Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    My wife's house in Nebraska
    Posts
    4,568

    Default

    I Like your rifle!

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    SOUTH CAROLINA
    Posts
    258

    Default

    Punch, it is a nice rifle. Enjoy. I'm sure you'll get some answers from John and Rick. Hope it's good news.

    john
    Last edited by JOHN COOK; 02-12-2018 at 10:58.
    “Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.” (Luke 22:36)

  3. Default

    The Parker look's right........"Puke Green".

  4. Default

    Fred, I spent about 6 hours cleaning it. You would be proud. It does look really nice. I just cleaned the stock with spirits and 0000 steel wool. Talk about dirty!

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Sweet Home Alabama
    Posts
    2,041

    Default

    The rifle is not conclusively a USMC rifle. Perhaps it is, perhaps it isn't. The buttplate certainly appears to be a USMC buttplate. But buttplates are subject to the laws of Animal Husbandry. Nevertheless, you appear to have a fine rifle.

    Thanks for sharing!

    J.B.

    p.s.,

    The rifle is not listed in SRS.
    Last edited by John Beard; 02-13-2018 at 10:22.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    My wife's house in Nebraska
    Posts
    4,568

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Punch the Clown View Post
    Fred, I spent about 6 hours cleaning it. You would be proud. It does look really nice. I just cleaned the stock with spirits and 0000 steel wool. Talk about dirty!
    Great! May we see some photos of the cleaned rifle?

  7. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John Beard View Post
    The rifle is not conclusively a USMC rifle. Perhaps it is, perhaps it isn't. The buttplate certainly appears to be a USMC buttplate. But buttplates are subject to the laws of Animal Husbandry. Nevertheless, you appear to have a fine rifle.

    Thanks for sharing!

    J.B.

    p.s.,

    The rifle is not listed in SRS.
    John I can't help being a little disappointed. I am curious of it's origins. It does have the Hatcher hole, the right park, a lot of the parts in black oxide. When I took it apart it was all glued together and flooded with that dark brown cosmolene so I don't think it's a recent bubba job. Regardless, I'm happy with it and I think I paid a fair price.

    Fred, the weather is still crummy here. I took a couple of indoor pics but they don't do it justice.
    BTW, the Hatcher hole lines up perfectly with the gas port in the bolt. The stock is a bit high which half blocks the hole.



    Last edited by Punch the Clown; 02-14-2018 at 05:50.

  8. Default

    Posting Details. I Remember cplnorton mentioning some significance to the crossbolt staking.




  9. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Van Wert, OH
    Posts
    2,017

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Punch the Clown View Post
    Posting Details. I Remember cplnorton mentioning some significance to the crossbolt staking.
    Yeah you see that type of staking done on a lot of Marine target rifles, and even Marine snipers. But I also later found it on stocks that never had anything to do with the Marines. It just seems to be the way some had been staked.

    On your rifle, I could see the argument either way. As John has stated. It certainly looks like it could be one. You do see that type of finish on a lot of Marine looking rebuilds. But I have seen it on some rifles that bare no USMC traits.

    I do sort of believe it is likely was one, at one time though. Just because of the serial number and barrel date. But as John said it could really go either way. And as you know AAG is for Augusta. But the Marines were dumping M1903's as early 1943, and then you see the final exodus of M1903's out of the Marines post 1954.

    But going through the docs and seeing how much stuff is constantly going back and forth between all the branches. And how the Marines rebuilt Navy rifles, and how the Army refinished Marine rifles, and just so many weird things that make it hard for us studying traits, to make conclusive comments on. I mean it's entirely possible you could even have a rifle that served in every branch at one time or another in it's service life.

    But here is what I have around it Punch. It is certainly in good company to be USMC. But there are some around that are not. Like I said, I think the odds are better it was, than wasn't. But it would be nice to have some more evidence to say for sure.

    One thing you might check, is the front sight numbered? Like a .40 or anything?

    824665 101537USMC - SAN DIEGO (SURVEY)
    824672 102330USMC
    824687 111730USMC - PEARL HARBOR
    824728 061637CASS TECH HS
    824728 033138DETROIT HS
    824738 013031USMC - HAITI
    824738 031631USMC - HAITI
    824865 013031USMC - HAITI
    824902 083042USS J FRANKLIN BELL (APA16)
    824960 092632CAMP DIX TO SA
    824960 010433CAMP DIX
    Last edited by cplnorton; 02-17-2018 at 07:53.

  10. Default

    John and Steve, thanks for taking the time and reviewing this rifle. I guess a 50/50 chance ain't bad at all. I'll keep it in the safe next to the known USMC rifles just in case they're kin. No number on the front sight that I can see. Thanks again to you and John for all your help.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •