I bought the 7.62x51 Garand as a barreled receiver from the CMP years ago thinking I would try my hand at putting it together myself at some point. That point never came to pass even though I bought a parts kit and Dupage laminate stock around the same time as the purchase from the CMP. Twelve-plus years later I figured I should get it built or sell the pieces & parts. So, I sent it to Michelle at DGR (Deans Gun Restorations) as I had them build/refinish/and-or repair numerous rifles both before and after Deans death and have been pleased every time.

I already have a Garand in the traditional .30-06 (restored by Dean), and also have a Mini-G built by Tim Shufflin of Shuff's Parkerizing (also in .30-06). Recently I bought a Garand clip loader from Norm Hirter and will use that to load the .50 cal can of 7.62mm surplus I got from SGAmmo (before the panic hit) into the 50 clips that just arrived from Ammo Garand. Then the clips will go into a stock pouch, a cartridge belt, and a grab-n-go bag from Olangapo Outfitters - once he has a chance to catch up on production.

As for the Carbine, it's a 5-digit Inland I bought complete from the CMP at the same time as the Garand barreled receiver. It came packed in cosmoline and I've had it in a ZCorr bag all these years, untouched. The finish was somewhat worn where I did wipe away some of the cosmoline, and the stock was just coated in the stuff. Like the Garand I told myself either get it shootable (and shoot it!) or sell it to someone who will, so I sent it to DGR as well for inspection, reparkerizing, and stock refinishing. The barrel is a General Motors dated 10-42 and gauges well.

Additionally, I sent Ultimak mounts to be installed on both rifles as I intend to put an Eotech XPS on the carbine and either a Burris or Leupold 2x8 pistol scope on the Garand.

The pictures aren't the best. More for practice on how to use imgur and post photos as I haven't done so since Photobucket got all jacked up.




I couldn't find the company from which I got the Garand parts kit, but here are links to the other companies listed above:

- DGR (out of business as-of October(?) 2020)
http://dgrguns.com/index.htm

- Dupage Trading
https://www.dupagetrading.com/

- Shuff's Parkerizing
http://shuffsparkerizing.com/

- SGAmmo
https://www.sgammo.com/

- Norm's Garand clip loader
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnwTSR4NdBU

- AmmoGarand
https://www.ammogarand.com/

- Olangapo Outfitters
https://olongapooutfitters.com...performed=Y&q=Garand

-ZCorr gun storage bags
https://www.accurateshooter.co...er-gun-storage-bags/

- Ultimak scope rails
http://ultimak.com/

- Burris 2-7x32 pistol scope
https://www.burrisoptics.com/s...ndgun-scope-2-7x32mm

- Leupold pistol scope 2.5-8x32
https://www.leupold.com/scopes...3-handgun-2-5-8x32mm

Range report to follow... at some point.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: marksman41,

Is your Garand a Mk 2 Mod 0 or a Mk 2 Mod 1?

Those were a great buy when the CMP had them for sale.

I love the Garand. There was one similar at a gun show last year in Cave City KY that looked very similar and was in 308. The guy was asking $1,200 for it and said he had a lot more in it. I wish I would have had the cash one me to buy it.

Found the receipts and CMP certificates for both:

The Garand is a Mk 2 Mod 1; purchased as a barreled receiver from CMP in 2013.
Costs:
- $350 barreled receiver
- $300-$350 parts kit
- $200 laminated stock
- $185 Ultimak rail
- $400 for the refinishing, stock fitting, reaming for proper headspace, etc.
Total cost is $1600 to get the rifle to current stage. Scope and mounts will add another $400-$800.

The carbine I got from the CMP in 2007.
Costs:
- $495 Carbine
- $100 Ultimak rail
- $300 for refinishing metal and stock
Total cost is $900 at current stage. Eotech and mounts will add another $400-$500.

A lot of money to sink into what some might consider old and obsolete firearms - especially the upgrades which are considered heretical by more than a few. And the refinishing of a 5-digit Inland with a barrel matching receiver date, flat bolt, etc. will certainly cause lamentation from purists and collectors.

Considering that I've had the Carbine for 13 years and the Garand bits and pieces for seven, my perspective is that those initial costs are sunk and the current cost to bring both to nearly new and upgraded condition are only $600 (Garand) and $400 (Carbine). So for spending $1000 today I now have two excellent rifles with different capabilities and strengths.

