In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
If you look at the three operating rods you can see that the one on the bottom has a 65 prefix and that means that it is post war production.
Inter-war (between WWII and Korea) operating rods, as well as WWII rods, all used the D-prefix:
[img][/img]
It is important to remember that although M1 parts were being constantly updated during it's production run, very few parts were actually declared obsolete with a mandatory change from old to new. Because of this is is quite common to see a variety of M1 parts from different eras mixed on rebuilt rifles. A -2 hammer may have been updated to a -3 in the middle of 1942, but it was still a good hammer and could be reused many times over and may well be found in a rifle rebuilt in 1962, twenty years after the hammer was updated.
Mark.... Although I'm not an M1 "officianado" such as yourself...
However, I am an engineer and fully understand the numbering scheme you've outlined.
We too, use a similar scheme in our drawing numbering system...
In the issue of the hammer revisions -4 & -6... It could be a multitude of reasons they seem to why they were skipped...
But, often, engineering departments will deliberately skip certain numbers or letters to better differentiate between them.
In the case of not using the -4 & -6...
The numeral '6' is often confused with the lower case letter 'b' or an inverted '9'
Also the four can be easily misconstrued as the upper case letter 'A' or an inverted 'V' 'v'
This is often the reason the letters 'i' and 'j' are removed from the scheme along with lower case 'l' (L) and capital 'I' (i)...
Quite possibly, the revision numbers -4 and -6 were simply just not used...
At least that's the most plausible reason that I see as an engineer who works in a similar industry...
Being an engineer...
I would really enjoy sitting down with another engineer from the time period and just discussing the very points I've mentioned above.
Getting his engineering viewpoints would be so so interesting!!! OK Now I'm getting chills.... [:D][:p][:p][:p]
Several revisions were not incorporated into general production (for whatever reason-metallurgy/contract litigation, etc).
In the case of M1's, that's the reason they are not found. Revision so-n-so had been tested, and found lacking, and didn't get into general production.
As Mark said, earlier revisions were used during arsenal builds.
So, if you mistake one revision for another (revision '6' for revision '9', let's say), it is of no consequence, due to the fact that if it made it into full production at all it was considered good to go throughout the life of the inventory life of the rifle for R&R purposes.
Thinking over the revision numbers of various M1 parts I can say that there are no -4 or -6 trigger housings or bolts. There are however -4 and -6 marked safeties as well as a -6 operating rod.
[img][/img]
[img][/img]
By the way, sharp eyes might notice that the earlier -4 safety has a "flat back" while the later -6 has a "round back". There is a reason for this change...But it will have to wait for another thread [;)]
quote:Originally posted by mark christian
Thinking over the revision numbers of various M1 parts I can say that there are no -4 or -6 trigger housings or bolts. There are however -4 and -6 marked safeties as well as a -6 operating rod.
[img][/img]
[img][/img]
By the way, sharp eyes might notice that the earlier -4 safety has a "flat back" while the later -6 has a "round back". There is a reason for this change...But it will have to wait for another thread [;)]
Not to mention that -6 has a smaller diameter hole and more 'meat' around said hole on the safety lever. In addition the first 'point' (left side) is more 'pointy' and there are more generous fillets at the base of the point and on the opposite end of that 'notch'. The point on the right side of -6 also has a larger radius. Finally, there appears to be a 'lightening' hole added to -6.
Like 'Retro', I worked in an industry that had numeric revisions as well as letter revisions or 'nic' changes, as we called them. -5 to -6 would be a numeric, and A, AA, AB, etc would be 'nic's. The numeric changes are usually small, while the 'nic's are new 'replacement' parts.
I always appreciate learning new things. Thank you.
I did not see the posts from the gallery but don't sweat the small stuff. I would be glad to sometime purchase an M1 from you and would appreciate the knowledge past on in doing so.
The -6 depicted is identical to the M-14 safeties (by sight-I didn't bother to go upstairs and get an M1, and lay the M1 and the M-14 safeties side-by-side, so I pulled a HRA trigger group that I had nearby).
Notice the 'beak' on the bird? (Extreme right side, as viewed in the photo?) That 'beak' forces down onto a corresponding ledge in the hammer, and pulls the cocked hammer further back about .005, or so.
The goal being, is to move the strain from the sear, to the safety (when engaged).
I'd imagine the flat topped safety (-4 and earlier) were prone to breakage at that point due to the strain of pushing against the hammer spring during the moment the safety is set.
But, hey...wadda I know? I could be off base on this. Best, Joe
There are around two dozen known examples of M1 safeties and some of them are so rare that I don't have examples (lots of this M1 stuff costs plenty of $$$).
In the case of the -6 safety there are actually two variations; one with a solid body and the second later version with the tooling hole added to ease production:
[img][/img]
The design with the tooling hole would become the standard until the close of production, with the exception of the early post war U-marked safeties from Untied Automotive which also lacked the hole:
The reason that this post war contractor eliminated the tooling hole is unknown.
In this photo we can see a wide variety of M1 safeties, including a Winchester on the far left which maintained the old flat-back design throughout production:
[img][/img]
L-R Winchester, Springfield -4, -6 (no hole), -6 (with hole), -9, SA-11 (there were other revision 11 markings as well), International Harvester (IHC), International Harvester (F, also used on some post war Springfields), Harrington and Richardson (HRA), MXR (contract used on some mid production Springfields), U-marked (United Auto and used on early post war Springfields) and an unmarked replacement safety from Remington.
This is a better view of the Winchester safeties:
[img][/img]
The -11 safety became the finalized design and with the exception of the U-marked safety which had no tooling hole, all other safeties from all manufacturers were identical in design to the -11 and was also carried over for use in the M14 Rifle..
