[funny blog post] The Garand: almost as good as a real rifle

Garand said:
He is not speaking to morons, he is the moron speaking. The Garand served its purpose during its era. At least it didn't require re-engineering 300 (+) times over a 50 year service history like some rifles to make it "functional".
Click to expand...

Which 300 changes - AR15/M16/C7/M4? or SA80?

JC Garand borrowed the idea for the ejecting block loaded semi-auto from a late WWI French rifle. Then he spent a decade and a half tweaking and over-engineering what became the Garand. He suffered one significant stumble when the entire M1 inventory was recalled for major rebuild from gas trap to gas cylinder. Parts interchangeability was only possible because the US gun manufacturing industry could throw enough men, materials, engineering and machine time to adhere to very tight tolernaces. How many parts failed QC? Knowledgible Garand collectors know Winchester's Garand line failed most of its QC inspections until Springfield shipped over several of its inspectors and process engineers, and even then Winchester barely complied with its drawings. It would have been a national scandal except for the war.

As the guys here post, the Garand was a game-changer for WWII. Its capability spurred every major army to either consider (and reject) semi-auto rifles, or dive in headfirst.
 
For being the greatest battle implement ever devised, the Garand sure had a super short service life.

Quirk of history I guess, as it seems all the big caliber semi autos like SVT's, SKS, etc, went the way of the dodo as M16 and AK 47 variants took the field.
 
Wth the German development of the Sturmgewehr MP42/44 series of Assault rifles, the older design of semi-auto rifle came to a dead end. Similar thing happened with advent of smokeless powder in the late 19th century, with a multitude of rifles becoming obsolete overnight.
 
canuck98k said:
For being the greatest battle implement ever devised, the Garand sure had a super short service life.

Quirk of history I guess, as it seems all the big caliber semi autos like SVT's, SKS, etc, went the way of the dodo as M16 and AK 47 variants took the field.
Click to expand...
Short service life? Garands were still used by the Berlin Brigade until 1961.
 
US National Guard had them at the Kent State Shootings, very vivid photos were taken at that tragic event.
 
John Sukey said:
If you want a REAL horror story, the SA80 was a good candidate.
They had to give it to the Germans to fix it.
NOBODY ELSE wants it, even Belize and the Falklands rejected it!
Click to expand...

The Mexican Mondragon rifle made by SIG
Was another flop. The Russian SKT 40, The Canadian semi auto Ross.....the list continues.
But then I have to ask? Why are we arguing about how blatantly retarded this guys views are? Lol
 
Talk about a Garand hater, hey???:p

The Garand was the best semi-auto military rifle of its time!.

Sure, it wasn't perfect, but some of what he said is complete bullshyt.

Yes, it weighed 10 pounds, and yes, it had an 8 rnd enbloc clip (when most rifles of the time - the Enfield excepted - had 5 rnd mags). Yes, you COULD get your thumb smashed in the action, if you didn't know what you were doing (there's that training thing again).

On the Western Front in Europe, the rate of fire of the Garand simply couldn't be matched, let alone beat, until Germany introduced the G43 and StG 44 series of rifles.

The Garand was a reliable, relatively simple, but heavy, battle rifle. Of course the M14 and M16 were somewhat better, as there were 20 years of firearms development between the Garand and the M14.

Ask any US combat veteran of WWII which rifle he preferred, and I'll bet that he says "the Garand".
 
canuck98k said:
For being the greatest battle implement ever devised, the Garand sure had a super short service life.

Quirk of history I guess, as it seems all the big caliber semi autos like SVT's, SKS, etc, went the way of the dodo as M16 and AK 47 variants took the field.
Click to expand...

BTW, the Garand was first issued to US Army troops in 1937 (it was adopted in 1936) and was superseded by the M14 sometime in the early-mid 1960's. IIRC the only unit in 1961 that had had the Garand completely replaced by the M14 (4 years after the M14 was adopted) was the 101st Airborne. All other US Army units were still using the Garand at that time.

My math says that's over 20 years of front-line service - while the M14 was completely phased out of front line (not Reserve units thought) service by the late 1960's.
 
cyclone said:
The rifle that drove the SAS to the AR......:evil:.....

Seriously :( , no wonder the AR-180 gets such a bad rep/rap f:P: - look what they made of its "offspring rifles" ! :eek:
Click to expand...

The SAS first used M16s in Borneo in the 1960s, long before the SA-80.
 
All I'm saying is that in comparison the the other big name battle rifles, Mosin, Lee, Mauser; 20 years is a short service life for a rifle that many considered to be the king of the battlefield.

Much like the SMLE was saved by WWI, the Garand was a victim of history. The lessons of WWII included the fact that most small arms fire occurred at under 100 meters. With the STG44 and the AK 47 coming along, the writing was on the wall.

Great rifle, but it came along just before a major doctrinal shift in small arms.
 
It might be big and ugly and use a cartridge with far too much horsepower, but I still refuse to stand in front of one at 500 yards, given that the operator knows what he's doing.

Can you say the same for the modern stuff? Eight inches at 100 is great shooting for some Klacks; that works out to a 40-inch group at 500, but natural disprsion will actually increase that. The modern stuff NEEDS firepower to make up for its inherent LACK of range, velocity, accuracy and power.

REAL FIREPOWER is one round ON target, not 500 rounds all around it.

Looked at from that standpoint, the ugly old Garand is still pretty hard to beat.
.
 
They use the same round (7.62mm M-43) but the SKS is semi-auto and the Klack is selective-fire...... which puts them into different categories. Besides, the late-model Klacks handle the 5.45x39 anyway.
.
 
Redlight35 said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the SKS and the AK-47 use the same round... therefore there is no difference in calibers...
Click to expand...

No, but the difference is in doctrine. Armies moved away from top loaded, charger fed rifles, and moved toward magazine fed, select fire, "assault" rifles.

The Garand was a victim of circumstance. Hence the relatively short service life.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom