Skip to comments.M1 Garand: Our New Service Rifle (Original 1938 Review)
Posted on 05/21/2012 7:19:38 AM PDT by BO Stinkss
For more than thirty years the Ordnance Department endeavored to obtain a satisfactory semi-automatic or self-loading rifle to replace the bolt action Springfield. These efforts were not confined to the development within the Department. Invitations were extended periodically to gun designers in this country and abroad to submit weapons for test, and tests were made of those received which showed any promise of meeting the specifications prescribed.
During this period of thirty odd years many rifles were received and tested. Mechanisms embodying every known principle of operation were represented in the many types submitted.
After many tests of various calibers, it was decided that the caliber .276 cartridge developed sufficient power for a shoulder weapon and that the use of this smaller cartridge would facilitate the design of a reliable and durable self-loading rifle within the prescribed weight limit and would also reduce the load of the individual soldier due to the lighter weight of the cartridge. Of the several rifles in this caliber submitted for test, two were outstanding: the Pedersen; and the Garand, designed and developed by Mr. John C. Garand. Both Mr. Pedersen and Mr. Garand carried on their development work at the Springfield Armory.
A number of each of these types were manufactured and submitted to the services for test. Both rifles performed very well. However, to adopt a weapon of this caliber involved further complication of the supply problem by the introduction of another type of ammunition.
In the meantime, Mr. Garand, who has been in the employ of the Ordnance Department at the Springfield Armory for the past eighteen years as a designer of automatic weapons, completed a test model of a semi-automatic rifle designed to function with either the Caliber .30, M1, Model 1906, or the caliber .30, M1,
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
Own two and love ‘em. Springfield Armory, circa ‘43.
Lot of fun and shoot great!
Also much discussion here:
It sure is. I had a great opportunity to get two rather good service rifles from 1943 and 1944, but with barrels that were worn out. It took me 6 months to a year to get two corresponding correct good barrels, and it took some expensive barrel and receiver clamps (from Chestnut Ridge, BTW) to replace them. Corrected a few other things also.
Then Numrich had a short period where they were selling WWII receivers and I bought two! It took about 2 years of scrounging for the right parts, stocks, barrels, etc. but I now have 4 correct Garands. Along the way, I ended up getting a significant bit of the armorers tools and the wrenches.....right now, I’m just itching to get another receiver!
The Civilian Marksmanship Program sells receivers, complete rifles, and accessories upon completion of their purchase requirements (which are not difficult to meet). You'll start off buying a receiver, but will wind up with a full safe in no time, so be careful. :)
Now we are talking about something!
Usually, one finger bite was enougth to drive home the point.
Have two 1940’s era and a couple of ‘03’s all from CMP.
Folks at the range will let you shoot their model anything if you let them try your M1. Those who follow military history can only imagine where these ‘40’s era peices have been and what they have seen.
Thanks for the post.
Dude, been there! TWO larger safes and four fireproof file safes for the small stuff. I know about the CMP, but I would prefer not to get my stuff from such a public concern. I've been trolling through the gunshows looking for the worst beater with a good receiver, frankly. I have everything I need to bring one back to life :)
Obama’s Gun Ban
The Springfield Armory turned out many fine weapons and perhaps the best 1911 .45 ACP.
Springfield in its time produced excellent weapons. I’m partial though, to my 1911A1 from Colt (1943). Also have a 1911 Colt that I think was from a time when Colt actually meant something. Today’s Colt weapons you see (new manufacture) are, frankly overpriced, and the craftsmanship is not there.
Yep - my 1911 was made in 1914, has a low serial number, and has "all the right stamps" to make it a collector's item. Still smooth and sweet and have never known it to jam or misfeed in the 50+ years I have been aware of it (born in '52 and first shot it at age 10, but Dad used it for competition shooting at the local NRA-affilliated ranges). My Dad gave it to me before he died and I trust it with my life...
I love lever action rifles, does anyone know of a lever action in .556 or .223?
One thing for new shooters that may have learned on the AR/M16/M4 platform — the M1 in either .30 caliber or 7.62 NATO has RECOIL. Shooters learning on the light recoiling .223 Remington/5.56 NATO are unprepared for the much greater recoil of the M1 calibers. To shoot the M1 or its successor M1A/M14, these shooter may have to “unlearn” some bad habits picked up from the smaller caliber. With these Main Battle Rifles, correct position behind the rifle and hold are critical to accurate shooting (and shooter comfort).
I doubt such a rifle exists. Most 556/223 bullets are spire-point, which is very unsafe in the tubular magazine of a lever-action rifle. Generally, lever-action rifles are designed for round-nosed bullets only.
Looks like a lever action with a bottom feed magazine. Very interesting.
Got mine during replacement infantry basic training in Feb 44. First use was on firing range in the prone position firing distance with the straps wound around my arm. Drill sergeant asked me if I was comfortable. When I said Yes, he said that shouldn’t be and moved my arm to where it wasn’t. Anyway I liked the Carbine better but ended up with a M-1 in Europe where the stacking swivel was never of any use.
Awesome story! Thanks for sharing and thanks for your service.
My ‘06 Garand has what I consider to be relatively mild recoil.
I’ve got a Savage 110FP that likes a load roughly comparable to a .300 Win Mag; that one beats the heck out of me.
With a gas operated rifle like the M1, part of the recoil impulse is soaked up by the operating system of the rifle. The felt recoil seems much milder and I could shoot the M1 all day long without any recoil shyness problems.
On the other hand, my M1903A1 Springfield belts me with the full recoil with every shot. Shoot 100 rounds from a Springfield and your shoulder feels like it was worked over with a guy wielding a baseball bat. The reason for the difference is the action of the rifle — a Springfield (or your Savage) is a bolt action and all the recoil impulse is felt as RECOIL. That's the big difference and a new shooter who's learned to shoot on a Mouse Gun is going to get pounded before he or she gets rid of bad habits and gets things sorted out.
That, and the load I fire out of that bolt rifle uses a bullet 20 grains heavier and 100 fps faster than the M2 Ball round.
Haven’t done much NM’ing at all. I brought these back to issue condition.
No no no ... in the Garand, I shoot M2 Ball or equivalent handloads (168gr MatchKing and 47-or-so grains of 4064).
The .300 WinMag load is a 190 gr MatchKing with 58.5 grains of RE-19 out of a bolt rifle. That load would destroy the op-rod on a Garand in short order.
The 4064 load for the M1 sounds good.
That’s a pretty heavy load for the bolt gun. Is this an actual .300 Win Mag load or is it a .30-06 trying to perform like a .300 Win Mag — I’m a little foggy here — I’m not sure of the bolt gun’s caliber.
The bolt gun’s a .30-06.
Didn’t plan for that particular load, just loaded up a bunch of different charges and it shot most accurately at the charge that I believe puts the MV at just short of 2900 fps.
Which, with a 190 gr MK, very nearly matches Federal’s published data for their 300 Win Mag Gold Medal Match load.
Great to hear from some “Brown Shoe” vets about first hand Garand use!
I started my service with an M16A1, but the AR series will never generate the warm, fuzzy feeling I have for the Garand.
It’s a great rifle and a link to a time when America did some things better than it does today.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.