Thaddeus Posted January 30, 2017 Share #1 Posted January 30, 2017 Good Afternoon,I bought a little gift for myself after returning from some time overseas. This is an early model Inland M1 Carbine with high wood, flip sights, flat bolt, and no bayonet lug. Inland barrel is marked 11-42 and serial number on the receiver correlates with the barrel date. I haven't seen an earlier barrel date one on of these things yet but really glad to have picked up an early one. The majority of the parts that are marked are of Inland manufacture. The stock appears to have been sanded at some point but the cartouche and a faint HI (Hillerich & Bradsby Co.) near the slingwell. After taking the rifle apart, it also has an OI mark inside the upper portion of the stock. There is also a large crack continuing past the magazine well and towards the front of the rifle. It appears one of the previous owners may have attempted to reinforce the wood by placing some glue on the inside. There also appears to be repair marks to the rear of the recoil plate area. I believe that the stock is original to the rifle but I do not want to fire it because of the large crack. The buttplate appears to be a Irwin-Peterson model but does not have any markings on it.I'm not sure what all of the markings are on the receiver group? Could anyone enlighten me on them? I would love to receive feedback on what you guys think! -Thaddeus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sundance Posted January 30, 2017 Share #2 Posted January 30, 2017 Very nice with flip rear sight and no bayo lug. Is it a push button safety? They are sweet rifles and I'm sure you deserved the gift. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaddeus Posted January 31, 2017 Author Share #3 Posted January 31, 2017 Sundance - Sorry all of the photos did not post for some reason. to answer your question, yes it has a flat push button safety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaddeus Posted January 31, 2017 Author Share #4 Posted January 31, 2017 I am going to add some more pictures from when I broke the rifle down while inspecting it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaddeus Posted January 31, 2017 Author Share #5 Posted January 31, 2017 Some more images with the stock repair and markings on the parts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaddeus Posted January 31, 2017 Author Share #6 Posted January 31, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaddeus Posted January 31, 2017 Author Share #7 Posted January 31, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaddeus Posted January 31, 2017 Author Share #8 Posted January 31, 2017 Does anyone know what all the markings are on the receiver group? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirt Detective Posted January 31, 2017 Share #9 Posted January 31, 2017 Hi Thaddeus.... Beautiful Carbine...love the Carbines. Is the serial 331xxx ? If so I think it has been re-barreled , it was hard to see the pic. I have 3 orig 1-43 Inlands and they start with 171xxx, 196xxx and 206xxx, will check what my 42 is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirt Detective Posted January 31, 2017 Share #10 Posted January 31, 2017 Are you sure the barrel is 42 and not 43. a 11-42 Carbine would be around 114xxx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lambo35 Posted January 31, 2017 Share #11 Posted January 31, 2017 The early date on your barrel could be a case of first in the installation pile= last out of the pile. The stamps on the bottom of the barrel are inspection stamps, characteristic of Inland manufactured Carbines. The HI stamped in the sling well is probably for Hillerich/Bradsby for Inland. Chuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirt Detective Posted January 31, 2017 Share #12 Posted January 31, 2017 If the serial is 331xxx I would put it at about 3-43 Here are two known original 3-1943 Inlands 3319xx and 261xxx Still a great lookin Carbine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lambo35 Posted January 31, 2017 Share #13 Posted January 31, 2017 My Inland 366216 has a 4/43 barrel and 238905 with a 2/43 barrel. Outliers often occured in WW2, receivers with early barrels are okay but not earlier receivers with later barrels, with the exception of replacement receivers, especially S'G' for IP block numbers. Chuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newscotlander Posted January 31, 2017 Share #14 Posted January 31, 2017 Carbine does not appear to be original, as manufactured. Problems include the trigger housing color, hammer type, stock, possibly the rear sight, etc. More pictures would help to clarify. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalbert Posted February 3, 2017 Share #15 Posted February 3, 2017 Carbine does not appear to be original, as manufactured. Problems include the trigger housing color, hammer type, stock, possibly the rear sight, etc. More pictures would help to clarify. Thaddeus, Please take the quoted comment with appropriate consideration. Your Carbine does not have "problems." Some collectors will be quick to point out what they perceive to be non-original issues, and they may, or may not be correct. You can take their input as you wish. I would not rush out and try to replace parts to attempt to make it "more correct," unless you really want to. It's your new M1 Carbine. Enjoy it. Congratulations! If you feel inclined, you should join the Carbine Club forum. http://www.uscarbinecal30.com/forum/forums.html David Albert [email protected] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirt Detective Posted February 5, 2017 Share #16 