M1 Garand or WASR 10


PDA






Mtn395
July 29, 2009, 11:24 AM
I really want an M1 Garand, but the WASR 10 has caught my interest.

If you enjoyed reading about "M1 Garand or WASR 10" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
GRIZ22
July 29, 2009, 12:53 PM
I voted for the M1. It will do more than the WASR except fire more than 8 rounds without reloading.

Deckard
July 29, 2009, 12:55 PM
Do you really have to ask?

offthepaper
July 29, 2009, 12:59 PM
Apples and oranges really.

Go with the apple- M1 Garand.
craftsmanship, quality, greater effective range and power, the history involved, what's not to like?

try taking both to a local American Legion or VFW when some of the "ole timer's " are around and see which one they show the love for.

It won't be the stamped metal gun.

sublime167
July 29, 2009, 01:01 PM
The Garand is definately an investment. In a couple years it'll be worth a lot more than you paid for it. The WASR, not so much.

highorder
July 29, 2009, 02:43 PM
In a couple years the moment you buy it it'll be worth a lot more than you paid for it.

fixed. ;)

ZombiesAhead
July 29, 2009, 03:01 PM
The Garand is a much better gun all around. The WASR is probably cheaper and in some ways is more practical, cheaper-to-shoot, and more entertaining.

longdayjake
July 29, 2009, 03:12 PM
Garand. Better in every way. I take it you have never shot one or you wouldn't be asking. Right?

FlyinBryan
July 29, 2009, 04:19 PM
definitly the garand.

i also would have to guess that you havent fired a garand.

the is absolutely no comparison in quality.

the m1 garand is a man among boys in the world of semiauto rifles.

61chalk
July 29, 2009, 04:45 PM
I picked Garand....I don't know what a WASR 10 is???? Anyone have a picture?

Mtn395
July 29, 2009, 05:50 PM
Its a AK, and your right I have never shot either, but I'm getting the M1.

Big Daddy Grim
July 29, 2009, 05:55 PM
M1 one of my favorites and it will become one of yours.

3pairs12
July 29, 2009, 05:58 PM
I have shot both and would pick the garand, but what will this gun be used for? I mean I certianly would rather carry the wasr since it probably 1/2 the weight. Garands are going to dry up a lot sooner than the AK variants.

61chalk
July 29, 2009, 06:37 PM
Mtn395....Ohhh...its a AK, thanks, I've got a Mak-90 an the M1 Garand. Still pick the Garand, didn't even have to think about it.

Hammerhead6814
July 29, 2009, 08:38 PM
It's like comparing a Ferrari Daytona (the M1 Garand) to a Volkswagen Beetle (the WASR-10). One is an elegant, angry machine that will never settle for second place. While the other will get you there and can be repaired with a brick and some string but will win you no contest or dates.

If you have the money get the Garand. If not, then save up and get the Garand. If that won't work, sell everything not essential to your living and get the Garand. If none of that appeals to you, buy a WASR.

Dr_2_B
July 29, 2009, 08:56 PM
Well, I voted Garand too, but I'm surprised to see it leading 9 to 1.

Publius1688
July 29, 2009, 08:58 PM
I voted 'other', because you need them both. One is a 'jeep', and one is a 'porsche'.

Gelgoog
July 30, 2009, 01:24 AM
M1 garand. I had a wasr-10 and it was the biggest POS I have ever owned. I have a bunch of AKs and they are leagues better then a WASR. So get a M1 garand from CMP, I loved mine and it showed up in like new condition.

chevyforlife21
July 30, 2009, 01:28 AM
these are two way different guns lol i voted for the ak i want one bad but the garand is a sweet gun too

SimpleIsGood229
July 30, 2009, 01:51 AM
M-1 Garand. No contest. I was going to post a clever parallel comparison of two cars or something, but I can hardly think of two cars that are as dissimilar as the WASR and Garand! :p

Seriously though, get the U.S. Rifle, Caliber .30, M-1. The balance is supremely excellent--probably the best of any rifle I've ever handled. The sights are supurb. It's a piece of history. None of this can be said about the WASR (with no offense to WASR owners, or course ;)). It's really not even close, in my mind...

