Jump to content


Photo

Inspectors Stamps


  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

#1 artu44

artu44

    MODERATOR EMERITUS

  • Members
    • Member ID: 67
  • 2,541 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Liguria - Italy

Posted 22 November 2008 - 11:59 PM

Look what they sold on ebay

http://cgi.ebay.com/...-...:1|240:1318

#2 Jeeper704

Jeeper704
  • Members
    • Member ID: 157
  • 6,393 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgium

Posted 23 November 2008 - 01:40 AM

Put up description and photo for future reference;

For sale is this refined set of M1 Carbine Cartouche, Crossed Cannons, and acceptance dies. There are 3 more dies in this set than the original offering that I have made earlier. These are for reproduction use only. With these dies one can add a much needed service for your customers. These dies are well defined in detail and are heavily constructed. You will be very pleased with these. Your customers will like the added service you can offer with these additional tools in your business. Covers WWII production of the M1 Carbine. Included are as follows:

Winchester, 5 dies
Rock Ola, 2. These rock Ola if you will notice are made into 1 die. Most claim this is the correct way to produce this die. Also if you will notice there is still the Rock ola single dies so you can produce any way you choose.
National Postal Meter, 3 dies
Underwood, 4 dies
Inland, 4 dies
IP, 2 dies
S’G’, 2 dies
SG, 2 dies
Quality Hardware, 1 die
Standard Product, 1 die
IBM, 1 die
Stock proof P in a circle and 1 field replacement die


http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t188/TD-soldier/a5aa67d2.jpg

Erwin

Edited by Jeeper704, 23 November 2008 - 01:41 AM.


#3 hawkdriver

hawkdriver
  • Members
    • Member ID: 2,549
  • 8,038 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 November 2008 - 04:41 AM

And I'm sure that whomever bought them will only use them for good. Jeez

#4 Chris_B

Chris_B
  • Members
    • Member ID: 3,065
  • 1,256 posts
  • Location:Canton MA. USA

Posted 23 November 2008 - 05:32 AM

but this is old news isn't it; this practice is not new.

#5 Orgone

Orgone
  • Members
    • Member ID: 2,588
  • 227 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NY Metro area

Posted 24 November 2008 - 11:31 AM

Almost 30 years ago a man walked into a gun show I was set up at and sold to a guy in the row in front of me a box full of original WW2 German Waffenampt stamps for $100.! There must have been 75 of them, all different numbers and letters. The man had brought them home from WW2 himself after he found them in a factory. I've wondered many times over the years if those stamps were ever used for "enhancing" war relics.

#6 SGM (ret.)

SGM (ret.)
  • Members
    • Member ID: 626
  • 462 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Piedmont Area, South Carolina

Posted 24 November 2008 - 06:04 PM

Posters on the CMP Carbine sub-forum, the M1CarbineForum.com, and the M1 Carbine Collector's Forum say that these same type stamps have been sold on eBay for quite some time. These are just the newest sets sold by the same (?) dealer. The stamps are also being sold individually, so the faker doesn't have to invest a half-grand to get started ripping people off. He can start small and build up his practice, adding new stamps and new fakes to his inventory as his ill gotten gains increase.

There are similar sets on the street for all the M1 Garand stocks (and these have also been out there for quite a while).

When the value of the item exceeds the costs of of making repros by just enough to make a profit, you can be assured that the fakers will be coming out of the wood work. A real problem are some of the "no sh*t" real experts (advanced collectors with large varied collections) who will not freely share their knowledge about the detail differences between the fakes and the originals. Thus our collective defense against this B.S. is diminished by those collectors who could help others less experienced.

I understand the argument that by sharing the information the fakers just get better.

But I think that the real reason is that these advanced collectors want to protect the vlue of their own collections at the expense of the average collectors. I recently followed a pertty heated thread (on another forum) about some suspect carbine stock cartouches. In the end, the guys with the depth of knowledge to point out the faults, after making pronouncements about the fakes, clammed up. Of course, if only the guys with deep pockets have the "secret knowledge," only other guys with deep pockets can play. A side benefit is that any fakes in their collections can be pawned-off on the "ignorant masses" without loss of investment.

