Garand Family

[Dave DeLaurant]

I found a Springfield Armory M1A 'Tanker' at my LGS last week, second-hand but unfired and about $300 under the local retail price.



The story was that the rifle's owner had a sudden change of heart and needed funds badly for a 45-70 Sharps purchase. I went home and thought about it for 48 hours' before deciding to buy -- $1600 is a respectable chunk of change, after all.

I have an M1 in 7.62 NATO (rebarreled at the CMP Custom Shop), and had been considering one of Shuff's Mini-Gs as a more compact stable mate for some years now. I didn't really have a preference between the Mini-G and M1A Tanker. Both are milsurp fantasy rifles with roughly the same dimensions. Even here in the People's Republic, the M1A holds two more rounds, although I can slap in an 8-round en-bloc clip much faster than swapping magazines. The Mini-G is slicker without the protruding magazine box, but then the compact muzzle brake and tritium front sight on the Tanker are also nice features. About my only aesthetic objection to the M1A Tanker is the inclusion of the stupid 'shoulder thing that goes up' -- IMO it's only purpose in this configuration is to irritate politicians.

I brought my 'new' rifle home yesterday in it's factory padded case. It didn't come with a spare magazine, but Gunmag Warehouse has KCI 10-rounders on sale for $9.99 that appear identical to the Springfield factory mag. At that price I bought five -- right now, original GI-surplus Garand clips aren't much cheaper on the local market.

https://gunmagwarehouse.com/kci-m14-m1a-308-win-7-62x51-nato-10-round-steel-magazine.html

I hope to get both rifles to the range in the next month or two and compare how they shoot.

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

Looks great!

If you don't mind some advice, wear ear plugs AND muffs when firing the shorty......

 

[Corpral_Agarn]

Looks great!

If you don't mind some advice, wear ear plugs AND muffs when firing the shorty......

Especially if you're indoors...

ETA:

Good post, OP. I absolutely adore my CMP Garand in 308.

I have been going back and forth on the M1A for years now. Let us know how yours shoots!

A buddy let me shoot is socom 16 and I have to admit to being pleased with the experience.

But alas, like you said, in CA... Enbloc clips are faster and don't weigh as much as mags...

 

[Dave DeLaurant]

Looks great!

If you don't mind some advice, wear ear plugs AND muffs when firing the shorty......

It takes a California politician to imagine a flash hider is scarier than ...

 

[adcoch1]

I've been drooling over the shuffs mini g myself, but that tanker of yours sure does the job! I don't yet own any variation of the garand, but my uncle has one I've shot several times and reloaded for. They are pretty amazing rifles. Nice family @Dave DeLaurant !

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

It takes a California politician to imagine a flash hider is scarier than ...

View attachment 1137814

Its not the voltage (flash) that gets you, its the amps (noise). Lol.
Just sayin' the SOCOM16 is one noisy crickett bro.

 

[Frulk]

You had me at Tanker.

 

[AlexanderA]

About my only aesthetic objection to the M1A Tanker is the inclusion of the stupid 'shoulder thing that goes up' -- it's only purpose in this configuration is to irritate politicians.

At least you and I agree that the "shoulder thing that goes up" refers to the folding outer buttplate (shoulder rest). The consensus on this and other forums is that the "shoulder thing that goes up" is a barrel shroud. Doesn't make any sense to me, but whatever. Former Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, who originated the "shoulder thing that goes up" phrase, knew absolutely nothing about guns, except that she hated them.

The folding outer buttplate is an iconic feature of the M14, and as such it's worth having from a collector standpoint. It was clearly inspired by the similar folding shoulder rest on the M1918A2 BAR, but that one only extended about halfway down. The M14 rest fully covers the buttplate.

 

[Pat Riot]

I love the looks of those “Tankers”. Back in the early 90’s I came very close to buying one. I knew full well it was just a modified Garand. I think the price was around $500. Anyway, the guy started telling me of the illustrious contributions that “Tanker” Garands made in WW2 in the hands of tank crews and a bunch of BS stories and I told him he was full of condensed cow manure and left. Had he not given me those BS stories I would probably have it now.

Anyway, Congratulations on your new Tanker. Let us know how it shoots.

 

[tark]

Nice rifle, Dave. Good price. Nice piece of lumber as well!!

You nailed it !!!!!

 

[dredd]

Congratulations on the new rifle!

You will enjoy it.

 

[Dave DeLaurant]

The folding outer buttplate is an iconic feature of the M14, and as such it's worth having from a collector standpoint. It was clearly inspired by the similar folding shoulder rest on the M1918A2 BAR, but that one only extended about halfway down. The M14 rest fully covers the buttplate.