Kevin5098
July 30, 2009, 08:22 AM
You can't go wrong with the M1 for all the reasons enumerated above. Hope you're buying from CMP unless you have a lot of money and really know Garands. They are a first class operation.

Jmurman
July 30, 2009, 01:25 PM
I think you have your answer.

If you're still on the fench just watch the History channel; or Military channel and see who carries what in battle.

Limeyfellow
July 30, 2009, 01:53 PM
Just a question. Why the WASR? It is the cheapest nastiest of all AKs and you compare it to an M1 Garand.

After all there as the Saigas, Mak90 series, Yugo M70s, Galils, Valmets, VEPRs, the various Bulgarian ones Arsenal uses and so on. Probably over a dozen manufacturers and say 50 different configurations and you choose the WASR 10 most likely to compare because it is the cheapest of the bunch. It kind of makes it a little unfair.

HexHead
July 30, 2009, 01:57 PM
Only one of the above was known as "the greatest battle implement ever devised." ;)

nwilliams
July 30, 2009, 03:19 PM
No brainer

I don't even have to say it.

Fergy35
July 30, 2009, 03:35 PM
The poll results seem to say it all.

The Garand is a classic icon and gets my vote too. I have shot both, and I have shot some of the nicer AK variants. The AK's have their place, but that Garand was well, wow! What a fine rifle.

If you are going to get an AK, save up and get one of the better ones.

NWGunner
July 30, 2009, 04:09 PM
WASR-10 without question. *Flame suit on*

I appreciate the history of the Garand, recognize that the quality, crafstmanship and overall condition of the gun will likely be better. However, this comes at a cost.

If it's a collection piece you don't plan to shoot, the Garand is the obvious choice. If you want a functional, rough and tumble carbine with 30+ rounds of rock and roll, the WASR is the better choice.

I have shot both, own a WASR, and chose to spend the $1K that could have bought a Garand on a DSArms FAL.

My knocks against the Garand:
*No high cap magazines or drums readily available
*It would be very difficult to "bump-fire" a Garand
*30-06 ammo is relatively expensive compared to 7.62x39
*Larger, heavier and more cumbersome to carry in a self-defense, SHTF situation
*Value of a Garand won't increase appreciably if there is another Assault Weapons Ban - WASR-10 would be front-and-center on a ban list and therefore be more "valuable"

Did I mention the Garand won't accept hi-cap mags?

As previous posters have correctly stated you're really asking about apples and oranges. Garands are great guns and well deserve their place of honor amongst collectors - but I would still go for the WASR.

scientific
July 30, 2009, 06:19 PM
Apart from the history associated with the M-1 rifle, why would someone want one instead of an M-14?

61chalk
July 30, 2009, 06:53 PM
The M1 Garands are more available an much cheaper than the "M14's." The ammo from CMP is cheap. The M14's are semi an full auto, not much chance of getting one, you are probably referring to the M1A which is the semi "M14". After all was said an done with the M14, some in the miltary said it was still basically a Garand...read that somewhere....the "M14", M1A is still a excellent rifle, an the Garand shoots a slightly more powerful bullet, an after all these years they are still a very accurate rifle.

j-easy
July 30, 2009, 06:56 PM
I respectfully disagree on some points, my text in bold
WASR-10 without question. *Flame suit on*

I appreciate the history of the Garand, recognize that the quality, crafstmanship and overall condition of the gun will likely be better. However, this comes at a cost.

If it's a collection piece you don't plan to shoot, the Garand is the obvious choice. If you want a functional, rough and tumble carbine with 30+ rounds of rock and roll, the WASR is the better choice.

