maxxhavoc
Member
Interesting sling arrangement - what is the rationale behind the mount locations?
The M1 Garand Rifle - Why Is It, "Heavy"?
- Thread starter Garandimal
- Start date
- Status
Interesting sling arrangement - what is the rationale behind the mount locations?
OP
OP
Garandimal
member
You're the one putting a clock on it.
I've reloaded both enough to know which is the better choice too.
So the whole defining issue of the battle rifle... is reload time?
Focus.
GR
OP
OP
Garandimal
member
So, a hypothetical disqualifies a battle rifle w/ a 3-5 second reload time...?
Pass me the "phased plasma rifle in the 40-watt range."
GR
lysanderxiii
Member
I am comparing it to its contemporaries.
But if you prefer: a fully loaded M4A1 with a SOCOM barrel, ACOG sight, and adapter rails weighs it at 8.75 lbs according to the manual. A fully loaded M27 IAR is 10.5 lbs with an ACOG sight.
So, again, it ain't that heavy, relatively speaking.
Oh, and BTW, why wouldn't you want to clear a room with a Gew 43? It would be pretty good at it.
Last edited:
tark
Member
Hector Cafferata ! 20:30!! 
Phaedrus/69
Member
I thought your entire thread was crapping. Isn't this an elaborate troll job? If you meant this seriously then my bad.
Are you having a conversation with yourself? I didn't say any of that.
You made a comment that in one very restricted type of fighting that soldiers "will care little b/t clip or magazine fed rifles."
I asked a very specific rhetorical question and provided my answer to it. If you don't have a response for what I wrote, why bother wasting your time and everyone else's posting a strawman response instead?
OP
OP
Garandimal
member
I don't think that's the case. He himself admitted, he only got one about 10 years ago. Dont know of any trainers pushing the M1 as the rifle of choice. About the only place you might really learn to shoot one these days would be the military or high power matches. And if you want to get down to it, even at most of the matches, the M1 and M14/M1A were replaced quite a while ago by the AR's.
Seems like this goes on every time one of these threads comes up. Just wait til he figures out the M14 was what surpassed it and he gets an M1A.
You have quite an imagination, pop.
Why would I want to ruin a perfectly good battle rifle...
... by adding a heavy and bulky magazine, that ruins the slick balance and handling of the smooth-bottomed M1... and doubles the cost?
Crazy.
GR
OP
OP
Garandimal
member
Isn't fighting or moving from cover to cover still the preferred method for the implementation of a battle rifle?
The M1 rifle has a 3-5 second reload time.
How can I help you?
GR
OP
OP
Garandimal
member
Phaedrus/69
Member
Thanks.
Hector Cafferata...
... time stamp 20:30.
Just ribbin' you.
Hector Cafferata...
... time stamp 20:30.
Just ribbin' you.Preference has nothing to do with it. What has to be done has to be done. It is true that there are certain types of fighting where capacity isn't a big deal, it's also true that soldiers don't always get to choose the type of fighting they must engage in.
Curious how you arrived at this estimate?
OP
OP
Garandimal
member
What type wasn't in either WWII or Korea?
The M1 Rifle was there.
Simple:
CMP Service Grade M1 Rifle - $750 delivered.
SAI M1A Rifle - $1500 plus shipping.
GR
Again, are you having a conversation with yourself? If you don't want to respond to what I posted, why bother wasting your time and everyone else's posting a strawman response.
Are you claiming that the cost difference between those two rifles is primarily due to one being clip fed and the other taking a detachable box magazine?
The original M1 Garand cost about $85 a copy in WWII era dollars. The original M14 about $104 per copy in 1959 dollars.
OP
OP
Garandimal
member
I'm asking you a question.
What type of basic infantry combat exists today... that didn't exist during the confines of either WWII or Korea?
So we can define where the M1 rifle hasn't been... and succeeded.
I am stating Economic Fact.
Go buy either.
GR
I'm actually pretty sure most people have just stopped reading what I write (or just gloss over long posts), but I'll be generous to the argument and assume I'm maybe I'm not making my point clear to you because it doesn't seem like you're understanding it.
From this thread alone, in less than 48 hours, I've learned:
- The loaded weight of an M1 Garand
- The combat load of WWII soldiers vs Modern infantry
- The range of machine guns in 1936 and when they were swapped out with M60s (and anything else CapnMac says)
- How quickly someone can swap out an en bloc 8 round clip on an M1
- Garandimal broke down the literal weights of the weapons vs how much ammo you could carry for each at the same weight
- The value of dismount for a modern combat rifle
- There's an actual difference between a designated "battle rifle" and "assault rifle"
- What a hoolbrook device is and what it does (including the measurements it works with)
- You can get an M1 for $750 from the CMP
- Quite a bit about MAG-58 testing in 1974
Now, maybe I don't know diddly squat about firearms and am the least informed person in the world, but I'm willing to bet dollars to doughnuts most of the people reading this didn't know all of that stuff either.
That stuff all came out in process of discourse and debate, which was initiated and continued by the OP.
For all the bellyaching from random members who popped in and contributed nothing besides basic name-calling, attempts to suck up to mods, and a very obviously dismissive read of the content from what is demonstrably terrible moderation -- I otherwise think this is and was a productive thread that satisfies the point of the community as Oleg set it out to be.
Again, maybe you guys knew all of that stuff walking in the door, but I didn't and I'm sure other readers didn't either.
To your point, I have no intentions of changing this community (nor power to do so). I'm just contributing to a discussion that would have most likely otherwise been closed a lot sooner had I not said something (for what are clearly fictitious reasons). I've seen the same moderator prematurely close threads erring on the side of debate before under the similar "I DON'T CARE WHAT THE DISCUSSION IS! PEOPLE JUST LIKE WHAT THEY LIKE!!! LET'S NOT HURT ANYONE'S FEEL FEELS!!11!" paradigm. Quite frankly a lot of those threads were equally, if not more informative.
With all due respect (whatever respect is due), that's a disservice to this community. I don't mind openly opining about leaving it for this reason with the hope that maybe someone who runs this place will read it and put two and two together. Personally I think what makes THR worth visiting is that the average age of the members is collectively higher than you'll find on other forums --- and with age comes wisdom. That said, that userbase isn't going to be online forever and if you business isn't growing, it's dying. Right now, the 2A needs all the help it can get. People might not like my opinions or whatever, but the reality is we're all in the same boat here.
As far as you thinking this is a "well trafficked" forum, you clearly don't know a lot about SEO. Someone trying to convince me you have 'one hundred new members a week' is demonstrably BS. On a Sunday night you have less than 200 members using this board. On Saturday night when he first said this you had less than 110. Does that sound like a forum that has over 200,000 active members on it? Not a chance.
Not to bust up your tea party here, but the subreddit dedicated to AKs has over 120,000 members with thousands active right now. Similarly, the "guns" subreddit has well over 600,000 members with thousands actively logged in and posting right now. So I don't know what you're talking about about, but THR is definitely not thriving.
Again, I'm not trying to change your community, but I have no qualms about openly opining to a dying forum that maybe they'd retain or promote better membership if they didn't spring in to lock a thread every time a discussion gets going. If it isn't obvious by now, I do this for a living.
Does the current M4 have a 3 shot burst? They probably hadn't invented that feature back in the days of the Garand. It was originally black powder wasn't it?
Yes, the M4 is a 3 shot burst (or at least the ones I served with). Ironically, we never used it as soldiers. We were trained almost exclusively to fire our weapons on semi.
Here's a question to shake up the thread (if anybody actually reads what I write), but is there a way to make an M1 take an external magazine? Has this been done successfully?
Again, this is a strawman. I have not so much as hinted that the M1 Garand wasn't a success in its era.
The original M1 Garand cost about $85 a copy in WWII era dollars.
The original M14 about $104 per copy in 1959 dollars.
Clearly changing from clip to detachable magazine did not double the price. Not even close. And that's even assuming that there are no other differences in the guns which could cause the M14 to be more expensive.
lysanderxiii
Member
The last contracted price for M1s was around $93 in 1956.
The original price of an M16 was $110 per copy.
The original price of an M16 was $110 per copy.
BM 59
OP
OP
Garandimal
member
You speak of "strawman," and then qualify your statement with the term, "era".
So I'll ask you again,
What type of basic infantry combat exists today... that didn't exist during the confines of either WWII or Korea?
So we can define where the M1 rifle hasn't been... and succeeded.
You are being obtuse.
Go buy either, today.
The CMP Service Grade M1 Rifle will cost you $750 delivered.
The SAI M1A Rifle will cost you at least $1500.
