M1 Carbine Gas Piston Abnormality

Vic6 · April 30, 2016, 02:57 AM

Hey guys, back with another question. I picked up this M1 Carbine a few months ago. I am going to take it to the range soon and I was doing a complete disassembly and I noticed the piston on mine looked different from photos of ones on the internet. I will add pictures. I just wonder if it's safe, cause it almost looks welded on to the damn thing.

Thanks for any advice given.

Photos: http://imgur.com/a/XegS2

gyvel · April 30, 2016, 03:33 AM

It looks brazed on and the barrel doesn't look very GI to me.

amd6547 · April 30, 2016, 06:06 AM

Is that a Universal carbine?

dahermit · April 30, 2016, 07:18 AM

I cannot get over the excessively heavy tool marks in the receiver.
Also, that is brazing not a weldment on the gas piston housing.

Other than that, it looks like a fine weapon.

Nodak1858 · April 30, 2016, 11:27 AM

Not USGI, what brand is it?

T. O'Heir · April 30, 2016, 11:32 AM

The excessively heavy tool marks indicate something home made. Even Universals were made better than that.
Some commercial gas housings were brazed, but not like that.
What marking's are on the receiver?

Vic6 · April 30, 2016, 01:23 PM

It's an Underwood Carbine, I can't get a pic of it because of the Korean war era sight that was added. As long as the gun functions safely, I could care less if the thing was brazed on. But, the barrel does looked replaced as the receiver, front sight, and trigger housing look like a different metal. According to the serial number, this was made between July, 1943 - March, 1944.

Pics of the gun: http://imgur.com/a/XegS2

mapsjanhere · April 30, 2016, 08:53 PM

No idea about the tool marks, but it has its bayonet lug removed and the shaft looks lacquered. That's typical for carbines used in Germany or Austria after WWII, as they were issued to police units they weren't allowed bayonets. And many of those got rebuild locally, explaining the different color finish and, maybe, the odd repair.

gyvel · May 1, 2016, 02:51 AM

Well, the stock shows that it is an Augusta Arsenal rebuild.

RickB · May 3, 2016, 04:00 PM

That's no USGI Carbine barrel.
Is the stock or handguard heavily inletted to accept it?

James K · May 4, 2016, 01:30 PM

When GI parts started to dry up, a number of companies made carbine parts, some of them at best marginal, at worst dangerous. That mishmash appears to be in that category. If I could not return the gun for a full refund, I would replace the barrel with a GI barrel (they are still around and some of the new repros are to GI spec). At worst, I would remove the stock* and test the heck out of that gun under controlled conditions to make sure that if the gas cylinder, piston or piston nut did fly off there would be no injury.

It might work OK for many years, but it just doesn't look right to me.

*To keep it from being destroyed if the barrel or cylinder does let go.

Jim

Vic6 · May 24, 2016, 09:12 PM

So I did some more digging and I found that it is a Plainfield M1 Carbine barrel that replaced a bad USGI barrel (I assume so, because why replace a perfectly good barrel). It looks like a bad job, but it's very firm on the gun

I found another thread: http://forums.thecmp.org/showthread.php?t=127717

This person however has a crack in the piston and I don't. I am looking into replacing it with the correct barrel though.

April 30, 2016, 02:57 AM	#1
Vic6 Junior Member Join Date: April 19, 2016 Posts: 7	M1 Carbine Gas Piston Abnormality Hey guys, back with another question. I picked up this M1 Carbine a few months ago. I am going to take it to the range soon and I was doing a complete disassembly and I noticed the piston on mine looked different from photos of ones on the internet. I will add pictures. I just wonder if it's safe, cause it almost looks welded on to the damn thing. Thanks for any advice given. Photos: http://imgur.com/a/XegS2

April 30, 2016, 03:33 AM	#2
gyvel Senior Member Join Date: August 30, 2009 Location: Northern AZ Posts: 7,172	It looks brazed on and the barrel doesn't look very GI to me. __________________ As always, YMMV. __________________________________________ MIIAA SIFE

April 30, 2016, 06:06 AM	#3
amd6547 Senior Member Join Date: May 27, 2006 Posts: 2,313	Is that a Universal carbine? __________________ The past is gone...the future may never happen. Be Here Now.