I have shot both, own a WASR, and chose to spend the $1K that could have bought a Garand on a DSArms FAL. You can get a Garand from CMP for between $445 and $595, plus like 20 bucks shipping, no sales tax, no dealer transfer required.

My knocks against the Garand:
*No high cap magazines or drums readily available
*It would be very difficult to "bump-fire" a Garand
*30-06 ammo is relatively expensive compared to 7.62x39 you can get 960 rounds of brass cased non corrosive reloadable surplus for 419.75 delivered via cmp, Its actually $75+$8.95 shipping per 192, so you don't even have to buy a case to get that price per round, 7.62x39 is only cheaper if it is non reloadable steel cased
*Larger, heavier and more cumbersome to carry in a self-defense
*Value of a Garand won't increase appreciably if there is another Assault Weapons Ban - WASR-10 would be front-and-center on a ban list and therefore be more "valuable"
with CMP you really are buying a rifle worth 1k for 600 bucks and the value increases steadily every year regardless of legislation

Did I mention the Garand won't accept hi-cap mags?

As previous posters have correctly stated you're really asking about apples and oranges. Garands are great guns and well deserve their place of honor amongst collectors - but I would still go for the WASR.

I own and shoot both and I like my WASR-10 but if I had I could own only one I would go with a garand any day

jaholder1971
July 30, 2009, 07:11 PM
Buy both.

Kevin5098
July 30, 2009, 08:10 PM
My knocks against the Garand:
*No high cap magazines or drums readily available
*It would be very difficult to "bump-fire" a Garand
*30-06 ammo is relatively expensive compared to 7.62x39
*Larger, heavier and more cumbersome to carry in a self-defense, SHTF situation
*Value of a Garand won't increase appreciably if there is another Assault Weapons Ban - WASR-10 would be front-and-center on a ban list and therefore be more "valuable"


When was the last time anyone reading this forum NEEDED to fire more than 8 rounds without reloading?

Bump-fire? Why????

Price of ammo could be a legitimate factor, but Greek ammo is selling for $0.44 a round from CMP, and reloading is always an option.

Self-defense/SHTF? Neither would be my choice for self defense, and IMO SHTF is a fantasy.

Garand value will increase regardless of AWB as previoously pointed out and an AWB seems unlikely.

Frankl03
July 30, 2009, 09:00 PM
I have an M1a and now I want to get a Garand. I say get the Garand.

travellingJeff
July 31, 2009, 11:49 AM
If you don't own a Garand and you're involved in a "Garand or (X)" decision, the answer is always Garand.

UNLESS

The (x) is "TWO GARANDS", in which case, buy that.


If you buy a nice service grade M1 Garand, and the AGI video's about it, you'll be pleased. A few hundred bucks to send it to Shuffs Parkerizing to get it crowned, a trigger job and reparked, and you've got a darn fantastic weapon.

My M1 Garand is, and will be, my END OF THE WORLD gun.

AND if you buy a Hornady progressive loader now, you can get one thousand (!!!!) free 150g FMJ/BT bullets. For the price of a nice FN/FAL, you can have a slightly tweaked M1 Garand, a reloader and dies, a thousand bullets, brass and primers. Then you can buy some of the en bloc clips and in good spirit.

I've never been to the range and done a brief "gun swap" with anyone, for shooting purposes, and been more impressed with what they brought than I was with my M1 Garand.

YMMV, of course. Best of luck either way.

NWGunner
July 31, 2009, 02:09 PM
In response to J-easy's comments:

You're correct on the rifle cost being less expensive through CMP - for some folks who don't belong to ranges or a shooting club, the paperwork required to purchase through CMP may be "objectionable" to some - including a membership cost to a range - I would put the paperwork on par with getting your C&R 03 FFL - some folks don't want that hassle, albeit minor. The least expensive membership to a range near me is $150 for a 1-year membership. I think it would be fair to add this cost to the rifle - putting it closer to $700 depending on the grade that you buy.