I understand some of the M1 Garand trigger group components are used in the M14. Do you happen to know which parts those are and are older M1 parts found in M14 groups?
Side note switched out the comercial modern day Springfield trigger group in my M1A for a M14 assembly. Couple friends of mine have had hammers break on them.
Hey Mark, I didn't see all the posts you mentioned, but if they think they know more or are better at identifying/assembling/nomenclature of M-1s; they are mistaken.
I'd love to crawl around inside your head and find out what all you've forgotten about these guns.
You're one of the Brain Trust that makes GB such an invaluable resource for us all.
Thanks for being here.
That oughta be good for at least 10% off your next auction, don't ya think?
I understand some of the M1 Garand trigger group components are used in the M14. Do you happen to know which parts those are and are older M1 parts found in M14 groups?
Side note switched out the commercial modern day Springfield trigger group in my M1A for a M14 assembly. Couple friends of mine have had hammers break on them.
Hammers and safeties can be interchanged between the M1 and M14. M1 and M14 triggers are similar but because of difference in the length of the sear between the two types they are not freely interchangeable. Due to the once large number of surplus M14 parts in the 1960s is not uncommon to find hammers and safeties with M14 drawing numbers in late M1 rebuilds.
Even a guy with zero interest in M-1s can appreciate and admire this level of knowledge and expertise. From the writing, I would suggest, "You oughta write a book."
This one is for our two engineers who have been following the thread. Occasionally (with luck) you might just stumbled across an M1 part with no revision numbers at all, the original design. In this case there are something like two dozen different trigger housing revisions: 15 from Springfield Armory, plus five from Winchester and three from International Harvester (H&R used only one). Here is one of the very earliest known trigger housings with no revision number and no manufacturers identifier (none was needed since at that time only Springfield was making M1s)and was used from serial number 500 to 38,000:
[img][/img][img]Here is the same part shown with a -14 housing, which was in use from 3.3 million:[/img][img][/img]
Notice that the single large hole in the lower part of the original housing has been replaced by what is commonly known as the "Cloverleaf", which became standard at serial number 75,000 and that the hole above it for the trigger pin has been made slightly larger.
Collectors of very early M1 rifles are constantly on the look out for those very early M1 parts for restorations.
quote:Originally posted by mark christian
This one is for our two engineers who have been following the thread. Occasionally (with luck) you might just stumbled across an M1 part with no revision numbers at all, the original design. In this case there are something like two dozen different trigger housing revisions: 15 from Springfield Armory, plus five from Winchester and three from International Harvester (H&R used only one). Here is one of the very earliest known trigger housings with no revision number and no manufacturers identifier (none was needed since at that time only Springfield was making M1s)and was used from serial number 500 to 38,000:
[img][/img][img]Here is the same part shown with a -14 housing, which was in use from 3.3 million:[/img][img][/img]
Notice that the single large hole in the lower part of the original housing has been replaced by what is commonly known as the "Cloverleaf", which became standard at serial number 75,000 and that the hole above it for the trigger pin has been made slightly larger.
Collectors of very early M1 rifles are constantly on the look out for those very early M1 parts for restorations.
I spotted 9 out of the 14 changes (maybe 10, but the 'micrometer eyes' aren't what they used to be). Great examples of part development, Mark. Thanks!
With the ever increasing interest in M1 Garands and the fact that supplies of these rifles at the CMP are now very tight, I thought that it might be a good time to rerun this piece on the M1 Rifle that I wrote and posted a few years back. This is a very brief overview of a very complex subject, a subject which many collectors have dedicated much of their time to study and is only intended to give you enough information to walk through a gun show with at least some idea of what you were looking at. This is far from a definitive treatment of the M1 Rifle.
Hey Mark, I understand that there were a bunch of companies that made M1s. Who were they?
There were four US firearms firms that produced the M1 rifle. These were the US Armory at Springfield (SA), Winchester Repeating Arms (WRA), Harrington and Richardson (HRA), and International Harvester (IHC). It is common in Garand-speak to use the letter codes SA, WRA, HRA or IHC in place of the full manufacturers name.
So during what time periods were these firms making M1 rifles?
Springfield began M1 series production back in 1937, continued through WWII and then began producing M1s again During the Korean War. Winchester began their series M1 production in January 1941 and delivered their last complete M1 rifle in June, 1945. Winchester would never produce complete M1 rifles again and in fact sold all of their M1 tooling to Beretta in the 1950s. Both Harrington & Richardson and International Harvester produced post war M1 rifles. No M1s were built by either if these two firms during WWII.
Okay smart guy, I want a WWII M1 because of it's history. I know now that all Winchesters are WWII rifles but what about the Springfields, how can I tell a WWII rifle from a post war M1?
The easy way is by serial numbers. Any Springfield M1 rifle above 3.9 million is going to be post war while Pre WWII rifles will be numbered below about 400,000. Any rifle in the 7+ million range will be a commercial rifle, typically one produced by Springfield Armory Inc (the M1A folks).
I don't care about when the rifle was made, I just want the best built M1. Who made the best of the rifles and during which time period?
You have to remember that all M1s were subjected to very severe government inspections so every rifle which was accepted into service is going to be a good one. With that said you must also keep in mind that during WWII it was a matter of life or death to get as many M1s into the hands of our troops as fast as possible. Because of this, fit and finish and small details like parts polishing during WWII were not a priority. Dammit, there is a war on and we need M1s NOW so just skip the extra bit of polishing and send out that rifle! Some WWII M1 parts will in fact appear roughly finished but they will all function properly. In my opinion the best made of all of the M1s are the post war Springfields and the Harrington and Richardson M1s (all post war). There was more time to spend on careful production, especially after the end of the Korean War, and by that time Springfield had been building M1s for nearly 20 years so they knew what they were doing. H&R was an old time gun maker with decades of production experience behind them and they got into the M1 production program at near full speed, making wonderful rifles which are in most cases the match for any of the Springfield M1s.
