M14 OLIN MATHIESON BOX

[delfino]

Hi, does anyone know if this box has any value? It is an original M14 OLIN MATHIESON shipping box dated October 1961. Thanks for your feedback.

[smle-man]

I bet the guys on the M14 forum would go nuts for it.

[tuolumnejim]

I bet the guys on the M14 forum would go nuts for it.

No doubt.

[Spyder]

Huh. Thats kind of cool. Glad I don't have it because I'd want to keep it.

[Mr. Beretta]

I bet the guys on the M14 forum would go nuts for it.

Guaranteed.

[dfletcher]

Hi, does anyone know if this box has any value? It is an original M14 OLIN MATHIESON shipping box dated October 1961. Thanks for your feedback.

I have a 1961 made M14 converted (with ATF approval) to semi-auto by Hahn Machine & Tool. They did a few hundred IIRC, I'm sure others did the same without ATF approval.

https://www.ar15.com/forums/armory/Question_on_Hahn_M14_Reweld_Receivers/6-294799/

I may be overthinking this but …

For anyone with a genuine, full auto M14 or even a reworked (ATF OK or otherwise) I can see $$$ being spent on the box. At least $250.00. Because they have what might be called a "genuine article". That's a fairly small customer base.

I don't know that anyone with a modern Springfield Armory, Fulton Armory, James River would go for it because it's so obviously not a match for their rifle. I think some makers now use an M14 heel and weld to a semi-receiver, maybe they'd go for it? You never know, some folks don't mind the obvious "trying to be …."

Were it mine and I was trying to sell I'd a) put it on Gunbroker with a $250.00 reserve then tell the M14 forum guys to have at it.

[beerman]

So if it’s an Olin, doesen’t that mean it’s for a Winchester M14? Wonder why it wasn’t in a Win marked box? Was Olin the military branch for Win back then?

[delfino]

Thank you for all the responses and information provided in this thread. Thought the box was kinda interesting which was why I bought it a few years back, but I think I'm going to pass it on to someone who can truly appreciate it. Looks like I'll try my luck either the M14 site or possibly Gunbroker.

[Spyder]

Link to the sales thread/auction please. I'd enjoy seeing the commentary that goes with it.

[smle-man]

I have a 1961 made M14 converted (with ATF approval) to semi-auto by Hahn Machine & Tool. They did a few hundred IIRC, I'm sure others did the same without ATF approval.

https://www.ar15.com/forums/armory/Question_on_Hahn_M14_Reweld_Receivers/6-294799/

James River and Bula have been welding M14 heels to their M1A style receivers so there are more M14/M1A mash ups floating around. Kelly did the same but he used saw cut receivers that retained the M14 mid track Oprod dismount cut which the ATF considered full auto receivers and confiscated them. Kelly ended up in jail over it.

[GM4spd]

James River and Bula have been welding M14 heels to their M1A style receivers so there are more M14/M1A mash ups floating around. Kelly did the same but he used saw cut receivers that retained the M14 mid track Oprod dismount cut which the ATF considered full auto receivers and confiscated them. Kelly ended up in jail over it.

[smle-man]

When I first read of Mr. Kelly's efforts I thought that it wouldn't end well and sadly it didn't for many innocent folks. You were lucky you could strip everything off. Some receivers went with barrels attached.

[dfletcher]

James River and Bula have been welding M14 heels to their M1A style receivers so there are more M14/M1A mash ups floating around. Kelly did the same but he used saw cut receivers that retained the M14 mid track Oprod dismount cut which the ATF considered full auto receivers and confiscated them. Kelly ended up in jail over it.

I've read of others contacted by ATF and the general result, or at least the one I've most often read, is "give us the receiver". rather shakey to rely on that though, I agree.

It seems to me there ought to be a way to do the saw cut, remove the leg and weld up the dismount and remove the receiver from its "once a machine gun" pigeonhole.

ATF is terrific at wordsmithing, crafting procedures and determining results. An organization that can determine & differentiate status between a handgun incidentally shouldered vs deliberately so, or allow that a handgun assembled as a rifle is not made a rifle, without rescinding its previous position to the contrary, ought to be able to tell us how to make an M14 receiver look and function just like a modern SA M1A receiver - were it inclined to do so.

[smle-man]

I've read of others contacted by ATF and the general result, or at least the one I've most often read, is "give us the receiver". rather shakey to rely on that though, I agree.

It seems to me there ought to be a way to do the saw cut, remove the leg and weld up the dismount and remove the receiver from its "once a machine gun" pigeonhole.

ATF is terrific at wordsmithing, crafting procedures and determining results. An organization that can determine & differentiate status between a handgun incidentally shouldered vs deliberately so, or allow that a handgun assembled as a rifle is not made a rifle, without rescinding its previous position to the contrary, ought to be able to tell us how to make an M14 receiver look and function just like a modern SA M1A receiver - were it inclined to do so.

ATF regs state that a MG receiver has to be torch cut it two spots. Even with that kind of damage people are successfully rebuilding Bren and other receivers into semi auto guns. I don't think there is enough space to follow the regs on an M14 receiver and put it back together.

[GM4spd]

ATF regs state that a MG receiver has to be torch cut it two spots. Even with that kind of damage people are successfully rebuilding Bren and other receivers into semi auto guns. I don't think there is enough space to follow the regs on an M14 receiver and put it back together.

You may be correct but I thought it required 3 cuts to meet ATF criteria.