I've been wanting something in .308 and also a CMMG-type short-barreled firearm and figured if I sold both the Garand and Carbine as-is I would still need to add a significant amount of cash to acquire today's equivalents, so I went with what I had on hand. Certainly my WWII workhorses are lacking in features and capabilities of their modern day cousins but they'll be effective for my limited purposes.

I think they look very cool and I am sure they will be excellent shooters.

quote:

Originally posted by marksman41:
Found the receipts and CMP certificates for both:

The Garand is a Mk 2 Mod 1; purchased as a barreled receiver from CMP in 2013.
Costs:
- $350 barreled receiver
- $300-$350 parts kit
- $200 laminated stock
- $185 Ultimak rail
- $400 for the refinishing, stock fitting, reaming for proper headspace, etc.
Total cost is $1600 to get the rifle to current stage.

I'm surprised you needed to have your barrel finish reamed unless it was replaced when you had the rifle rebuilt. If memory serves, at the time these were being sold a common issues was long headspace. Lots of guys using NOS post WWII SA bolts to try and bring the headspace down into the sweet spot.

Those Navy barreled receivers built up nice and are sweet shooters.

I've got a shooting buddy that's having some age related problems with his dominant eye.

I think an Ultimak or Amega is in his future if he wants to keep shooting his M1 rifle and Carbine.

What steered you to the Ultimak over the Amega?

I too was surprised about that. The barrel needed reaming because with the parts-kit bolt it didn't properly gauge on one or the other of 7.62 or .308. I can't remember which it was now (that was weeks ago I gave permission to do it), but I wanted to be able to safely shoot both so I had it done. As I recall, it was a "tight fit" on the caliber in question.

I've never had a good grasp of headspacing so I defaulted to DGR's expertise basing their recommendation on what ammo. I wanted to use. I'd be interested to hear any thoughts about that from forum members.

I actually have an Amega mount that I bought from the CMP a while back but decided to go with the Ultimak because it is lower than the Amega. Granted, not by much, but I'm wanting to shoot with a scope and not need a cheek pad. We'll see how that works out.

Another difference between the Amega and Ultimak is how they mount. I know Tim Shufflin at Shuff's Parkerizing likes the mounting system of the Amega better than the Ultimak, but prefers the lower rail height of the 'mak.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: marksman41,

Sir, I have toyed with sending a Garand to Shuff's to be converted to a Mini G. Can you tell me how you like the gun and how your experience with Shuff went? Thank you.

quote:

Originally posted by marksman41:
And the refinishing of a 5-digit Inland with a barrel matching receiver date, flat bolt, etc. will certainly cause lamentation from purists and collectors.

Indeed. A solitary, manly tear silently rolled down my cheek when I read your initial post.

Your toys, your rules. But dang, son...

Iron - My experiences with Tim Shufflin have all been positive. Besides the Mini-G, he has done inspections and refinishing work on other Garands and Carbines that I have passed along to some close friends. In my case, Tim has never gone past a quoted deadline and the rifles look and function flawlessly.

I really like my Mini-G. It's as handy as a Carbine and, to me, the felt recoil isn't much different from the full-size Garand - but with a caveat.

Originally my Mini-G came with a muzzle brake. It worked well for what it was designed to do but the blast was something fierce and I found myself flinching when firing. Recently I had my local gunsmith remove the brake and install a T-37 flash-hider but I haven't shot it since the swap so I can't comment yet on how the change affects recoil, blast, etc.. Hopefully I'll get it to the range this week for a test and will post my findings.

I like Tim's Mini-G over other "Tanker" conversions because his is shorter and does away with the short handguard that the others have. To me it's a cleaner look and also makes it a handier weapon. I've toyed with a mag-fed conversion, or a complete BM59 conversion but don't really know if there would be much difference between those and an M-14/1A.

I hope this helps with your decision. If I can, I'll answer any questions you might have that didn't get covered in the above.

Rogue - I hear you. Years ago I would have thought the same. As time has gone by, though, my perspective as a collector has changed more to that of a user. The Carbine is a mixmaster with some seemingly original to the receiver parts, while others are later upgrades showing it went through at least one refurbishment. In my view, having a new springs installed and a fresh protective coat of parkerizing applied shouldn't affect the value because that's how it would have come out of refurbishing anyway. I know in the mind of a collector it does make a difference but whether it's new or worn finish it's still the same gun, right?

Edit to add:

Thinking more about the subject of collecting vs. using, I guess the best example of my way of thinking is the Commemorative Air Force. Those guys bring those old warbirds back to new (or better than, in some cases) and keep them flying with a mix of NOS, when found, and new manufacture.