April 30, 2016, 07:18 AM	#4
dahermit Senior Member Join Date: October 28, 2006 Location: South Central Michigan...near Posts: 6,501	I cannot get over the excessively heavy tool marks in the receiver. Also, that is brazing not a weldment on the gas piston housing. Other than that, it looks like a fine weapon. Last edited by dahermit; April 30, 2016 at 06:26 PM.

April 30, 2016, 11:27 AM	#5
Nodak1858 Senior Member Join Date: September 7, 2009 Location: N. Dakota Posts: 435	Not USGI, what brand is it? __________________ We've all heard that a million monkeys banging on a million typewriters will eventually reproduce the entire works of Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet, we know this is not true.

April 30, 2016, 11:32 AM	#6
T. O'Heir Senior Member Join Date: February 13, 2002 Location: Canada Posts: 12,453	The excessively heavy tool marks indicate something home made. Even Universals were made better than that. Some commercial gas housings were brazed, but not like that. What marking's are on the receiver? __________________ Spelling and grammar count!

April 30, 2016, 01:23 PM	#7
Vic6 Junior Member Join Date: April 19, 2016 Posts: 7	It's an Underwood Carbine, I can't get a pic of it because of the Korean war era sight that was added. As long as the gun functions safely, I could care less if the thing was brazed on. But, the barrel does looked replaced as the receiver, front sight, and trigger housing look like a different metal. According to the serial number, this was made between July, 1943 - March, 1944. Pics of the gun: http://imgur.com/a/XegS2 Last edited by Vic6; April 30, 2016 at 01:32 PM.

April 30, 2016, 08:53 PM	#8
mapsjanhere Senior Member Join Date: August 6, 2009 Location: Albuquerque Posts: 2,832	No idea about the tool marks, but it has its bayonet lug removed and the shaft looks lacquered. That's typical for carbines used in Germany or Austria after WWII, as they were issued to police units they weren't allowed bayonets. And many of those got rebuild locally, explaining the different color finish and, maybe, the odd repair. __________________ 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.

May 1, 2016, 02:51 AM	#9
gyvel Senior Member Join Date: August 30, 2009 Location: Northern AZ Posts: 7,172	Well, the stock shows that it is an Augusta Arsenal rebuild. __________________ As always, YMMV. __________________________________________ MIIAA SIFE

May 3, 2016, 04:00 PM	#10
RickB Senior Member Join Date: March 1, 2000 Location: Boise, ID Posts: 8,518	That's no USGI Carbine barrel. Is the stock or handguard heavily inletted to accept it? __________________ Runs off at the mouth about anything 1911 related on this site and half the time is flat out wrong.

May 4, 2016, 01:30 PM	#11
James K Member In Memoriam Join Date: March 17, 1999 Posts: 24,383	When GI parts started to dry up, a number of companies made carbine parts, some of them at best marginal, at worst dangerous. That mishmash appears to be in that category. If I could not return the gun for a full refund, I would replace the barrel with a GI barrel (they are still around and some of the new repros are to GI spec). At worst, I would remove the stock* and test the heck out of that gun under controlled conditions to make sure that if the gas cylinder, piston or piston nut did fly off there would be no injury. It might work OK for many years, but it just doesn't look right to me. *To keep it from being destroyed if the barrel or cylinder does let go. Jim

May 24, 2016, 09:12 PM	#12
Vic6 Junior Member Join Date: April 19, 2016 Posts: 7	So I did some more digging and I found that it is a Plainfield M1 Carbine barrel that replaced a bad USGI barrel (I assume so, because why replace a perfectly good barrel). It looks like a bad job, but it's very firm on the gun I found another thread: http://forums.thecmp.org/showthread.php?t=127717 This person however has a crack in the piston and I don't. I am looking into replacing it with the correct barrel though.