jgd@gatech.edu (John G. DeArmond) (06/22/91)
Since 1982 I have owned a match grade M1A1 that I had custom
built by Springfield Armory. Recently I had a house fire and
this weapon was slightly rust damaged by smoke. I took the gun
to who I had heard was a good gunsmith (Ed's Gun and Tackle in
Marietta for local folks) to have it re-parkerized and cleaned
up. They have in my opinion destroyed the gun. I'll outline the
damage in a moment. I've taken the gun to a military weapons
specialist who is trying to salvage it. Meanwhile it looks like
things will get nasty with Ed's as he refuses to acknowledge
that they did anything wrong.
Here's what we've found so far:
* Trigger group was sandblasted (not beadblasted) an dipped in the
Parkerization process intact. The sear surface had sand embedded
in it and sand was between the hammer and group frame.
* Barrel and receiver was sandblasted and parkerized inside and out,
apparently with the gas cylinder still in place, as it was corroded
to the barrel.
* Bore loaded with rust and sand.
* Interior of gas cylinder has been sandblasted.
* The match sight assembly was full of sand and the threads have
been damaged by the blasting.
* The Parkerization process was not stopped (ie, given the oil bath.)
so the finish is chalked with chemical crystals.
* No oil had been applied to any surface on the gun.
* The bolt assembly was apparently blasted and parkerized as an assembly
and not cleaned afterward.
I'm looking for qualified opinions (preferably from some
gunsmiths or armorers in the group) regarding these facts. I
know, of course that leaving sand and chemical residue is
terrible. What I want to know is:
* Is it considered standard practice to parkerize the bore and chamber
of this weapon?
* Is it considered standard practice to sandblast gun parts instead of
bead blasting? The finish now has a specular surface similiar to the
texture of reflected laser light.
* Has the gas cylinder been damaged by being sandblasted?
* Has the bolt been damaged beyond use by the sandblasting and
parkerization? The bolt roller wheel was initially locked by
sand. We managed to work it loose with a brass drift and an
air hose but it is still somewhat gritty.
* I have the standard GI manual on the M1A1 and know the GI maintenance
procedure. It is in anyway conceivable to assemble a gun with
completely dry surfaces and present it as ready to shoot.
I have the opinion of my gunsmith and I of course, have my opinion as a
competitor but neither of us have the background to know what the
accepted military practice for this weapon would be. Is there a mil-spec
on the gun? (obvious answer) And what is the mil-spec on the parkerization
process.
Any help would be appreciated. My baby's been raped and I'm out for
blood!
Thanks in advance,
John
--
John De Armond, WD4OQC | "Purveyors of speed to the Trade" (tm)
Rapid Deployment System, Inc. | Home of the Nidgets (tm)
Marietta, Ga |
{emory,uunet}!rsiatl!jgd | "Vote early, Vote often"
[MODERATOR: Auch. The pain, the pain ... :-( ]cmort@NCoast.ORG (Christopher Morton) (06/24/91)
As quoted from <35918@mimsy.umd.edu> by emory!Dixie.Com!jgd@gatech.edu (John G. DeArmond):
#
# Since 1982 I have owned a match grade M1A1 that I had custom
# built by Springfield Armory. Recently I had a house fire and
# this weapon was slightly rust damaged by smoke. I took the gun
# to who I had heard was a good gunsmith (Ed's Gun and Tackle in
# Marietta for local folks) to have it re-parkerized and cleaned
# up. They have in my opinion destroyed the gun. I'll outline the
# damage in a moment. I've taken the gun to a military weapons
# specialist who is trying to salvage it. Meanwhile it looks like
# things will get nasty with Ed's as he refuses to acknowledge
# that they did anything wrong.
I'll have the moderator of FidoNet FIREARMS look at this. He builds M1As from
time to time. I hope it doesn't kill him....
If somebody actually did this, they should have their FFL taken away and be
made an indentured servant to Howard Metzenbaum. I wouldn't expect THAT degree
of incompetance and customer contempt even in Cleveland!
--
---------------------------------
"Well whose opinions did you THINK these were...?"
Christopher Morton
{uunet|backbone}!ncoast.org!cmort cmort@ncoast.orgruss@unmvax.cs.unm.edu (Russ Kepler) (06/25/91)
In article <35918@mimsy.umd.edu> emory!rsiatl!jgd@gatech.edu (John G. DeArmond) writes:
#I have the opinion of my gunsmith and I of course, have my opinion as a
#competitor but neither of us have the background to know what the
#accepted military practice for this weapon would be. Is there a mil-spec
#on the gun? (obvious answer) And what is the mil-spec on the parkerization
#process.
#
#Any help would be appreciated. My baby's been raped and I'm out for
#blood!
John and I have exchanged email on this, and I chatter with the New
Mexico state team armorer, and we've come to the conclusion that the
best method would be to send it to Springfield for evaluation. As
they put it together, they can match serial numbers and confirm the
the original match grade, the nature of the damage done and the
expected costs to put it right. It'd be hard to argue in small claims
court with the folks who make the rifle.
After Springfield makes the evaluation there are a number of smiths
that can do as good or better job than Springfield, IMHO.
It's a shame that this "Ed's" or whatever won't make good on their
work. I do a lot of business with a local outfit that *always* makes
good. From him I once bought an AR that failed to properly feed, and
he made it good. It took 3 trips and 2 smiths, and I later found that
it had cost more in work (new bolt, bolt carrier, recoil mechanics,
etc) than I had paid for the piece. But he always "makes good". It's
worth a bit to support a guy with that attitude.
--
Russ Kepler - Basis Int'l SNAIL: 5901 Jefferson NE, Albuquerque, NM 87109
UUCP: bbx.basis.com!russ PHONE: 505-345-5232