Are They Really That Good?

[Jayhawker]

I have lurked around lots of forums for lots of years and hardly ever have heard anything negative about the M1 Garand. I've never even handled one let alone fired it. Are they really as accurate and reliable as reported or is there just a strong mystique that "makes" them that way to folks?

Pete

 

[TimRB]

M1's are service rifles. As such they are accurate enough to hit a man-sized target at "reasonable" ranges by a qualified rifleman. They are not target rifles, although an M1 that has been worked by someone who knows what he is doing is very much more accurate than a service grade rifle.

They seem to be among the most loveable rifles for various reasons: history, reliability, power, nostalgia, 8 bangs and a ping, quality of construction, or just the look of a fine steel-and-wood rifle.

Tim

 

[jefnvk]

I bought one, and I am not the least bit dissapointed. Just nothing like PING!

 

[TrapperReady]

In general, the M1 is accurate enough. Some can be quite good indeed. They are robust in every way, and IMO are one of the best looking military rifles ever made.

So, you take that and toss in the nostalgia and the "mystique", and you get a cult following. Enhance that cult following by making it legal to order them through the CMP and have them delivered to your door. How can you beat that?

Besides, my dad used one through France and Germany in 1944 and 1945. If he thought it was the best rifle available, then who am I to argue?

 

[2t2 crash]

i have a dane service grade M1 from CMP... i love it. its a sturdy and HEAVY weapon. as far as accuracy goes, it is very accurate, i on the other hand, am still working on my half of the deal. :banghead:

my M1 weighs more than my scoped K98, with bayonet attatched

 

[MrMurphy]

Yes, they really are that good.






Ping!

 

[shermacman]

My M1 is my absolute favorite gun. I have shotguns/revolvers/semiautos etc. From high tech Glocks and Kel-Tecs I love them all for what they are and what they do. But when I fire my M1 there is nothing else that comes close. It really is that good, get one!

 

[brickboy240]

Years ago, I bought one through the CMP. It ran me about 300 bucks or so. I received a 1944 Springfield Armory model with its original barrel. It was worn but certainly not worn out.

I found the Garand to be a very fun plaftorm to launch the 30-06 round. Much easier on the shoulder than an M1903 bolt gun.

I also found the sights on the Garand to be superior to almost all WWII military sights. The No4 British Enfield has a great peep sight that is a close second.

The Garand I own is fairly accurate at the 100yd bench. It will hold its own against the German 98k, British Enfield and Russian Nagant. They all group about the same. The Swiss K-31, Swedish Mauser and Finnish M-39 will beat it from the bench, though.

I think the Garand (like the P08 Luger) is a great rifle to own. Besides the fact that it was "our" rifle in WWII, it is a great shooter, is extremely durable and reliable and is easy to maintain. Mine feeds everything I put in it, soft points, fmjs, you name it. No stoppages at all. It is amazingly reliable!

I have not done it yet, but I would have no qualms about using it as a deer rifle someday in the future.

If you want one, by all means get one. The purchase of ANY US military surplus rifle in shooting condition is always a good investment.

-Brickboy240

 

[AZ Jeff]

The M1 Garand, when introduced in 1936, was MILES AND MILES ahead of ANY other military rifle in terms of accurate, rapid, fire under adverse conditions. It's still a VERY good rifle, for the following reasons:

1. It has among the BEST fully-adjustable mechanical sights EVER put on ANY rifle. (Yeah, some target rifles have more precise adjustments, but they are also very fragile compared to the M1.)
2. It has a very good two stage trigger, and it can be "tweaked" for better performance EASILY
3. It has VERY good balance for offhand shooting.
4. It is EXTREMELY robust. Even the weakest part of the M1 (the operating rod) still rarely fails in a way that renders the rifle unshootable.

Modern (post WWII) rifles are lighter, and hold more rounds, and recoil less, but fundamentally, are NO better in their ability to consistently put the bullets where the rifleman wants them. That makes the M1 pretty close to the pinnacle of rifle design and manufacture.

In case you cannot tell, I really enjoy the M1, and have 3 of them, one in .308. When I first got one from the old DCM, I thought it was an archaic novelty. Then I made the mistake of shooting it a bunch, and began to realize how really GOOD the M1 is in terms of "shootability". As I have said to others--if I can SEE it, I can HIT it with my M1. It's that "Shootable".

Besides, how can one not like the "rifle that saved the world"?

 

[30Cal]

Service rifle matches are regularly shot at ranges between 200 and 600yds and even a rack grade M1 will beat up the black pretty easily.