The WASR still wins on ammo cost. Even surplus 30-06 ammo (by your figures) is still running ~$.44/round. Steel-cased non-reloadable ammo is all I have ever shot through my WASR and other misc. commie guns. It's still possible to get 7.62x39 at ~$.20/round. That means you can practice twice as much or have twice as much fun for the same cost.

Your arguments for the Garand assume that a potential buyer would already belong to a range or shooting club, not be put off by the paperwork, and that they are setup to reload to take advantage of reduced cost reloadable brass from the surplus ammo. All things being equal, for someone who does not belong to a range/club or reload - the WASR is a more economical choice.


In response to Kevin5098's comments:

The idea of "need" is highly subjective. I "need" as much as is required for my enjoyment. I find rifles which accept high-capacity detachable magazine to be "more fun". More shooting, less loading. Ever done the 5-gallon bucket dance with an AK or AR? It's FUN! With a Garand, your fun is over or at least paused after 8 rounds. The only exception so far (for me) is my Mosin-Nagant M44. That thing is VERY fun.

Ammo cost issue addressed above. SHTF may be a fantasy - but why not be prepared? I firmly believe that if basic services become "unavailable", people's general level of politeness and civility would decline rapidly - maybe share your belief that SHTF scenarios are a fantasy with all the victims Hurricane Katrina - think Superdome.

I'll concede that we cannot be certain as to the investment value of either weapon. Another AWB is only uncertain until new legislation is introduced - or public sentiment is ripe for "change" after another public shooting.

In my mind, the WASR is still the clear choice.

+1 to all the posters suggesting he buy both.

j-easy
July 31, 2009, 02:25 PM
i will agree that the CMP paperwork is somewhat of a hassle to get everything in order, and I did not factor in the cost of joining a CMP affiliated organization, If not already a member of a range you can join the "garand collectors association" for something like $25 dollars a year to fulfill the organizational requirement.

they are both great guns and I believe this is a question of "what should I buy first", both are excellent rifles worth owning.

NWGunner
July 31, 2009, 02:31 PM
Definitely!

NC-Mike
July 31, 2009, 02:51 PM
Yeah, get both...


I have both and it's good to have both. :evil:




The CMP ammo has gone through the roof. :( The 192 round cans used to be 45.00 not so very long ago, now they are 75.00 a pop but a CMP Garand is still the very best deal in firearms there is. You'll get a rifle that is worth almost double on the open market than what you pay CMP and that's why you are NOT supposed to buy from CMP if your intent is to sell the rifle.

A CMP field grade for 495.00 is light-years ahead of most Garands you see in shops for 800 or 900 dollars. Can image how beat to hades a Garand must be to wear a 495.00 price tag in a gun shop. :eek:

And it would still be snapped up in mere hours. :)

Get a CMP Service grade for 595.00 while they still have them and you'll never regret it.

NC-Mike
July 31, 2009, 02:58 PM
In response to Kevin5098's comments:

The idea of "need" is highly subjective. I "need" as much as is required for my enjoyment. I find rifles which accept high-capacity detachable magazine to be "more fun". More shooting, less loading. Ever done the 5-gallon bucket dance with an AK or AR? It's FUN! With a Garand, your fun is over or at least paused after 8 rounds. The only exception so far (for me) is my Mosin-Nagant M44. That thing is VERY fun.



The idea of "fun" is also highly subjective. :D

I submit to you that shooting 8 rounds of 30-06 out of a Garand is every bit the equal joy of dumping a AR/AK 30 round mag.

And with the Garand, you also get the ping! :evil:

jhco
July 31, 2009, 03:07 PM
garand

NWGunner
July 31, 2009, 04:01 PM
It's pretty clear based on the polling that I'm in the minority and fighting an uphill battle in this regard.

Setting aside the subjective qualities of "fun" and "needs". I'd like to steer the debate back to the technical and economic merits of WASR-10 ownership.

