Hi,
Here are some pictures of my 1903 Sprinfield and my Inland M1 Carbine.
First the Springfield
Its an early rifle as can be seen by the serial number 153383, manufactured in 1906. Has been refitted in WW2 with the barrel dated 7 42. I have read that these early Springfields are unsafe to fire due to dodgy heat treatments on the recievers.
The highest rate of failures occurred among the receivers manufactured in 1904 (8.71/100,000), followed by 1911 (8.53/100,000), 1916 (7.53/100,000), then 1907 (7.26/100,000). The distribution of these rates by year suggests that the problem of overheating the receivers was present during ten of the 15 years of manufacture, and was worse before 1917, especially in the earliest years of production, with 10 of the 33 known receivers being made before 1908.
The absence of receiver failures in some years suggests that the problem may have been specific to some workers who only worked during some years. At Springfield Armory the worst three years for receiver failure were 1904-1907 with 1905 being an exception. Receivers made in these four years account for nearly 45.5 % (15/33) of all the receivers that failed. The absence of failed receivers among those produced in 1908-10, 1912 and 1915 suggests that the problem was not caused by hastily trained war time workers unfamiliar with rifle manufacturing requirements.
This is the info I found on my rifle, is this true?
My M1 Carbine
Its a Inland Division rifle, serial 6710001. The new barrel is marked I.E.M CORP 11 43.
Here are some pictures of my 1903 Sprinfield and my Inland M1 Carbine.
First the Springfield
Its an early rifle as can be seen by the serial number 153383, manufactured in 1906. Has been refitted in WW2 with the barrel dated 7 42. I have read that these early Springfields are unsafe to fire due to dodgy heat treatments on the recievers.
The highest rate of failures occurred among the receivers manufactured in 1904 (8.71/100,000), followed by 1911 (8.53/100,000), 1916 (7.53/100,000), then 1907 (7.26/100,000). The distribution of these rates by year suggests that the problem of overheating the receivers was present during ten of the 15 years of manufacture, and was worse before 1917, especially in the earliest years of production, with 10 of the 33 known receivers being made before 1908.
The absence of receiver failures in some years suggests that the problem may have been specific to some workers who only worked during some years. At Springfield Armory the worst three years for receiver failure were 1904-1907 with 1905 being an exception. Receivers made in these four years account for nearly 45.5 % (15/33) of all the receivers that failed. The absence of failed receivers among those produced in 1908-10, 1912 and 1915 suggests that the problem was not caused by hastily trained war time workers unfamiliar with rifle manufacturing requirements.
This is the info I found on my rifle, is this true?
My M1 Carbine
Its a Inland Division rifle, serial 6710001. The new barrel is marked I.E.M CORP 11 43.
