Dave DeLaurant
Member
You know, the supply/demand formula also wasn't helped when Garands were given away by the tens of thousands as foreign aid to now-enemy regimes like Iran, or demilled by Uncle Sugar hisself.
As for some very rough (and highly debatable) numbers, the Garand cost about three times as much as a Mauser K98k variant to produce (about $90 vs. $30 in 1940s dollars, depending on who made what and when); about three times as many Nazi K98s were made as Garands during WWII (14.6M vs. 5.5M, including Korean War Garand production.) Look at original K98k prices today, multiply by three and compare with the Garand.
That's an over-simplification, but add to this calculation the historical appeal of its honored service in WWII and Korea, plus the fact that it functions quite well even by modern standards and is a hoot to shoot. Karl and Ian at InRangeTV make the case for the Garand being obsolescent instead of obsolete. Also, thanks to its magazine/clip system, it gets around legal restrictions on semi-auto rifles in parts of the USA.
There weren't whole Garand rifles made as later reproductions, however there were cast receiver composites with a mix of new and surplus parts sold under Springfield Armory and Santa Fe brands. The Chinese could probably produce a whole (and probaly lousy) M1 Garand the way they've done their M1A knockoffs. Ruger makes the Mini 14 receiver using a casting process and could probably pull off a 1:1 Garand reproduction if they thought it would be a money maker -- they sort of tried with their XGI project but that got too expensive before the bugs could be worked out. However, even with newer production methods, the Garand is and probably will remain a costly rifle to produce. The gas cylinder/front sight base and that bent op-rod aren't cheap parts either. Maybe if demand stays high and originals hit the $3K mark, Ruger might try again, or Springfield might contract another production run. Properly done, a cast receiver could function just as well as a machined forging, but if the product cost of a reproduction is as much as a collectible original without the added appeal of real collectibility, would the market support it?
I wish Garands were cheaper too, so I could own more than one.
As for some very rough (and highly debatable) numbers, the Garand cost about three times as much as a Mauser K98k variant to produce (about $90 vs. $30 in 1940s dollars, depending on who made what and when); about three times as many Nazi K98s were made as Garands during WWII (14.6M vs. 5.5M, including Korean War Garand production.) Look at original K98k prices today, multiply by three and compare with the Garand.
That's an over-simplification, but add to this calculation the historical appeal of its honored service in WWII and Korea, plus the fact that it functions quite well even by modern standards and is a hoot to shoot. Karl and Ian at InRangeTV make the case for the Garand being obsolescent instead of obsolete. Also, thanks to its magazine/clip system, it gets around legal restrictions on semi-auto rifles in parts of the USA.
There weren't whole Garand rifles made as later reproductions, however there were cast receiver composites with a mix of new and surplus parts sold under Springfield Armory and Santa Fe brands. The Chinese could probably produce a whole (and probaly lousy) M1 Garand the way they've done their M1A knockoffs. Ruger makes the Mini 14 receiver using a casting process and could probably pull off a 1:1 Garand reproduction if they thought it would be a money maker -- they sort of tried with their XGI project but that got too expensive before the bugs could be worked out. However, even with newer production methods, the Garand is and probably will remain a costly rifle to produce. The gas cylinder/front sight base and that bent op-rod aren't cheap parts either. Maybe if demand stays high and originals hit the $3K mark, Ruger might try again, or Springfield might contract another production run. Properly done, a cast receiver could function just as well as a machined forging, but if the product cost of a reproduction is as much as a collectible original without the added appeal of real collectibility, would the market support it?
I wish Garands were cheaper too, so I could own more than one.
Last edited:
