MR Buttstock stamp revisted

[reconbob]

A while back this photo was posted and I commented that the marking looked fake to me because

the letters were not defined and the wood around the letters had been pressed in as well - a sign that

the wood was seasoned for many years and too brittle to take a clear impression.

 

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f392/reconbob/MR-Stamp_zpscc8ccb39.jpg

 

Here is another MR - this looks like it should - the wood was soft when it was stamped and the letters are

clearly defined instead of being like a box punched into the wood:

 

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f392/reconbob/pix429462386_zps79a4fd63.jpg

 

Note also that in the first picture the letters are slightly mis-aligned - probably because they were

individual stamps - an M and an R. In the second photo the letters are perfectly lined up with each

other because it was done with a single stamp.

 

 

Bob

 

[dalbert]

Good post! The pictures and your details tell the story well. Thanks, Bob.

 

David Albert

dalbert@sturmgewehr.com

[Z3BigDaddy]

Apples and coconuts... The two stamps have nothing in common excluding that they are M & R. They don't match in font, cut or size. The second one is sans serif while the first is not. The second one has a sharp thin cutting line while the first has a flat face. You have done nothing to advance your theory in my humble estimation.

Edited March 12, 2014 by Z3BigDaddy

[j.hayes1942]

I disagree. I think he made his point rather well. jh

[dalbert]

Apples and coconuts... The two stamps have nothing in common excluding that they are M & R. They don't match in font, cut or size. The second one is sans serif while the first is not. The second one has a sharp thin cutting line while the first has a flat face. You have done nothing to advance your theory in my humble estimation.

 

Blaine,

 

I guess it depends what perspective you take, but I think your observations add to reconbob's premise. The fonts are different, in addition to the issues that he detailed. These two stocks are real examples, and I think reconbob's forensic analysis is excellent, and your font observation is an additional detail to note when such a mark is encountered.

 

David Albert

dalbert@sturmgewehr.com

[jim c 351]

Question, since rebuilt guns and stocks are generally considered less valuable by collectors, than non rebuild stocks, why would someone fake a rebuild stamp???

I have a ratty looking M1A1 stock that is stamped somewhat similar to stock #1 and in close proximity to the stamping on stock #1. Looks like it was hit with individual stamps and a little farther apart than the M-R in stock #1.

Who knows how long the wood may have been seasoned before being made into a stock.

Perhaps stock #2 above was once owned by Myron Rupus.

Jim C

PS this might also demonstrate the total disregard for modern day Thompson collectors by the inconsiderate men at Mt. Rainier arsenal.

Edited March 12, 2014 by jim c 351

[cocoabill]

As the owner of the stock with the first stamp I still think in context this is a real stamp, although just looking at the stamps I would tend to believe Bob. This gun is definitely arsenal refinished and belonged to a local recently deceased vet, who had owned as far back as the wife could remember. The gun has a mint parkerizing job and a well used bolt. Also on the front grip there is clear stamp, like Bobs example of an "F".

 

There is also zero wear on the refinish and no indication it has been shot in the last 40 years or so. With no one ever seeing an "F" stamp and no financial gain for making these fake stamps, I just don't know why an old vet would do this, unless he had a new set of stamps he just wanted to deface his gun with.

 

As I said I would tend to believe Bob but I just don't think this guy faking the stamp makes sense. I wish guns could talk or an old Mount Rainier arsonal guy would chime in.

 

Bill

[reconbob]

Go stamp an old WW1 or WW2 stock and see what you get. The wood will be brittle, not soft.

When you stamp the wood it will indent like the first photo and may even have little splinters flake

off.

People have been faking stock markings for years. It does not happen much with Thompsons

but with M-1 Garands they have been doing it for years, because true original Garands had big

cartouches on the left side of the stock. I have seen ads where people have the fake stamps and

you can send your stock to them to be marked. And since your replacement stock is new, it will

take the impression without denting and flaking.

The point with this is its one more little thing to look for - like the open 4 of the faker vs. the

closed 4 of original markings...

 

Bob

Edited March 12, 2014 by reconbob

[cocoabill]

If you stamp a stock that has been through a summer in North Africa and the a winter in Belgium; who is to say how dry and brittle the stock is; just saying I don't think you have much science behind your claims. I would buy the argument that stamps put on when the stock were brand new should not show signs of fracturing but we are talking a rebuild after 4 to 10 years of use and who knows what environment. I would think the more persuasive claim is the fonts are not the ones the government used.

 

Bill

[dalbert]

Reading through this, I think everyone makes valid points. I also think the provenance of the first stock is very good, but we don't know that with 100% certainty. When it comes down to it, you buy the gun, and not the story. I'd rather buy a gun with stamp example #2.

 

David Albert

dalbert@sturmgewehr.com

[reconbob]

Actually I have quite a lot of experience behind my claims. Years ago I was assembling M1903 rifles - complete

builds starting with a stripped receiver and building up from there. The person I was doing the work for had original

M1903A3 semi-pistol grip stocks in MINT condition in the original crates. Somewhere along the way it was decided

that these rifles would look more authentic if they had the big "P" stamped on the grip behind the trigger guard. This

was immediately abandoned because the stamp did not leave the correct impression in the wood which had seasoned

over the years (at the time approx. 30 years) and instead left a mark that was obviously done yesterday. It was decided

that the rifles looked better with no "P" than with an obviously fake "P".

