Garand as a curio

[StarfuryZeta]

Greetings,
I was wondering if anyone has been able to find a Garand that qualifies as a C&R, so I can purchase one that way. Everyplace that I see selling them, they are never listed as a C&R purchase. Anyone know why one wouldn't be on the C&R list?

Thanks for the info.

[Rome]

I've been curious about the M1 designation as a C&R too. The BATF lists the C&R M1 as follows:

U.S., Rifle, cal. 30 M1, original military issue only, produced prior to 1956.

Now, to my reconing, there aren't any "original" military issue rifles left. Each and every M1, with very few exceptions, has been rebuilt a number of times from parts. Frankly, even brand spanking new it was a parts gun. The only way you get an "original" M1 is to make sure all your components "fit" the build date of the receiver. So, does this mean that all the components must be older than 1956. For instance, if every part was "proper" for my 1942 M1 but my barrel is from 1961 does that eliminate it from C&R status? What would happen if I installed an older, "proper" barrel on it? What then?

I've only been collecting for a few years now and started with an SKS and then the M1. Both were purchased before my C&R 03 license was issued. What I'd like to know, from some guru of C&R land, is which M1 is a curio and relic?

[craigz]

I bought my Garand from Fulton Armory as a C&R.

http://www.zacker.com/temp/garand1a.jpg

[Steve Smith]

Garandsare C&R's, but CMP doesn't ship them to C&R holders...they said it was too much of a PITA for the volunteers that work there. :(

[Gewehr98]

While the CMP doesn't bother with C&R transfers of their Garands, by definition in the ATF Curio & Relic listing, the U.S. Rifle, Caliber .30 M1 is indeed a C&R-eligible gun. However, the gun must, as Rome mentioned, be in original military condition, and chambering. So a .270 Garand isn't a C&R.

Now, what constitutes the gun per law is the receiver. That's the date basis for any C&R eligible gun. That doesn't mean that a stripped Garand receiver dated 1942 is a C&R piece in and of itself. It needs to be a complete gun, in military issue condition, and chambered as the military issued it, either originally, or as it went through arsenal rebuild.

That also means that a sporterized Garand, say with a Monte-Carlo stock, doesn't meet C&R eligibility requirements. Why? Because the reason for placing certain guns under the C&R listing is to preserve them as collectibles based on their historical significance.

So, a original configuration 1903 Springfield, with the vintage receiver and all the other parts in as-issued or as arsenal-rebuilt condition, will get C&R eligibility.

That deer rifle made from a Springfield 1903, but with a shorter barrel and Fajen stock, doesn't.

Same goes for those Century Arms International Garands one sees for sale in Shotgun News and Big 5 Sporting Goods, among other places. Since they're built on newly-manufactured receivers, using USGI parts for the remainder of the gun, they are not eligible for C&R status.

Many guns on the C&R list aren't military at all, but are listed due to their collectible nature, to include some pre-'64 Winchester Model 70's. Those guns also have to remain either in store-bought condition or restored to that configuration to retain their C&R status.

Wow, how's that for confusion?:D

[James K]

In this case the receiver manufacturing date determines C&R status, not the age of the parts. The reason most "M1" rifles listed for sale are not C&R is because they are rebuilt from parts using new receivers because the original receivers could not be brought back in legally.

Much has been said about those new receivers, especially the ones from CAI, most of it not very good. Take a look at www.fulton-armory.com for some of their comments on those receivers.

No stripped receiver, of any date or any kind, can be given C&R status. BATF takes the position that C&R is for collectors and that no one collects receivers.

Jim

[Rome]

Thanks, all, for you remarks. I'd like to say it makes sense and follows logic but with C&R, sometimes that's not enough.

So, the bottom line, then, is that any complete M1 with an original SA or other "original" mfg receiver dated before 1956 is C&R eligible. The "new" M1s are not eligible. Am I getting this correct Jim?

This would make sense but you don't usually see the M1 listed as a C&R eligible rifle in the sites selling those rifles.

And GEWEHR98 hit it on the head about C&R holder. We do hold the history in our hands. It's an honor, actually, to be able to obtain little bits of firearm history each time you purchase a rifle or pistol under C&R for your collection. You're preserving the past. I talked with a BATF supervisor not long ago and he told me that the BATF encourages obtaining a C&R license as it makes things much easier for collectors and does, indeed, preserve historical weapons. I'd encourage anyone who loves the shooting sports to obtain their C&R. It's only $30 and a short application. It allows you to purchase across state lines without any hassles at all! I know. I've been doing it for a couple of years now.

