Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. I understand the custom of the rifle staying with the individual thru out his service career. The problem IS,,,,with that is that ser# of 110016, the EARLIEST it could have been in use was Jan of 1918 on a M1917 of Winchester make,,, if that serial number belonged to a M1903 it was not manufactured until after Jan of 1919. So you great uncle COULD NOT HAVE BEEN ISSUED A M1903 OR M1917 RIFLE WITH THAT SER.# IN 1917.. it did not exist. Do you understand the problem of that ser# and that 1917 date now??????? 45B20
  2. I see nothing on those records that indicates what ser# he qualified with. Most likely that 17 June 1917 qualification was fired with a M1903 of unknown make or ser#. That ser# of 110016 is most likely the rifle he was issued at some later date. I would guess his last one before he got out . If it was his last rifle most likely it was a M1903, but no one can say for sure it was not a M1917. If your grate uncle was discharged before 01 Jan 1919 that serial number has to belong to a M1917. I think that note of service with the Army is an interesting one. Do you know any think about that??? 45B20
  3. Thank you for posting those records. However I do not see that ser# 110016, is it on something you have not posted?? Or am I missing something ??? 45B20
  4. Tbruno I ‘think’ that "MQO 56 Series 1917” refers to a course of fire, not to a weapon. Most likely your great uncle carried an M1903 in France,, although he may have trained and qualified with the M1917 while in the US before going to France According to Crossman and Canfield a M1903 receiver with a serial number of 110016 was made in 1919. C.F. Ferris in his book “United States Rifle Model of 1917” states that the marines were issued M1917 Rifles. As one of his sources he uses “History of Rifle, Revolvers, and Pistols” by Miriam McConaughty, A U.S. Gov publication, printed in 1920. On pg 18, this publication states that 61,000 M1917s were delivered to the marines and 604 to the navy. Ferris goes on to state that, “Lt.Col. William Harlee published in 1919 “the U.S. Marine Corps Score Book and Rifleman Instructor” This was for use with both the Models 1903 and 1917 rifles, and contained very detailed information on the’17. If I read Ferris correctly, he is saying is that Harlee gave detailed information on the M1917 because the marines were using the M1917 at that time. According to C.F. Ferris, Winchester last serial number on 21 Dec 17 was 109570 and on 22 Dec 17 was 110515. Remington and Eddystone numbers are not so exact, Ferris gives observed original M1917s barrel dates. Barrels dates are when the barrel was made and the barrel was usually assembled to the receiver ‘ROUGHLY’ one to two months after the barrel was dated. A Rem. M1917 with a ser# of 91779 has a barrel with a date of 1-18 and the next Rem.M1917 with a ser# of 114108 has a barrel with a date of 2-18. A Eddystone M1917 with a ser# of 101140 has a barrel with a date of 10-17 and the next Eddystone M1917 with a ser#114174 has a barrel date of 11-17. I would GUESS that IF that qualification course was fired before going to France, your great uncle qualified with a M1917 Rifle probably of Winchester manufacture or maybe Eddystone. What was the date of that qualification?? It may have been after he returned from France and he was using a M1903. On other boards I have seen photos presented by others that appeared to represent marines with M1917s during the WWI time period. My understanding is that the Marine Corp used the M1917 only at stateside training facilities, however I could be wrong and marines used the M1917 in France, I will let others argue that one out. 45B20
  5. Dalbert I have the first Carbine Tech. Manual, TM 9-1276 dated 05 June 43,, it supersedes the common TB 23-7-1,dated 17 Mar 42 AND the TB 23-7-2 with a date of 16 Apr 42. I have List of Publications, FM 21-6 dated 01Feb44, neither TBs are listed, which is understandable, seeing that both TBs had been superseded. What I do not have is FM 21-6 dated 01July43, which may have listed those TBs. I’ve asked Eric Nicolous to ask his contacts and see if any of them have actually seen a TB 23-7-2. I think (hope) that it actually was printed. With a TM over a year away, I would think that the -2 would be needed. I’m going thru my Ordnance Sergeants and see if in one of their list of new pubs TB 23-7-2 is listed. However,,, given the popularity of the Carbine, someone should have turned up a -2, we will see. I will be happy to send those covers to you. I am not really good at scanning. My wife is away for a few days, when she returns I will have her show me how. If all else fails, I will send copies by mail. 45B20
