M1 Garand

Hi pals...
in a War game about the 101st Paras... it quotes,"The M1 Garand was the best American semi-auto rifle ever."....

Is this true...
lets here your opinions...???

Dan...Kirkyboy2

 

Yes!!

 

id like to think so

no bolt action, higher caliber rounds i believe, and overall more reliable

 

For me it was its great reliability and superior sights.

Its official designation was US Rifle, Cal .30, M1

 

(Kirkyboy2 @ Nov 16 2005, 06:15 PM) [post=41631]in a War game about the 101st Paras... it quotes,"The M1 Garand was the best American semi-auto rifle ever."....

Is this true...
[/b]

I think it is, but there may be a catch, at least as far as service issue weapons are concerned.

The previous service rifle was the bolt action M1903. The subsequent service rifle was the M14 with full automatic capability.

Technically, I think it is the only US semi-auto service rifle.

 

From my understanding the M1 had to finish the rounds to eject the clip.

You know, the idea that you can't eject the magazine until it has fired all the rounds is a bit unnerving to me. I can't imagine having a single round in the clip and approaching some potential one-on-one engagement.

 

(jimbotosome @ Nov 17 2005, 05:38 PM) [post=41688]From my understanding the M1 had to finish the rounds to eject the clip.

[/b]

Don't ask me to explain how, but I have heard that it could be done, just not quick and easy.

 

(angie999 @ Nov 17 2005, 03:51 PM) [post=41683]The previous service rifle was the bolt action M1903. The subsequent service rifle was the M14 with full automatic capability.

Technically, I think it is the only US semi-auto service rifle.
[/b]
Actually, there was one other US semi-automatic service rifle:

The M1941 Johnson rifle, cal .30 (30/06)

It was submitted for US Government trials but rejected by the Army in favor of the Garand. However, the US Marine Corps showed interest in the rifle and the US Government purchased a small number for their use and gave it the above designation. The USMC did use the Johnson rifle for some specialized missions during WW2. The story of its adoption, use and disposition is well documented at:

M1941 Johnson rifle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

At the time, I was shooting the US rifle, cal .30, M1 (Garand) almost daily in competition and field trials so I had an opportunity to compare both rifles. Overall I preferred the Garand -- mostly because of my familiarity with it and my confidence in its capabilities -- but that is my strictly personal assessment.

Of course, in WW1, the US Government did adopt and issue the US Rifle, cal .30, M1917 -- a rechambered (from .303 British to US 30/06) version of the Pattern 1914 bolt action rifle produced by Remington Arms Company on contract to the British Government. This rifle was supplied in considerable quantity to the US Army in addition to the US Rifle, cal .30, M1903 -- it was the model of rifle used by Sgt. York of US Army WW1 fame (M1917s were issued to his regiment).

 

(jimbotosome @ Nov 17 2005, 04:38 PM) [post=41688]From my understanding the M1 had to finish the rounds to eject the clip.

You know, the idea that you can't eject the magazine until it has fired all the rounds is a bit unnerving to me. I can't imagine having a single round in the clip and approaching some potential one-on-one engagement.
[/b]

Believe me, as someone who has fired tens of thousands of rounds through M1 (Garand) rifles -- and been associated with hundreds of others who have also done so in combat and competitive shooting -- it is not an encumbrance or concern. Even a modestly proficient recruit can load a new clip in a Garand and be prepared to fire with the same speed and proficiancy as an operator of a bolt action rifle.

I have also fired thousands of rounds through SMLE (Short Magazine Lee-Enfield) British rifles and M1903 US Springfield rifles and so I make the above statement based on considerable experience.

As a point of interest, I occasionally shot my Winchester HB cal. 30/06 Match Target rifle in High Power Rifle competition for a number of years concurrently with my M1 Garands. The standing to sitting and standing to prone rapid fire strings consist of 10 rounds at 200 and 300 yards respectively. This requires loading the M1 Garand with an initial 2 round partial clip and reloading with a full eight round clip after discharging the initial rounds. With the bolt action rifle, five rounds are loaded into the magazine from a stripper clip and a second five round stripper clip is loaded after the magazine is emptied. The time limit is 50/60 seconds for the sitting/prone 10 round rapid fire strings respectively. If ever there is a time for fingers and thumbs and miss-loading it is in competitive rapid fire shooting -- every bit so as in combat! I always found it far easier to re-load with the Garand than with the bolt action rifle.