In the end, none of this is new, though. The same discussions and arguments have been made over and over with other collecting genres (helmets, daggers, order and decorations, uniforms, field gear, etc, etc, etc). If you've never followed any of the cut-throat discussions about German Helmets or badges, I suggest for your own education you surf around on some of the other militaria forums. It's a real eye-opener (also entertaining!), and the move valuable the items, the more cut-throat it gets!

It sucks, but it's also just a condition that we all have to deal with if we want to collect. I'm guessing that there were rip-off cave men putting fake antilope paintings on cave walls 30 thousand years ago, and other cave man "experts" sitting around the camp fire arguing the finer points of paint patterns and colors!

Mike

#7 Greaser

Greaser
  • Members
    • Member ID: 3,887
  • 154 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dublin Ohio

Posted 24 November 2008 - 07:13 PM

Honestly, I'm not too worried about these stamps being out there... Many of the stamps I've seen out there are either poorly patterned or direct copies of the ones out of JC Harrison's books - which have slight flaws to them.

The problem with cartouches is that many use them as a crutch and instant check for "originality". "Buy the gun, not the story" We've heard it 1000 times before. I usually always ignore cartouches when examining a rifle for purchase - I look at the overall pice as a whole, parts, wear, finish, mechanical condition, proper function - then I'll look at nuances.

Unless I am only looking for a cartouched stock to complete a gun - then i'll give it the scrutiny. Even then, you have to learn and know the correct contours and features for that early SA or WRA stock... look at those details first - from there, then give it a look. I have seen VERY few fake cartouches that were very very convincing. ANYBODY can shell out the $$$$$ for a set of these dies - but it'll take an artist and a lot of practice to make them look "right". These arent something you can simply pick up a hammer and whack onto any stock to make them look right. It takes a lot of force to replicate the original apperance, as it was pressed in. Gunstock walnut is suprisingly hard - especially after so many years. From there, once the markings are applied - its a matter of getting just the right "patina" and "gunk" into the newly applied cartouche. TRFindley uses alcohol based leather dye to get the right "color" then wax and other finishes ontop to make it look halfway right. Even after all of that, you have a still somewhat "fresh" looking cartouche that doesnt exibit the same wear and dings, dents, deformities and age that a real one will have. It'll take a LOT of practice and experimentation for somebody new to it looking to make a quick buck to be able to produce a "fake" quality product - in the mean time, screwing up a bunch of ever expensive gunstocks, or otherwise applying cartouches to stocks of patterns totally inappropriate to that cartouche. It takes some balls to take a very nice early SA or WRA type stock and apply a cartouche to it - giving the chance of a crappy impression, and then having to go through the work to age it... I just dont see it as being a ridiculously huge problem....

Just having a set of copper alloy marking dies for cartouches out for sale certainly doesnt mean that every single cartouche out there is suspect. Look, learn, read - the internet is our friend. Network with your colleagues and build your repository of images of known legit cartouches and try and handle every original example that you can.

There is demand out there for cartouched stocks, legit original, or recently smashed - people want to fill holes in their collection - especially for bargain basement prices. Not everybody is a through and through collector of excellent original examples - just wanting something representative - let alone the reenactor market which is scary in and of itself.

The sky is not falling. I'm happy to talk shop about cartouches and my opinions - I just dont think that this is the end of collecting as we know it. I dont think most of these guys out there are rip off artists set out to annoy and piss off all those guys over on Jouster and here on US Militaria forum. There's been repro parts, with repro stampings on them for 20 years now....

Chris-

Edited by Greaser, 24 November 2008 - 07:17 PM.


#8 artu44

artu44

    MODERATOR EMERITUS

  • Members
    • Member ID: 67
  • 2,541 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Liguria - Italy

Posted 25 November 2008 - 12:22 AM

BTW. This nice box full of WWII german stamps is in Budapest.

http://mcollec.free....hp?f=22&t=33145

#9 101CH47

101CH47
  • Members
    • Member ID: 2,964
  • 858 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA

Posted 25 November 2008 - 06:31 AM

The forum of the National Automatic Pistol Collectors Association has a section called “Cottage Industry Alerts” which is a section devoted strictly to topics such as these stamps. In that section true experts will point out what to look for in the stamps and how they are applied. In regards to certain German pistols it even gets down to what serial number ranges certain stamps would have been applied to.

But I think that the real reason is that these advanced collectors want to protect the vlue of their own collections at the expense of the average collectors. I recently followed a pertty heated thread (on another forum) about some suspect carbine stock cartouches. In the end, the guys with the depth of knowledge to point out the faults, after making pronouncements about the fakes, clammed up. Of course, if only the guys with deep pockets have the "secret knowledge," only other guys with deep pockets can play. A side benefit is that any fakes in their collections can be pawned-off on the "ignorant masses" without loss of investment.


A German collectors forum very similar to this forum is famous for that. Some of their “experts” will not share information with the younger collectors for fear the fakers will learn from the discussion. On several occasions I have pointed out to these "experts" that the vast majority of information they claim to have has been in print for years, then ask do they advocate burning books also? Most get mad and disappear at that point. The problem I see is two fold, one they feel ANY information given will be used by the fakers so will not try to help the new collectors with information that will assist them in avoiding being trapped by a faker and, two, that if they educate the newer collectors these “experts” will lose some sort of celebrity they feel is due them. In my opinion, these "experts" in not helping the new collectors actually in a round about way help support the fakers by providing them ready customers.

I have been collecting over thirty years, I would be no where near where I am with my collection had it not been for some very experienced collectors who took time to teach me much of what they had learned over the years. Many of these old time collectors are still around and more than willing to share their information. The individuals such as you see on the unnamed German site that will pronounce something a fake without giving any reasons or documentation for their opinion do more to harm the hobby than help it. If they are unwilling or so afraid to document their answers then it would probably serve all of us in the collecting community better if they just kept their opinions to their self. If a person is not willing to help the newer collectors coming in behind them then I see these types as not worth dealing with.

Edited by 101CH47, 25 November 2008 - 06:32 AM.


#10 SGM (ret.)

SGM (ret.)
  • Members
    • Member ID: 626
  • 462 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Piedmont Area, South Carolina

Posted 25 November 2008 - 06:53 AM

Hi Chris,

Interesting comments, most of which I agree with. And before I go any further, let me say that this forum, The US Militaria Forum, is the most gentlemanly (with apologies to RaiderGirl and other ladies) that I know of. Without exception, everyone here freely shares their knowledge, and the moderators do an excellent job of archiving information for reference by the whole collecting community. Having said that, this forum is too often the exception rather than the rule when it comes to such behavior.

You are correct (or at least I share your opinion, as do most others I imagine) that the best protection is self-education about the particular subject being collected, be it M1 Carbines or whatever. And, of course, "buy the atifact not the story" is always a sound rule of thumb. However, once someone undertakes to change the physical nature of the item (in this case to add a fake acceptance cartouche), the "story" is no longer the issue. The issue is now the details of the physical characteristics that makes up the "artifact."

This is the point where I would criticize some of the more "advanced" collectors for not being forthcoming with their knowledge and opinions. I'm sure the reasons for this silence are as varied as the people, but my opinion, based on admittedly limited observations, is that many of the more outspoken "experts" have an agenda to protect their own interests rather than expand the base of historical knowledge. Be that as it may, it is a condition of the collecting environment that we all must deal with.

Add to this the issues of anominity of the internet and the ease with which any individual can create "virtual personalities" and use these on various sites to shill for his own self-interest in order to "vet" the authenticity of any item being discussed.

As for the issue at hand, M1 Carbine acceptance cartouches, I don't know of any single source that a collector can turn to for trustworthy information on the variations. Ruth's War Baby is dated, incomplete, and the drawings are not to scale. Reisch's U.S. M1 Carbines, ... does not offer any drawings or photos at all covering the subject. As for Harrison's Field Guide, I have read the same comments that you made about its inaccuracies, but know of no souce that makes an actual comparison of his template drawings with known originals. The self-professed (or assumed) experts who state that the fake cartouches are easy to spot "if you know what to look for" are certainly not going out of their way to publish on the net any system of information on the subject.

While some may not view the fake stamps as a problem others (myself included) do not share that position, so I'm sure that the moderators here would be happy to archive in the reference sections any "repository images of known legit cartouches" that you might like to post. Also, if you know the "slight flaws" of the fake stamps and Harrison's drawings, please share that information with the rest of us.