Well I want a rare/ hard to find M1. Which of those four firms made the most and which one the fewest rifles?
Springfield produced something like 4,040,000 M1s, Winchester a little over 500,000, while H&R and IHC each produced under 500,000 M1s each. Clearly Springfields are the most common. While it would appear that it would be easier to find a Winchester than an IHC or H&R it is important to remember that all of the Winchester rifles were produced during WWII and they suffered large loses during that conflict. The surviving Winchesters then saw duty during the Korean War and they took a beating there as well. As a result of their two tours of duty Winchesters are often very hard to locate. It can also prove difficult to find an International Harvester and because of this the "Cornbinder M1s" are very popular with collectors.
So why is it that I see a lot of WWII period Springfields with barrels dated during the 1950's and 1960's?
Starting right after WWII our military began rebuilding M1s which were worn or damaged. This repair/rebuilding program continued well into the early 1960s and it is not uncommon to find M1s which have been rebuilt once, twice or even three of more times! As long as the receiver was within specifications Uncle Sam would just keep replacing barrels and parts to keep these old war horses in service. As an example of how vital it was to keep the older M1s in serviceable condition Springfield Armory rebuilt over 200,000 M1 rifles in 1948 alone and would average another 100,000 rebuilds each year up until 1952 when M1 production was resumed for the Korean War. Each M1 rebuilt in 1952 cost an average of $6 while a new rifle off the production line cost Uncle Sugar over eight times that amount! Rebuilding M1 rifles saved the taxpayers a bundle of cash and was much quicker than making a brand new rifle.
So what about getting an all matching M1, you know, a real collector's rifle?
Unlike many European firearms our military did not match the parts of a particular M1 rifle to that rifle's receiver by serial number.
Well I see a whole bunch of little numbers stamped on parts all over the rifle. What are these for?
Those numbers are called drawing numbers and are more or less production code numbers. As the M1 evolved it's parts were modified, in most cases very slightly, and these minor changes were reflected in a change in drawing numbers. Of course certain drawing numbers were only used on rifles during a specific production period so it is possible for collectors to look at a rifle, check the drawing numbers of it's parts, compare the known production dates and then determine of the parts are correct for an M1 in that serial number range.
Why is it that I see so many M1s with what would appear to be replacement barrels? My M1 carbines all have their original barrels. Are M1 barrels made from bad steel?
All pre war, war time and much of the post war .30-06 ammunition used by our military was loaded with corrosive primers and this took a toll on M1 rifle barrels and this is why it is hard to find a WWII M1 with it's original barrel. Barrel loses due to corrosion damage were so high that in 1944 Springfield produced over 400,000 replacement barrels in addition to barrels for brand new rifles coming off the production line. Chrome lining the barrel would have added an additional 75 cents per barrel (new unit cost) but the Army did not want to spend the money; so instead they ended up buying nearly 1 million replacement barrels at $3.50 each! All .30 M1 Carbine ammunition was loaded with non corrosive primers and this is why so many Carbines survived with their original barrels.
With the ever increasing interest in M1 Garands and the fact that supplies of these rifles at the CMP are now very tight, I thought that it might be a good time to rerun this piece on the M1 Rifle that I wrote and posted a few years back. This is a very brief overview of a very complex subject, a subject which many collectors have dedicated much of their time to study and is only intended to give you enough information to walk through a gun show with at least some idea of what you were looking at. This is far from a definitive treatment of the M1 Rifle.
Hey Mark, I understand that there were a bunch of companies that made M1s. Who were they?
There were four US firearms firms that produced the M1 rifle. These were the US Armory at Springfield (SA), Winchester Repeating Arms (WRA), Harrington and Richardson (HRA), and International Harvester (IHC). It is common in Garand-speak to use the letter codes SA, WRA, HRA or IHC in place of the full manufacturers name.
So during what time periods were these firms making M1 rifles?
Springfield began M1 series production back in 1937, continued through WWII and then began producing M1s again During the Korean War. Winchester began their series M1 production in January 1941 and delivered their last complete M1 rifle in June, 1945. Winchester would never produce complete M1 rifles again and in fact sold all of their M1 tooling to Beretta in the 1950s. Both Harrington & Richardson and International Harvester produced post war M1 rifles. No M1s were built by either if these two firms during WWII.
Okay smart guy, I want a WWII M1 because of it's history. I know now that all Winchesters are WWII rifles but what about the Springfields, how can I tell a WWII rifle from a post war M1?
The easy way is by serial numbers. Any Springfield M1 rifle above 3.9 million is going to be post war while Pre WWII rifles will be numbered below about 400,000. Any rifle in the 7+ million range will be a commercial rifle, typically one produced by Springfield Armory Inc (the M1A folks).
I don't care about when the rifle was made, I just want the best built M1. Who made the best of the rifles and during which time period?
You have to remember that all M1s were subjected to very severe government inspections so every rifle which was accepted into service is going to be a good one. With that said you must also keep in mind that during WWII it was a matter of life or death to get as many M1s into the hands of our troops as fast as possible. Because of this, fit and finish and small details like parts polishing during WWII were not a priority. Dammit, there is a war on and we need M1s NOW so just skip the extra bit of polishing and send out that rifle! Some WWII M1 parts will in fact appear roughly finished but they will all function properly. In my opinion the best made of all of the M1s are the post war Springfields and the Harrington and Richardson M1s (all post war). There was more time to spend on careful production, especially after the end of the Korean War, and by that time Springfield had been building M1s for nearly 20 years so they knew what they were doing. H&R was an old time gun maker with decades of production experience behind them and they got into the M1 production program at near full speed, making wonderful rifles which are in most cases the match for any of the Springfield M1s.