  6. Dalbert I have seen references to TB 23-7-2, I have a date of 16 April 1942. But I have never found anyone who has actually seen one. Does that manual really exist???? I never was really interested in the Carbine, so my list of publications does not contain any thing unusual. But this is what I have in the way of SNLs and Parts Manuals. I have an original “SNL B-28, Organizational Spare Parts and Equipment for Carbine, Cal..30, M1 and M1A1”, dated 17 Aug 1943, with Change 1 dated 21 Sept. 1943. A copy of an “ORD9 SNL B-28, List of all Parts of Carbine, Cal..30, M1, M1A1, M1A3, and M2“, dated 06 Feb. 1945. An original “ORD 8 SNL B-28 Field and Depot Maintenance Allowances for Carbine, Cal..30, M1, M1A1, and M2“, dated 09 Aug 1955. And I have an original “TM 9-1005-210-35P,Field and Depot Maintenance Repair Parts and Special tool List For Carbine, Caliber .30, M1 and Carbine, Caliber .30, M2“, dated 17 Oct. 1963. If you can use any of these let me know. 45B20
  7. Guscanoesp Those tools are still cheap enough why don’t you buy others which are not still in the wax??? That way you can have a display of those tools as issued and as used. After all, once removed from the wax seal, they can never be returned to that condition. And now for the cynical approach, with all the fakery going on I question everything. Someone maybe taking old used tools, sand/bead blasting, refinishing and also dipping them in wax. Regrettably, something to think about. 45B20
  8. Airborne53 It is listed in Ordnance Supply Catalog: “Items of Cleaning. Preserving, and Lubricating Materials; Recoil Fluids, Special Oils, and Miscellaneous Related Items, ORD 3 Standard Nomenclature List K-1” dated 06 May 1946. I do not have the earlier (12Dec.44) issue of this SNL. Stock Number is 52-P-270, Specification, SNR-S-1281, UZ-6 or UZ-8, or equal. The nomenclature is listed as, “PAINT, black, flat, 1 q5. (For gas cylinder on rifle, U.S. cal. .30 M1, M1C. If necessary to thin, use THINNER, enamel synthetic.)” Painting and baking (“1½ hr. at 300 to 350 deg.F) is covered in TM 9-1275 dated 17 June 1947 on page 59 & 60. Refinishing of Gas Cylinders is not covered in the TM 9-1275 dated 06 Nov 1942 , however painting of Gas Cylinders may have been covered in a Change to this TM or a Technical Bulletin issued after the Nov.42 TM and before the June 47 TM. Thank you airborne53 for putting this up. 45B20
  9. Charlie, thank you for that interesting photo. Canfield reports that 354 Spencer Shotguns were purchased by the US Military between 1886 and 1893. The only information as to their use was for, “guarding prisoners”. Spare parts may have be obtained from Bannerman or made by Springfield. In 1892/93 fiscal, Springfield reports purchasing Spencer Shotgun parts. Perhaps some Spencers were purchased directly by the Navy or as the Army obtained M1897s, the Spencers were passed to the Navy. Or in this case, perhaps confiscated from this family. David The Win M12 and Rem. M10 were not purchased by the US Military until 1917, so they were not in service in 1914 45B20
  10. BARgunner The MK 2 on the base is the US Navy’s designation of a case made of brass. I can not read the markings on the primer. For a USN case of that date, 2-45, the primer should be a Mk 22. IIRC, the triangular shaped mark on the base is the manufacture. If that was an US Army round (for that date) it would have the case and the complete round lot # stamped on the base. Just a guess,, I think the lot number on the base is the case lot number and I am just not sure about the stenciling on the side of the case. The Army shot up a lot of Navy 40-mm ammo in Viet Nam and I do not remember any thing stenciled on the side of the cases, could be I just don’t remember. I have a empty 40-mm steel case (MK 3) in my shop, in a.m. I will check if it has anything on its side. 45B20
  11. One little thing I forgot to add, I think it is fairly certain that reduced antimony lead cores were pressed inside GMCS jackets and then these projectiles were then used to make M2 Ball cartridges . So there were alternate/alternative M2 Ball rounds, although I do not know of any market in such a fashion. 45B20
