T2 Garand - Part 1
- Thread starter Dyspnea
- Start date
- Status
GunsNotPuns
CGN frequent flyer
I've done business with Marstar despite johnone's belligerent attitude but I think this pretty much ends any future association with the company. I realize that the volume of my business wouldn't pay for the pot that two of his staff would piss in but I'd rather deal with someone whom I had a bit more confidence in. I've dealt with about half of the site's sponsors over the years and there was the occasional mistake or issue. With the exception of one company, all of them apologized, rectified the error and didn't engage in insults over the issue. Marstar needs to take a page from companies like Canada Ammo, Budget Shooter Supply or Corwin Arms -- to name a few -- to find out what friendly and proactive customer service is about.
At any rate, I look forward to seeing one of these at the next gun show I go to because I know there will be a "legitimate, rare Tipo 2 Garand" for sale at some guy's table for a mere $2500.
At any rate, I look forward to seeing one of these at the next gun show I go to because I know there will be a "legitimate, rare Tipo 2 Garand" for sale at some guy's table for a mere $2500.
This thread needs to stay open. Rather than make a new thread I would much rather post my experience with the returns process here. We shall see how this is resolved. Marstar has the opportunity to make this right and return peoples money.
Anything less than a full refund and any resistance or reluctance in providing so will only confirm and give credibility to the worst suspicions already exposed in this fiasco.
Anything less than a full refund and any resistance or reluctance in providing so will only confirm and give credibility to the worst suspicions already exposed in this fiasco.
Everyone is being surprisingly on topic and not unnecessarily trashing people.
It is about the guns and how they are not as advertised and even unsafe in cases. I think it is very important to leave open. I will be dissapointed to see it closed for telling the truth...
The sad thing about this whole situation is that the T2 Garands are
back in stock on the Marstar website.
I'm sure that every rifle that is returned from CGN will just be flipped
to some other unsuspecting soul looking for a nice Garand to shoot.
back in stock on the Marstar website.
I'm sure that every rifle that is returned from CGN will just be flipped
to some other unsuspecting soul looking for a nice Garand to shoot.
I agree. Guns could be broken down for parts, repaired, or sold as project guns minus the offending parts without destroying reputations completely.
Could be the shade tree place puting them together misrepresented them?
My observations so far. If anyone wants me to go back and take another look just let me know what details you would like checked.
Otherwise I am not touching these rifles anymore than I need to before I send them back.
Otherwise I am not touching these rifles anymore than I need to before I send them back.
I have since examined the bolt in the 3rd rifle and it has also been ground on the lug faces. So that is 3 for 3 unsafe bolts in the rifles in my possesion.
Closer inspection of the bolts revealed a grinding cut or gouge on one of the extractors. Also some of the grinding on the bolts extends past the lugs and cutting into the bolt body, creating a fracture/failure point, greatly increasing the risk of catastrophic failure already caused by the grinding. Whoever was modifying these bolts to fit was working extremely quickly or sloppy or both.
Closer inspection of the bolts revealed a grinding cut or gouge on one of the extractors. Also some of the grinding on the bolts extends past the lugs and cutting into the bolt body, creating a fracture/failure point, greatly increasing the risk of catastrophic failure already caused by the grinding. Whoever was modifying these bolts to fit was working extremely quickly or sloppy or both.
Last edited:
Taking into the condition of parts and quality of advertising a dollar would have been to high. If these rifles where in poor quality when originally bought by Marstar then I would think a minimum 50-60 % profit. When the average retailer in my area has 40% mark up
Just want to keep this topic at the forefront so that everyone picks up on these issues and thoroughly checks what they have bought..Don't want anyone burying their head in the sand about this....
Hi All,
I just spent a few hours going over one of these rifles with a CGN member who is on this thread.
My findings and photos are attached. The owner was with me while I inspected the rifle and can verify my findings if he would like to.
Firstly, these are not Tipo 2 rifles. There is ZERO chance these are actual Tipo 2 rifles. Bruce Cranfield's "The M1 Garand Rifle" pages 609-616 deal specifically with Italian produced M1's and pages 614-616 deal with the Tipo 2 directly. While there are certainly Tipo 2 modified components (i.e. op rod, stocks) to accommodate a shorter rechambered barrel, these are civilian produced barrels of unknown and defiantly questionable quality. The receivers are Danish contract rifles. True Tipo 2's used modified GI or Italian military marked receivers... Never Danish contract.
With regards to the barrel. Zero government markings (only civil CIL N laser engraved proofing) and highly questionable geometry and manufacturing quality. In this example, the barrel was under-indexed and incorrectly finished reamed on a lathe, resulting in an off –axis, and heavily scored (on one side of the chamber) chamber. That’s not the really big problem though. The barrel threads are cut not in line with bore axis resulting in a barrel, that when matted to the receiver, has a .050” gap along the top where it doesn’t even touch the receiver. The barrel has a definite droop that is visible to the naked eye. I suspect the barrels were finish reamed as a group to save time during assembly. I also suspect they finished them before realizing they were all over-headspaced.
