Jump to content

Inspectors Stamps


Recommended Posts

Crossed cannons look more like an ink stamp than a stamping but cameras can play tricks

 

However, unless that stock has been in some sort of climate-controlled time capsule for decades, it would seem to me that this is the most perfect stock ever stamped and preserved...and my information is that the wood does not get that smooth from the finish it was given while new, but from use...which makes that highly unlikely to be an 'original' cartouche since there's no hint of wear

 

The metal stamp itself could be original, and thus a new impression made with it could be described as 'an original stamp' and arguably be a version of the truth, albeit a misleading one

Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that this one is probably intended to be an Underwood cartouche. Just to remind everyone, it was on a rifle for sale which was purported to be all original Inland. I also agree that this cartouche looks like a rubber ink stamp and not an impression into the surface of the wood stock. Also note that the rifle cartouch does not have the box, the letters are not shaped the same, and they appear to have been individually stamped.

 

I took a bit of time and made a comparison with Harrison's template Underwood #11, and the results are posted below and in the next post. The next post shows a comparison of the template with an original Underwood cartouche that Harrison included in his book.

 

In all fairness to J.C. Harrison, he makes quite the effort to point out many things that should be carefully examined when looking at any M1 carbine or part. The tone of his writing is very "collector" oriented, and his objective is clearly to help the collector not enable the fakers. He exposes many scams and fakes in his book.

 

His work is excoriated by many collectors who are quick to point out at every mention that his books have errors. However, no reference work is error free and the longer from its publication date to the present, the more errors will be found as new information is uncovered.

 

Harrison deserves a great amount of credit for even attempting to put something in writing, and the collecting community is enriched by his sharing his research. The search for truth and knowledge marches on, though, and we can benefit from using his work as a point of departure for new learning.

 

Mike

post-626-1229043786.jpg

"Hope is not a course of action." Sean P. Kelly, SSG, 1st US Ranger Battalion

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a comparison between Harrison's Template Under #11 (there are three different Underwood cartouche varients in the template) and an orginal Underwood cartouche also published in the same book.

 

Anyone with the book can flip back and forth between the pages and make this same observation.

 

Mike

post-626-1229045052.jpg

"Hope is not a course of action." Sean P. Kelly, SSG, 1st US Ranger Battalion

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to close out this particular rifle, here is a comparison between the sling on the rifle for sale and an original (post-war) US GI sling.

 

Note the difference in the weave between the webbing. As far as I know, all original US slings, wartime and post-war, are woven the same way. The only difference in the webbing is the change in color from OD #9 (khaki) to OD #7 (OD green), but the weave remained unchanged. Some references sate that the color change in the carbine sling was made late in the war and some say that only post war slings were the darker color.

 

Of course, there are details between reproduction sling hardware and original hardware which are not illustrated here. However, this improper webbing weave seems to be consistant with all the fakes that I have seen.

 

Again, this rifle was up for sale on an auction site and was described by the seller as all original Inland. The point being that there are many more details that must be considered, not just stock markings. (Not only are the stock markings on this rifle probably fake, they're not even fake Inland but fake Underwood.)

 

Mike

post-626-1229045285.jpg

"Hope is not a course of action." Sean P. Kelly, SSG, 1st US Ranger Battalion

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is another M1 carbine manufacturer, Standard Products.

 

This comparison is between a very suspect (fake?) Standard Products cartouche, the Harrison Template Standard Products cartouch, and a purported original Standard Products cartouche.

 

Although not shown, I would like to point out that the Harrison Template and the the drawing in Larry Ruth's War Baby are nearly identical and that neither is the same as the purported original here. Perhaps someone on the forum who has an original Standard Products stock can provide some additional information on this one.

 

Also note how uniform and perfectly impressed the suspect cartouche is. The purported original was impressed 90 degrees from the vertical (not the direction of the wood grain). I rotated the photo to make the comparison easier, but this is another example of the casual nature of the workers who produced the originals versus the faker.

 

Mike

post-626-1229045925.jpg

"Hope is not a course of action." Sean P. Kelly, SSG, 1st US Ranger Battalion

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello all.. New here.. Love this thread.. I have Harrison's & Riesch's books.. I'm not a collector but I like the carbine and it's a fascinating subject... I'd like to contribute a couple of pics of the markings on a Winchester I cut high wood stock with no markings in the sling well.. Never posted pics here so here goes my 1st trypost-4909-1229052478.jpg

post-4909-1229052551.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

This has been an excellent thread. It's to bad that Mr. Harrison has passed on. I think it goes to show that unless you really know the person you have to be very cautious who you buy from. I've gotten to the point where I only buy from a select few trusted people when I purchase rifles.