 

I thought that after WWI, all the M1917s went back to store and quite a few of them ended up here as Home Guard weapons.

 

(angie999 @ Nov 17 2005, 05:20 PM) [post=41700]I thought that after WWI, all the M1917s went back to store and quite a few of them ended up here as Home Guard weapons.
[/b]
Most did indeed go into storage or were sold as surplus to the civilian community where they were frequently modified into hunting rifles. Their large, robust and strong actions were much favored for magnum calibers by custom rifle gunsmiths. Not all went into storage, however -- many military organizations and units retained quantities for use by honor guards, their clean lines and fine balance being much favored for ceremonial use.
Large quantities of stored "Enfield" M1914/1917 rifles were consigned to the British government by the US for use by the Home Guard (and, I believe, other units) under Lend-Lease in 1941.

The M1914s were most favored because they were chambered in 303 British -- avoiding ammunition incompatibility problems. My Father's Home Guard unit was issued Enfields, but I can't remember the caliber for sure -- it was so long ago.

 

BTW, the "M1 Garand" rifle has been discussed at great length in numerous other threads on this Forum and some of the material in this present thread is repeated from the others.

In order to access and read the previous information enter garand as the keyword in the Site Search block at the upper right of the Forum main page. Scroll down the thread list to the M1 Garand thread for what I believe is one of the most informative series of postings.

 

(jamesicus @ Nov 17 2005, 12:19 PM) [post=41699](jimbotosome @ Nov 17 2005, 04:38 PM) [post=41688]From my understanding the M1 had to finish the rounds to eject the clip.

You know, the idea that you can't eject the magazine until it has fired all the rounds is a bit unnerving to me. I can't imagine having a single round in the clip and approaching some potential one-on-one engagement.
[/b]

Believe me, as someone who has fired tens of thousands of rounds through M1 (Garand) rifles -- and been associated with hundreds of others who have also done so in combat and competitive shooting -- it is not an encumbrance or concern. Even a modestly proficient recruit can load a new clip in a Garand and be prepared to fire with the same speed and proficiancy as an operator of a bolt action rifle.

[/b] James, Well my thinking is a little different than the choice having been a bolt action rifle but rather a thompson. In a single shot bolt action, I can see the M1 being fine. But compared to a weapon that has a clip that can be replaced at any time. I mean, lets say you get done with a barrage of shooting. You move into a city area between buildings. You are trying to sneak around and flank something. You need all the ammo ready to go when you make your move. But you can't fire that last round to clear the clip so you can put a full one so you are ready for the surprize you might find around the next corner. Wouldn't that be a liability of the rifle?

 

(jimbotosome @ Nov 18 2005, 09:11 AM) [post=41720](jamesicus @ Nov 17 2005, 12:19 PM) [post=41699](jimbotosome @ Nov 17 2005, 04:38 PM) [post=41688]From my understanding the M1 had to finish the rounds to eject the clip.

You know, the idea that you can't eject the magazine until it has fired all the rounds is a bit unnerving to me. I can't imagine having a single round in the clip and approaching some potential one-on-one engagement.
[/b]

Believe me, as someone who has fired tens of thousands of rounds through M1 (Garand) rifles -- and been associated with hundreds of others who have also done so in combat and competitive shooting -- it is not an encumbrance or concern. Even a modestly proficient recruit can load a new clip in a Garand and be prepared to fire with the same speed and proficiancy as an operator of a bolt action rifle.

[/b] James, Well my thinking is a little different than the choice having been a bolt action rifle but rather a thompson. In a single shot bolt action, I can see the M1 being fine. But compared to a weapon that has a clip that can be replaced at any time. I mean, lets say you get done with a barrage of shooting. You move into a city area between buildings. You are trying to sneak around and flank something. You need all the ammo ready to go when you make your move. But you can't fire that last round to clear the clip so you can put a full one so you are ready for the surprize you might find around the next corner. Wouldn't that be a liability of the rifle?
[/b]
With so much firing going on you may be tempted to expel the cartridge and reload before sticking your head around the corner!

