WRA Follower

[Marty T.]

What is the approximate earliest date for usage of the 13 marked WRA follower? I have a mid to late Jan. that needs a correct follower and having trouble locating an unmarked, but have found the 13 marked. Need to know if the 13 would be used in that time frame or if mine is too early. Thanks.

[stan4]

What is the approximate earliest date for usage of the 13 marked WRA follower? I have a mid to late Jan. that needs a correct follower and having trouble locating an unmarked, but have found the 13 marked. Need to know if the 13 would be used in that time frame or if mine is too early. Thanks.

Mid to late Jan of 1945? Then you want a follower for a Win-13? Then, a no serif 13 marked follower should be correct. The order for latter 1944 to end of production in 1945 is (consensus opinion?): "Winchester used 11 (serif) marked followers with a punch mark for a short time late summer 1944. (Punch mark on the slide and follower as well as the bottom of the breach end.)" To the next follower: "Winchester's late production used the late style follower. They were marked with a san serif 13."

Anyone know why the Winchester parts have the punch mark (the remnants of hardness testing)?

Also, why do the Winchester rear sight knobs have open arrows (other than to help us identify them)?

[Marty T.]

Here's why the question. Mine is not a Win-13. It is just before they started those. So did the 13 follower come before the Win-13 rec. or after? Thanks.

[RCS]

I thought that serif marked revision 11 followers were Springfield only, is there any documentation that would indicate Winchester using the serif marked revision 11 follower ? Many collectors have looked for the evasive revision 11 follower without serifs, without finding one - maybe someone has a photo ?

[stan4]

I thought that serif marked revision 11 followers were Springfield only, is there any documentation that would indicate Winchester using the serif marked revision 11 follower ? Many collectors have looked for the evasive revision 11 follower without serifs, without finding one - maybe someone has a photo ?

Yes, there are pictures---lots of them, in M1 GARAND PHOTO ESSAY by Larry Babcock (Google it).

I am not aware of a sans serif revision 11 follower.

[RCS]

I sure would not quote Babcocks work as documentation, - he might even have fake stuff and not really know about it. I am sure you could do better than Babcock as a recommended source ? and don't use Harrison either.

[stan4]

Here's why the question. Mine is not a Win-13. It is just before they started those. So did the 13 follower come before the Win-13 rec. or after? Thanks.

From the consecutive (no omissions from Mar 44) build sheets of Winchesters in DUFF's Red book:
Mar 44 ---- early, un-marked
Aug 44 ---- 11
Oct 44 ---- 13
Nov 44 ---- late, un-marked
Apr 45 (Win-13) ---- late, un-marked
Jun 45 (Win-13) ---- 13

You know how it goes, if you asked 10 Winchester experts, you would probably get three different answers (see Aug, Oct, Nov, above) . The good news, you get to decide for your rifle.

For even more clarity contact "Billy Pyle <garandstand@academicplanet.com>". He is very nice and should get back to you in a few days.

[RCS]

The Aug 44 which is serial number 2481387 is the only example and could well be in error. Charles Redfield (who provides the line drawings for Pyle's newsletter - as long as your name dropping) told me that he has never found a Winchester revision 11 follower -without serifs and without the BEVELS

[stan4]

I sure would not quote Babcocks work as documentation, - he might even have fake stuff and not really know about it. I am sure you could do better than Babcock as a recommended source ? and don't use Harrison either.

Dear Kind RCS,

He asked for possible pictures. I answered. Information is just that. It is maybe good, bad, correct or incorrect. I know there are unintentional mistakes in his photo essay book---there are mistakes in all books. There maybe even "fake stuff" that he does not know about. If he did, he would most likely remove or correct the information. Please feel free to add constructive suggestions about his work (we might all benefit from your input). I do know the pictures are real, even if they are of "fake stuff". Nice clear pictures, that for the most part, clear up (for some) those confusing word descriptions.

"I am sure you could do better than Babcock as a recommended source ?" Maybe I can, and maybe not, obviously that is for others to contemplate. I did make another recommendation to another question in this thread, I hope I did not offend.

Please RCS, do a "better than Babcock as a recommended source", and give us your top three or four sources for good reliable pictures. I, for one, will use them for added information to consider.

Best Regards,

[RCS]

Stan, I recommend you purchase Harrisons M1 book and study it like a bible - it will improve you knowledge