Thanks for the clarification. Sorry about the "sell" of the C&R. Jim, maybe someday TFL will have a C&R forum too?

Rome

[Destructo6]

I believe you have it straight with you last statement, Rome. An original receiver, built into the original configuration is C&R.

Most of those sites don't sell real, GI, Garands. Why you'd (general "you") pay $400 for a parts gun with a questionable receiver when you can pay $500 (current price?) for a CMP Garand is beyond me.

[El Rojo]

Most of the adds in Shotgun news from SOG and a few others that are not on the top of my head are new receivers with original GI parts. They are all selling for around $400. Everyone on this board has stated that these guns are not worth it and for an extra $100, get one from the Civilian Marksmanship Program (http://www.odcmp.com/). So if the store says it is not C&R, it is because it is on a new receiver, a new receiver that has not been given many good reviews. Good luck. I will eventually get around to getting one myself.

[StarfuryZeta]

I looked into the CMP link that was provided. Wow, what a great offer. I guess I need to look into joining a club.

[EOD Guy]

Also, a firearm that was manufactured over 50 years ago is automatically C&R. They do not have to be specifically listed. The only exception is for military firearms. They must be in original military configuration. That means sporterized versions do not qualify.

[johnwill]

There are plenty of "military issue" Garands available that quality as C&R guns! They just have to be in original military configuration, it doesn't mean they can't have ever been rebuilt during their service life!

[StarfuryZeta]

Anyone tried the Garands offered by Orion7 (http://www.m1garandrifle.com) ? Looks like they offer shipping to C&R license holders.

[El Rojo]

I would think i would just go with a CMP Garand or two before I spend the extra $200 on one of the Orions. The only draw back is I would have to wait for the CMP. Oh well, it sounds worth it. I wish I wouldn't have just bought that 43" TV and DVD. That is preventing me from getting a Garand! Soon. Patience El Rojo, patience.

[James K]

Hi, Johnwill,

Maybe I am missing something, but I can't find anything in the C&R law or the regs about "original configuration". While a receiver alone cannot be a C&R item, the receiver is always the determining factor for firearms type and manufacturing date. I didn't think it mattered for C&R purposes if a military rifle has been "bubbaized" or not.

Can you cite the section about configuration if you have it? Thanks.

Jim

[Rome]

Jim,

I just spent the last half hour looking through the Firearms Regulations Reference Guide and could not find a "specific" mention of disqualification of any firearms which were altered beyond "original configuration". The only place I actually found this phrase is on page 10 of the Firearms Curios and Relics List booklet, under the heading of "importation restrictions". The last line of the first paragraphs states that

" Surplus military firearms classified as curios or relics must be in their original military configuration to qualify for importation".

So, from that one could infer the following. Let's look at the MAS 49/56 which was originally chambered in 7.5mm AND 7.62 x 51 (NATO) by the French. Both are specifically mentioned in the C&R list as C&R eligible. According to this statement, if the French exporter had undertaken the conversion of the 7.5mm to NATO, they'd no longer be importable as C&R eligible. By inference, then, when CAI modified them in the states, this would also make them ineligible under C&R. I'm no lawyer but I'd bet this is where the rub occurs. To put it simply, if you can't import a normally eligible C&R rifle due to mods done by the exporter, then doing them here would also make them ineligible. You could, however, do an arsenal overhaul with all original parts, thus "original military configuration" and stay within the law. Once you start altering them with "sporter" stock, different calibers, and extended magazines, you loose the C&R designation. They still may be imported, but as "regular" firearms.

It clearly appears that the intent of the C&R designation is that the milsurp rifles stay in their original configuration for collector status. Once you strip the wood off an SKS and replace it with a Monte Carlo plastic stock, it has lost it's C&R status forever. If, however, you replace the shot-out barrel of an M1 with another M1 barrel, you're ok as long as it's the same caliber.

Does this address your comments? It is interesting that there isn't a more definitive comment, rule, or opinion listed anywhere in the regs about this specific situation, however. It appears that we're left with a lot of "gray area", just like the tax code. Surprise!

