M1 Garand: horrible rifle, horribly hyped.

IBTL!!!

You must have missed reading about WWII and Korean War history then.

The Garand is one of the main reasons you didn't type that post in German or Chinese!!

Good grief!!!!

Whether you can understand it or not?
It was the most advanced battle rifle anyone in the world could devise or field, during two very important wars in history.

As for not reloadable?
I have no idea what you even think you are talking about??

Rc

You speaking bad about the greatest battle rifle of all time and the reason we all aren't speaking german!

Yes, Thermactor, we all learned in your posts in the thread about the potential of 1911s from CMP that you have a major hate-on for the Garand...

designed in a way that is not reload able

Click to expand...

So people would fire 8 shots and throw it away? I think we can all have enough academic integrity to admit that the gun is reloadable.

it is heavy

Click to expand...

it is a product of its time. Show me a full powered semi-auto rifle from that time that was not similarly heavy.

optics cannot be mounted straight on it

Click to expand...

Again, a product of the time.

s a danger to the hands of those who use it

Click to expand...

There's a trick to handling it. Big whoop.

I think you need to find a better hobby than ragging on a beloved old war horse that served our country and the world very very well.

Get ready for the reaction to this! The Garand does have some issues which you point out. However you have to judge it for the time it was in use. It was without a doubt, "the best battle implement ever devised" according to someone who should know. By the way, it served until the adoption of the M14, well after the Korean "police-action" and later still in the hands of our allies, the S. Koreans and ARVN. When our enemies were fielding the M98 Mauser and the Type99 Arisaka, The M1 was technically, and tactically superior.

Now personally, I don't shoot my M1 all that often because it is heavy, "dangerous" to reload (M1 thumb is for real) requires those 8-round enbloc clips, and throws my valuable brass way out into the weeds. Also, I can't mount a scope over the bore, and it just isn't all that accurate. All the same I love it for what it DID, not so much for what it is in 2105.

Cool story bro.

But so, so wrong.

I suppose the thousands of men who were killed with it in WW2 were better equipped with their 5rd bolt actions.

Umm, the Mosin has seen use by insurgents to this day because the Soviets made something like 37 million of them. The Germans made something like 14 million Mausers, and that was just in Germany. LOTS of other countries manufactured and used that rifle, it was like the AK of the late 1800s/early 1900s.

The US didn't make as many M1s, but they've seen use in recent wars as well. People will use whatever they can get.

What? I understand that you have your opinion but it doesn't make much sense.

people....people....people....stop feeding the trolls!!!!

what a load of YOU KNOW WHAT, ask any man who saw combat first hand in ww-2-korea what he thought of the m-1 garand and you will get a ear full. even with all the short commings you list, it was the big cheese in the room. the rifle saved so many american fighting men to fight another day by allowing small groups of men in a fire fight being able to fight their way threw much larger groups of german and japanese solgiers. as far as the 98,s and the mosins going for another 50 years, the countries that used them didn,t care much about their men surviving and used them as cannon fodder. the chinese proved that in korea. the marines who pride them selfs of their marksmenship, begged,borrowed and lifted them from any place they could in the island fights. my uncle who fought threw the islands in the south pacific would tell you your full of it. eastbank.

Some people just need attention. There, you're welcome.

Well it's clear Therma is looking for a fight, and I know some people enjoy stirring the pot a little and I won't actually begrudge him that too much. Insulting the Garand around here is like insulting the flag. But while everyone else will jump at the opportunity to flame him, I'll say the US would have done well to eliminate the 'garand-thumb' issue before fielding the rifle. And perhaps a loading a little lighter than 30-06 would've allowed for a lighter gun and easier ammo-toting.

But it's easy to make that call way up here in 2015.

Saw use in Viet Nam, the ARVNs had them and we had a few too!

If the thread title isn't fighting words, I don't know what is. You can reload it mid clip which is what I'm assuming is what you're referring to and the designed carried over into the M14 which is still in use today by the military as a DMR. The only thing I see wrong with the rifle is that it should have been chambered in a .27 caliber round like .276 Pederson instead of .30-06 but it did just fine.