The bolt was modified in order to try to compensate for the over headspace condition created by incorrect chamber finishing. By welding the rear face of each lug and grinding the front face of each, the assembler attempted to move the enire bolt forward in the action in order to bring it back into spec. this explains why some bolts have also been ground around the forward area (in order to fit inside of the chamber ring). A standard, unmodified bolt would show excessive and dangerous over-headspace, however welded and modified lugs could potentially be a grenade. On the example inspected, the RH lug was also not ground in a matting angle to the receiver. It was rounded leading to a condition whereby it would have at best, 15-20 locking surface. BTW, anything below 80% was considered to be a reject by USGI standards. The new locking face is of an unknown hardness and the steel is discoloured (extreme heat from welding) in the forward area immediately adjacent to the lugs. The extractor is similarly discoloured indicating it was left in the bolt when it was welded and ground. This annealing also weakens the bolt lugs and could, over a relatively few amount of rounds, allow the headspace to expand as the lugs are peened from recoil (that is if they don’t shear off beforehand).
The gas tube surpassed GI specs and is actually beyond serviceable condition.
Many parts were NOS, and many (gas tube and op rod) were out of spec or simply worn out.
Anyways, I could go on…
Suffice it to say, these are parts guns assembled by someone not at all familiar with the M1 rifle.
In the case of the examined rifle, I WOULD NOT FIRE IT in current condition.
In order to make this rifle suitable for reliable and safe firing, at a minimum new barrel and bolt would be required. On this rifle, a new gas tube and possibly op rod would be required for reliable functioning.
I just spent a few hours going over one of these rifles with a CGN member who is on this thread.
My findings and photos are attached. The owner was with me while I inspected the rifle and can verify my findings if he would like to.
Firstly, these are not Tipo 2 rifles. There is ZERO chance these are actual Tipo 2 rifles. Bruce Cranfield's "The M1 Garand Rifle" pages 609-616 deal specifically with Italian produced M1's and pages 614-616 deal with the Tipo 2 directly. While there are certainly Tipo 2 modified components (i.e. op rod, stocks) to accommodate a shorter rechambered barrel, these are civilian produced barrels of unknown and defiantly questionable quality. The receivers are Danish contract rifles. True Tipo 2's used modified GI or Italian military marked receivers... Never Danish contract.
With regards to the barrel. Zero government markings (only civil CIL N laser engraved proofing) and highly questionable geometry and manufacturing quality. In this example, the barrel was under-indexed and incorrectly finished reamed on a lathe, resulting in an off –axis, and heavily scored (on one side of the chamber) chamber. That’s not the really big problem though. The barrel threads are cut not in line with bore axis resulting in a barrel, that when matted to the receiver, has a .050” gap along the top where it doesn’t even touch the receiver. The barrel has a definite droop that is visible to the naked eye. I suspect the barrels were finish reamed as a group to save time during assembly. I also suspect they finished them before realizing they were all over-headspaced.
The bolt was modified in order to try to compensate for the over headspace condition created by incorrect chamber finishing. By welding the rear face of each lug and grinding the front face of each, the assembler attempted to move the enire bolt forward in the action in order to bring it back into spec. this explains why some bolts have also been ground around the forward area (in order to fit inside of the chamber ring). A standard, unmodified bolt would show excessive and dangerous over-headspace, however welded and modified lugs could potentially be a grenade. On the example inspected, the RH lug was also not ground in a matting angle to the receiver. It was rounded leading to a condition whereby it would have at best, 15-20 locking surface. BTW, anything below 80% was considered to be a reject by USGI standards. The new locking face is of an unknown hardness and the steel is discoloured (extreme heat from welding) in the forward area immediately adjacent to the lugs. The extractor is similarly discoloured indicating it was left in the bolt when it was welded and ground. This annealing also weakens the bolt lugs and could, over a relatively few amount of rounds, allow the headspace to expand as the lugs are peened from recoil (that is if they don’t shear off beforehand).
The gas tube surpassed GI specs and is actually beyond serviceable condition.
Many parts were NOS, and many (gas tube and op rod) were out of spec or simply worn out.
Anyways, I could go on…
Suffice it to say, these are parts guns assembled by someone not at all familiar with the M1 rifle.
In the case of the examined rifle, I WOULD NOT FIRE IT in current condition.
In order to make this rifle suitable for reliable and safe firing, at a minimum new barrel and bolt would be required. On this rifle, a new gas tube and possibly op rod would be required for reliable functioning.
- Status