GR
I used the term "era" in a comment about what I did NOT say--about what I did not even HINT at saying. It makes no sense at all to twist that around and make try to make it seem like it's qualifying something I did say.
I have said nothing about the M1's success or failure in this era or in any other. Nothing. I didn't qualify any comments I made about it's success or failure because I haven't made any comments at all about it's success or failure.
Ok, we've now gone past the point where you can reasonably pretend that you don't understand that I'm not addressing that the success of the M1 Garand, and well past the point where a continued pretense on your part could reasonably be interpreted as anything other than deliberate trolling.
You keep trying to address a topic I have never broached.
You made the comment that in one narrowly defined type of combat that soldiers "will care little b/t clip or magazine fed rifles." I pointed out that soldiers don't get to pick what kind of specific combat tactics to use and only engage in that type. From that point on, you have tried repeatedly to put words in my mouth.
I say again, if you don't want to respond to what I wrote, then don't. Making a strawman response is pointless. Persisting in the behavior past a point can only be interpreted as trolling.
Don't be ridiculous.
Your comment was that "adding a heavy and bulky magazine <to the> M1" would double the cost. Clearly it did not. We can compare the cost of the the M1 to the M14, apples to apples and the difference in price was not remotely double. That's even neglecting inflation and ignoring other factors beyond the feed differences that could have increased the cost of the M14, above the M1.
The feeble attempt to obfuscate the issue by comparing the cost of a new manufacture M1A to a used M1 Garand more than 6 decades old is laughable.
AK103K
member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2002
- Messages
- 7,610
A true issued, 40's, 50's, 60's issued Garand will likely cost you about the same as a standard grade M1A at current prices and actually, maybe more, depending on the rifle. Around here, rifles of that type and era, on the low end, are bringing north of $1200.
My understaning is that the CMP has been out of decent guns for awhile now, and the guns you're seeing now, mostly being built from parts, are they not?
My understaning is that the CMP has been out of decent guns for awhile now, and the guns you're seeing now, mostly being built from parts, are they not?
chicharrones
needs more ammo
I do get it that forums have essentially gone the way of print on paper to the younger generations, but I was comparing THR to other forums not other means of internet social media. I figure us middle agers and older don't play much at reddit. Pretty much like our predecessors didn't play much on forums. I was in my low 30s when forums were the new thing, so it's familiar to folks like me.
SEO, yeah I know what SEO is. It's not my primary duty, but one of my duties at my job when I'm not turning a wrench is that I've been the webmaster, designer, maintainer, whatever since 2003. Publishing 4 websites during that time for my employer with the last design from scratch published in the fall of 2018. SEO "providers" contact me regularly trying to sell us their SEO services time and time again. Been down that total money loss road a few times. Gurgle is a money sucking vampire for small business, in my experience.
People gotta wear a lot of hats to make it in the 21st century, and I wear at least 4 at my company which has kept me worth keeping . . . so far.
Anyway, back to the M1. I've fired them, I like them, but I've never owned one.
When I was in my 20s the local Woolworth store had ads in the local newspaper (pre-SEO) offering surplus M1 carbines for $199 and surplus M1 Garands for $299. That was more than I could imagine paying, so I skipped those two and got an unissued Chi-com SKS for 1/3rd the price of the surplus Garand. Steel case commie ammo for the SKS was $1.99 per 15 round box, if I remember right. I never did know why that ammo didn't come in 20 round boxes like American rifle ammo.
When my brother got out of the 82nd Airborne in the late '80s, he bought a surplus M1 Garand. He had some "parting gift" money from Uncle Sam it would've seemed. My bro is the one that introduced me to the term Chi-com, right there at the sporting goods counter while I was buying my SKS in the early '90s.
Do I regret not sucking it up and springing for a questionable surplus Garand? Sure. But I also remember what some of those beater mil-surps were like back then. Headspacing problems, worn out mechanicals, etc. I didn't know enough about checking out or fixing firearms back then, so I wanted something "new".
Last edited:
I was actually going to ask just this.
TBQH this thread is seriously making me consider picking up an M1A. I saw them on the link Garandimal posted but I fear what quality I would be getting for that price.
For the record, reddit is a forum. I know they don't look like the old vbulletin ones but those are basically dying.
Either way, I think you make a fair point. I'm actually not interested in arguing or trying to be obdurate here. I value your perspective.
marksman13
Member
Whoa, now. Don’t go interrupting this dude’s fantasies with reality.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
