WW2 SA receiver photo

[RCS]

Does this receiver look ok or is there something wrong ?DSCN2351.jpg

[kj47]

Looks ok to me but Not knowledgeable enough on Garands to be sure.

[lyman]

the profile of the V contour above the stamping looks odd, but that may be the lighting,

[Johnny P]

Maybe just because the photo is out of focus, but markings have a pantagraphed look.

[bruce]

Looks like a righteous SA receiver w/ discolored lead dipped heal. Of course ... I might be ... wrong. Maybe ... even likely. JMHO. Sincerely. bruce.

[Allen]

One of the clearest marked WWII receivers I have seen.

[Johnny P]

While the height of the characters of the U.S. Rifle/CAL..30 M1/SPRINGFIELD/ARMORY are not as tall as the serial number, on the photo in the original post they are basically the same thickness for lack of a better word) as the serial number

In this photo these receiver markings are much "thinner" than the serial number.

[url=https://postimg.cc/nXtgTmvx]

[Allen]

While the height of the characters of the U.S. Rifle/CAL..30 M1/SPRINGFIELD/ARMORY are not as tall as the serial number, on the photo in the original post they are basically the same thickness for lack of a better word) as the serial number

In this photo these receiver markings are much "thinner" than the serial number.

Yep. Good catch.

I thought about that on the Winchester receivers but not the SA receivers.

[lyman]

maybe Johnny,

the letters look crisp (as in not rounded like some pantograph does)

I've locked up the shop, so can't (too lazy to reopen the vault, on the way out the door) take a pick of a million plus serial,
were they all the same font, regardless of the number, , font or size wise?

[Johnny P]

A pantograph can cut crisp, but it can't cut square ends on the letters and numbers. The receiver shown has rounded ends on the letters and numbers, common to all pantographs.

Take a look at RIFLE, with the letters up and down, not in a straight line. Then look at the original I posted.

[Art]

While the height of the characters of the U.S. Rifle/CAL..30 M1/SPRINGFIELD/ARMORY are not as tall as the serial number, on the photo in the original post they are basically the same thickness for lack of a better word) as the serial number

In this photo these receiver markings are much "thinner" than the serial number.

[url=https://postimg.cc/nXtgTmvx]

Our son has a CMP special grade S.A. with a six digit number in which the letters and numbers are struck on the receiver exactly like this example. My 2,170,000 series rifle has the numbers that are struck in the same thinner format throughout. This stuff obviously changed with time. It's just knowing what time.

[Johnny P]

Regardless of the slight variation in size, which can vary somewhat with how deep they were struck, the stamping was always lined up, not up and down as on the receiver in the original post.

[Allen]

Regardless of the slight variation in size, which can vary somewhat with how deep they were struck, the stamping was always lined up, not up and down as on the receiver in the original post.

Agree with what you are saying but that 89 appears to be floating higher than the rest.

[lyman]

A pantograph can cut crisp, but it can't cut square ends on the letters and numbers. The receiver shown has rounded ends on the letters and numbers, common to all pantographs.

Take a look at RIFLE, with the letters up and down, not in a straight line. Then look at the original I posted.

I can see that now that I see what you blew up,

[RCS]

WW2 receiver

This receiver had the logo and serial number refreshed by an engraver in NJ some twenty five years ago.
I was able to take a few photos before it was sold two years ago. It never looked right to me, maybe without
the white color, it might look better. the owner stated the logo was faint from being refinished and hoped to
improve the receiver. Thanks for all the opinionsDSCN3156.jpg also a photo of a 2 mil
receiver in my photo