert on these. Learning fast though. I'll post any info I can find out since I am very interested in the history of the gun. Thanks for the input and if it was my gun prior to Wednesday there would be no rust on it. ps. Since the stock is getting a bit dry what would be your suggestion for its' preservation? Raw linseed oil was the original approved finish correct? Should I rub a bit on the stock and let it dry?

July 22, 2016, 08:10 PM	#14
James K Member In Memoriam Join Date: March 17, 1999 Posts: 24,383	The term "provenance" means little when it comes to the M1 carbine, if by that is meant a history of the item. All those contract carbines were issued, many were repaired, modified, or had parts replaced through the years of service and many more later. All that can be said is that the M1A1 stock looks correct and could have been original. Or put on yesterday. I don't see the cartouche, but it often gets obliterated over the years; its absence would mean a stock replaced at some point, something very common but also done in the field. The only part in real doubt is the safety. I have never seen a safety with that marking; a push button type would have been correct for the carbine at the time it was made, but the head would have been either checkered or plain, not with an "o". Barring information from a more thorough study, I would say the carbine is a good one. As a side issue, best check out the handcuffs; they are illegal to own in some states, so please don't get in trouble over them. Jim

July 22, 2016, 08:23 PM	#15
Sledge Member Join Date: July 17, 2016 Location: Gulf Coast Posts: 28	I took a closer look at the safety button. It's not stamped with a letter it looks like a machining mark. I'll try to take some good pics and post them.

July 22, 2016, 10:14 PM	#16
kilimanjaro Senior Member Join Date: November 23, 2009 Posts: 3,963	Certainly looks pretty good to me.

July 23, 2016, 09:49 PM	#19
James K Member In Memoriam Join Date: March 17, 1999 Posts: 24,383	FWIW, they later changed the safety to a rotating one to keep users from pushing the magazine release when they intended to release the safety. My concern on that carbine is the lack of markings on the stock; that usually indicates stocks issued for replacement or to make up M1A1 carbines in the field rather than ones originally installed at the factory. Not a big deal, but dollarwise it does make a difference. Jim

July 23, 2016, 10:38 PM	#20
Sledge Member Join Date: July 17, 2016 Location: Gulf Coast Posts: 28	Thanks James. You mean the markings on the handguard? There are no marking in the channel but there is a very faint OI on the rail. I can't make it show up in pics. The stock has the OI at the end of the channel but it is a lot clearer. I almost missed the circle P at the back since it only shows up with side light and a flash. What else should I look for on the stock? Appreciate the input.

July 23, 2016, 11:53 PM	#21
James K Member In Memoriam Join Date: March 17, 1999 Posts: 24,383	No, the OI stands for "Overton for Inland". Most carbine stocks and handguards were made by the Overton company (O) as a subcontractor; the second letter would be the prime contractor. (The other major supplier of wood for carbines was a company named Hillerich & Bradsby, of which you might have heard in connection with other, less serious, contests.) The markings on the stock I was referring to were the Ordnance symbol, inspection cartouche and the stock maker's marking on the grip. Those absences indicate that stock was not installed at the factory, but in the field. It could have been a replacement, or installed because of a need for paratrooper carbines at a particular time. Or as a replacement by an owner after the war to make the carbine look "sexy". Jim

July 24, 2016, 12:25 AM	#22
Sledge Member Join Date: July 17, 2016 Location: Gulf Coast Posts: 28	I'm missing something in the translation somehow. I used the page below to get a handle on what I was looking for and it sounds like you may be referring to the second run stamps as shown in the second run table. http://www.uscarbinecal30.com/modelM1A1.html Here is the first run table. The formatting of the table didn't copy well, sorry. Part Manufacturer Description Forestock: S.E. Overton Walnut Highwood; OI stamped inside stock at rear of slide opening Hand Grip: S.E. Overton Walnut; OI stamped in bottom of grip Hardware: Royal Typewriter Final Assembly: Royal Typewriter Final Inspection: S.E. Overton M1A1 Carbine Assembly: Inland Mfg. Test Fire Proof Inland Mfg. a large circled P on rear of forestock(discontinued during the latter part of 1st run) Ordnance Acceptance Markings: Inspectors at Inland Mfg. Ordnance cannons stamped on bottom of grip

July 24, 2016, 11:26 AM	#23
kilimanjaro Senior Member Join Date: November 23, 2009 Posts: 3,963	Isn't that a crossed cannons mark in the third photo of your Post No. 8?

July 25, 2016, 10:37 AM	#25
Mike Irwin Staff Join Date: April 13, 2000 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 41,390	I suspect not. The tell? The barrel stamp... Inland MFG. I believe original production guns were stamped Inland Mfg. Div., as they were a division of General Motors at that time. A few years ago a new start up called Inland Mfg. started making new, but authentically styled and marked, M1 and M1A1 carbines. The markings on the new guns are virtually identical to the real McCoy, but are slightly different in a few places. I think you have one of the new production guns. Did your friend say when he got it? __________________ "The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.