Several technical and economic features of the weapon set the WASR apart as the more advanced and sensible design:

*Detachable magazines
*Small bolt handle vs. large operating rod (This really bugs me about the Garand)
*Plethora of aftermarket support for stocks, main grips, foregrips, barrels, pistons, muzzle accessories, etc. - easy to procure replacement parts
*Relatively cheap ammo
*Proven, highly robust design - longer record of military service (not to say the Garand is unreliable - just that the AK/WASR's are more widely used and still hold their own in a "modern" military force)

Also, let me be clear that I am not trying to bash Garands, the design, or anyone who likes them. They are fine weapons and everyone should have one....right after they buy an AK patterned rifle.

NC-Mike
July 31, 2009, 04:08 PM
Setting aside the subjective qualities of "fun" and "needs". I'd like to steer the debate back to the technical and economic merits of WASR-10 ownership.


Boring... :evil:


Besides, the M1 is much purdyier rifle! :p

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/154/393334569_5d06650c78.jpg

Kevin5098
July 31, 2009, 04:16 PM
NWGunner said:
Several technical and economic features of the weapon set the WASR apart as the more advanced and sensible design:

No argument with any of the merits listed in this post. It all boils down to why you want the rifle in the first place. The Garand fits my requirements better than the WASR-10 ever could, but someone else will be much more satisfied with the AK or other rifle.

OP needs to decide what his requirements are and choose the best fit.

NWGunner
July 31, 2009, 04:34 PM
Agreed. The Garand is a majestic looking rifle.

AK's have all the elegance and grace of a spork.

NC-Mike
July 31, 2009, 04:55 PM
Agreed. The Garand is a majestic looking rifle.

AK's have all the elegance and grace of a spork.

Well said. :D

I do appreciate the AK for what it is though. As I mentioned, its good to have both. :)

Mikee Loxxer
July 31, 2009, 06:10 PM
The Garand is one of the finest true military surplus rifles available. Accurate and powerful.

The WASR is considered a bottom barrel kalashnikov.

No comparison, no comparison at all.

NC-Mike
July 31, 2009, 06:58 PM
The WASR is considered a bottom barrel kalashnikov.

I have to tell you, there really is such a thing as an AK snob...


I have a WASR-10 and it is sound in every regard. Admittedly I have only 1,000 rounds through it but it has NEVER had any failure to feed, fire or eject a round. I'm rather fond of it. :)

This is mine with the wood refinished and the metal blued.

http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g312/Mike____Smith/Collection/WASR10-2.jpg

Hammerhead6814
July 31, 2009, 07:57 PM
A Garand isn't good in a SHTF situation? :confused: Sure it doesn't have hi-cap magazines or for that matter, detachable magazines, but the question is that when you have eight rounds of .30-06 at your disposal, what else could you need? You can shoot through a deer, the tree behind it, the stone behind that, and the Chinese will be wondering "Just what the hell was that?" by the time it's ready to stop.

WASR-10 and the 7.62x39? The deer. So I guess if your going for eco-friendly then YES the WASR-10 is a better choice as tree's and ingenious rocks everywhere will be safer, and the Chinese will be much happier. :D

JHansenAK47
July 31, 2009, 08:00 PM
Garand is going to be the better shooter and easier to shoot accurately.
The WASR is considered a bottom barrel kalashnikov.
A khyber pass AK is a bottom of the barrel AK. WASRs are low end AKs but with some work are much nicer.

NC-Mike
July 31, 2009, 08:54 PM
WASRs are low end AKs but with some work are much nicer.


I did a good fluff and buff on mine and it also has a Power Custom trigger in it. I added that muzzle brake as well. Never really liked the slant.

Runs like a top.

NWGunner
July 31, 2009, 10:11 PM
I guess I just have a fondness for dirty commie guns...and now I'm done blustering.

Did the OP ever make a decision as to which firearm will be purchased first?

wally
July 31, 2009, 10:16 PM
WASRs are common and will be for a long time. Good Garands at reasonable prices are getting scarce fast.

