Gun Hub Forums banner
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,975 Posts
I wonder if it didn't happen in the course of manufacturing 'clean-up'.

The other thing----the seller is known for being straight as an arrow----and further, I generally just don't see someone faking a II-A catch.

The only way to know for sure would be to buy it and then do some precise measurements-----that said, the Seller does offer a money-back guarantee-----not "pulling" an abcleigh or Riverbank 'all sales final' type of scam.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,318 Posts
Paul,
I do have that QA fake type 3 Mcc mag catch. So it has been done but that one came from a former employee of ATP.
I bid on this mag. catch just to add to my pile. I think they are real.
 
G

·
Riesch says they made a 2A marked E-SG, but not a 3. Odd about that M, but it looks okay, just another anomaly I guess. I like Paul's theory, cleanup item. If you get it Bolo-7, you can always grind off the M like others have! :lol: :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,318 Posts
Wayne,
Why do you think it is not correct? Because it is not in some book? That is not a good reason.
I have found about a dozen parts that do not show up in Mr. Riesch's book.
I am sure he used the best information available at the time, Carbine Club news letters I understand mostly. But any book on M1 carbines is still a work in progress.
If I win it (I bet not) I will send picturers.
Love and Kisses,
Roger
 
G

·
Bolo-7 said:
Wayne,
Why do you think it is not correct? Because it is not in some book? That is not a good reason.
I have found about a dozen parts that do not show up in Mr. Riesch's book.
I am sure he used the best information available at the time, Carbine Club news letters I understand mostly. But any book on M1 carbines is still a work in progress.
If I win it (I bet not) I will send picturers.
Love and Kisses,
Roger
Ah, Roger...respectfully speaking...I agree with you...Craig did use some Carbine Club info...he also used quite a bit of data from the Michigan U.S. Carbine Collectors Association...(MCCA).....I know...I edited the original manuscript for the first publication of "U.S. M1 Carbine, A Wartime Production", by Craig Riesch...as a favor North Cape Publications Editor Joe Poyer. Books #2, #3 and #4, also has information from the MCCA Newsletters....and I'm sure...from the Carbine Club, too. I also added about 15 pages of codes, to Book #1... from the MCCA Library Archives. Both Craig and Joe were MCCA Members, as well as Larry Ruth, who was our "Reference Data Editor" for several years. The MCCA, also... along with the Carbine Club... assisted Larry Ruth, with his new book...."The M1 Carbine Owners Guide". I also would not be surprised if Harrison's books contained information from both the MCCA and the Carbine Club files and newsletters.. The MCCA published over 5,000 pages of archive and membership information from 1992-2003......No one person, or "Club"...did all of this...it was a "combined effort", and the "efforts of the Club's memberships"......... that really did all of the homework....Just setting the record in order, politely... :D
 
G

·
I didn't say I thought it wasn't correct, I thought I said it looks okay to me, and that CBR's theory sounds reasonable. I learned many moons ago not to rely too heavily on references, as they always miss something. Never say never with the Carbine, that's my motto. Not one of my Carbines has ever fit the "book" version of what is supposed to be in them, no matter how "correct" they were. The part about grinding off the M was a joke. If I needed an SG mag catch, I would find that one completely acceptable for almost ANY early one, but that's just my opinion. I tend to shy away from the "books" for data on "proper" markings as in my experience, they are wrong more than they are right, and there are no "absolutes". The Carbine Club uses serial number comparisons to determine what is "probably" correct, but it can only be used as a rule of thumb as I have found over the last 25 years. There will NEVER be any absolutes with Carbines, nobody can ever know what happened on those assembly lines 60 years ago, and they didn't keep those type of records. While I applaud their efforts, it's still guessing. :D
 
G

·
I must agree here...NO book has all the answers. It is a guideline for a place to start, and what was found in certain numbered ranges on original guns. As for codes...the parts packages, Ordnance and factory documentations, and interviews with former employees and supervisors, who actually did the work...are the only absolutes in this field, IMHO. :wink:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
176 Posts
Have the seller measure the mag-catch slide rails. A 2A should be .097 +/- .010/.008, and a type3 will be .076 +/- [.010/.008, Kuhnhausem].
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top