Milsurp or not?

[Shawnc]

I just had a pleasant conversation with one of the moderators, and just as a curiosity question for the purists, and those less so, I have an M1 Garand built completely from "new old stock" parts, not sure where the wood came from, and was just wondering if it is considered a "true milsurp". I posted a thread about it earlier here: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2149

I personally never thought of it that way, but now that I'm starting to get into it more, I was just curious if it would fall into that category.
Nobody's gonna hurt my feelings, I'm just interested in the general consensus.



Shawn

[websterz]

If the parts were intended for miliary use, and were surplussed out, then it is a mil-surp IMO.

[entropy]

I'd say its about as milsurp as a gun can get. Built from MILitary SURPlus parts. Yep, it's a milsurp. Nice way to get a Garand, BTW. I liked building the AR I had and the AMD-65 I have.

[Junk Yard Dog]

If it's a Garand assembled at a US arsenal for issue to US troops then it is a milsurp, otherwise it is a commercial sporter built from military parts. Universal M1 carbines utilized surplus US parts for years, but they are not considered milsurps, so to did the early built Springfield Sporter M1 Garands, but they too are sporters, not milsurps.
The 7.62mm Garand was a common enough site back in the 90's, I handled them, and fired one, but these were not Navy issue 7.62mm Garands, they were built by commercial outfits with no military or government affiliation.

[Shawnc]

Now, when I think Milsurp, what comes into my head is an issued item, or at least an item constructed to be issued to military personnel.
If somehow, I were visiting my crazy Uncle Ivan, and he had in his attic a box of new old stock Mosin parts from WWII that he snuck over from the old country, but none of it was ever issued, and I put the parts together into a rifle, this rifle would have much less historical significance than one that a soldier carried. Or would it?

[Shawnc]

If it's a Garand assembled at a US arsenal for issue to US troops then it is a milsurp, otherwise it is a commercial sporter built from military parts. Universal M1 carbines utilized surplus US parts for years, but they are not considered milsurps, so to did the early built Springfield Sporter M1 Garands, but they too are sporters, not milsurps.
The 7.62mm Garand was a common enough site back in the 90's, I handled them, and fired one, but these were not Navy issue 7.62mm Garands, they were built by commercial outfits with no military or government affiliation.

A-ha! But mine was built buy Navy personnel, at a Naval armory, but for his own use. It's like it's in milsurp/sporter limbo.

I'm not defending either position...I'm just trying to start trouble.

[Junk Yard Dog]

If it's built on government property as a Navy arsenal definitely is then it's a milsurp, the man who built it did so in a government arsenal while serving on active duty with the Navy and using Navy owned parts.

[OLD OUTLAW]

You say he built it for his own use. Hmmmmm. Did not know that was legal to build one to take home. I live about 10 minutes from the US Rock Island Arsenal.
A few there years ago built a few varieties for themselves like an M14 out of parts they took home with them. ATF found out years ago and they went to
jail for making one for their own use. Guess they should not have went to a range with M14, M2 Carbine, and a funky select fire M1.
If he had a bill of sale from the US Government, all is legal. If not, well, be careful. Just from my point of view, I cannot agree it would ever be Milsurp.

[Sgt. Rob]

Is the receiver USGI? if so you have a homebuilt milsurp mixmaster. If the reciever is commercial, i.e. Century, Springfield Inc., Fed.Ord.,etc. You have an M1 copy with some USGI parts thrown together. If the receiver is Berretta or Breda, you have a foriegn homebuilt milsurp mixmaster. Even alot of the M1's coming out of CMP are being parts swapped at Anniston to make functioning rifles, and the folks working there are not serving military armorers. Although they are very good at what they do. They also build competition versions utilizing aftermarket stocks, barrels and other small parts. I am not in anway infering that this makes for a less intresting or even collectable rifle. Only stating that this is the way it is in the M1 shooting and collecting world overall. Most collectors in this field have no qualms whatsoever of swapping parts around in order to make a rifle "correct" or "restored". It is a very diffrent mind set then the community here has for Mosins and other milsurps.

Semper Fi, Rob

[Shawnc]

I know for sure he bought and paid for the receiver himself. Not sure where he got the stock. As he was an armorer and shot in competition, I'm pretty sure he used other parts from the armory, or possibly acquired through the armory, maybe from CMP. It shoots great.
I just happened to have this rifle as an example, but really this thread wasn't about the Garand, it was a way of finding out what you all considered "Milsurp". As with anything else, opinions range. I stated what I consider Milsurp previously, and as a beginning collector that's kind of my criteria to go by for my collection. The Garand I got just because I always wanted one. When I got it I had no intention of collecting milsurp rifles. That started with my Mosin.
On another note, will M14's make it to the market? Not so much the full auto, but when I was on ship we had them for shark watches and such, and if I remember correctly, they were going to be replaced by AR's eventually. We had at least one full auto, maybe 2. They also used them for shooting the mooring lines over to the other ship during underway refueling.

[Junk Yard Dog]

There are some full auto M14's around on the civilian market, they are registered full auto weapons with BATFE, and they are milsurps. My M14 used a Winchester parts kit and a commercial receiver, it's a semi auto, was built by a Marine armorer for his own use and then sold to me because I made him an offer he couldn't refuse. It is a commercial sporter with milsurp parts, but still a commercial sporter. Your friend could have easily bought a Garand receiver to build his rifle, they were fairly cheap 20 years back, and not that bad today. If so then the rifle uses all GI parts, you know the story behind it, but once it's out of your hands anybody looking at it will simply see a GI 7.62mm barrel, and a GI receiver and assume it's another 7.62mm Navy Garand. Most of the 7.62mm conversions used a commercial barrel, no GI markings on it, easy to pick out, some of the later ones use Australian receivers new production made for Springfield sporters.