M1 Garand quiz/easy
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Joined
·
1,087 Posts
Well Ed I got some more time to read Volume 2 and found some neat stock stuff which of course is like feeding a addiction to me. I can't let the few secrets out but can know possible refer to early SA/SPG wood and later wood. I found it in the letter from Oct 31 1938 from John Garand himself. I am wondering if this may be when they deleted the drawing #'s on the bottom as a change would call for a new number? Thanks again for all the info and have a Merry Christmas. Rick B
Stock Doc,
If you read that same file, notice the part about the cut in the op-rod. I wonder if Mr. Garand is talking about the cut that early in production.
Thanks again
Merry Xmas to you and yours
Clancy
ps when your done let me know what you think of vol 2. I have been getting flak.
If you read that same file, notice the part about the cut in the op-rod. I wonder if Mr. Garand is talking about the cut that early in production.
Thanks again
Merry Xmas to you and yours
Clancy
ps when your done let me know what you think of vol 2. I have been getting flak.
Joined
·
1,087 Posts
Yah what flak,, it is plain and simply in Black & White. Who is flaking on the original papers. I love silly people and I say this because they will argue a stop sign when they see the darn thing. Or the two people in a accident who argue neither did anything.
I read the few pages of back and forth conversation on Parkerizing and how they didn't like the gray color in 1939. G.H.D. talks about how they were quenching the parts after parking in oil. I read on to see in another letter it was Mineral oil heated to 100 Fahrenheit. I loved it as many wonder about the original colors and how they got it. You're darn files tell how and people could be dangerous with this info.
There are many things I have heard debated for years in you're book telling the true with printed answers but a hard head who thought he was a big shot spouting off his reasons for something I guess doesn't want you're papers to prove his Hypothesis was incorrect all these years I bet?
Ed what you did with these paper's is a great thing and anyone that argues with files has to be a bit off, I'm sorry. As Dana said Bring on Volume 3 I need more Winchester info and bet you get hit with flak hard on that book. Those Winchester guys have stone set stuff that I have blown apart already. Like the 2S butt plate is not Winchester only. This I bet my collection on and have plenty of proof now. Heck I have had guys with Collectable originals early in the hundred thousand's range and some 1 million range that argued and pulled there butt plates off there Springfield's only to find a 2S mark. I smirk then and they bum. 2S is a sub contractor and what I think happened is Winchester was sent these plates early on from SA's supplier. But Winchester guys latch on to different stuff to separate Winchester from SA. Heck the rough milling marks and a punch mark theory aren't holding water either as seen on many early SA parts. Keep the stuff coming Ed as I learned allot from these paper's. Thanks,,Rick B
I read the few pages of back and forth conversation on Parkerizing and how they didn't like the gray color in 1939. G.H.D. talks about how they were quenching the parts after parking in oil. I read on to see in another letter it was Mineral oil heated to 100 Fahrenheit. I loved it as many wonder about the original colors and how they got it. You're darn files tell how and people could be dangerous with this info.
There are many things I have heard debated for years in you're book telling the true with printed answers but a hard head who thought he was a big shot spouting off his reasons for something I guess doesn't want you're papers to prove his Hypothesis was incorrect all these years I bet?
Ed what you did with these paper's is a great thing and anyone that argues with files has to be a bit off, I'm sorry. As Dana said Bring on Volume 3 I need more Winchester info and bet you get hit with flak hard on that book. Those Winchester guys have stone set stuff that I have blown apart already. Like the 2S butt plate is not Winchester only. This I bet my collection on and have plenty of proof now. Heck I have had guys with Collectable originals early in the hundred thousand's range and some 1 million range that argued and pulled there butt plates off there Springfield's only to find a 2S mark. I smirk then and they bum. 2S is a sub contractor and what I think happened is Winchester was sent these plates early on from SA's supplier. But Winchester guys latch on to different stuff to separate Winchester from SA. Heck the rough milling marks and a punch mark theory aren't holding water either as seen on many early SA parts. Keep the stuff coming Ed as I learned allot from these paper's. Thanks,,Rick B
DANA, StockDoc,
Wait until Vol 3 gets out I call that one ammo-gate as Ordnance ORDERS that no M1 BALL is to be used in the M1 Garand. With that in mind You will really go crazy with WINCHESTER gate!! It's all in Vol 3 and the fur will fly.
Thanks again
Clancy
Wait until Vol 3 gets out I call that one ammo-gate as Ordnance ORDERS that no M1 BALL is to be used in the M1 Garand. With that in mind You will really go crazy with WINCHESTER gate!! It's all in Vol 3 and the fur will fly.
Thanks again
Clancy
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Join the discussion