Well I want a rare/ hard to find M1. Which of those four firms made the most and which one the fewest rifles?
Springfield produced something like 4,040,000 M1s, Winchester a little over 500,000, while H&R and IHC each produced under 500,000 M1s each. Clearly Springfields are the most common. While it would appear that it would be easier to find a Winchester than an IHC or H&R it is important to remember that all of the Winchester rifles were produced during WWII and they suffered large loses during that conflict. The surviving Winchesters then saw duty during the Korean War and they took a beating there as well. As a result of their two tours of duty Winchesters are often very hard to locate. It can also prove difficult to find an International Harvester and because of this the "Cornbinder M1s" are very popular with collectors.
So why is it that I see a lot of WWII period Springfields with barrels dated during the 1950's and 1960's?
Starting right after WWII our military began rebuilding M1s which were worn or damaged. This repair/rebuilding program continued well into the early 1960s and it is not uncommon to find M1s which have been rebuilt once, twice or even three of more times! As long as the receiver was within specifications Uncle Sam would just keep replacing barrels and parts to keep these old war horses in service. As an example of how vital it was to keep the older M1s in serviceable condition Springfield Armory rebuilt over 200,000 M1 rifles in 1948 alone and would average another 100,000 rebuilds each year up until 1952 when M1 production was resumed for the Korean War. Each M1 rebuilt in 1952 cost an average of $6 while a new rifle off the production line cost Uncle Sugar over eight times that amount! Rebuilding M1 rifles saved the taxpayers a bundle of cash and was much quicker than making a brand new rifle.
So what about getting an all matching M1, you know, a real collector's rifle?
Unlike many European firearms our military did not match the parts of a particular M1 rifle to that rifle's receiver by serial number.
Well I see a whole bunch of little numbers stamped on parts all over the rifle. What are these for?
Those numbers are called drawing numbers and are more or less production code numbers. As the M1 evolved it's parts were modified, in most cases very slightly, and these minor changes were reflected in a change in drawing numbers. Of course certain drawing numbers were only used on rifles during a specific production period so it is possible for collectors to look at a rifle, check the drawing numbers of it's parts, compare the known production dates and then determine of the parts are correct for an M1 in that serial number range.
Why is it that I see so many M1s with what would appear to be replacement barrels? My M1 carbines all have their original barrels. Are M1 barrels made from bad steel?
All pre war, war time and much of the post war .30-06 ammunition used by our military was loaded with corrosive primers and this took a toll on M1 rifle barrels and this is why it is hard to find a WWII M1 with it's original barrel. Barrel loses due to corrosion damage were so high that in 1944 Springfield produced over 400,000 replacement barrels in addition to barrels for brand new rifles coming off the production line. Chrome lining the barrel would have added an additional 75 cents per barrel (new unit cost) but the Army did not want to spend the money; so instead they ended up buying nearly 1 million replacement barrels at $3.50 each! All .30 M1 Carbine ammunition was loaded with non corrosive primers and this is why so many Carbines survived with their original barrels.
Getting the numbers "right" on an M1 is one of the trickiest points of collecting the rifles, made all the more so because no parts will bear a number that matches the rifle's serial number. Many WWII and pre war parts are extremely rare and can often cost as much as a complete rifle!
quote:Originally posted by iceracerx
Any idea about prices per rifle? (cost to gov't) I'd heard $85 ea.
It all depends on the time period and who built the rifles. During the final days of WWII Springfield Armory was able to get costs down to just below $28 per unit. Of course you must remember that Uncle Sam was ordering M1s in lots of 1 million! Winchester costs per unit never broke the $30 barrier for a couple of reasons: Smaller orders from the Army and of course the fact that as a private concern they had to make a profit and passed that along to the Army when they bid their contracts. As anyone who lived during that period can tell you; prices after WWII and on into the 1950s took a big jump so naturally M1s procurement costs also increased. Factor in the smaller purchases (250K per order rather than 1 million) and higher costs for material and labor made the M1 much more expensive. Each post war Springfield M1 cost the government about $40 while those that came from H&R and International Harvester (IHC) were quite a bit more expensive. IHC had a number of production issues which lead to cost over runs, none of which could be back charged and they ended up losing money on every M1 that they produced. Grunts who lost or badly damaged their M1s were made to pay around eighty bucks but actual procurement costs were not near that amount.
quote:Originally posted by retroxler58
Ever thought about putting your knowledge on paper Mark?
I had an idea to write a book on the M1 but with the wealth of information now available online and through such fine organizations as the Garand Collectors Association (I am member #458), there just does not seem to be the same need as there was even a decade ago.
quote:Originally posted by mark christian
quote:Originally posted by retroxler58
Ever thought about putting your knowledge on paper Mark?
I had an idea to write a book on the M1 but with the wealth of information now available online and through such fine organizations as the Garand Collectors Association (I am member #458), there just does not seem to be the same need as there was even a decade ago.
I understand where you are coming from Mark, but... what are we all going to do for info when SHTF and there is no internet for a number of years?[:0]
quote:Originally posted by TangoSierra
quote:Originally posted by mark christian
quote:Originally posted by retroxler58
Ever thought about putting your knowledge on paper Mark?
I had an idea to write a book on the M1 but with the wealth of information now available online and through such fine organizations as the Garand Collectors Association (I am member #458), there just does not seem to be the same need as there was even a decade ago.