Posted February 5, 2017 Would love to see more pics out of the stock and parts markings. Any chance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirt Detective Posted February 6, 2017 Share #17 Posted February 6, 2017 I think your right Lambo...it is possible a receiver can have a earlier barrel date.. Never say " Always" with carbines..lots of mystery's with these cool little rifles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newscotlander Posted February 7, 2017 Share #18 Posted February 7, 2017 Please take the quoted comment with appropriate consideration. Your Carbine does not have "problems." Some collectors will be quick to point out what they perceive to be non-original issues, and they may, or may not be correct. You can take their input as you wish. I would not rush out and try to replace parts to attempt to make it "more correct," unless you really want to. It's your new M1 Carbine. Enjoy it. Congratulations! If the OP thinks that his carbine is original, as manufactured, it does have "problems". If you want to take facts and try to turn them into fallacy, that is your prerogative. Could dalbert please tell me when Inland starting using the straight hammer marked I.K. in production? And also when he thinks the OP's carbine was manufactured at Inland? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalbert Posted February 7, 2017 Share #19 Posted February 7, 2017 If the OP thinks that his carbine is original, as manufactured, it does have "problems". If you want to take facts and try to turn them into fallacy, that is your prerogative. Could dalbert please tell me when Inland starting using the straight hammer marked I.K. in production? And also when he thinks the OP's carbine was manufactured at Inland? Newscotlander, With all due respect, I prefer not to put down the new acquisition of a member by referring to "problems" with their firearm's originality. Maybe it's semantics. You are free to take that approach, as you do. I prefer a friendlier approach, and want to help Thaddeus celebrate his new acquisition. He's pretty happy about his new Carbine! I have not turned any facts into fallacy, but you are free to think that, if you wish. Members here will form their own opinions of the interactions demonstrated in this thread. As you know, Carbine collecting has different schools of approach. Some believe that every Carbine should be returned to its absolute original configuration as it exited the factory, and if it's not in that configuration, it has problems or issues, and is automatically subpar. The issue with this approach is that no one is 100% certain how different manufacturer Carbines left their factories. We can guess with reasonably high accuracy what was correct, and we can base it on many current observations, and available historical information, but there are still factors such as parts sharing that can throw a wild card into the whole thing. I personally do not promote the idea that all Carbines should necessarily attempt to be returned to a configuration that is perceived by a group of collectors to be correct. That's not saying it's a wrong approach...It's just not the first approach I suggest. Does it mean that I can't appreciate a Carbine that is 100% factory correct? No, it does not. I like to see them, like most other collectors. The other school of approach involves arsenal reworks, and their effects on the parts makeup of M1 Carbines, and other small arms. Carbines were tools, and were treated that way. Their parts were designed to be interchangeable, and were interchanged. As such, many arsenal reworked Carbines with various manufacturer parts are correct from this perspective. In regards to your last two, specific questions intended to trip me up, I don't know the answers offhand, and don't really care, based on the aforementioned collecting approaches and preferences. I am sure you know the answers, and will offer up your expertise. David Albert [email protected] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newscotlander Posted February 7, 2017 Share #20 Posted February 7, 2017 I'll avoid verbosity. The OP asked for opinions. I gave him one. Now it's up to him to decide whether I know what I'm talking about or am full of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirt Detective Posted February 8, 2017 Share #21 Posted February 8, 2017 I'll avoid verbosity. The OP asked for opinions. I gave him one. Now it's up to him to decide whether I know what I'm talking about or am full of it. I agree.. When someone says " I would love to receive feedback on what you guys think!" he is asking what people think. When people post a helmet here and ask that...sometimes the reply's are not positive. This M1 was posted saying it was built in 1942...should we not tell him if it was't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirt Detective Posted February 10, 2017 Share #22 Posted February 10, 2017 I saw the post on the US Carbine forum...it confirms everything we have said here. Still a good looking Carbine though..will be a good shooter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
collector Posted February 14, 2017 Share #23 Posted February 14, 2017 I agree that the original poster should be informed, to me an issue can be the the 'tone' of the response, and the subsequent interactions between members. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newscotlander Posted February 15, 2017 Share #24 Posted February 15, 2017 My apologies if brief and to the point is the wrong 'tone'. I tried to help the OP and not mislead him or have him misled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now