Springfield Armory Garand 1943

[Victor Albetta]

Thanks, I went back and took off the trigger unit and exposed the op rod. It was uncut.
Thanks for help. I will post pictures, as I know it’s not original wood stock, but believe all parts are Springfield, but will need help on sights.
Concerning the sights, the gentleman who sold me this rifle wrote, “The rear sights look and feel new. The elevation is marked, windage knob is marked and the adjustment locking knob in place.”

[RCS]

Here is a photo of an original operating rod without the relief cut

[Victor Albetta]

I did not take the stock off. I had trouble getting the op rod off and the small parts reassembled, so did not take off the lower part of the rifle. Is that the only way to see whether is cut or not cut?

[Orlando]

what about stock? Is op rod cut or uncut?

[Victor Albetta]

Finally got some time to investigate the Garand. Disassembly fine, but having a little trouble getting parts lined up correctly.

Here’s what I put down in my Garand Data page.

serial: 1378776
Receiver Drawing number: D28291-17
Heat Lot: S 8 B <>
Barrel Side Markings: S-A-6-46
Bolt: D28287- 12 SA
OP Rod: D 35382 6SA
Trigger Housing: D28290 6SA
Hammer: C 46008 -5SA
Follower: 11

Thanks for your help. Maybe you can now give me more information on the rifle and value.

[Victor Albetta]

I gave you info you need in post #2

Thank you for the help. I will use it as a guide.

[Orlando]

Wow, this is certainly an extremely complicated subject. Guess I’ll have to disassemble the M1 and take some pictures and rely on the forums expertise to zero in on what on bought. It is the only M1 Garand in my rifle collection, which is mainly SKS, Winchester & Marlin 1894, and more modern rifles.

I gave you info you need in post #2

[Victor Albetta]

Wow, this is certainly an extremely complicated subject. Guess I’ll have to disassemble the M1 and take some pictures and rely on the forums expertise to zero in on what on bought. It is the only M1 Garand in my rifle collection, which is mainly SKS, Winchester & Marlin 1894, and more modern rifles.

[TJT]

Bill,
Thanks for the confirmation.
Jon

[Orlando]

Jon yes seal on the Sept 42, Feb 43 is the cut off for the seal but there is some overlap

[TJT]

CC,
MY rifle is from Sept '42. The February rifle (in the post above) is from '43. I'm still convinced that a Sept '42 rifle (800.000 sn range) would have the seal (narrow base and rebated screw head) and that the later Feb '43 rifle may or may not have the seal.
Jon

[CCyooper]

TJT. There are multiple rifles in the thread now but I would think the February rifle would have a seal and the the September rifle would not. A technical bulletin published at the end of June indicates new rifles are beings manufactured without the seal and references a late May MWO that indicates if you remove the seal you do not have to replace it. I expect that in May the sight seal was possibly being eliminated from production rifles. It’s definitely not being used by late June according to the TB.

[TJT]

wfolds,
Remember that all WWII 30-'06 ammo was corrosive so the barrel probably became a sewer pipe from inadequate cleaning.
Jon

[wfolds]

Thanks it is still a cool gun. I love shooting it...

[TJT]

Bill,
Is the -9 safety with or without the hole? I'm thinking without--if my rememberer is working right, early -9's had the hole. I have a Sept. '42 SA and it is without the hole. Would that '43 have the sight seal? My '42 would've originally had the seal, but it's long gone although I do have a seal. I've just never tried to install it.
Jon