Stake Marks

One thing I would consider is the difference between the words "correct" and "original".   To some in the carbine world, "correct" means that parts on a carbine which were not part of its original manufacture are replaced with parts bearing marks which would have likely been on the carbine at the time of its manufacture. "Original" is usually conferred to mean that the carbine has all of the exact, original parts which were initially assembled during the manufacture process (i.e. No parts were updated or changed).

In the case of the stake marks, they indicate that it is likely that a type II or type III rear sight was once installed on that dovetail. Since someone has replaced it with a type I which is "correct" but obviously not the "original" part, it is now considered "corrected". Hence, it can not be valued at a higher dollar amount of a carbine that is in its original configuration.

Its all a play on words, but those words are what help establish values to carbines as collectables.

Just my two cents.

One would have to look at the stake marks to begin with.  Do they line up with where the type I sight is at?  Are there indications present that show that the type I has been on the carbine a loooong time (patina, matches surrounding surfaces, etc)?  Does the type I show marks where it has been pushed into place?  How "fresh" is the metal of the stake marks compared to the surrounding metal?  Assuming that the front sight is original, does the carbine shoot to a point of aim?  There are a good number of indicators which helps you evaluate the rear sight to determine if it is original or just correct.  There is just not a flashing neon sign or a rigid "if this, then that" set of rules.  This is why doing evaluating and determining collector values is such an art work.