 

(spidge @ Nov 17 2005, 11:58 PM) [post=41732]With so much firing going on you may be tempted to expel the cartridge and reload before sticking your head around the corner!
[/b]
That's my point exactly Geoff. The only way to expel it is to fire it. But if you fire it, you give away the ambush position you have moved into. You fire it, they know you are coming around the corner and you have warned them you are coming and no longer have the benefit of surprize. That would seem like a liability to me. Maybe it is a case of it is better than a bolt action, but compared to an automatic like the "thompson" it seems to me to be a risk.

 

Jimbo, you can remove the round in the chamber by opening the bolt, the clip release is on the left side of the receiver, one can quietly remove the remaining rounds and pop in a fresh clip in a matter of moments.


Cheers
Bob

 

(Reverend Bob @ Nov 18 2005, 08:34 AM) [post=41753]Jimbo, you can remove the round in the chamber by opening the bolt, the clip release is on the left side of the receiver, one can quietly remove the remaining rounds and pop in a fresh clip in a matter of moments.


Cheers
Bob
[/b]
Thanks Bob, that's what I didn't know and was seeking. My understanding was that this was not possible. Thanks for clearing that up.

 

(angie999 @ Nov 17 2005, 04:51 PM) [post=41683](Kirkyboy2 @ Nov 16 2005, 06:15 PM) [post=41631]in a War game about the 101st Paras... it quotes,"The M1 Garand was the best American semi-auto rifle ever."....

Is this true...
[/b]

I think it is, but there may be a catch, at least as far as service issue weapons are concerned.

The previous service rifle was the bolt action M1903. The subsequent service rifle was the M14 with full automatic capability.

Technically, I think it is the only US semi-auto service rifle.
[/b]
Angie, not quite. Don't forget the M-1 Carbine, which was actually issued in more numbers than was the M-1 Garand. And even the M-14 was normally issued only in a semi-automatic format (selector lever and switch removed), as it was uncontrollable in full automatic fire. The current M-21 sniper rifle is a semi-auto version of the M-14. We can't forget the Barrett .50 calibers, either. They come in Bolt Action and Semi-Auto versions. Doc

 

I humped many a mile with the ol' M14 and I can say that it is the finest service rifle ever. When I first came in-country in 1966 the USMC was still transistioning from the M14 to the M16 and I first shouldered the 14 at MCRD Parris Island. Everyone always makes it a point to say that it was uncontrollable in full-auto fire, but they miss the true point. You should never be firing full auto with any rifle unless you are near point-blank range. Full auto even in a very "controllable" weapon like the AK47 is hard to keep on target past 25m and very wasteful of ammo. At ranges of 25m and under, an M14 is easy to keep on target, so when in a CQB situation it works fine. When you aren't you have a reliable rifle that puts rounds on target at 800m+. So the answer to the original question is yes and no. The M14 is the best semiautomatic rifle ever fielded, BUT the M14 is basically John C. Garand's original design with a flash hider, 20 round box magazine, chambered in .308 (7.62X51mm NATO) and full automatic capability. The reason the M1 was such a war winner was it's accuracy, ruggedness and reliability, and added firepower over the weapons of all the other combatants during the war. The M1 is every bit as capable of match accuracy as the Mauser or Lee-Enfield, it offers twice the firepower of those bolt-action rifles, and is damn near impossible to jam. I never had a single problem with my M14 in Nam (the M16 is a different story), and I've taken my M1 to deer hunting camps, dropped it in the mud, etc and have never had a malfunction, other than a jam from one of my clips being bent. The only time I can think of hearing a reliability problem from an M1 is from an older cousin of mine who went to Korea. He told me that during the Chosin Reservoir campaign his M1's bolt would freeze occaisonally but that he would just piss on it and it would function again!

 

GarandGuy,

Don't the M16s have a burst mode where they get off 3 rounds for each trigger pull? That's the optimum in auto-mode isn't it? Like you said, unless you are up close you are wasting ammo. The three round fire, I thought optimized the number of rounds you could put on a target without the recoil pulling it off target. Am I thinking right here? Also were there any automatics in WWII that had a burst mode? (on any side)