Photos of my Inland M1 Carbine #20951

[kb466]

I have been photographing some of my collection, and have been posting some of the pictures here. First, a few days ago, I posted pictures of two of my '03's in the M1903 section (look for thread asking for info on USMC and RIA rifles). I just now posted some photos of three of my M1 Garand Rifles in the M1 Rifle section. Now I am posting some photos of my Inland M1 Carbine, #20951.

This is an early carbine that is all original as far as I can tell and has not been restored. It is as I received it about fifteen years ago. I was told that is was brought home from the Pacific by either a Marine officer or a Seabee officer. When I received it, it had the sling on it and also came with a USMC WW2 stock pouch. It has all correct early features and the barrel is Inland marked and dated 7-42. Here is the link to the album with the photos--

http://www.jouster.com/forums/album.php?albumid=275

Again, all comments are welcome and encouraged. Thanks.
Bill M.

[Barryeye]

Does it shoot as good as it looks?

[kb466]

I've never shot it. But I would imagine it would shoot quite well. It has a perfect bore and appears to be in excellent condition. I have seemingly split my collection into my collectible arms, like this one, then I have my shooters.
Bill M.

[southfork]

Nice looking carbine. I have early Inland as well, but not as early as yours (101XXX). I always look at the threads on early Inlands to see if my carbine is correct. Something that confuses me on your carbine is the butt plate. I thought that the early inland butt plates had the rows in diagonals versus vertical and horizontal. That is the kind of butt plate that i have been looking for, based on another thread on butt plate identification. Not saying yours isn't correct, but it is different than i had expected it to be. I am still learning, so I'd appreciate info from those in the know.

[joem]

Very nice. Looks way better than my 5 digit one.

[Tuna]

It has all the attributes of an original as can be seen in your photos. Are there any other markings in the sling well other then the bomb stamp? I would also expect to see an early butt plate on it for a September 1942 carbine instead of the second type plate which is listed as being used at the beginning of 1943. But you may be able to take off the butt plate and look at the wood to see if there is a pattern embedded in the wood behind the plate and if it matches the plate or not. Really a great looking carbine.

[kb466]

I'll take a look at it when I get home. Yes I do remember another mark inside the sling well-- maybe OI? I'll check for sure. I have never had the buttplate off. It does look like it has been there forever-- i think it is original. I'll check for any other imprints underneath in the wood when I get home.
Bill M.

[kb466]

I took a look at my carbine. I removed the buttplate and there was no sign it had ever been removed, nor any imprints underneath, so no help there. I really think this is the original buttplate on this carbine. In the sling recess, there is the flaming bomb, "IO" and a small crossed cannon stamp. The crossed cannons and the IO are sharp but appear lost among the very pronounced milling marks.
Bill M.

[Tuna]

Other then the butt plate being later It sure looks original and in excellent shape but I would keep the butt plate on it as there could have been 100 different reasons for it. The markings in the stock are correct and that alone is a hard stock to find. You have an excellent collector quality carbine, a real gem.

[TSimonetti]

I took a look at my carbine. I removed the buttplate and there was no sign it had ever been removed, nor any imprints underneath, so no help there. I really think this is the original buttplate on this carbine.

The condition and wear of the buttplate is consistent with the rest of the carbine. According to the Carbiine Club's research, both types of butt plates were found throughout the first block of Inland's production. I wish they were more precise with their comments on the matter, but there you have it. On the other hand, if you look at another reference, Reisch for example, it makes essentially no mention of such an overlap and tells you that early diagonal style was early, and later style was later, but I don't believe it's that cut and dried. I have a vet bringback carbine number 114,xxx with a "late style" buttplate that I consider absolutely original. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I'm definitely not touching it.

Bottom line is that your buttplate is very possibly original.

[Johnny P]

Can't tell from the flash pictures, but is the finish phosphate or Du-Lite. I know of a couple of original 5 digit Carbines finished in Du-Lite blue.

[Tuna]

Ruth states the type 2 butt plate was used from about January 1943 onward.

[kb466]

As to the finish, I believe it is a light parkerizing, similar to the parkerizing on the rest of the carbine. The buttplate screw looks like a dark matte blue. I have no doubt the buttplate is original. First, I know the prior owners back to the veteran that brought it home-- none of them would have changed out the buttplate. When I removed it, it looked like it had been there forever, with built up grit, dirt and sand around the inside edge. No indication of stock refinishing, sanding, etc. No sign it had been off the stock in a very long time if ever. I think it is original. Regardless, it is staying on the carbine. Thanks for the comments!
Bill M.

[Motorcop]

I give you credit Bill, I would simply have to take the carbine out and test fire it at least once to see how it does. I cannot own a firearm that I haven't shot at least once. Many years ago I bought a new Colt SAA .45 that had a 3.5 inch barrel on it with an ejector rod. As I recall Colt only made 300 of these, 150 in .45 and 150 in .44-40. I had that revolver for several years always thinking it would grow in value and be worth so much more in unfired condition. After 10 or 12 years the value of that revolver didn't go up but a lick. I sold it knowing that I would not be able to resist the desire to shoot it much longer. Now I don't own a firearm that I can't or won't shoot. If I could do it over that nickled 3.5 inch Colt would have seen the firing line the first day I bought it. I have long wondered how that short Colt handled actually putting rounds out of it.

Rick

[wtmr]

if Ruth's book says only diagonal early it is wrong, hope he corrects in the new book, lots of folks restored incorrectly using the diagonal-that square pattern buttplate is very correct buttplate for that serial range