Help with M1 Garand decision

[Albert]

Hello!

I am considering buying an M1 Garand rifle. Prefer an all matching WWII one but since I want to shoot it it might as well come with some "liabilities".

Now here is a guy selling one and this is the description:

"I have an M1 Garand made by Springfield Armory with a 1.58 million serial number that was built in May, 1943. It has a 1951 SA barrel, an SA op-rod, an SA milled trigger group, and a Winchester bolt. The rifle is not import marked. It's in a new walnut CMP stock set."

Apparently the bolt and stock are replacement parts and so might be some of the rest... My question is how desirable is gun like this and what should it be worth.

Thanks!

Regards,

Al

[MikeP]

The concept of an all matching WW2 Garand is somewhat fanciful.

The only serial number is on the reciever.

Other parts might have numbers identifying them as "correct"
These rifles are more commonly assembled from gunshow parts boxes in recent years.

Used to be funny watching guys with magnifiers and flashlights rooting for these.

Unless a rifle was sent home from the original assembly line, chances are it went thru at least one, probably several refurbs or upgrades.

[Albert]

Thanks! That surely helps. What is a fair value with good potential of not loosing money if the need to sell it came up. Oh, the seller is asking $700

[Lon]

Without seeing the rifle, in decent condition, $700 sounds about right. Before shooting I would have it checked out by a good gunsmith. These are powerful weapons and definitely fun to shoot. Watch out for the M1 thumb!

[phild]

The concept of an all matching WW2 Garand is somewhat fanciful.

The only serial number is on the reciever.

Other parts might have numbers identifying them as "correct"
These rifles are more commonly assembled from gunshow parts boxes in recent years.

Used to be funny watching guys with magnifiers and flashlights rooting for these.

Unless a rifle was sent home from the original assembly line, chances are it went thru at least one, probably several refurbs or upgrades.

I agree 100% with the above opinion and also with the estimate given of around $700 as a value. On my own I will say that many would call the rifle that you describe a "shooter" but rifles like this are in fact generally 100% original as used (and even issued at some point in their life) military arms.

These kind of collector labels are very superficial and misleading. If you want to collect factory condition that is fine. You can call yourself a "purist" or whatever else makes you feel good, but if you are interested in collecting as used military correct firearms firearms (or anything else) there is a whole other scope of condition and "matching" parts criteria that comes into play.

This is not just my opinion, but rather simple and provable fact.

[Albert]

I agree 100% with the above opinion and also with the estimate given of around $700 as a value. On my own I will say that many would call the rifle that you describe a "shooter" but rifles like this are in fact generally 100% original as used (and even issued at some point in their life) military arms.

These kind of collector labels are very superficial and misleading. If you want to collect factory condition that is fine. You can call yourself a "purist" or whatever else makes you feel good, but if you are interested in collecting as used military correct firearms firearms (or anything else) there is a whole other scope of condition and "matching" parts criteria that comes into play.

This is not just my opinion, but rather simple and provable fact.

Thanks for all opinions and guidance, it is much appreciated! To complete the picture I can add that the seller said he was the second owner with the US Govt. being the first. Just need to find out if he himself has replaced or modified any parts... As far as I am concerned this is all much less philosophical. What ever rifle I buy would be my very first one... and if I get this one it will definitely be put to use. Speaking of "use", would this be an acceptable rifle for deer hinting?

[Frogprince]

Almost all Garands and carbines went through a U.S. government rebuild program at one time or another. Sometimes it was just an updated rear sight or other small part, and other times with other rifles the whole rifle was stripped down and rebuilt. (Absolutely untouched factory OEM Grands are very rare.)

The rifle under discussion seems to outside this category as a later example using civilian manufactured parts. I’ve seen really nice rifles of the first category go for more money (justifiably IMO).

For hunting/other purposes the rifle could be OK at a relatively reasonable price. As for seller’s statements sometimes they can be the absolute truth. Other times a lie (or worse). I even had one guy who manufactured his own dummy round for the muzzle wear test - so you can’t be too careful. FP

[phild]

Almost all Garands and carbines went through a U.S. government rebuild program at one time or another. Sometimes it was just an updated rear sight or other small part, and other times with other rifles the whole rifle was stripped down and rebuilt. (Absolutely untouched factory OEM Grands are very rare.)

The rifle under discussion seems to outside this category as a later example using civilian manufactured parts. I’ve seen really nice rifles of the first category go for more money (justifiably IMO).

For hunting/other purposes the rifle could be OK at a relatively reasonable price. As for seller’s statements sometimes they can be the absolute truth. Other times a lie (or worse). I even had one guy who manufactured his own dummy round for the muzzle wear test - so you can’t be too careful. FP

Shame on me for not reading the original post carefully and picking up on the CMP wood. In that sense you are correct that there are commercial parts on this one and that would impact the historical integrity.

I would submit that in reference to the official military arsenal/depot rebuilds that there was also a lot of parts replacement at the individual and lower unit armorers level....in all armies and in all wars. Sometimes these period of use substitutions can be spotted and many other times they can not be with any degree of certainty.

[Albert]

... Oh, the CMP wood is commercial and not GI... Well, that kills the rifle for me then:-( But thanks guys, appreciate all your help!

[Frogprince]

First a typo correction. Make that: “Absolutely untouched factory OEM Garands are very rare.”

I would submit that in reference to the official military arsenal/depot rebuilds that there was also a lot of parts replacement at the individual and lower unit armorers level....in all armies and in all wars.

Especially for many U.S. arms, that some repairs and/or updates were conducted at lower echelons I think is a fair statement. I don’t know if I still have it, but I seem to recall seeing a listing of what could be done at the different levels depending on the weapon in question. With a rear sight change I think being an example of a simple repair/update, and a barrel change (for the Garand) tending to be at the other end of the spectrum. FP

[Frogprince]

PS: I have owned more than one 1950’s (barrel) dated Korean War era government rebuild. That were very nice rifles - so that for me by itself is not a major issue if the rifle is otherwise decent. FP

[Albert]

PS: I have owned more than one 1950’s (barrel) dated Korean War era government rebuild. That were very nice rifles - so that for me by itself is not a major issue if the rifle is otherwise decent. FP

If the bore is good I would not be concerned about a later replacement barrel. What is bothering me is the replaced stock. Or am I overreacting?

[Frogprince]

I’ve never owned a CMP wood set so I don’t have a basis for comparison. And I think it depends on your perspective. In times past one or more of the importers regularly replaced barrels with commercially manufactured ones. The guns were generally overall marginal with new barrels.

Sometimes otherwise reasonably OK DCM/CMP guns came with really bad wood, that guys replaced with commercial wood if they could not find GI wood. If I had to make a hard choice it would be the one with just the wood replaced. (Hard to find now, GI wood can sometimes be found. But good (GI) barrels IMO are a lot harder to find, properly fit, etc.)

But that's just my personal opinion, and fortunately for me not something I have to worry about at the moment. FP

[sneakerd]

imho, as long as you have a good bore and breech, and it headspaces, the CMP wood should be completely irrelevant. It's good wood matched to the rifle and purchased/provided by the CMP which is the civilian rifle surplus disposal arm of the government. Get 'em while you can at the current price, they only go up. It it came from the CMP, there should be some paperwork accompanying to see what grade it is.
DAve

[Svt40]

If the bore is good I would not be concerned about a later replacement barrel. What is bothering me is the replaced stock. Or am I overreacting?

On a rebuilt rifle the wood is not of much concern. So long as the trigger group locks up tight then it will be fine. Besides the CMP wood is some of the best replacements out there.