I understand where you are coming from Mark, but... what are we all going to do for info when SHTF and there is no internet for a number of years?[:0]
[;)] Some of us 'still' appreciate pen and paper...
quote:Originally posted by mark christian
quote:Originally posted by retroxler58
Ever thought about putting your knowledge on paper Mark?
I had an idea to write a book on the M1 but with the wealth of information now available online and through such fine organizations as the Garand Collectors Association (I am member #458), there just does not seem to be the same need as there was even a decade ago.
Many still like to keep a book. It is more personal and trust worthy. Thank you for your time.
I have an SA born in 1947, bought it as a Service Grade from CMP 10 years ago. It was a Greek Loaner. So could it have seen use in Korea prior to being loaned to Greece? Or were they produced and directly loaned to Greece since WWII was over?
quote:Originally posted by shilowar
I have an SA born in 1947, bought it as a Service Grade from CMP 10 years ago. It was a Greek Loaner. So could it have seen use in Korea prior to being loaned to Greece? Or were they produced and directly loaned to Greece since WWII was over?
There were no new M1 rifles being produced in 1947 so your rifle probably (I am just guessing) went through a post war rebuild and now has a replacement barrel dated 1947. If it has a WWII era serial number (up to 3.9 million) then there is an excellent chance that it saw action in WWII as well as Korea before being sent out on loan to Greece.
Comments
[img][/img]
..am I off base in this regard? Thanks, Joe
If you look at the three operating rods you can see that the one on the bottom has a 65 prefix and that means that it is post war production.
Inter-war (between WWII and Korea) operating rods, as well as WWII rods, all used the D-prefix:
[img][/img]
It is important to remember that although M1 parts were being constantly updated during it's production run, very few parts were actually declared obsolete with a mandatory change from old to new. Because of this is is quite common to see a variety of M1 parts from different eras mixed on rebuilt rifles. A -2 hammer may have been updated to a -3 in the middle of 1942, but it was still a good hammer and could be reused many times over and may well be found in a rifle rebuilt in 1962, twenty years after the hammer was updated.
However, I am an engineer and fully understand the numbering scheme you've outlined.
We too, use a similar scheme in our drawing numbering system...
In the issue of the hammer revisions -4 & -6... It could be a multitude of reasons they seem to why they were skipped...
But, often, engineering departments will deliberately skip certain numbers or letters to better differentiate between them.
In the case of not using the -4 & -6...
The numeral '6' is often confused with the lower case letter 'b' or an inverted '9'
Also the four can be easily misconstrued as the upper case letter 'A' or an inverted 'V' 'v'
This is often the reason the letters 'i' and 'j' are removed from the scheme along with lower case 'l' (L) and capital 'I' (i)...
Quite possibly, the revision numbers -4 and -6 were simply just not used...
At least that's the most plausible reason that I see as an engineer who works in a similar industry...
Being an engineer...
I would really enjoy sitting down with another engineer from the time period and just discussing the very points I've mentioned above.
Getting his engineering viewpoints would be so so interesting!!! OK Now I'm getting chills.... [:D][:p][:p][:p]
In the case of M1's, that's the reason they are not found. Revision so-n-so had been tested, and found lacking, and didn't get into general production.
As Mark said, earlier revisions were used during arsenal builds.
So, if you mistake one revision for another (revision '6' for revision '9', let's say), it is of no consequence, due to the fact that if it made it into full production at all it was considered good to go throughout the life of the inventory life of the rifle for R&R purposes.
Joe
[img][/img]
[img][/img]
By the way, sharp eyes might notice that the earlier -4 safety has a "flat back" while the later -6 has a "round back". There is a reason for this change...But it will have to wait for another thread [;)]
Thinking over the revision numbers of various M1 parts I can say that there are no -4 or -6 trigger housings or bolts. There are however -4 and -6 marked safeties as well as a -6 operating rod.
[img][/img]
[img][/img]
By the way, sharp eyes might notice that the earlier -4 safety has a "flat back" while the later -6 has a "round back". There is a reason for this change...But it will have to wait for another thread [;)]
Not to mention that -6 has a smaller diameter hole and more 'meat' around said hole on the safety lever. In addition the first 'point' (left side) is more 'pointy' and there are more generous fillets at the base of the point and on the opposite end of that 'notch'. The point on the right side of -6 also has a larger radius. Finally, there appears to be a 'lightening' hole added to -6.
Like 'Retro', I worked in an industry that had numeric revisions as well as letter revisions or 'nic' changes, as we called them. -5 to -6 would be a numeric, and A, AA, AB, etc would be 'nic's. The numeric changes are usually small, while the 'nic's are new 'replacement' parts.
I did not see the posts from the gallery but don't sweat the small stuff. I would be glad to sometime purchase an M1 from you and would appreciate the knowledge past on in doing so.
Notice the 'beak' on the bird? (Extreme right side, as viewed in the photo?) That 'beak' forces down onto a corresponding ledge in the hammer, and pulls the cocked hammer further back about .005, or so.
The goal being, is to move the strain from the sear, to the safety (when engaged).
I'd imagine the flat topped safety (-4 and earlier) were prone to breakage at that point due to the strain of pushing against the hammer spring during the moment the safety is set.
But, hey...wadda I know? I could be off base on this. Best, Joe
In the case of the -6 safety there are actually two variations; one with a solid body and the second later version with the tooling hole added to ease production:
[img][/img]
The design with the tooling hole would become the standard until the close of production, with the exception of the early post war U-marked safeties from Untied Automotive which also lacked the hole:
The reason that this post war contractor eliminated the tooling hole is unknown.