Mike

#11 Greaser

Greaser
  • Members
    • Member ID: 3,887
  • 154 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dublin Ohio

Posted 25 November 2008 - 08:10 AM

Mike-

I'm at work so I cant dig through things and rummage about - but I'll try and spend some time over the holiday between travel and family to put a few things together as far as the photos I've saved off the net. I am by no means an expert collector on cartouches with endless knowledge on them. I have seen quite a few of the recently stamped stocks and have noticed some of the features of them. Additionally, I've taken and compared the Harrison template to my own mediocre collection and found some inconsistencies.

How about I start with a few examples that I can think of off the top of my head, if I can remember correctly:
The shape and style of the A on many SA GAW, SA GHS to be very distinctive, with the - bar on the A being fairly low in the letter on original exmples, while the new cartouches commonly exhibit the - being toward the middle/center of the letter like you see on most modern fonts. Additionally, I've noticed the A in SA being slightly too wide on some of the repros - where the repro looks almost triangular in shape while the originals appear to have almost an "arrowhead" appearance.

Circle P proofs are often times over struck to get most of a full impression, resulting in an overstruck apperance as well as the circle being slightly oval in shape.

The SA EMcF the C's have a very distinct shape to them on originals, where most of the repros i've seen got the shape wrong. It has to deal with the back shape of the C being flat vs curved and the height of the letter.

Crossed cannons are usually an area of contention too - with many times the cannon chamber area being very very "fat" looking in comparison to originals.

I know this doesnt directly address carbines - as i havent seen the carbine repro cartouches from the ebay link in person or any of the repros from there. I'd need to sit down with my paltry 4 carbines and see what observations that I can make based on the Harrison template.

I seem to think that the inconsistencies in the harrison template arise from the process used to digitally "draw" them - as stock fonts may have been used an manipulated to get it "close" rather than painstakingly redraw each one.

I certainly acknowledge that these marking dies wore out over time and were replaced. The guys and gals back then didnt have the luxury of CNC machinery to make them - resulting in each die or set of dies being slightly different, allowing some room for variation.

There is only so much we can do on going by pattern and marking/impression detail alone - much of the rest of it comes down to integrity of the seller. I totally agree with you as to people hiding behind anonymous handles and refusing to give their real name. Much of our hobby comes down to nuances of details, seeing lots of them over and over again, as well as gut feel. I'm not at the point where I can pick up a stock, give it a glance and ID it positively one way or the other like I am with webgear and uniforms - but the education and experience has to start somewhere.

Chris-

#12 SGM (ret.)

SGM (ret.)
  • Members
    • Member ID: 626
  • 462 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Piedmont Area, South Carolina

Posted 25 November 2008 - 05:53 PM

Been thinking about how this thread was developing and realized that I was getting pretty close to "living in a glass house." So, I went to the couple of resources that I had to make some first-hand observations to share with the forum.

Unfortunately, I have only ever had three different M1 Carbine stocks in my possession (only one left now), and when I was able to photograph their details I wasn't thinking as clearly about the problem of fake cartouches and the Harrison Template.

I've never handled or seen (even ID'ed photos) of the fake cartouche stamps (the exceptions are the eBay pics which lack enough resolution to be useful), so I can't offer up any comparisons of the fakes with originals.

However, I do have Harrison book with the template, so I can compare pics of the cartouches on the stocks that I have had with the template. I've kept the upload size of these pictures are large as allowed by the forum so as to offer as much detail as possible. I felt that with the difficulty in seeing the details of the original stamps that it was worth it. (Hope all the pics will load!)

If, as many experienced carbine collectors claim, that the fake cartouches are based on the Harrison Template, then the differences between the template and the original should be close to the difference between the fake cartouche and the original. If, however, this observation is not true, then the comparison might be pointless.

Oh well, here's the first. It's a comparision of the Harrison Template's large Inland overlay with an original Inland cartouche. I've picked out what I thought were the easiest differences to highlight.

Mike

Attached Images

  • Slide1.jpg


#13 SGM (ret.)

SGM (ret.)
  • Members
    • Member ID: 626
  • 462 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Piedmont Area, South Carolina

Posted 25 November 2008 - 05:58 PM

Here's the second. It's also a comparision of the Harrison Template large Inland with a different original Inland cartouche.

Note the difference between this one and the last. In the last, the top of the original was stampped clearer than the bottom. In this picture, the bottom of the original is stampped clearer than the top.

Mike

Attached Images

  • Slide2.jpg


#14 SGM (ret.)