As had been said, the WASR is about the bottom of the AK barrel.

--wally.

jaholder1971
August 10, 2009, 05:45 PM
I still say buy both.

ZombiesAhead
August 10, 2009, 07:55 PM
OK so what did you end up getting?

ZombieKiller
August 11, 2009, 02:22 AM
Out of those 2, definitely the Garand... but have you thought about a nice HK rifle?

Cap'n Jack Burntbeard
August 11, 2009, 04:13 AM
I just got bitten by the CETME / HK roller delayed blowback bug, these things are brutally simple, good ergonomics, easy to tear down, and hey the design has been scaled from a battle rifle (CETME / G3), to a legendary sniper rifle (PSG1 / MSG90). a submachinegun (MP5 series), and a few other interesting variations in between.

:uhoh: Am I the only one in here that thinks this way?
I feel Im being surrounded by the the religious followers of the holy M1, and they're not happy.:eek:

Yes WASRs are junk, but they are junk that goes bang every time.
The Garand, Its a traditional looking auto-loading .30-06 battle rifle from WWII, what more could you ask for?:cool:

Cap'n Jack Burntbeard
August 11, 2009, 04:28 AM
>JHansenAK47
Don't knock the Khyber pass Kalashnikov, it may be held together by duct tape and coat hangers, and loaded with corrosive ammo from the 1960s, but it has a happy switch, and yours doesn't.:D

PandaBearBG
August 11, 2009, 04:54 AM
Get the Garland, it cost more but like everyone said its value will go up. The WASR is ugly, and rough, but it won't let you down and can and will take the beating all AK's get and keep going. The best part is, the WASR will always be there you can get it later.

John Parker
August 11, 2009, 07:23 AM
Only one of the above was known as "the greatest battle implement ever devised."

While the other is still in active use the world over due to its simplicity and practicality. I do love the AK for everything it is, but the WASR...well, that's the garbage model. The M1 is a great rifle and you'll really enjoy it!

BobOfTheFuture
August 11, 2009, 08:20 AM
Okay, The greatest battle implement ever devised verses a german weapons knockoffs knockoff.

If the large cap matters in any way, ill say the power of a real battle rifle cart. and accuracy more then makes up for a WASR with a 30 rd mag, not to mention by, say, your 5th reload in a row you should have the skill to reload that 8 rd'er faster then you can even empty 8 rds from that WASR. IMO.


Reliability? The M1 was reliable before it was cool for an autoloader to be so. A russian AK will be somewhat more reliable. a WASR? who knows.

Storm
August 11, 2009, 06:31 PM
No-brainer. Today I traded an AK (not a WASR) for a 1943 Springfield Garand without hesitation.

CZguy
August 11, 2009, 09:43 PM
No-brainer. Today I traded an AK (not a WASR) for a 1943 Springfield Garand without hesitation.


Good choice, but.......need pics.

Hammerhead6814
August 11, 2009, 09:48 PM
How is this thread still here? If anything, it's proven that age has not affected the M1 Garand's mystique and place in the safe.

Get a Garand. Thread done.

FlyinBryan
August 12, 2009, 01:11 AM
lol, no doubt cz.

a wasr or a m1? A WASR?????!!!!!

I would not hold it against the thread starter. it just makes more sense to presume that he doesnt know the weapon (m1)

once he does, he will know. its not that he isnt doing his homework. this is his homework, and theres nothing wrong with that, at least imo.

once he knows the m1 garand, it will be as easy as choosing between two telescopes that are similar in price, and one says walmart on the side and the other says hubbel.

Quentin
August 12, 2009, 01:39 AM
This is definitely comparing apples to oranges but I'll waste a few minutes. Really, comparing the M1 Carbine and the WASR would make more sense. For a battle rifle I'd love to have a Garand but would choose the M14 over it mainly because of the 7.62 NATO cartridge.