In this photo we can see a wide variety of M1 safeties, including a Winchester on the far left which maintained the old flat-back design throughout production:
[img][/img]
L-R Winchester, Springfield -4, -6 (no hole), -6 (with hole), -9, SA-11 (there were other revision 11 markings as well), International Harvester (IHC), International Harvester (F, also used on some post war Springfields), Harrington and Richardson (HRA), MXR (contract used on some mid production Springfields), U-marked (United Auto and used on early post war Springfields) and an unmarked replacement safety from Remington.
This is a better view of the Winchester safeties:
[img][/img]
The -11 safety became the finalized design and with the exception of the U-marked safety which had no tooling hole, all other safeties from all manufacturers were identical in design to the -11 and was also carried over for use in the M14 Rifle..
I understand some of the M1 Garand trigger group components are used in the M14. Do you happen to know which parts those are and are older M1 parts found in M14 groups?
Side note switched out the comercial modern day Springfield trigger group in my M1A for a M14 assembly. Couple friends of mine have had hammers break on them.
I'd love to crawl around inside your head and find out what all you've forgotten about these guns.
You're one of the Brain Trust that makes GB such an invaluable resource for us all.
Thanks for being here.
That oughta be good for at least 10% off your next auction, don't ya think?
Mark,
I understand some of the M1 Garand trigger group components are used in the M14. Do you happen to know which parts those are and are older M1 parts found in M14 groups?
Side note switched out the commercial modern day Springfield trigger group in my M1A for a M14 assembly. Couple friends of mine have had hammers break on them.
Hammers and safeties can be interchanged between the M1 and M14. M1 and M14 triggers are similar but because of difference in the length of the sear between the two types they are not freely interchangeable. Due to the once large number of surplus M14 parts in the 1960s is not uncommon to find hammers and safeties with M14 drawing numbers in late M1 rebuilds.
Thanks
[img][/img]
Notice that the single large hole in the lower part of the original housing has been replaced by what is commonly known as the "Cloverleaf", which became standard at serial number 75,000 and that the hole above it for the trigger pin has been made slightly larger.
Collectors of very early M1 rifles are constantly on the look out for those very early M1 parts for restorations.
This one is for our two engineers who have been following the thread. Occasionally (with luck) you might just stumbled across an M1 part with no revision numbers at all, the original design. In this case there are something like two dozen different trigger housing revisions: 15 from Springfield Armory, plus five from Winchester and three from International Harvester (H&R used only one). Here is one of the very earliest known trigger housings with no revision number and no manufacturers identifier (none was needed since at that time only Springfield was making M1s)and was used from serial number 500 to 38,000:
[img][/img]
Notice that the single large hole in the lower part of the original housing has been replaced by what is commonly known as the "Cloverleaf", which became standard at serial number 75,000 and that the hole above it for the trigger pin has been made slightly larger.
Collectors of very early M1 rifles are constantly on the look out for those very early M1 parts for restorations.
I spotted 9 out of the 14 changes (maybe 10, but the 'micrometer eyes' aren't what they used to be). Great examples of part development, Mark. Thanks!
Hey Mark, I understand that there were a bunch of companies that made M1s. Who were they?
There were four US firearms firms that produced the M1 rifle. These were the US Armory at Springfield (SA), Winchester Repeating Arms (WRA), Harrington and Richardson (HRA), and International Harvester (IHC). It is common in Garand-speak to use the letter codes SA, WRA, HRA or IHC in place of the full manufacturers name.
So during what time periods were these firms making M1 rifles?
Springfield began M1 series production back in 1937, continued through WWII and then began producing M1s again During the Korean War. Winchester began their series M1 production in January 1941 and delivered their last complete M1 rifle in June, 1945. Winchester would never produce complete M1 rifles again and in fact sold all of their M1 tooling to Beretta in the 1950s. Both Harrington & Richardson and International Harvester produced post war M1 rifles. No M1s were built by either if these two firms during WWII.
Okay smart guy, I want a WWII M1 because of it's history. I know now that all Winchesters are WWII rifles but what about the Springfields, how can I tell a WWII rifle from a post war M1?
The easy way is by serial numbers. Any Springfield M1 rifle above 3.9 million is going to be post war while Pre WWII rifles will be numbered below about 400,000. Any rifle in the 7+ million range will be a commercial rifle, typically one produced by Springfield Armory Inc (the M1A folks).
I don't care about when the rifle was made, I just want the best built M1. Who made the best of the rifles and during which time period?
You have to remember that all M1s were subjected to very severe government inspections so every rifle which was accepted into service is going to be a good one. With that said you must also keep in mind that during WWII it was a matter of life or death to get as many M1s into the hands of our troops as fast as possible. Because of this, fit and finish and small details like parts polishing during WWII were not a priority. Dammit, there is a war on and we need M1s NOW so just skip the extra bit of polishing and send out that rifle! Some WWII M1 parts will in fact appear roughly finished but they will all function properly. In my opinion the best made of all of the M1s are the post war Springfields and the Harrington and Richardson M1s (all post war). There was more time to spend on careful production, especially after the end of the Korean War, and by that time Springfield had been building M1s for nearly 20 years so they knew what they were doing. H&R was an old time gun maker with decades of production experience behind them and they got into the M1 production program at near full speed, making wonderful rifles which are in most cases the match for any of the Springfield M1s.
Well I want a rare/ hard to find M1. Which of those four firms made the most and which one the fewest rifles?
