cut down m1 garand

[hydrogmiller]

Been reading bout the m1 tanker. If a person has garand with a 1400000s/n, that was bought from a Lt. back from the Pacific in 1946. I guessing it's one of the original field mods done over there.

Anybody know what the value of it would be???????????

 

[hso]

Sorry, but without solid provenance proof from WWII documenting it as being authentic no one would value it beyond any of the commercial products.

 

[highorder]

If I understand you correctly, something like that would have to be hand evaluated by a competent person.

If its "real."

More likely, its one of the many recent short M1 conversions done by numerous places. Quality varies.

Buy the gun, NOT the story.

Pics? drawing numbers? Barrel date? Manufacturer?

EDIT: hso sneaks in whilst I was composing my thoughts, and goes right to the point.

 

[Trebor]

I agree: Without paperwork showing this was done "in the field" back during the war, it's just another gunsmith conversion that could have been done by anybody, anytime.

Absent paperwork, if you have a picture of the soldier holding *that* rifle, and documentation that this is the rifle he brought back, maybe you could get a collector to bite.

 

[FLNT4EVR]

I would be extreemely wary of this of this one.Do some extensive research. As far as I know, that would be the only one to have ever made it out of the pacific = very doubtful that it's what it's claimed to be.

 

[briansmithwins]

There's also the problem of how it would have left military custody. The military didn't hand out M1s to demobilized troops when they left the service. BSW

 

[Slamfire]

Here's one of those "original" M1 Tankers.

A club member brought it out to the range. Sorry I did not take a full length picture.

Seems the barrel sort of unscrewed itself.


This rare and original rifle was most unusual. The front end had Springfield Armory drawing numbers



But the back was Winchester.



Of course we ignored these metal sections.





As this must be the only Winfield Tanker in existence, we told the owner it must be worth a Million Dollars!

 

[hydrogmiller]

I know where this rifle has been for the last 50+ yrs. As i know nothing about barrel dates how are they coded

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

I do not know of a a serious Garand collector that has SEEN a real tanker Garand.
I believe they are an urban legend. While they may exist, far too many fabricated ones exist to completely muddy up the potential of finding or authenticating any possible real tanker m1's.

 

[highorder]

Authentic T26 Garands don't exist, with the exception of the ONE in Springfield Mass.


More info here:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=5437610

 

[hydrogmiller]

I know the man that bought it from the Lt. in 1946

 

[sammy_adams]

The Springfield Armory Museum has what looks like a garand, but short, in a display case against the wall of the building that is closest to the parking lot. I cannot remember what it was called on the tag, though.


http://www.nps.gov/spar

 

[highorder]

I know the man that bought it from the Lt. in 1946

We understand that, but without documentation, it's unverifiable.

The rifle is worth the sum of its parts, somewhere between $400 and $800.

Please let us know what the serial number is on the heel of the receiver, and what information is stamped on the barrel;
its visible when the Op-Rod is locked to the rear.

That is a start.

 

[hydrogmiller]

Just dumb question did any any of the 150 that were built have docs.

 

[hydrogmiller]

If so what were the S/N's

 

[highorder]

From the experts:

It is a near certainty that any short Garand you see is a commercial conversion of a full-sized rifle or a commercial "reproduction" on an M1 receiver. Scott Duff and I have some evidence that a substantial number of rifles were in fact converted in the Phillippines in 1944; we have some evidence of when and where they may have been issued. However, no "factory built" T26 will be found, and no field-converted short Garand has ever been found. We believe that the latter were converted back into standard rifles or destroyed. Should one exist, it would be an important historic artifact. I do not believe that any exist, however.

http://www.scott-duff.com/t26.htm

If you have one, you should guard it like gold, and have someone from the Springfield Armory Museum evaluate it immediately.

Of course, if you have pics that bear any resemblence to the rifle above, we can put this thing to bed.

In the case of the "Tanker" above, its a simple matter to see that a Winchester receiver rear was welded to a Springfield Armory front.

The rest is history.

