M1 T26 marked "Experimental"

[beerman]

This is by far, the most intriguing post ever on the C&R board. Thanks for sharing it… it looks legit to me. Note the weird gas cylinder.

[kendog4570]

Here's a few more pictures...looks like a Rock Island serial on the Trigger group?...

That is a part drawing number and the manufacturer of the hammer. WRA for Winchester.That stamped trigger guard was not made until way after the war.


I stand corrected. Looks like SA started stamped TG's at the end of WW2. And this one has a milled latch.

[slick44]

Thats what I was thinking. Look real close and you can see what appear to be rotational tools marks in the letters, like it was done on a modern programmable mill. Of course, this could have also been done at that time with a motorized engraver like a New Hermes.

Would the ordnance people simply stamp further ID marks in with the existing roll stamps of a run of the mill receiver? Or would they completely mechanically scrub the heel and remark it as such? I'm thinking the former, unless this was some kind of presentation piece to an acceptance board and prettied up as much as they could.
The top of the A in "WAR" is applied over a ding and the finish is in both, and the heel looks like it was scrubbed. Also, the op rod joint weld sticks out noticeably. Overall in the pictures provided it looks in excellent condition.

On the op rod weld it was finished so smooth I couldn't even feel it or catch a finger nail across it! That was another point that made me raise an eye brow!

[joefrank64k]

Here's my guess: It's a repro.

It's too new looking.

The 'engraving/stamping/roll mark' don't look right.

The trigger guard doesn't look right

The OP rod looks weird.

If I'm right, I'll take the humped-up rifle as payment

If I'm wrong, I'll buy myself another gun

[slick44]

That is a part drawing number and the manufacturer of the hammer. WRA for Winchester.That stamped trigger guard was not made until way after the war.


I stand corrected. Looks like SA started stamped TG's at the end of WW2.

Okay I appreciate that info thank you...

[slick44]

Here's my guess: It's a repro.

It's too new looking.

The 'engraving/stamping/roll mark' don't look right.

The trigger guard doesn't look right

The OP rod looks weird.

If I'm right, I'll take the humped-up rifle as payment

If I'm wrong, I'll buy myself another gun

Hahahaha...I don't think I'll bite on that wager but thank you anyway Lol...the "looks too new" thing is what I was thinking all along...but I'd never seen markings like that and no "makers mark" and no serial number? Who in their right mind would manufacture without serializing? I'm an 07 FFL myself and I know I'd never think of such a thing!

[slick44]

She's supposed to call me back after she has her coffee...I'll post the answers she provides...thank you all for your input...been great...I forgot how much I missed Cal Gunners!

[kendog4570]

...The trigger guard doesn't look right....

Thats the only part that does!

[joefrank64k]

Thats the only part that does!

Haha!!

Typed too fast...trigger group doesn't look right (too new, like the rest of the rifle)

And like the OP said, no serial #?? On a gov/mil weapon sample?? Hmmm...

Though it would be cool to be proven wrong and have this be some sort of missing link!!

[RNE228]

Would CMP be any help with unusual requests like this?

[glassparman]

I'm no expert at all but what I see looks like the area where the information is stamped seems like it was machined off to remove old data.

I remember I think it was Santa Fe Arms took a bunch of Garands and cut the receivers down to M14 size and made them psuedo M1A rifles with surplus M14 parts. They did the same thing and machined off the Garand identification stuff and just left a serial number.

Just a dumb guy observation.

[slick44]

Okay so finally got off the phone with her, so the story is not quite like she first stated but she has done considerable research on it years ago including Scott Duff and the Springfield museum...

So her husband was in WW2 but didn't come across the rifle until 1990 at a gun show in Reno NV where he bought it for $600 back then, story was that the gentleman selling the rifle was the son and the rifle was his fathers, his dad had passed away a couple years earlier and he was selling off some of his dads firearms. The woman's husband that bought the thought it might have been valuable so at that time he took it to a gunsmith in Livermore named Bruce Morgan, Bruce thought all the same things that we've all been bouncing around, so Bruce took it to a friend that worked at Lawrence Livermore Laboratories and they checked it and mic'd it and they said there was no way that any original markings had been ground off and it remarked...that the markings were in fact original but they had no way to date it. Bruce then told him it needed to be put into a military museum. It was shortly after that her husband passed away in 1993. A few years later she put it up for auction on Butterfield & Butterfield an auction site out of San Francisco, there it attracted a lot of attention but without it being authenticated no one would buy it...one person told her if she it was authenticated he would give her $70K for it. That's when she started trying to get it authenticated, but she is completely unwilling to let it leave her possession, she contacted Springfield National museum and they told they would love to see it and check it out, she was welcome to bring it there herself or ship it to them, she says she doesn't have the money to go herself and refuses to ship it...next she contacted Scott Duff in either 1995 or 1996 she's not positive which year but hes the one that told her there was a 3rd T26 prototypes made that no one knows what happened to...he asked her to ship it to him, she refused, she said he was welcome to come out to her place and see it, she said that's when Scott got kinda snippy with her and told her that it was fake and she didn't have anything, he never seen it or any pictures. She's been stewing on all that since then...until yesterday when she brought into me...she is 91 years old. I told her I wasn't sure what she wanted me to do since the only way to truly authenticate it is basically the Springfield Museum and their archives. She is frustrated but won't budge...she may very well have the third one...either way I'm not sure what I can do for her from here?

[stevie]

Looking at Canfields book, the 2 rifles mentioned were reworked SA which carried SA serial numbers. The original request was for 150 but it is unknown how many were actually created. It did mention that when the program was cancelled most likely they rebuilt to regular rifles.

Also said many fakes were created some having Pacific Warfare Board marking on the reciever.

[Quiet]

AFAIK...

The Pacific War Board created the shorten M1 from existing M1 Garands.

Two of those were sent to Springfield Armory, which they used to make their own version, which they designated the T26.

The T26 and PWB M1 have physical differences, most visible is the PWB M1 has a shorten front handguard secured with a M1903 barrel band and the T26 did not have a front handguard.

Per the Springfield Armory National Historical Museum, the receiver for the T26 did not have any special markings & it was marked like a standard M1 rifle, because they used an existing receiver they had on hand, and no authentic PWB M1 rifle was marked/remarked with any special markings & they were all made in 1944 & field/combat tested by the 503rd Parachute Infantry Regiment in the New Guinea campaign (07-02-44 through 08-31-44).

Fake/reproduction PWB M1 rifles started appearing in the early-1960s.

[slick44]

Looking at Canfields book, the 2 rifles mentioned were reworked SA which carried SA serial numbers. The original request was for 150 but it is unknown how many were actually created. It did mention that when the program was cancelled most likely they rebuilt to regular rifles.

Also said many fakes were created some having Pacific Warfare Board marking on the reciever.

Yeah I'm coming to the same conclusion - it's gotta be a reproduction, that would also explain no serials on other parts like the sights and such, they're after market knock offs...thing is she'll never know unless she goes to the Springfield Museum and they tell her, because she sure didn't want to hear it from me either...oh well, if she wants to hang on to that idea that's her choice...

Thank you all for all your input and thoughts and wisdom...that was fun!