Springfield produced something like 4,040,000 M1s, Winchester a little over 500,000, while H&R and IHC each produced under 500,000 M1s each. Clearly Springfields are the most common. While it would appear that it would be easier to find a Winchester than an IHC or H&R it is important to remember that all of the Winchester rifles were produced during WWII and they suffered large loses during that conflict. The surviving Winchesters then saw duty during the Korean War and they took a beating there as well. As a result of their two tours of duty Winchesters are often very hard to locate. It can also prove difficult to find an International Harvester and because of this the "Cornbinder M1s" are very popular with collectors.
So why is it that I see a lot of WWII period Springfields with barrels dated during the 1950's and 1960's?
Starting right after WWII our military began rebuilding M1s which were worn or damaged. This repair/rebuilding program continued well into the early 1960s and it is not uncommon to find M1s which have been rebuilt once, twice or even three of more times! As long as the receiver was within specifications Uncle Sam would just keep replacing barrels and parts to keep these old war horses in service. As an example of how vital it was to keep the older M1s in serviceable condition Springfield Armory rebuilt over 200,000 M1 rifles in 1948 alone and would average another 100,000 rebuilds each year up until 1952 when M1 production was resumed for the Korean War. Each M1 rebuilt in 1952 cost an average of $6 while a new rifle off the production line cost Uncle Sugar over eight times that amount! Rebuilding M1 rifles saved the taxpayers a bundle of cash and was much quicker than making a brand new rifle.
So what about getting an all matching M1, you know, a real collector's rifle?
Unlike many European firearms our military did not match the parts of a particular M1 rifle to that rifle's receiver by serial number.
Well I see a whole bunch of little numbers stamped on parts all over the rifle. What are these for?
Those numbers are called drawing numbers and are more or less production code numbers. As the M1 evolved it's parts were modified, in most cases very slightly, and these minor changes were reflected in a change in drawing numbers. Of course certain drawing numbers were only used on rifles during a specific production period so it is possible for collectors to look at a rifle, check the drawing numbers of it's parts, compare the known production dates and then determine of the parts are correct for an M1 in that serial number range.
Why is it that I see so many M1s with what would appear to be replacement barrels? My M1 carbines all have their original barrels. Are M1 barrels made from bad steel?
All pre war, war time and much of the post war .30-06 ammunition used by our military was loaded with corrosive primers and this took a toll on M1 rifle barrels and this is why it is hard to find a WWII M1 with it's original barrel. Barrel loses due to corrosion damage were so high that in 1944 Springfield produced over 400,000 replacement barrels in addition to barrels for brand new rifles coming off the production line. Chrome lining the barrel would have added an additional 75 cents per barrel (new unit cost) but the Army did not want to spend the money; so instead they ended up buying nearly 1 million replacement barrels at $3.50 each! All .30 M1 Carbine ammunition was loaded with non corrosive primers and this is why so many Carbines survived with their original barrels.
Hey Mark, I understand that there were a bunch of companies that made M1s. Who were they?
There were four US firearms firms that produced the M1 rifle. These were the US Armory at Springfield (SA), Winchester Repeating Arms (WRA), Harrington and Richardson (HRA), and International Harvester (IHC). It is common in Garand-speak to use the letter codes SA, WRA, HRA or IHC in place of the full manufacturers name.
So during what time periods were these firms making M1 rifles?
Springfield began M1 series production back in 1937, continued through WWII and then began producing M1s again During the Korean War. Winchester began their series M1 production in January 1941 and delivered their last complete M1 rifle in June, 1945. Winchester would never produce complete M1 rifles again and in fact sold all of their M1 tooling to Beretta in the 1950s. Both Harrington & Richardson and International Harvester produced post war M1 rifles. No M1s were built by either if these two firms during WWII.
Okay smart guy, I want a WWII M1 because of it's history. I know now that all Winchesters are WWII rifles but what about the Springfields, how can I tell a WWII rifle from a post war M1?
The easy way is by serial numbers. Any Springfield M1 rifle above 3.9 million is going to be post war while Pre WWII rifles will be numbered below about 400,000. Any rifle in the 7+ million range will be a commercial rifle, typically one produced by Springfield Armory Inc (the M1A folks).
I don't care about when the rifle was made, I just want the best built M1. Who made the best of the rifles and during which time period?
You have to remember that all M1s were subjected to very severe government inspections so every rifle which was accepted into service is going to be a good one. With that said you must also keep in mind that during WWII it was a matter of life or death to get as many M1s into the hands of our troops as fast as possible. Because of this, fit and finish and small details like parts polishing during WWII were not a priority. Dammit, there is a war on and we need M1s NOW so just skip the extra bit of polishing and send out that rifle! Some WWII M1 parts will in fact appear roughly finished but they will all function properly. In my opinion the best made of all of the M1s are the post war Springfields and the Harrington and Richardson M1s (all post war). There was more time to spend on careful production, especially after the end of the Korean War, and by that time Springfield had been building M1s for nearly 20 years so they knew what they were doing. H&R was an old time gun maker with decades of production experience behind them and they got into the M1 production program at near full speed, making wonderful rifles which are in most cases the match for any of the Springfield M1s.
Well I want a rare/ hard to find M1. Which of those four firms made the most and which one the fewest rifles?
Springfield produced something like 4,040,000 M1s, Winchester a little over 500,000, while H&R and IHC each produced under 500,000 M1s each. Clearly Springfields are the most common. While it would appear that it would be easier to find a Winchester than an IHC or H&R it is important to remember that all of the Winchester rifles were produced during WWII and they suffered large loses during that conflict. The surviving Winchesters then saw duty during the Korean War and they took a beating there as well. As a result of their two tours of duty Winchesters are often very hard to locate. It can also prove difficult to find an International Harvester and because of this the "Cornbinder M1s" are very popular with collectors.
So why is it that I see a lot of WWII period Springfields with barrels dated during the 1950's and 1960's?