Kinda hard to compare the big ol' 30-06 with the 7.62 Russian short... Ok, my reply is a mess just like the poll but I voted for the WASR since I actually bought one. Never got around to the Garand yet. Honestly I have much more use for a good AKM than the Garand. And the WASR truly is a good AKM even though you see many negative comments.

One thing both rifles have in common, they're excellent for the purpose they were designed for!


Edit: One thing I forgot to mention, you have to be very careful with the ammo you use in the old Garand. Can't use just any 30-06 loads or you have a dangerous situation. The WASR can eat up just about anything you throw at it.

Younggunner
August 13, 2009, 12:18 AM
The garand imo is just as reliable as the wasr and it'll keep its value and go up FOREVER. my uncle has his fathers m1 from world war 2 that is still in the cosmoline. never fired, perfect condition. now that is just a work of art.

skidooman603
August 13, 2009, 07:06 AM
Own both and wouldn't ever give up either ;)

skidooman603
August 13, 2009, 07:11 AM
The WASR is a fine SHTF gun. If the zombies were attacking that would be my choice. However the Garand is poetry. Every red blooded American owes it to themselves to have both. 30 zombies vs 8. :cool:

John Parker
August 13, 2009, 07:29 AM
my uncle has his fathers m1 from world war 2 that is still in the cosmoline. never fired, perfect condition. now that is just a work of art.

So, he never had to clean the cosmoline off of hs rifle? Uncle's dad never had to zero his rifle, test fire it at the range, anything?

mp5a3
August 13, 2009, 09:03 AM
Shame not to shoot a Garand..

OT question about the WASR, wouldn't it be considered a "surplus" gun. It's techinally used, correct ?

(Oh, and I own a WASR 10/63 so I'm not knocking them)

rogertc1
August 13, 2009, 09:19 AM
Get a Hi-Point carbine!!! Heck get 2 of them.

1shot3kills
August 13, 2009, 09:41 PM
I prefer the spork over a spoon and fork,less to clean afterwards,and it makes the best for corn eating,but in answer to the poll a wasr 10 ,its cheap to shoot and if you owned and shot both the gun you would take out to blast away with will always be the wasr 10,the grand will sit and gather dust"not a fate the garand deserves,but it will happen"

travellingJeff
August 14, 2009, 12:13 AM
Why would a Garand collect dust? *confused*

Old Jimmy
August 14, 2009, 12:41 AM
I have several AK's but only had 1 Garand and had to sell it when going through a divorce and I have hated my ex every since.

I own a M1A and love it but I still want another Garand.

I own a HK 91 and still want another Garand.

I have 2 AR 15's and I still want a Garand.

They have national matches to shoot Garands.

The Garand can be shot out to 1000 yards with accuracy.

The AK is near its limit at 300 yards.

My son and I used to take my Garand and a can full of 30 06 out and shoot all day until we came home at night with blood bruises from the recoil and to this day with all the rifles I have ever owned my son still talks about the all day shoots with the Garand and he wants me to find another one so we can start doing it again.

An AK is a AK is a AK and you can find them all over the place.

But there will only ever be one GARAND!!!!

Limeyfellow
August 14, 2009, 12:50 AM
Younggunner:

The garand imo is just as reliable as the wasr and it'll keep its value and go up FOREVER. my uncle has his fathers m1 from world war 2 that is still in the cosmoline. never fired, perfect condition. now that is just a work of art.

That makes no sense. How did he get ahold of his father's M1 Garand without going through every one in the CMP to come across it? If he never handed it back in after WW2, wouldn't it be classed as stolen Government property, and why would it be in cosmoline?

CZguy
August 14, 2009, 01:30 AM
Why would a Garand collect dust? *confused*

I think he meant that if he owned one it would gather dust.

knights_armorer
December 8, 2009, 06:04 PM
pretty one sided poll

If you enjoyed reading about "M1 Garand or WASR 10" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!