New Rock-Ola, picture heavy.

[Mike in NC]

If you paid more than $2K you got taken for a ride big time. This one isn't fixable and the few parts that are real aren't worth more than $2K.

[leftyo]

without getting into correct parts, looks reparked, and the stock has been well sanded and refinished. i dont think its worth anything close to 2K.

[aptech77]

Good news, its going back and im getting a full refund plus shipping. Man that was close. Looks like I have a lot more to learn.

Anyone wanting to sell an honest Rock-Ola let me know. Thanks all for the help.

[joem]

Still a very nice carbine. Wish it was mine!

[aptech77]

Is this one worth going to look at? It's close to where I live.

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/Vie...Item=425729737

[Mike in NC]

This 6.08 Rock-Ola is worth taking a look at if you are close. I like the stock, it looks real and doesn't look like it has been messed with. The pictures aren't the right ones, we don't need all the pictures of the "17" rack number. There aren't great pictures of the front sight or the barrel band. Many of the parts look like they are the right type for that vintage Rock-Ola such as round bolt, stamped trigger housing, type 2 looking barrel band, what looks like type 4 slide, plain face mag catch, etc. From the poor pictures, it looks like the bolt might be DuLite finish. What is missing is any contractor stamps on any of the parts. Can't really see any of these in an assembled carbine with the magazine in place. A couple of the pictures as dark as they are show a hint that that the staking on the front sight pin is right. Glad I don't live in the Chicago area, but wish I was there to look over this carbine.

[aptech77]

that's good news. this carbine is located in the town next to where I grew up. it is only an hour south of where I live now so it gives me an excuse to go visit my folks as well. Thanks again!

[aptech77]

I would first like to thanks those who took the time to respond and help me with the first Rock-Ola debacle, especially the forum member who took his time to actually call me, and offer some advice. Cheers! I was able to send it back and with your help, saved my rear end from getting screwed. With a little help, I was able to find and purchase another Rock-Ola that seems to be a winner. Thanks, again everyone for the help.

[aptech77]

[aptech77]

[aptech77]

[EricR]

Here's mine for comparison. What I believe to be a legit RMC stock that went through an U rebuild.

[Tuna]

Ok so you do have a nice carbine....except for the oiler is far too early for it. Should be one marked IS and the hammer is wrong. The B/R marked hammers are not Rock-Ola hammers. They are replacement hammers made by Brunner Ritter Co. These hammers are listed in both War Baby and in US M1 Carbines Wartime Production as being Rock-Ola but they are not. A type 3 hammer marked LT-R or LT-Q would be correct.

[aptech77]

I was informed about the hammer and just waiting to find out what would be correct. LT-R or LT-Q it is. M1 carbine family noted correct type III as being marked, "KR" "KR2" "R-LT" "LTR" "Q" "I.K." "S/R" "KR" in a diamond", but i'll look for the ones you noted. About the oiler, I did find this.....

"In January 1943 International Silver sent two letters, one to the Springfield Ordnance Dept. and to the Carbine Industry Integration Committee, requesting permission to eliminate the prime contractor markings on magazines and oilers made by them. In the letter(s) they stated that they were making so many magazines and oilers that keeping them segregated by manufacturer was becoming burdensome and that it would be more efficient to eliminate markings all together or mark both with the generic IS. With magazines and oilers bearing a generic mark they (International Silver) would be in a better position to respond to the prime contractors needs and could keep stocks on hand to respond to increases in production schedules".

So from that point on, all the Oilers were just marked "IS"

Thanks for the aditional info and help.

[aptech77]

Where my pics go hummmm?