What do you think?

Rome

[johnwill]

Jim,

Actually, upon looking back in the 2000 green book, it has to do with importing military C&R guns. It doesn't pertain to their status once they're in the country. Here's the quote from page 255:

"In classifying firearms as curios or relics under this regulation, ATF
has recognized only assembled firearms as curios or relics.
Moreover, ATF's classification of surplus military firearms as curios or
relics has extended only to those firearms in their original military
configuration. Frames or receivers of curios or relics and surplus military
firearms not in their original military configuration were not generally
recognized as curios or relics by ATF since they were not of special interest
or value as collector's items."

[Rome]

Johnwill,

I assume you mean the "Fed Firearms Regulation Reference Guide" when you mention the "green book". Am I right? If so, my 2000 book only has 153 normal pages in it with a few index and Q&A pages after that. Which book are you refering to? Maybe you've got another issue for full 01 FFLs. I've only got the C&R 03 issue.

With regard to the quote you've posted, however, I've got to believe that the BATF would disqualify any milsurp C&R rifle if it was sporterized or "bubbacized" as some call it. It isn't a military rifle anymore and has lost it's historical significance. Cutting down an M1 or modifying an SKS or rechambering the MAS does the same thing. It permanently alters the rifle from it's original configuration. Ergo, it no longer qualifies as it originally did.

As I mentioned in my too-long post, it would be good for someone at BATF to clear up this very gray area although it does provide some latitude to guys like us who'd like to maybe restore a ruined rifle and still be able to purchase it as a C&R from the owner.

Ow! OW! OW! My head hurts. This is supposed to be fun, isn't it? I guess I'll go to the kitchen and have a piece of homemade pecan pie. That'll make thing better.

Rome

[johnwill]

Rome,

You're right, I'm searching the PDF version that I downloaded from the ATF web site. I checked my green (paper) book, and the page numbers are different. Only our government could screw up a PDF file so it's different from the printed copy!!! :mad:

[mbott]

Rome,

I don't think it's that "gray" and this discussion has been hashed out quite a few times on the C&R FFL mailing list. When I read the following, I think it's pretty clear. Found on page 119 of the green book (page 281 of the PDF).

c. Licensed Collector's Activities
Subject to other applicable provisions of the law and regulations, a
collector's license entitles its holder to transport, ship, receive and
acquire curios or relics in interstate or foreign commerce and to dispose of
curios or relics in interstate or foreign commerce to any other Federal
firearms licensee. Dispositions of curios or relics by licensed collectors
are not subject to the requirements of the Brady law; however, dispositions
should not be made to any person whom the collector knows or has reasonable
cause to believe is a felon or is within any other category of persons to whom
sales are prohibited by 18 U.S.C. 922(d).
However, ATF has recognized only assembled firearms as curios or relics.
Moreover, ATF's classification of surplus military firearms as curios or
relics has extended only to those firearms in their original military
configuration.
Frames or receivers of curios or relics are not generally recognized as
curios or relics by ATF since they are not of special interest or value as
collectors' items. Specifically, they do not meet the definition of curio or
relic in 27 CFR 178.11 as firearms of special interest to collectors by reason
of a quality other than is ordinarily associated with sporting firearms or
offensive or defensive weapons.

--
Mike

Come join all the fun at the C&R FFL mailing list at http://www.shelfspace.com/~c-r-ffl/frames.html or go to http://www.cruffler.com/ for links to the mailing list and other cruffler spots. :)

[Rome]

Well, I guess you hit it on the head. So, there is a clear definition of what constitutes a C&R afterall. I didn't read the entire book and have marked that passage for the future. Thanks, again, for the help.

This still allows M1 Garands in their "original" configuration as C&R, however. So, my next purchase of an M1 will be on that basis, period. This also clears up the 'controversy" regarding the MAS 49/56 "conversions" from 7.5 to Nato. While these rifles were mfg in both calibers, the fact that CAI converted 7.5 to Nato disqualifies those rifles as C&R.

I'd certainly check out the site. See you there!

Rome

[James K]

Hi, guys,

I knew about the import business when I posted, and simply forgot to say so. Rome, thanks for the info. That is pretty definitive and I just could not find it. Some day I just have to learn to read!

Jim