This episode with the Springfields led me on a mini-crusade to see if WW2 or earlier wood could be stamped without

the indenting and flaking which I have described. I had access to all kinds of wood stocks and tried stamping everything

from M-1 Carbine up to BAR, even riot and trench guns. I probably stamped over 200 assorted stocks or pieces of stocks.

All were U.S. military

stocks and most of them were used although some were new. In this era the wood was all walnut. Birch stocks were

made for the Garand but for some reason they were rare at the time and I saw very few of them. If I stamped a stock,

90% of the time I got the defective impression I have described. You could not get a V-section stamp to leave a V

impression in the wood - it would be a dull squarish impression. Flaking of the wood would happen maybe half of the time.

Now, if you stamped a stock at the end - either under the buttplate or at the tip, you would get a better impression

because of the grain, but still the wood would not be soft. And the sides are the worst because of the smoothness

of the grain and from the stocks being cared for. You would also get a decent impression in the barrel channel probably

because the wood had aged differently being covered by the barrel and handguard and not exposed to light and air.

Back when wood was used for stocks they sent buyers out to purchase quantities of raw lumber which was cut

into raw blanks which were seasoned in unheated sheds for a year or two (I can check the exact time) before being

finished into stocks. So maybe a "new" stock was several years old when it was fitted to a rifle. During WW2 they

probably sped up the process of seasoning wood. So any WW2 stock would be 3-5 years old during the war. The same stocks

being used and rebuilt during and after Korea would still be not more than 10-12 years old and in my opinion would still

be soft enough to take a good impression. Of course as time has gone by the stocks are now 70+ years old. But I was testing

stocks that were approx. 30 years old.

 

Bob

[Z3BigDaddy]

Prima Facia, the whole premise that Bob declares this mark to be a fake and someone has created a forgery begs the question, why? What possible motive would someone have to go to such lengths to do this? The marks are obviously made by two different stamps but stamps were changed out on a constant basis so that is no big deal. So the whole argument is that someone can tell at what point a piece is stamped by it's moisture content at the time? Not taking in account moisture content varies in the life of a piece of wood with many variables too numerous to list....

Edited March 13, 2014 by Z3BigDaddy

[Z3BigDaddy]

There are tricks to making a new stamp look old... I watched a person do it time after time at the Reno Gun Show. It helped the he had all the original ordnance stamps not repros.

Edited March 12, 2014 by Z3BigDaddy

[jim c 351]

FWIW, I checked the stocks on 5 carbine stocks. One of them had a M R stamp and it looked almost identical to stock # 1 at the very top of this page, and therefore almost identical to the M1a1 TSMG stock I mentioned above.

Jim C

[cocoabill]

Jim, thanks for the post I was leaning towards Bobs opinion but with an identical fake mark, I am tilting back towards it being original, I just don't see why anyone would fake this. Anyway it's a very interesting thread and why this forum is great.

 

Bill

[Sandman1957]

Has anyone ever seen, suspected or documented "Fake" anchor stamps on a remington (Colt) stock? That would be motive and $dollars...

[cocoabill]

I was over at a friends shop who has several thompsons on his wall, and just happened to look over and spot an MR stamp on one of his M1A1's which he has had since the early 70's, looks rather familiar. If these are fake then there seems to be someone running around with the same font stamping these in the same place, for what reason who knows.

 

Bill

 

[Bob]

I have some Mt Rainer Ordnance Depot stamped wood, some of their stamping looks like it was done by a 9 year old.

 

Was after all out in the wild wood of Washington;

 

http://www.historylink.org/index.cfm?DisplayPage=output.cfm&file_id=5631

Edited March 13, 2014 by Bob

[bug]

So you figure the POWs did the sloppy stamping, eh?

[Bob]

I checked the rack for the MR wood and didn't find it yet. Here are some others for reference and what they look like when they went around the block a second time. Most of these have been hanging around for 30-40 years in the safe.

 

 

 

[Bridgeport28A1]

Bob, is the O.G. (Ogden) rebuild cartouche pictured on the M1/M1A1 buttstock the only one on a Thompson buttstock?

 

Thanks for posting the pictures.

[Bob]

Yes.

[rpbcps]

I have a deactivated M1 Thompson in my collection, which has an " I " stamped on the stock.

 

Any ideas what that may indicate?

 

 

Stay safe

Richard

Edited October 21, 2014 by rpbcps

[buzz]

Just as an aside -

 

Those are all "inspector's stamps"

 

 

A "cartouche" means two things -

 

A paper cased cartridge or box of cartridges.

 

or -

 

A decorative figure (usually oval) used as an ornament to bear a sovereign's name.

 

On a rifle that would be something like the king's coat of arms stamped on the receiver.

 

An example would be the 16 petal flower on a Japanese military rifle denoting it as the imperial property.

[buzz]

The best way to tell if a stamp is real is to get a known real example and compare.

 

I used to be a big garand collector.

 

The fake garand stamps are easy to tell usually. A pristine stamp applied to a dinged and scratched stock is a dead give-away.

 

Also, the real inspector's stamp letters and border would tend to close up over the years until it was more of a thin razor-cut than a bevel shaped impression.

 

With dirt and grease staining the letters into the wood.

 

You see some big fat bevel shaped letters with no dirt and no wear and you know it's a new stamp.

Edited October 26, 2014 by buzz