HHC 3/39th Inf. Bn., 9th ID 76-79
IAFF L-726 - retired.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi 2POP:

 

Welcome to the forum and thanks for posting your Winchester cartouche photos. Do you mind if I use them in another comparison collage with the Harrison Template?

 

Oldfireguy:

 

Yes, it is unfortunate that Mr. Harrison has passed away. I never met him either in person or by correspondance, but from his books, he sounds like a "straight up" kinda guy who was mostly interested in sharing his research and enriching the collector community. I wish some folks would keep that and the ephemeral nature of historical research in mind when they criticize his (and for that matter, most other authors') books. It's one thing to point out specific errors or mistakes but quite another to undertake wholesale condemnation that borders on personal attack.

 

Mike

"Hope is not a course of action." Sean P. Kelly, SSG, 1st US Ranger Battalion

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi 2POP:

 

Welcome to the forum and thanks for posting your Winchester cartouche photos. Do you mind if I use them in another comparison collage with the Harrison Template?

 

Oldfireguy:

 

Yes, it is unfortunate that Mr. Harrison has passed away. I never met him either in person or by correspondance, but from his books, he sounds like a "straight up" kinda guy who was mostly interested in sharing his research and enriching the collector community. I wish some folks would keep that and the ephemeral nature of historical research in mind when they criticize his (and for that matter, most other authors') books. It's one thing to point out specific errors or mistakes but quite another to undertake wholesale condemnation that borders on personal attack.

 

Mike

 

Thanks for the welcome :D Be my guest.. Been out of town.. or I would have posted sooner..

Link to post
Share on other sites

SGM: Thanks for the stock markings info. I have two CMP M1 carbines, both Inlands with 1943 markings, one for me and the other to give to my brother for Christmas. He lives in Augusta so I am sure he would especially like one that came through that arsenal, but the one I have earmarked for him has a manufacturer marking "LW" in the sling cut-out and I don't see anything else on the stock. The ona I am going to keep has the crossed cannons cartouche.

 

By the way, one thing I am wondering is that the carbine I am going to keep has a little piece of wood missing from the stock to the right of the recoil plate. It is if the cut out for the slide just continues straight back. Given that you would seem to have a tendency to put your thumb right about there I wonder if this was a personal mod of some kind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With 2POP's permission, here's a comparison of the Winchester cartouche he posted and the Harrison Template's cartouche. Interestingly, Harrison's Winchester cartouche design seems to me be the closest to correct. However, there are still small differences.

 

MIFlyer:

 

Your brother's a lucky guy!

 

The LW marked stock is probably a Lumb Woodworking Co. example. If you can make out a faint "-U," after the "LW" then the stock was made originally for Underwood. If you can make out a faint "-B," then the stock was made for IBM. Many of the original stocks were sanded fairly heavily during arsenal rebuilds, especially if they had been used hard and were banged-up or chipped. It's entirely possible for the original manufacturer and acceptance stamps to be sanded away. Also, there is some discussion of various types and size fonts used for the "LW" markings, so the fancy font shown in an earlier post is possibly not the only one used.

 

I don't know if Lumb Woodworking made generic replacement stocks during the war, one of the other forum members might be able to answer that. (Such a stocks do exist, I just don't know about the manufacturer). If they did make replacement stocks, then your "LW" stock might have been made as a replacement without any other markings, to include no acceptance cartouche.

 

As for the missing piece of wood, I would guess that it's probably damage. Given how the grain usually runs in that spot, a small "split out" seems the most likely explanation. Without any pictures, it's hard to say, but I could easily accept even a small bit of "personal" improvement with the broken spot being smoothed out a bit to prevent splinters, etc. Since you describe the notch as on the right of the recoil plate, a right-handed firer's thumb would actually be on the opposite side, so a deliberate modification seems unlikely (but always possible in the "never say never" vein).

 

Mike

post-626-1229556900.jpg

"Hope is not a course of action." Sean P. Kelly, SSG, 1st US Ranger Battalion

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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