Possible universal redux

Thanks.   I'll have to wipe it down and clean again.....shot another deer, so the bore and the grease on the barrel/slide will be dirty and i suspect they'll be some more woods bits in there from tracking.

Your carbine is a good example of the problem with the "generations" approach to separating one Universal from another. Whatever defines one generation from another doesn't apply to this carbine.

Just a suggestion, avoid giving it a generation. It will avoid confusion.

Point out in the listing that it has a GI style slide with single recoil spring but some of the features of the later carbines. Those redux carbines were not made for retail sales. They were made for police agencies and governments that wanted something that disassembled/reassembled like the GI M1 carbines. OKay to add this tidbit to the listing.

If you have a headspace gauge checking the headspace to make sure it's within spec would be a bonus to any buyer. Especially one who knows how important headspace is.

With all those magazines and the scope I'm guessing you should get about $800 for it but it's just a guess. As noted, prices are all over the map.

Jim

copy.  It's why I asked.  Current auctions are 400 to 1300+ with no evident differences between auctions

Reviving an old thread....

Narrative and a couple pics added to clarify the cut in the rear of the receiver bridge.

http://www.m1carbinesinc.com/carbine_universal4.html

Hi everyone! It is nice to finally see a thread with someone talking about an Universal Carbine same

Sharps40 wrote: this thing is a great shooter.   Trigger sucks but tula ammo is right on the sights at 100 marking.   Very reliable with the 15 Rd promags too. Over all I'm quite happy and the price was excellent.   Reminds me of how much fun my Universal was when I was a young man.

Do a little self-research on Tula and formulate your own opinion. Most say the steel case ammo is not recommended due to the case itself and the finish applied to the case. You can get it for a few $ less, but one stuck case can ruin your day.

Hi guys

The bolt designed and used by Universal having the internal firing pin is of the same outward dimensions as the GI bolt. I haven't tried one in a GI carbine as I don't wanna find out the hard way that something is different. I'm not a gunsmith or a machinist. Beyond my abilities.

The later carbine designed by Universal had parts designed for that carbine. Not for a GI carbine. So mixing and matching I figure isn't a real good idea. Even if something worked it may not continue to do so.

One thing true of all commercial bolts I've tested and used in the various trials of the commercial carbines from every commercial manufacturer is the rear of the bolt wasn't hardened to GI spec. GI spec was for the bolt to be hardened to RC 38-43 with the rear of the bolt receiving a second hardening of 48-54. Commercial bolts, if hardened correctly the first time, have been 38-43 front to rear with no second hardening of the rear.

Where this becomes important is the repeated impact the rear of the bolt receives from the hammer. If the hammer is a GI hammer the lifespan of the rear of a commercial bolt is less than what it would be with the hammer built to go with the commercial bolt. I've said throughout the websites and forums the rear of commercial bolts need to be inspected periodically to make sure the design hasn't been deformed from repeated hits of the hammer. Whether the hammer is GI or commercial. With used guns there is no way of knowing what part was original vs a replacement or swapped around between carbines.

The design of the rear of the bolt is a safety feature to prevent the hammer from striking the firing pin until the bolt has rotated and locked. Universal Firearms retained that design.

An FYI regarding the receiver bridge of a Universal Firearms carbine. Universal machined their receivers from forged steel billets. When machining was complete and the markings added they then hardened their receivers before bluing. GI spec for receivers was/is RC 38-45. All of the Universal receivers I've tested have been in the 42-45 range. With the exception of a few having the markings of Jacksonville, AR after Universal was closed in 1984 and relocated there.

Sticking with the receivers made in Hialeah, FL, unless one knows what they're doing I wouldn't recommend machining a hardened receiver bridge to accommodate a GI firing pin tang. I recommend using the bolt the receiver was designed for.

The one drawback to owning a Universal Firearms hybrid carbine with a s/n above 100k is replacement parts. Generally if it looks like an M1 carbine people inevitably try to use GI parts or parts made to GI spec. Unless one knows what they're doing this isn't a good idea. Particularly with the more critical parts such as the bolt.

A question we should ask ourselves is, at what point is a "carbine" no longer an "M1 Carbine"? Universal dropped the U.S. from U.S. Carbine about 1966 just before s/n 88,000. Why is a long story and not relevant to this question. Or is it? While Universal changed the design or a number of parts prior to s/n 100k with the introduction of their hybrid at s/n 100k in 1967 the majority of parts thereafter were no longer compatible with GI parts. While it looked similar and fired the same ammo that doesn't make it an "M1 Carbine" (more correctly: "Carbine Caliber .30, M1")

That "Model M1" was the designation given the carbine designed by Winchester and accepted by Ordnance to eventually become the U.S. Carbines manufactured under contracts to U.S. Army Ordnance from 1942-1945. The carbines designed by Universal Firearms having s/n 100k and higher were chambered for the .30 caliber carbine cartridge as were a number of other firearms.

Saying a Universal Firearms carbine having a s/n 100k and higher is an "M1 Carbine" is kinda like the lead-ins in a movie that say "based on a true story". While the true story was the basis for the movie the movie usually has very little in common with the true story. Where we humans have difficulty is comprehending the difference between the real story and the movie. For many the movie becomes what's remembered as the "true" story.

Jim

I'd just be looking for a spare late-model bolt, they turn up now-n-then. Probably the only advantage one would gain by modifying the receiver bridge would be the capability to install a hard GI bolt with a much longer service life. It's not likely wise to have the bridge cut for the FP block and I think the reason Universal changed the design was to avoid relying on that cut, which most commercial manufactures never got right. There are even two distinct versions on that cut among GI carbines. There is nothing wrong with a spring-retained FP system. It's been used for eons and is still in use today.

I'm wondering if the spring-retained system could be carried-over to a GI bolt. Universal pins and springs also show-up, but I don't know the dimensional differences between the two. Maybe someone here does. I think I know who to ask.

finally got moved.   Internet soon and then some photos.   Stuck with a blackberry for now.   But got unpacked enough to locate the cleaning supplies.   With a cleaning and grease it functions smooth as silk.