EDITED TO ADD:

Identification of a legitimate "Tanker" is difficult. All specimens would have been built from rifles in used condition; therefore, the serial number range would reflect that. Numbers would probably be lower than 3,500,000 and could not be above 3,800,000. The barrel date, of course, would be no later than early 1945.
Also, the receiver is marked as a normal M1 and would be of either Springfield Armory or Winchester manufacture. Judging by the specimen in the Springfield Armory Museum, workmanship was marginal. The barrel splines look like they were hand filed and much freehand saw and file work shows up.

Source: http://www.nps.gov/spar/historyculture/upload/fact sheet 5 M1 Tanker_1206.doc

 

[hydrogmiller]

This line get's thicker. This rifle was not one of the 150.

My dad bought the rifle from the Lt. in 46 He needed $$$$$$$$$$$$

The Lt. had it made because the m1 was to long in the jungle

So ya know no documintaion other than then then the weapon
mine and my fathers custudy

 

[1KPerDay]

Remove the trigger group by inverting the rifle, pulling upward and rearward on the rear of the trigger guard, remove the stock, tell us what the numbers on the right front of the receiver say, and post the serial number (leave the last 2 numbers as XX if you like), and post what the numbers/markings on the right side of the barrel near the receiver are.

 

[FlyinBryan]

can anyone comment on the reliability of these conversions?

forget collecter value, i would like to have one and would shoot it regularly if i did find one.

just something cool about a short little carbine length rifle that shoots 30-06.

 

[dfariswheel]

Reliability is totally a factor of who built the rifle.

This ranges from great conversions made by top custom M1 rifle smiths down to basement hack jobs built from scrapped receivers that were welded together, like the one pictured above.
Years ago there were a lot of these built by some company that used "Ordnance Company" in their name.
Turns out it was one man working out of his basement with minimal tools, and turning out absolute junk.

The problem is, you're never sure of what you got until you shoot for reliable and accurate function and very closely examine the workmanship.

From my experience over the last 30 years: Unless you KNOW it was built by a known good builder, it's strongly suspect. Many if not most are unreliable.

 

[30Cal]

If it doesn't have paperwork, it's really just a bubba'd M1. Especially if it has a bunch of late manufacture parts on it, welded receiver, 2-groove barrel, etc. Buy the rifle, not the story.

 

[FlyinBryan]

ya, thats kinda what i figured. (high probability of problematic)

i suppose id be better suited going with a socom or scout rifle, but i am a total garand fanatic here lately for some reason

(a condition i now fear will never improve)

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

Try shuffsparkerizing.com for about the coolest cut down Garand you'll fine anywhere.

 

[30Cal]

The front end had Springfield Armory drawing numbers

But the back was Winchester.

Take a careful look, boys:
-drawing number at the front doesn't match the manufacturer of the rear
-discoloration
-voids
-grinding marks (especially under the wood)
-look closely at the clip latch cut-out. There are lines there that should be perfectly straight, but they aren't.
-wear pattern in the oprod groove is not continuous
-tool marks are not continuous

The back half also looks like it was heavily pitted prior to it being reparkerized (pock marks).

 

[Slamfire]

Take a careful look, boys:
-drawing number at the front doesn't match the manufacturer of the rear
-discoloration
-voids
-grinding marks (especially under the wood)
-look closely at the clip latch cut-out. There are lines there that should be perfectly straight, but they aren't.
-wear pattern in the oprod groove is not continuous
-tool marks are not continuous

The back half also looks like it was heavily pitted prior to it being reparkerized (pock marks).

Yes the Tanker in the picture is a "reweld". I was trying to use sarcasm.

The market is full of "tanker" M1's. It is my recollection that Federal Ordnance was selling them. If not them, I do recall seeing 80's/90/s vintage ads in Shotgun News for "Tanker Garands". The ads clearly indicated that the maker was chopping up surplus M1's.

Because of the number and vast quantity of aftermarket Tanker Garands, without period pictures/documentation, I suspect each and every collector who hears the words "Tanker Garand" will have the same reaction: "Bogus!".

I cannot tell you the number of bogus stories I have heard on military equipment. People claiming great age, or that it was “confederate”. Always wondered how General Lee made those Arisaka bayonets fit his muskets.