SGM (ret.)
  • Members
    • Member ID: 626
  • 462 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Piedmont Area, South Carolina

Posted 25 November 2008 - 06:06 PM

This picture illustrates the Harrison Template IBM cartouche with an original IBM cartouche.

Note that on the original stock, the cartouche was stampped upside down (!), so I have rotated it in the picture to make it easier to see. Also, it was slightly angled from its vertical centerline, so I had to tilt the Harrison Template drawing to allow for easy viewing.

For those not familier, the IBM cartouche is only about 3/8" in diameter, and this particular original was lightly stampped to begin with. It is difficult in the the photo to discern the details in comparision with the template drawing. But, this is all I'm able to do with it. Maybe someone else has a better example to offer.

Mike

Attached Images

  • Slide3.jpg


#15 SGM (ret.)

SGM (ret.)
  • Members
    • Member ID: 626
  • 462 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Piedmont Area, South Carolina

Posted 25 November 2008 - 06:14 PM

That's all that I have for original cartouches, but I thought that I'd add some pictures of the other stock markings.

This next picture is the manufacturer's stamp located in the sling cut-out for the IBM stock in the previous post. There has been some discussion about the likelyhood that there are some variants in the font type used for this marking.

This "JL B" with fancy serifs is the only style that I have actually observed first-hand, but there may be other original, correct styles. "JL B" is for the Jamestown Lounge Company which made stocks and handguards for IBM.

Mike

Attached Images

  • Slide4.jpg


#16 SGM (ret.)

SGM (ret.)
  • Members
    • Member ID: 626
  • 462 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Piedmont Area, South Carolina

Posted 25 November 2008 - 06:21 PM

This next picture shows two Augusta Arsenal rebuild stamps ("AA letter") on two different stocks. One stock is the IBM stock from the previous posts and the second stock if the second Inland stock posted.

If anyone has any information of the third letter (in these cases a "U"), please post. I've read that the third letter was the arsenal inspector's intial, but I've also read that the third letters were random coded to an inspector. It would be nice to have some definative information.

BTW: The Inland stock was used to correct an Inland carbine which came from the CMP with the IBM stock. I was very happy to find a correct Type III (original "low-wood") with the same arsenal re-build as the CMP rifle's incorrect IBM stock.

Anyways...

Attached Images

  • Slide5.jpg


#17 SGM (ret.)

SGM (ret.)
  • Members
    • Member ID: 626
  • 462 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Piedmont Area, South Carolina

Posted 25 November 2008 - 06:26 PM

This next picture compares the "OI" (S.E. Overton Company for Inland) manufacturer's markings on two different Inland stocks.

The darker stock (Inland 01) is older and was originally a Type II, oval oiler hole and "high-wood" which was modified to "low-wood" configuration.

The second stock (Inland 02) is a newer Type III, oval oiler hole and "low-wood."

I found the differences between the "OI" stamppings instructive.

Mike

Attached Images

  • Slide6.jpg


#18 SGM (ret.)

SGM (ret.)
  • Members
    • Member ID: 626
  • 462 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Piedmont Area, South Carolina

Posted 25 November 2008 - 06:31 PM

Here is a detail picture of the Rock Island Arsenal re-build stamp ("Boxed RIA over EB") on the older Inland stock.

It is interesting to note that the curvature of the stock has prevented the stamp from evenly marking. The bottom edge of the box is missing (actually, it's very lightly visible on the original).

It has been noted several times by more experienced collectors that one indicator of fake stamps is that they are too often "perfectly" formed, the faker having to have rotated and made several strikes on the stamp to get an even impression.

Mike

Attached Images

  • Slide7.jpg


#19 SGM (ret.)

SGM (ret.)
  • Members
    • Member ID: 626
  • 462 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Piedmont Area, South Carolina

Posted 25 November 2008 - 06:42 PM

Ok, this is the last that I have.

Here's a picture comparing all of the "P" proof marks stampped on all three of the illustated stocks.

Again, note how the stampped impressions are uneven on every one of the proof marks. Again, this is presumably caused by the curvature of the stock (in this area, the pistol grips).

The "Circled san serif P" marks are proof codes used during the original manufacture of the rifles. These were only used on certain serial number ranges by Inland, Winchester, Underwood, and Irwin-Pedersen/Grand Rapids.

The "Plain san serif P" and the "Boxed san serif P" were re-proof marks used during acceptance after arsenal re-builds. (There are other reproof marks, too.)

