Quote History Quoted:
Low number receiver. I would retire it. There is a question about its shooting safety.
Goes without saying, since the original rear sight has been removed. Even replacement iron sights wold require drilling and tapping.
NOT a good candidate for restoration.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Quote History Quoted:
I have a 1906 date sporterized RIA
Low number receiver. I would retire it. There is a question about its shooting safety.
Has it been drilled and tapped?
Goes without saying, since the original rear sight has been removed. Even replacement iron sights wold require drilling and tapping.
NOT a good candidate for restoration.
Its been shot a lot before me and by me. If you read the reports (while the receivers are weaker due to poor heat treatment process) there was also overpressure ammunition problem. I shoot only known decent ammunition or lightly loaded garand type ammunition. That M2 in that picture is not commonly shot through it or the garand. Its 61,xxx or 62,xxx I cant remember. Well below the 287k "safe number"
I have the complete rear sight, front site and the stock from it. The only "hard modification" if the redfield front sight silver soldered on the original barrel. I dont know why you said replacement iron sights would require drilling and tapping. The hand-guard covers the sport rear sight holes on the barrel.
Family sentimental value in the rifle.
Also, didnt meant to hijack OP's thread.