The recoil is firm but not unpleasant--just enough to let you know that you're sending some powerful mojo downrange. But man, oh man, they are a joy to shoot! The best part though is the *PING!* and you don't know what you're missing if you haven't done it!

Ty

 

[artherd]

They're good rifles, that get cut a lot of slack because of their age and nolstagia.

They're not target accurate, and they have an older gas system than even the M1A/M14. The op-rods bend. They require more than the usual ammount of maintinence/lube procedure. They can bite your thumb.

Also, at the time, they were THE S_HIT A NUMBER ONE RIFLE. Still not bad to this day. Won WW-II for us, etc. All in all, a cool rifle, even a landmark rifle.

 

[cracked butt]

"Are they really as accurate and reliable as reported or is there just a strong mystique that "makes" them that way to folks?

"


They are all of the above.

Sure they are heavy, but they are heavy in all of the right places and balance better than anything else I have. My M96 swedes are much more accurate from a bench, but I shoot my M1 much better than the 96s when shooting off my hind legs.

 

[George S.]

Like any other service rifle, they will take abuse and still work like they were intended. I bought a April 41 Springfield Garand from the CMP last year; it's one of the Danish returns that had a VAR barrel installed by the Danes. The barrel shows very little wear and 4" groups at 100 yards are not difficult to get as long as I do my part.

You can get match-grade barrels for the M1 in either .30-06 or .308 so you could build a very accurate rifle if you wanted. But to me, the thrill is in having a real piece of American military history that after 60+ years, it still goes BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG, PING every time using 40 year old ammo!

When I look at mine, I begin to wonder where it has been and what it did for my country. Was it at Anzio? Omaha Beach? In the snow of Bastogne? Somewhere in the Pacific being carried through the salt water or maybe the black sands of Iwo Jima? Or maybe just sitting in an arms room somewhere waiting to train each cycle of recruits to defend our country and allies from tyranny.

In any event, I really don't care if I can get a single ragged hole (it can't) or miss the whole target frame (it doesn't). It's fun to shoot and a real link to our past and the fight to destroy those who would ruin the world.

 

[bnolsen]

Yeah, nothing like firing an M1.
Sadly nowadays they do some serious damage to your wallet.
Those who picked them up a while back made out like bandits.

 

[chuckles]

My Garand would still be a top 3 choice in a SHTF scenario. As another poster said, "How could you not love the rifle that saved the world"? Great fun to shoot and handle. Get one before they're all gone.

 

[Old NFO]

You can get match-grade barrels for the M1 in either .30-06 or .308 so you could build a very accurate rifle if you wanted. But to me, the thrill is in having a real piece of American military history that after 60+ years, it still goes BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG, PING every time using 40 year old ammo!

Yep, and they will do it day in and day out in the mud, snow, rain, etc... There was another thread on here about what three guns- I "think" the overwhelming majority of is "older" guys picked the M-1. They are no where near as finickly as the black guns, and I normally carry an M-1 to shoots as my backup gun.

A gotcha on me was the first time I went shooting with a black rifle, I never heard the PING, so I kept pulling the trigger- couldn't figure out what had gone wrong...

 

[jrhead75]

Funny thing is, as soon as I saw the title of this thread, I knew it was about Garands.

They're solid, accurate, powerful, dependable, historic, available, reasonably priced, AND fun to collect, work on, and shoot.

Plus you get the the *PING* for free.

What's not to like?

 

[Vern Humphrey]

I was in one of the last Basic and Advanced Infantry units to train with the M1 rifle at Fort Polk, LA in 1962. Because I had an application in for OCS, I was held over and remained in the company after graduating from AIT. I cleared a lot of M1s to prepare them for turn-in, and rode the truck to Ordnance with a company's worth of M1s, and came back with the same number of M14s.

In '66, I was an adviser with the 4/48th ARVN Infantry. We (the advisers) were issued M2 carbines. Mine got wrapped around a tree, and I bummed an M1 from the ARVN and carried that for the rest of my tour.

As a company commander next time around, I badgered my battalion commander to get me two sniper rifles. I had one man who had been through sniper school, and I kept the other -- both accurized M14s.

 

[444]

I own three of them.
I compete in a match every month with one.
They are probably my favorite rifles.

No, they are not anywhere near as good as the internet gun boards make them out to me. Especially in the accuracy department. They exhibit mediocre accuracy. It is more than good enough for it's intended purpose. But no where near as accurate as they are made out to be on-line.