I've had a couple. They are in fact heavy, clunky and a pain in the behind to load (proper technique takes care of the hazard to user part). They were a pretty good rifle in its day though, and are still a lot of fun to shoot. They had much better sights than anything else in the day, besides being the first practical self loading military rifle that was widely used.

As far as "greatest battle instrument ever", thats a dated comment, made in the 1940's. I think they are good guns, but hardly the greatest fighting rifle ever if "ever" didnt stop at 1945.

me too, the local villagers got them for hamlet defence. i bought one threw the cmp in 2004 that was rearsneled at letterkenny and has a new 1966 barrel and i consider it a true vietnam war era rifle. i have been shooting shooting m-1 rifles for about 50 years and never got a m-1 thumb, as you insert the enbloc push the oprod back with the back of your hand as you push the loaded enbloc in with your thumb holding the rifle in your left hand. eastbank.

I believe the M1 Garand is a bad rifle. It's designed in a way that is not reload able, it is heavy, optics cannot be mounted straight on it, and it is a danger to the hands of those who use it. As a relic, it may have collectors value, like a Lebel or a Carcano, but there is a good reason why it was thrown in the trash after 1945, while designs like the Mauser and even the lowly Mosin Nagant saw action for half a century after world war 2. The Garand is an overrated rifle, born of comic book hubris and of little actual battlefield merit. That's how I see it.

Click to expand...

You're entitled to your opinion, as guaranteed by the 1st Amendment...

But I disagree. I think the OP will end up in the deep minority on this one. The OP may have heard of a General named George Patton - who is legendary. His opinion of the M1 Garand was that it was, "The greatest battle implement ever devised."

Going back to the era, it was rugged, reliable and offered more and faster semi-auto shots on target than our opponents. The Garand is no more or less difficult to mount optics, on, and most GIs in the fight had no reason for optics. Fighting was done largely within pretty close proximity in urban and heavily wooded areas or small farmlands. The weight was appropriate for the cartridge While the Mauser is a marvel, it held only 5 rounds and was slower bolt action. The Arisaka wasn't much of a rifle by comparison and was among the worse bolt guns of the era. Big, awkward, and clumsy.

The M1 Garand gave GIs the ability to put 8 quick .3006 shots on target without stoping to operate a bolt or reload, so much faster and retaining sight picture. Multiply that by hundreds of Soldiers, and that's a massive advantage. Assuming for the sake of argument that it's twice as fast, and you have 100 Soldiers (and reloads take the same amount of time... let's just see how it compares. Assume these are aimed shots and sustained rates of fire and unlimited ammo for the sake of argument.

8 round clip x 2 (representing twice as fast versus bolt guns) shots x 100 Soldiers = 1600 rounds.
5 shots x 100 Soldiers = 500 rounds.

That is a huge difference in the aggregate multiplied by long, sustained battles and hundreds of thousands of men.

On a personal note, I own 4 and find it to be a beautiful and well-functioning work horse. There are advantages to the fixed internal magazine. It's not perfect, nor as good as a modern semi-auto rifle. But compared to the cars from the 1940s neither are they as good as cars today...

Someone forgot to eat their wheaties. Garands are awesome

I believe the M1 Garand is a bad rifle. It's designed in a way that is not reload able, it is heavy, optics cannot be mounted straight on it, and it is a danger to the hands of those who use it. As a relic, it may have collectors value, like a Lebel or a Carcano, but there is a good reason why it was thrown in the trash after 1945, while designs like the Mauser and even the lowly Mosin Nagant saw action for half a century after world war 2. The Garand is an overrated rifle, born of comic book hubris and of little actual battlefield merit. That's how I see it.

Click to expand...

Ok Comrade....

They were impressive when they came out.

Ok, I'll bite...

Let's see, first full-strength semi-auto battle rifle to be issued as basic equipment for a major power (commissioned in 1934!), fielded for roughly 20 years, design becomes the M14 with minor alterations, design is still wildly popular as the M1a, and in it's original configuration is still used by precision drill teams for its unsurpassed balance.

Yeah, a real dog...

I can't help thinking my reply should be the same as the op's signature "life is harder when....."

This post has "Social Experiment" written all over it.