The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The North Corral > Curios and Relics

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old January 16, 2019, 03:33 PM   #1
ADClope
Member
 
Join Date: October 5, 2016
Posts: 51
USGI M1 Carbine Question

Recently picked up an M1 Carbine (Inland).

Barrel was dated 3-44 (Inland - General Motors)

Receiver is 5,50x,xxx. Based on this information that I found, the receiver seems to have been made in late summer 44, maybe July/August.

4,879,526 - 5,549,820 (Jan. 1944 - Aug. 1944)

Would this likely be the original barrel and receiver being potentially 6 months apart?, I wouldn't have assumed that much elapsed time I guess.

Thanks
ADClope is offline  
Old January 16, 2019, 04:43 PM   #2
RC20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2008
Location: Alaska
Posts: 5,682
I don't know anything to speak of about the M1 Carbine, but flip the question around.

How likely is it to have a barrel that is GM and receiver GM that is that close?

Someone might know, if not I can ask some others that might know.

I do know Model of 1917 rifle vs receiver dates of 3 months apart were the norm.
__________________
Science and Facts are True whether you believe it or not
RC20 is online now  
Old January 16, 2019, 09:14 PM   #3
ADClope
Member
 
Join Date: October 5, 2016
Posts: 51
Yeah, I thought about that too. It's a fair point.
ADClope is offline  
Old January 17, 2019, 02:14 PM   #4
T. O'Heir
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 10,700
6 months apart wouldn't be unusual.
Rummage around here. All the links work too.
http://www.uscarbinecal30.com/barrels.html
__________________
Spelling and grammar count!
T. O'Heir is offline  
Old January 23, 2019, 06:33 PM   #5
HiBC
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 13, 2006
Posts: 6,141
I make no claim to being an M-1 Carbine expert.I might be wrong.

Seems like I read that they approached carbine manufacture a little differently.

Where a Garand or a Springfield was likely made start to finish all in one arsenal,carbine parts were farmed out to a number of contractors.

I don't know what particular combinations were typical,but a first time brand new build could have Saginaw,Quality Parts, TRW, picked from a stockroom to build an Inland carbine (No,I don't know that a carbine was made with that assortment of parts. I'm just saying its a mistake to believe all carbines were built with single source parts)

Because the barrels may very well have been made 6 months different in time and ina different plant,I would not jump to conclusions about your carbine being a rebuild or mongrel.

Matching parts may not be a reasonable expectation for an M1carbine
HiBC is offline  
Old January 26, 2019, 01:32 PM   #6
T. O'Heir
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 10,700
"...carbine parts were farmed out..." Yep. None of the original makers made all the parts. Literally hundreds of small shops all over the U.S. Eastern seaboard made Carbine parts. Some were marked, some were not. S'why there's no such thing as an "all original" Carbine. Or one with matching parts. Moreso when you consider the fact that 99.99% of all Carbines were arsenal rebuilt after W.W. II.
They were bringing 'em up to "current standard" every time something was accepted too. Bayonet lugs and adjustable sights, for example.
__________________
Spelling and grammar count!
T. O'Heir is offline  
Old January 27, 2019, 08:13 PM   #7
Lexspeed
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 18, 2015
Location: Southern IL
Posts: 139
Just to add to what has been said. There were 12 different M1 30 carbine contracted manufacturers. Many shared parts with each other. Not to mention there were many more subcontractors making components. During war time no one cared who's parts were in one gun, only that the production kept humming to reach or exceed each month's quota.
Lexspeed is online now  
Old January 30, 2019, 09:00 AM   #8
RickB
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 1, 2000
Location: Western WA
Posts: 7,740
Quote:
During war time no one cared who's parts were in one gun,
That's not true, in the sense that there are very detailed records of exactly which small parts were originally on the guns, but true in the sense that a part, is a part, is a part.

I would be extremely suspicious of any Carbine claimed to be "original", for reasons listed above, as it would have to be a "time capsule" that missed all the updates and rebuilds which were pretty continuous in the '40s and '50s.
__________________
Runs off at the mouth about anything 1911 related on this site and half the time is flat out wrong.
RickB is offline  
Old February 1, 2019, 11:17 AM   #9
Lexspeed
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 18, 2015
Location: Southern IL
Posts: 139
Rickb, I did not say or intended to imply that detailed records of parts where not kept. My point was that the US government intended the parts from all contractors to be interchangeable and generally speaking the government was more concerned about quality standards and production volumes/quotas and less concerned which parts from which contractors where used to produce the carbines. I don't claim to be an expert, but have read all of Ruth's books and a few from other authors to arrive at the conclusion of the points I was making in my post above.

I agree with your point that most "correct" parts matching carbines we may encounter are probably made correct by an individual at a later date. Carbines newly produced had a mix of contractor/subcontractor parts and then most carbines were rearsenaled at least once and received another mix of parts. Even defining what possible mix of parts is "original" seems to be debatable. The history of the USGI 30 carbine is very fascinating.
Lexspeed is online now  
Old February 1, 2019, 01:49 PM   #10
T. O'Heir
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 10,700
"...records of exactly which small parts were originally on..." Never seen any such list/very detailed records, ever. In any case, most subcontractor parts were not marked in any way.
The weapons techs who did the post war rebuilds(that was done primarily to bring as many as possible up to current standard as of 1945. Weapons techs still do not care who makes the parts they install on anything.) did not care who made what part. Nor did they document any of that. Other than which arsenal did the work on a particular Carbine. The parts used came out of bins and some of 'em were updated by FN in Belgium.
Even then the part numbers were not the same over the Carbine's entire career. You really have to read the whole uscarbinecal30.com site.
__________________
Spelling and grammar count!
T. O'Heir is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.05502 seconds with 10 queries