It's also interesting to note that the proof markes on the bottom of the pistol grips on these stocks are very lightly impressed (the "Boxed P" is really more of a dirty spot than an impression and the "Circled P" has been almost sanded off during the arsenal re-build).

Mike

Attached Images

  • Slide8.jpg


#20 Greaser

Greaser
  • Members
    • Member ID: 3,887
  • 154 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dublin Ohio

Posted 25 November 2008 - 07:38 PM

Mike-

Outstanding work!!! I'll try and emulate the same style when I get into my safe and take photos. Thanks for starting us off right.

Chris-

#21 Kilroy

Kilroy
  • Members
    • Member ID: 3,129
  • 64 posts
  • Location:ITALY

Posted 26 November 2008 - 03:10 AM

I have been collecting US military weapons for about thirty years. Obviously, fake stamping is something we have to live with. My advice here goes with what Greaser has already stated.

Most times, you will be able to determine if the stock is "OK" (which means different things depending on context) without having to consider cartouches. Only if everything else stands examination, it will be worth determining if any cartouches present are faked or not.

This in practice rules out most cases of stocks with fake cartouches. Keep in mind that all markings have to be consistent with each other, and with stock characteristics. This - in faking carbines stocks - is more easily said than done, as such faking will most usually be detected because of inconsistencies or by examining for traces of getting rid of previous markings, etc.

Just remember: If everything was OK in the first place, there wouldn't be a need for faking stamps, to raise price!

Edited by Kilroy, 26 November 2008 - 03:11 AM.


#22 SGM (ret.)

SGM (ret.)
  • Members
    • Member ID: 626
  • 462 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Piedmont Area, South Carolina

Posted 03 December 2008 - 06:25 AM

Thought I'd bump this topic back up and see if anyone else has any info on the subject of fake cartouches vs. originals.

I'd like to see some pictures of known fakes if any such photos are available. Also, I was only able to make comparisons of a couple of Inland originals and a single IBM original. It would be nice to see some other examples and different carbine manufacturers.

I'm guessing that there are some forum members who have (perhaps many) carbines made by other companies that they could share with the rest of us. Also, I'm sure that some of the other forum members have some pretty significant experience in the subject and could offer up some details and specifics on what they look for in originals, re-finished, and faked stocks. What may seem obvious to someone with decades of experience may not be so obvious to someone just entering the field.

Mike

#23 SGM (ret.)

SGM (ret.)
  • Members
    • Member ID: 626
  • 462 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Piedmont Area, South Carolina

Posted 06 December 2008 - 10:49 AM

I've been looking around on the net for more good examples of M1 carbine cartouches and have found a few on guns up for sale on various auction sites.

The Inland riles (not surprisingly) are the most common, and since no one else has added any, I thought I'd try to keep this topic alive a bit longer by posting a couple of noteworthy examples.

This first is another original Inland. It shows some details not visible in the above posts.

Attached Images

  • Inland_Cartouche_Collector__s_Firearms_Auction_01.jpg


#24 SGM (ret.)

SGM (ret.)
  • Members
    • Member ID: 626
  • 462 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Piedmont Area, South Carolina

Posted 06 December 2008 - 10:53 AM

Here's another Inland.

What's interesting about this one is how it shows natural age and damage. Also interesting is how it has a "double image" from the inspector "bouncing" the die or hammer before making the real impression.

If you look very closely at the darker Inland stock in the earlier posts, you can see a very faint "ghost" image similar to this one in nearly the same location.

Attached Images

  • Inland_Cartouche_Collector__s_Firearms_Auction_02.jpg


#25 SGM (ret.)

SGM (ret.)
  • Members
    • Member ID: 626
  • 462 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Piedmont Area, South Carolina

Posted 06 December 2008 - 10:57 AM

Finally, here is a cartouch on a carbine that the seller has described as 100% original, all correct Inland.

I'll leave this up to the forum to pass judgment on. However, I'm pretty sure this is NOT an Inland cartouche, and I'm really not sure that it's an original from any other manufacturer.

I'd be interested in hearing some opinions from other more experienced collectors.

Mike

Attached Images

  • 132_3231_jpg_thumbnail1.jpg

Edited by SGM (ret.), 06 December 2008 - 10:58 AM.



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users