Starting right after WWII our military began rebuilding M1s which were worn or damaged. This repair/rebuilding program continued well into the early 1960s and it is not uncommon to find M1s which have been rebuilt once, twice or even three of more times! As long as the receiver was within specifications Uncle Sam would just keep replacing barrels and parts to keep these old war horses in service. As an example of how vital it was to keep the older M1s in serviceable condition Springfield Armory rebuilt over 200,000 M1 rifles in 1948 alone and would average another 100,000 rebuilds each year up until 1952 when M1 production was resumed for the Korean War. Each M1 rebuilt in 1952 cost an average of $6 while a new rifle off the production line cost Uncle Sugar over eight times that amount! Rebuilding M1 rifles saved the taxpayers a bundle of cash and was much quicker than making a brand new rifle.
So what about getting an all matching M1, you know, a real collector's rifle?
Unlike many European firearms our military did not match the parts of a particular M1 rifle to that rifle's receiver by serial number.
Well I see a whole bunch of little numbers stamped on parts all over the rifle. What are these for?
Those numbers are called drawing numbers and are more or less production code numbers. As the M1 evolved it's parts were modified, in most cases very slightly, and these minor changes were reflected in a change in drawing numbers. Of course certain drawing numbers were only used on rifles during a specific production period so it is possible for collectors to look at a rifle, check the drawing numbers of it's parts, compare the known production dates and then determine of the parts are correct for an M1 in that serial number range.
Why is it that I see so many M1s with what would appear to be replacement barrels? My M1 carbines all have their original barrels. Are M1 barrels made from bad steel?
All pre war, war time and much of the post war .30-06 ammunition used by our military was loaded with corrosive primers and this took a toll on M1 rifle barrels and this is why it is hard to find a WWII M1 with it's original barrel. Barrel loses due to corrosion damage were so high that in 1944 Springfield produced over 400,000 replacement barrels in addition to barrels for brand new rifles coming off the production line. Chrome lining the barrel would have added an additional 75 cents per barrel (new unit cost) but the Army did not want to spend the money; so instead they ended up buying nearly 1 million replacement barrels at $3.50 each! All .30 M1 Carbine ammunition was loaded with non corrosive primers and this is why so many Carbines survived with their original barrels.
Any idea about prices per rifle? (cost to gov't) I'd heard $85 ea.
It all depends on the time period and who built the rifles. During the final days of WWII Springfield Armory was able to get costs down to just below $28 per unit. Of course you must remember that Uncle Sam was ordering M1s in lots of 1 million! Winchester costs per unit never broke the $30 barrier for a couple of reasons: Smaller orders from the Army and of course the fact that as a private concern they had to make a profit and passed that along to the Army when they bid their contracts. As anyone who lived during that period can tell you; prices after WWII and on into the 1950s took a big jump so naturally M1s procurement costs also increased. Factor in the smaller purchases (250K per order rather than 1 million) and higher costs for material and labor made the M1 much more expensive. Each post war Springfield M1 cost the government about $40 while those that came from H&R and International Harvester (IHC) were quite a bit more expensive. IHC had a number of production issues which lead to cost over runs, none of which could be back charged and they ended up losing money on every M1 that they produced. Grunts who lost or badly damaged their M1s were made to pay around eighty bucks but actual procurement costs were not near that amount.
BTW, the fella that told me about the price is a Korean War vet, so his memory of price is not that far off, ie, the replacement cost.
As always, thanks for the history lesson.
BTW, the fella that told me about the price is a Korean War vet, so his memory of price is not that far off, ie, the replacement cost.
Sounds to me like he "KNOWS" so ask him if he had to pay it all at once or if they docked his pay $20 per month [;)]
Ever thought about putting your knowledge on paper Mark?
I had an idea to write a book on the M1 but with the wealth of information now available online and through such fine organizations as the Garand Collectors Association (I am member #458), there just does not seem to be the same need as there was even a decade ago.
quote:Originally posted by retroxler58
Ever thought about putting your knowledge on paper Mark?
I had an idea to write a book on the M1 but with the wealth of information now available online and through such fine organizations as the Garand Collectors Association (I am member #458), there just does not seem to be the same need as there was even a decade ago.
I understand where you are coming from Mark, but... what are we all going to do for info when SHTF and there is no internet for a number of years?[:0]
quote:Originally posted by mark christian
quote:Originally posted by retroxler58
Ever thought about putting your knowledge on paper Mark?
I had an idea to write a book on the M1 but with the wealth of information now available online and through such fine organizations as the Garand Collectors Association (I am member #458), there just does not seem to be the same need as there was even a decade ago.
I understand where you are coming from Mark, but... what are we all going to do for info when SHTF and there is no internet for a number of years?[:0]
[;)] Some of us 'still' appreciate pen and paper...
quote:Originally posted by retroxler58
Ever thought about putting your knowledge on paper Mark?
I had an idea to write a book on the M1 but with the wealth of information now available online and through such fine organizations as the Garand Collectors Association (I am member #458), there just does not seem to be the same need as there was even a decade ago.
Many still like to keep a book. It is more personal and trust worthy. Thank you for your time.
I have an SA born in 1947, bought it as a Service Grade from CMP 10 years ago. It was a Greek Loaner. So could it have seen use in Korea prior to being loaned to Greece? Or were they produced and directly loaned to Greece since WWII was over?
There were no new M1 rifles being produced in 1947 so your rifle probably (I am just guessing) went through a post war rebuild and now has a replacement barrel dated 1947. If it has a WWII era serial number (up to 3.9 million) then there is an excellent chance that it saw action in WWII as well as Korea before being sent out on loan to Greece.