For many years I, like most collectors, was a proponent of keeping old things as they were as a time capsule in static display. I questioned that mode of thought more and more as I got older, wondering who I was saving this or that item for if I wasn't going to use it.

Granted, if it's an item of absolute uniqueness or national/historic importance, of course that's something worth putting in a museum for safekeeping and public display. Nothing I have qualifies in either of those regards. Rather everything I have is a copy of something of which many copies were made.

So, to the collectors out there, it's not that I intentionally thumbed my nose at the hobby to denigrate your perspective. On the contrary, I am better able to respect your view because I, too, have been of that mind. I acknowledge that I have a modest treasure out of many treasures like it and merely choose to enjoy it in a different - some would say a more pragmatic - way.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: marksman41,

So I just went to Tim’s website to check out that Mini-G. Very cool.

And I found this in the order page which I absolutely love:

quote:

I offer no discounts for anyone. We are all equal at Shuff’s Parkerizing, unless you’re a filthy democrat.

...

If you voted for any democrat candidate in the last election, please use some other vendor. I do not do work for "people" who hire politicians to put me out of business.

Yeah, Tim is of an earlier generation - plainspoken, cut through the BS, and no PC. The kind of guy where a handshake and a man's word is more binding than a paper contract. And, thankfully, there are more than a few like him on this forum.

I also benefited from your original post.
I need a carbon steel single action revolver cylinder parkerized.
And in the list of vendors you supplied, you guessed it... Shuff's Parkerizing.
I sent him an email yesterday, he responded within a few hours.
He will do what I need, and for the BANK BREAKING sum of $35 plus shipping.
Just kidding about bank breaking, I thought that it was priced fairly for media blasting and manganese park.
I really should get some photos of the project gun up in the Pistols section. I will after the cylinder returns.
Long story short.. A Ruger Blackhawk (stainless) 4 5/8" bought used. It required some ScotchBrite work.
I changed the standard plow handle grip frame to a high polish stainless Birdshead & factory Micarta grips.
Then I fitted a blued carbon steel 9 mm cylinder. The cylinder was used and required a bit of machining.
The front of the cylinder is now unfinished after machining that surface.
Thanks Again for the link to Shuff's!

Cee, I'm always glad any info. I post is of help. I've been the recipient of a lot of assistance and great advice, so it's nice to be able to give back, even if only occasionally.

For your Ruger cylinder, if you don't mind my asksing, what factors helped decide on getting it parkerized vs. a Cera-Hide or NP3 type of finish?

I want the 9 mm cylinder to be "strikingly" visually different from the stainless steel .357 Magnum cylinder. Kind of like a visual reminder, make sure the ammo matches the caliber. One handgun, two cylinders, three ammo caliber choices. 9, 38, 357
I take the handgun to my rural property frequently. I'm running my tractor, loader, backhoe, bush hog. Working in ditches and stream beds. Sweating on it and getting it wet and dirty. I wanted to set something up that was reasonably powerful, capable of using a wide selection of ammo, simple and essentially unbreakable. A stainless Ruger Blackhawk is all of that. But the only 9mm cylinder I could find was blued, not stainless.
So after machining the used 9mm cylinder to fit my revolver, it needs refinishing.
Simple as that!

Understood. You will be pleased with with the results when Tim is finished with the cylinder. I'm also a fan of the charcoal color of manganese parkerizing vs. the lighter gray of the zinc.

marksman41,
Thanks Again for the Shuff's parkerizing information! The revolver cylinder was returned today.
Photos and complete story here: https://sigforum.com/eve/forums...0601935/m/8970044774

Happy to help, cee. I'm always glad when a recommendation of mine is useful to another member.

One change to my earlier post listing various gunsmiths & vendors is that DGR went out of business shortly after my two rifles were completed.

As a collector, I don't want my military stuff messed with. It ruins the value to me, but I don't fault or flame people who do.

The only thing I had done to these two rifles that can't be undone was having a fresh parkerized finish applied to correct years of wear, and allow for more additional years of wear by future generations without having to be overly concerned with rust. Otherwise everything else is completely reversable to original or "correct", as some would have it, by doing these procedures:

- remove Ultimak rails and optics; install replaced wood handguards.

- remove fresh springs and install worn out items (Carbine); Garand was built from barreled-receiver, (seemed like a waste to keep it as such just for the sake of collectibility).

- remove the receiver, barrel, and trigger group from properly fitted new stock and place in loose-fitting WWII stock (Garand); smear cosmoline all over current stock (Carbine).