Quantcast
New Patent for the Garand? - THR
THR  

Go Back   THR > Tools and Technologies > Rifle Country

Welcome to THR
You are currently viewing our site as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have, access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!


If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please visit the help section.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old November 25, 2014, 01:42 AM   #1
Kailuaflyer
Member
 
 
Join Date: October 21, 2014
Posts: 17
New Patent for the Garand?

I was researching to see if the patent on the M1 is still being held by Springfield Armory or if it has lapsed. I have yet to find the answer to my original search, but I did find this interesting patent for an "enhanced" Garand:

http://www.google.com/patents/US20110030546
Kailuaflyer is offline  
Old November 25, 2014, 02:00 AM   #2
Jim K
Member
 
 
Join Date: December 31, 2002
Posts: 15,486
I think the M1 patents were in John Garand's name, assigned to the United States.

But unless I am missing something, that patent appears to be the same idea as was used in the early 1960's by folks converting the M1 to use 7.62 and an M14 magazine. Maybe there are differences in details or maybe the folks who did the conversions never patented the idea, but it all looks very familiar.

Jim
Jim K is offline  
Old November 25, 2014, 02:25 AM   #3
Kailuaflyer
Member
 
 
Join Date: October 21, 2014
Posts: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim K View Post
I think the M1 patents were in John Garand's name, assigned to the United States.

But unless I am missing something, that patent appears to be the same idea as was used in the early 1960's by folks converting the M1 to use 7.62 and an M14 magazine. Maybe there are differences in details or maybe the folks who did the conversions never patented the idea, but it all looks very familiar.

Jim
Yeah, it looked like the M14 to me too. No idea why there would be a patent on a design that has already been implemented, unless this is a patent troll.
Kailuaflyer is offline  
Old November 25, 2014, 10:18 AM   #4
Bezoar
Member
 
 
Join Date: April 9, 2006
Posts: 1,430
its not technicallly new or old. what theyve done is designed a replacement trigger guard that accepts m1 magazines.
and a scope mount that puts the entire scope centered directly over the entire ejection port.

think putting a scope mounted over the top ejection winchester rifle, then turning it to a semi auto. FUN.
Bezoar is offline  
Old November 25, 2014, 10:25 AM   #5
dogmush
Member
 
 
Join Date: May 7, 2008
Location: Tampa
Posts: 632
Proprietary mag?

I didn't think .30-06 would fit in an M14 mag, and the patent doesn't say anything about changing caliber. It actually says no permanent mods to the rifle.
dogmush is offline  
Old November 25, 2014, 12:56 PM   #6
wojownik
Member
 
 
Join Date: May 15, 2009
Posts: 1,220
I think the unique or "non-obvious" contribution of this patent is the overall idea that "the kit must complete it's design functions with no permanent modification to the rifle." The M14 design is a significant and permanent modification. Not saying, though, that the patent isn't close to several other ideas already out there ...
wojownik is online now  
Old November 25, 2014, 01:03 PM   #7
carbine85
Member
 
 
Join Date: July 1, 2007
Location: Southwest, Ohio
Posts: 1,380
My thoughts are there isn't many people out willing to modify their Garands at this point in time. They bring a hefty price.
__________________

"That's the good thing as a President, I can do whatever I want"
Barack Obama - Americas 1st Dictator
"I ask sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few politicians."
George Mason (father of the Bill of Rights)
carbine85 is offline  
Old November 25, 2014, 01:05 PM   #8
Jim Watson
Member
 
 
Join Date: December 24, 2002
Posts: 18,499
There were some of the T20 or T22 series of box magazine M1 derivatives that used the standard length action others were longer to improve full auto operation. I don't know how much even the shorter ones were modified from the M1 receiver, though.
__________________
We hear: "There is no such thing as a stupid question."
But: "What did I just buy and what is it worth?" comes awful close.
Jim Watson is offline  
Old November 25, 2014, 04:55 PM   #9
zoom6zoom
Member
 
 
Join Date: April 25, 2006
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,824
The company currently doing business as Springfield Armory has no connection to the original other than licensing the name. The original Springfield Armory shut down in 1968
__________________
www.vcdl.org Certified AR15/M16 and SIG pistol armorer.
zoom6zoom is offline  
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:13 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Optimisation by vB Optimise.
This site, its contents, Shooting Reviews, and its contents are Copyright (c) 2010-2013 Firearms Forum, Inc.
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER
Although The High Road has attempted to provide accurate information on the forum, The High Road assumes no responsibility for the accuracy of the information. All information is provided "as is" with all faults without warranty of any kind, either express or implied. Neither The High Road nor any of its directors, members, managers, employees, agents, vendors, or suppliers will be liable for any direct, indirect, general, bodily injury, compensatory, special, punitive, consequential, or incidental damages including, without limitation, lost profits or revenues, costs of replacement goods, loss or damage to data arising out of the use or inability to use this forum or any services associated with this forum, or damages from the use of or reliance on the information present on this forum, even if you have been advised of the possibility of such damages.