New Production Garand?

[CountryGent]

I've had a couple of horror story 1911's made by Auto Ordnance. I've come to the conclusion that with their corporate connection to Numrich Arms, in some of their product lines, they don't so much as use their own freshly made parts as they do sourced-out stuff. Including parts made in the Philippines. Using contracted-out parts is nothing new; using the worst ones available doesn't make for a good gun.

The new (not the old GM unit) Inland Manufacturing makes re-issue 1911's and M1 Carbines. Their version of the Carbine may be better than Auto Ordnance but I haven't owned one. I've owned of of their 1911's, it was okay, much better than AO.

Thanks for the details. Yah, the one AO M1 we had was total trash. I was close to buying an SBR Thompson from AO, but after that, forget it. Small sampling size, I grant, but I don't know how a company can screw up a carbine that bad.

The one and only Inland Manufacturing (new one, not wartime production) I shot was a complete and utter pile of goat excrement. As in jammed on 80-90% of cycles. (It was the Advisor "pistol", fwiw.)

(Parenthetically, the sporterized, mid-1940s Inland I have has had at least a couple thousand rounds shot through said by me. Malfunctions? Zero — literally zero, with any ammo, and any magazine I stuffed into it. Here's hoping the M2 from National Postal Meter that is coming soon is so reliable. But, I digress. )

 

[gmerkt]

Also by not having a detachable magazine...you may be able to get around laws / bans / restrictions regarding certain features of most semi automatic rifles.*

True, the M1 Rifle is not on the California list of assault rifles. So far, the various federal proposals that have batted around Congress over the years have not included the M1 Rifle. Unfortunately, the catch-all law concerning ALL semi auto rifles snared it in Wash. state. Which went beyond the detachable magazine issue.

(Sorry Andy, I know you are done with this thread)

The one and only Inland Manufacturing (new one, not wartime production) I shot was a complete and utter pile of goat excrement. As in jammed on 80-90% of cycles. (It was the Advisor "pistol", fwiw.)

How disappointing to pay $1,200 for something like that and have it not work. It's not like it's a new, revolutionary design.

 

[raftman]

Out of curiosity, and if you care to share, why is that? (I'm personally ambivalent about their offerings, at best, but am curious why you dislike like them so.)


I don't know if our experience was common, but the AO M1 Carbine we had was the biggest piece of crap I've ever owned, or at least in the running for that ignominious distinction. Two trips to the factory, tried every commercial ammo available, lots of different magazines, and finally a swap of all springs still wouldn't cycle through a single magazine without multiple malfunctions.

I must've been lucky with one of those. I bought one several years ago because it was on a very tempting sale even though I was well aware of the "mixed" reputation they have. Doesn't like steel-cased ammo, or at least didn't at the time I last tried, but still runs about 99.5% with brass. Not terrible for a plinker.

That said, a safe, reliable Garand is probably a much tougher challenge than an M1 carbine... at least if one plans to be competitive with the originals.

 

[Aero Denezol]

Out of curiosity, and if you care to share, why is that? (I'm personally ambivalent about their offerings, at best, but am curious why you dislike like them so.)


I don't know if our experience was common, but the AO M1 Carbine we had was the biggest piece of crap I've ever owned, or at least in the running for that ignominious distinction. Two trips to the factory, tried every commercial ammo available, lots of different magazines, and finally a swap of all springs still wouldn't cycle through a single magazine without multiple malfunctions.

I don't dislike PSA. On the contrary I very much like PSA (I assume that's what you're asking about is PSA). I just think they talk a big game and make a lot of promises, and don't deliver. Fans have been waiting for years following big announcements about the MP5, the Krinkov, and the AK 74, and there is no communication from the company - just rumors on message boards. So with this in mind I am very skeptical about PSA building a Garand in my lifetime.

Regarding AO I do not own one of their Carbines. I only know they built replicas of Carbines. I do own an AO 1911 and that one is great - no complaints. I guess you could say the 1911 is the original military replica.

 

[CountryGent]

I don't dislike PSA. On the contrary I very much like PSA (I assume that's what you're asking about is PSA

This question was directed to @clanhanson as he say he "despise(s)" the line. I was just curious why. Thanks for the perspective though.

 

[Diamondback]

I've had a couple of horror story 1911's made by Auto Ordnance. I've come to the conclusion that with their corporate connection to Numrich Arms, in some of their product lines, they don't so much as use their own freshly made parts as they do sourced-out stuff. Including parts made in the Philippines. Using contracted-out parts is nothing new; using the worst ones available doesn't make for a good gun.

The new (not the old GM unit) Inland Manufacturing makes re-issue 1911's and M1 Carbines. Their version of the Carbine may be better than Auto Ordnance but I haven't owned one. I've owned of of their 1911's, it was okay, much better than AO.

Numrich sold AO to Kahr back when I was in college, IIRC. As for H&R, if you remember Mike from NoDakSpud, JJE (PSA's parent) bought NoDakSpud and merged it into H&R specifically to make him the pointman on projects like this. If he's allowed to do the same quality work as he did at NDS with Retro AR components, I'd consider buying a receiver to start a build on. (SUCK ON THAT, PEDO BOB!)

 

[gmerkt]

As for H&R, if you remember Mike from NoDakSpud, JJE (PSA's parent) bought NoDakSpud and merged it into H&R specifically to make him the pointman on projects like this.

Mike Wettegel surely has high ambitions. It sounds like the H&R name was prized by PSA for the trademark that could be applied to retro AR's. So there is that project, not too tough, AR stuff is pretty easy to make. Then they envision replicating not only M1 Rifles (with forged receivers) but also M14 clones. They envision several versions of each. And some other stuff, like Handi-Rifles done right. Maybe.

The mention of a Technical Data Package for the M1 Rifle, I think he said, "We had the TDP when we got the intellectual property for H&R..." Which isn't the same as, they got the TDP with the purchase of H&R. The TDP for the Garand is already out there from years gone past. I'd be very surprised if paperwork from the pre-1986 HRA had filtered down to what PSA got. But I might very well be wrong.

If they can make this work, good for them. They had vision to see the H&R brand as having value for their contracted US military rifles of the past. When the Remington bankruptcy properties were up for bid, I wondered who / why there might be bids on H&R. My impression, H&R wasn't the most highly respected name in American commercial firearms manufacturing. To this day, I have a few. One military weapon they made under contract was the Reising SMG, which wasn't popular in the USMC.

AR's with a carrying handle went out of style. Now some are being made again, like Windham. I kept mine all along. I wonder how much market there is for one with the H&R brand on it. Mike W. must see some collector interest in the venture.

Numrich sold AO to Kahr

1999. My Auto Ordnance 1911's were made prior to that date.