  12. Ive re-read the “Caliber .30 M2 Ball dated 1943”, post by Chunky Monkey, and I noticed incorrect use of the word “Alternative” by several of the posters. The correct definitions as they relate to .30 cal. Rifle Ball ammo is: ALTERNATIVE relates to the makeup of the projectile's lead core ALTERNATE relates to the makeup of the projectile’s jacket. This is some of the information I used. For 'Alternative' “Like the M1 Ball, the M2 was also authorized to be made in a alternative version having less antimony in the bullet core in order to conserve this strategic metal during wartime manufacture” From: “History of Modern U.S. Military Small Arms Ammunition” by Hackley, Woodin and Scranton pg.56. Drawings of these two .30 cal. Ball Cartridges, both normal and alternative, are shown in “Record of Army Ordnance Research and Development, Vol., 2, Book 2 Small Arms Ammunition” pg. 118 &119. SO, ALTERNATIVE means 30 cal. Rifle Ball cores having a different ratio of lead and antimony. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Now for the word ’Alternate’: This is from the Cal. .30 Ball M2 Clad-Steel Bullets Jacket Development Section “In May 1942 the first lot of M2 Ball cartridges assembled with clad-steel bullets was made at Frankford Arsenal.------------- The first full-scale production of this cartridge started at Frankford Arsenal on September 28, 1942. This round was called Cartridge, Ball. Cal. .30 M2 (Alternate) and is shown on Dwg. B137544 as revised September 30, 1942.” The above is also from Hackley et-al pg.61 SO, ALTERNATE means .30 cal. Rifle M2 Ball with GMSC projectiles. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I have been following these terms alternate and alternative as they apply to US Ammo and it can be confusing. Here is a quote from Ray Meketa on the IAA Board that I think sums the whole thing up rather well. “99.9% of the confusion, I believe, is the result of the cavalier use of the words ’Alternative' and 'Alternate’, and the abbreviation Alt. And not by collectors but by those in charge, who should have know better.” The abbreviation Alt. was used on cartons and cans, Ray Meketa is of the opinion that Alt. indicates .30 cal. M2 Ball ammo with GMCS (clad) jackets. The above information is not ‘written in stone’ some 'alternative' and 'alternate' ammo was being made and packed at the same time. I have read reports of alternate marked cartons having alternative type projectiles and visa versa. IIRC 'alternative' was used only with .30 cal. Rifle ammo and that was with the M2 Ball that had the lead-antimony ratio changed and the M2 AP with a different penetrator core. As a side note: because of the shortage of antimony in 1942 one lot, FA3552 was loaded with projectiles having cores of pure lead. 'Alternative' could have been used with other US ammo, if you find an example let me know. The word ’alternate’ with different meanings, was used with other .30 cal Rifle ammo, such as tracer, incendiary, dummy, blank and armor piercing. From what I have read tracer did not do well with GNCS jackets. The word 'alternate' was also used in the discriptions of other U.S. ammo. Armor piercing is another round that is often miss-described. The core was/is not made up of tungsten carbide but was a tungsten-chromium steel alloy with about 4% tungsten, (WD74100) in Feb.1942 this core was changed to one made of a manganese-molybdenum steel alloy. Pure T.C. is much too brittle to be used as a AP core. I have no idea of what is use as the material for today’s SA ammo AP cores. “Test of the 'alternate' molybdenum core indicated it was equal to the tungsten core in penetration. High carbon steel was also authorized as a substitute for manganese-molybdenum.” from Hackley et-al. pg.73 As an example of how confusing this can get, the Cartridge Cal..30 AP M2 was produced with an GMCS jacket (alternate) and a steel mang-molyb core (alternative). Source Hackley et-al pg,73 and Drawing B138194 in Record of Army Ordnance R&D, vol.2 book 2 pg.194. Ive never seen or heard of a .30 cal M2 AP box carton with 'Alternate' and 'Alternative' printed on it, but there maybe one and it would be correct. For more information on ''alternative'' and ''alternate'' as it applies to US ammo I recommend the above two books and the IAA board and journal. 45B20
