What am I seeing here?

[StrangeRanger]

Look at pictures 5, 10 and especially 13

 

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/932697640

 

Shouldn't the tip of the foregrip mount be riding on the OD of the fins rather than in the groove between them?

[giantpanda4]

Yes. Replacement barrel. Also why the appropriately specialized gunsmith they have been employing for years messed up the comp pin as well.

Not to mention the vert grip is a repro too. And broken ear....

 

Funny have we seen this gun before?

[RoscoeTurner]

The amount of residue showing in compensator openings reminds me of a 1928A1 I bought years ago. The lead fouling in the compensator was so bad that there was just an opening large enough for a bullet to pass through. Spoke volumes on the maintenance skills of the previous owner.

[brveagle]

I asked the seller for more detailed pictures a week ago and nothing yet. He couldn't even confirm that the lower was matching or not.

 

i don't think it's any surprise that no one has bid on it yet.

[inertord]

Same seller has an M1 listed as transferable, that I believe is a dealer sample due to import markings on receiver: https://www.gunbroker.com/item/932702564

[anjong-ni]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Are there any "V-marked" mags in the group? ...Phil

[reconbob]

I agree that the tip of the grip mount should rest on a fin and not the space between the fins as in the photo.

 

But I have encountered original G.I barrels MINT-in-wrapper where the spacing of the fins is such that the tip of the grip mount rests in the space between the fins. These barrels were aquired 40+ years ago when it was cheaper to buy an original barrel than it was to make a new barrel.

 

I wonder if somewhere along the way, incorrect barrels were made, and set aside and not used/issued because they were out of spec. Then years later when surplus was sold off the barrels were included in the various lots.

 

In a similar way I have seen M1A1 sights that are all correct except they do not have the little round circle of pressed in checkering around the sight aperture, And these sights are packed with a paper label with correct nomenclature, etc.

 

So maybe not correct or to spec but certainly original.

 

Bob

Edited May 19, 2022 by reconbob

[fifthmdec]

Same seller has an M1 listed as transferable, that I believe is a dealer sample due to import markings on receiver: https://www.gunbroker.com/item/932702564

I agree. Inter American import export company out of Sacramento CA. Imported many pre May sales samples in the early 1980s.

 

I noticed that their information is stamped on the weapon in the photos. We’ve had many of their sales samples MGs over the years.

Edited May 19, 2022 by fifthmdec

[2ndArmored]

I agree that the tip of the grip mount should rest on a fin and not the space between the fins as in the photo.

 

But I have encountered original G.I barrels MINT-in-wrapper where the spacing of the fins is such that the tip of the grip mount rests in the space between the fins. These barrels were aquired 40+ years ago when it was cheaper to buy an original barrel than it was to make a new barrel.

 

I wonder if somewhere along the way, incorrect barrels were made, and set aside and not used/issued because they were out of spec. Then years later when surplus was sold off the barrels were included in the various lots.

 

In a similar way I have seen M1A1 sights that are all correct except they do not have the little round circle of pressed in checkering around the sight aperture, And these sights are packed with a paper label with correct nomenclature, etc.

 

So maybe not correct or to spec but certainly original.

 

Bob

 

What would be the point in warehousing out-of-spec parts?

[Got Uzi]

I've been watching that M1 as its one of the few AOC M1 marked guns I've seen for awhile. I noticed the import markings as well, could it be possible that this gun was imported before 1968 and got papered during the amnisty?

[reconbob]

In the example given - fins in the wrong place and rear sight apeture with

no checkering - the parts are perfectly useable, so maybe it was thought to

be best not to throw them away. If the parts were sold as surplus at a later

date, that turned out to be (I think) the right decision.

 

Bob

[fifthmdec]

I've been watching that M1 as its one of the few AOC M1 marked guns I've seen for awhile. I noticed the import markings as well, could it be possible that this gun was imported before 1968 and got papered during the amnisty?

I do not think that it was imported before the Amnesty. Based on that the company Inter American Import/Export Company did not exist before the Amnesty. It was a subsidiary of Old Sacramento Armory on J Street. IA was not the only import export company that was a subsidiary of OSA. IA dealt almost exclusively in Pre May a sales Samples during the early 1980s. They sold the Pre May stuff through a company called ARMEX. They advertised to LE and Class 3 dealers in the Shotgun News.

 

Much of the information here is from guys that worked there during that time. They imported on Form 2s. Since the information in the NFRTR is less than accurate. Who knows what was input over the years. The NFA has been kicking forms back for corrections. We had 5 sent back to the transferor for photos and corrections.

 

A FOIA request is the best way to put the uncertainty to rest. We had a standing deal to purchase a M3A1 Guide Lamp advertised as Transferable. It has IA SAC stamped on it. He called the NFA and indeed it was a Pry May.

Edited May 20, 2022 by fifthmdec