  13. Star194 Shooting a Low Number always rises a lot of questions. You should go over to Culvers Shooting Page and read some of Michael Petrov’s writing under the Culver’s 03 Board. Mr. Pelrov has been trying to ‘blow up’ some Low Numbers with not much luck. The Low Numbers under US Gov control had to pass some serious proof loads each time they were rebuilt. Many people shoot them with no concern, others think the risk to too great. You refer to your rifle as a ceremonial/parade rifle, I want to make sure that this is not a Drill Rifle with the barrel welded to the receiver, the cut-off welded in place and a plug welded in the receiver. I will not fire an original low number receiver on the very slim chance that I might damage it. Your chrome plated (or maybe nickel plated) is certainly not original. If you decide to shoot your Low Number, have the rifle and its headspace checked. Take it to a gunsmith or buy a Field Gage and do the check yourself. The gages do not cost much and the Forrester’s are more than adequate for this job. Use standard GI M2 Ball or equivalent. Standard factory 30-06 usually runs higher in pressure than M2 Ball. And be sure to wear eye protection and a leather glove on the hand that grips the fore end. Please no re-loads, I do not care how good you think you are, you are not as good a factory ammo with regards to safety. The problem with the Low Number was the uneven heat control in forging, NOT the heat treatment. The original heat treatment was entirely adequate, the later double heat treatment just added another layer of safety. Remember; forging of the receiver, machining of the receiver then heat treatment of the receiver. But the bottom line is:: that any risk of firing a Low Number in good condition is very, very slim. I would really like you to recheck that date on your Low Number’s barrel and tell me what you find. 45B20
  14. David To my regret I do not have the photocopy, I saw it several years ago at a paper show in San Jose, CA. It looked kinda ratty and I was sure I would be able to find an original or at least a better copy. And of course I have not seen any more. I would guess that the Springfield Museum or Rock Island would have a copy or an original. If you are close to either one you might be able to get a copy. One thing I remember about the copy that I saw was that it was printed by the Armory’s print shop. That TM 9-2117 was the easiest to use of all the shotgun manuals I worked with. 45B20
  15. dalbert You are correct in that the War Dept. did not publish any manuals such as TRs before 1942, as I have already stated. (see my second post, 3rd par) However Springfield did produce a “service handbook” in fiscal 1921/22. This was for use by Springfield and the Arsenals. During the 20s and 30s, only Springfield, Benicia and Rock Island were authorized to do any repair on shot guns, (so no need for TRs) as per S.N.L. B-9, dated Jan 11, 1934. The one photocopy I have seen, looked like a lot of it was from Rem or Win with very neat line drawings and explanatory notes added. It was marked as to being from Rock Island. Even in 1943, those shotgun in the US that needed repairs, had to be sent to Augusta, Benicia, Raritan, R.I. or San Antonio Arsenal, as per Organizational Spare Parts & Equip SNL B-9, dated Apr 30, 1943. The first shotgun repair manual after the armory service handbook was the Ordnance School Text put out by Aberdeen in Aug of 41. It has some of the look of that ‘service handbook’ I saw. This first Text Book only covers the two Winchesters and the M10 Rem. The manual that was intended to replace TM 9-1285 was TM 9-2117, dated July 1957. But there was so many of the older shotguns still around I was also using TM 9-285 & 1285 when I was in Viet Nam. We also had separate manuals on the Win. M1200 and the Stevens 77E. The NRA stuff was on functioning and cleaning. TM 9-285 was available by late 42 for instructions on disassembly, cleaning, lubrication and company level repair work. The best combat shotgun from a functional, durability and ease of repair was the Ithaca the second was the Stevens 520 and this is not even a close second. The rest belong on the trap range or out hunting rabbits. The most challenging shotgun was the 77E. I would not take a 97 to a wedding, the thing almost shovels crud into itself and break or loose parts as soon as it has seen a little use. 45B20
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.