It makes good sense paired with an E2 stock and bipod -- it just seems seriously out of place to me on the shorty Tanker package.

 

[AlexanderA]

It makes good sense paired with an E2 stock and bipod -- it just seems seriously out of place on the shorty Tanker package.

Well, yes, when you bear in mind that the "tanker" wasn't military issue anyway.

The E2 version, in your illustration, was a belated attempt to make the M14 effective in automatic fire. It didn't work very well for that purpose, but certain features, such as the shoulder rest, the heavy M2 bipod, and the muzzle compensator, are equally useful on a (semiautomatic) Designated Marksman rifle. Here's how the latter two features are set up on my own M1A:

 

[tark]

It makes good sense paired with an E2 stock and bipod -- it just seems seriously out of place on the shorty Tanker package.

View attachment 1137905

Dave, that is the exact M-14E2 rifle That I carried around in Vietnam...At an in country R&R center while I was a REMF pretending to be a soldier. I got to fire it a lot, during H&I fire ( harassment and interdiction ) at Vung Tau Mountain. Couldn't hit %#$& on automatic fire. Sure was fun, however. A 20 round mag dump in less than two seconds!!!

 

[lysanderxiii]

Well, yes, when you bear in mind that the "tanker" wasn't military issue anyway.

The E2 version, in your illustration, was a belated attempt to make the M14 effective in automatic fire. It didn't work very well for that purpose, but certain features, such as the shoulder rest, the heavy M2 bipod, and the muzzle compensator, are equally useful on a (semiautomatic) Designated Marksman rifle. Here's how the latter two features are set up on my own M1A:

View attachment 1137945

Hmmmm, it's a bit more complicated than that.

The original idea was to have the T44E4 standardized as the M14 rifle, and the T44E5, equipped with a bipod, and heavy barrel and heavy stock, standardized as the M15 squad automatic rifle. Then just before they entered production in 1959, testing by the US Army Infantry Board (USAIB) showed that the M14, fitted with a flip-up butt plate and bipod was just just about as effective as the M15, so the M15 was dropped from production and the M14 altered slightly with the flip-up butt plate. It was intended that any M14 could be fitted with a bipod could become the squad automatic (an idea that would resurface again with the M16A1). When the M14 was tested against the new AR-15 a year or so later, it was found the automatic rifle less effective than the AR-15, so in order to improve the M14 as an automatic rifle, the USAIB made a new stock with a rubber butt pad, a pistol grip, a fore grip, devised a new stabilizer/muzzle brake, and improved the bipod and sling arrangements. This USAIB modified M14 was formalized as the M14E2 and later standardized as the M14A1.

The M14A1 wasn't a "belated" attempt to make a squad automatic rifle, it was a "we messed up when we got rid of the M15, and now we have to fix it with what we have" attempt to make a squad automatic rifle.

 

[Dave DeLaurant]

I came across Edward Ezell's book The Great Rifle Controversy back in the mid-1980s, when I was making pocket money at the CSU Fresno Library between classes. From chapter two onward, this book chronicled post-WWII US military rifle development up through the SPIW program, ending with the M16A2. Perhaps a third of the book involves the M14 design and production story. I think I've read it three times now -- really fascinating history.

Used copies of this book are expensive, but your local public library should be able borrow one for you via interlibrary loan.




====
A big detour off-topic:

I grew up reading my dad's old copies of Mechanix Illustrated magazine, which often included exciting and fanciful articles about future military weaponry. I was particularly struck by this Frank Tinsley illustration from the June 1952 issue of Mechanix Illustrated:



I had a poster-sized print of this two-page illustration made up recently for my bedroom wall. The rifle depicted isn't the proto-M14 (T44) but Earle Harvey's developmental T47 (mentioned in the article text) with Tinsley's own idea for a lightweight stock. The T25 and T47 were designs that head of the Ordnance Department's Small Arms Research division, Rene Studler, backed for a time, before the T44 was more fully developed. Ezell's book later provided me with the back-story on Earle Harvey's work for Ordnance.

As a kid though, I was drawn more to the helmets in this illustration. I later learned this was Bashford Dean's Model 8 helmet, designed back during WWI. The helmet looked pretty cool to me, until I considered how it would restrict vision and interfere with other equipment, but even at that age I found the boots and battle shorts a bit hard to swallow.

 

[CapnMac]

but even at that age I found the boots and battle shorts a bit hard to swallow.

Yeah, especially as they seemed to be greaves more than boots (and a strap-on legging would make more sense, anyway).
Minor things, like a chest full of ammo pockets, but exposed grenades? (and the pockets aren't big enough for the magazines, so that's stripper clip ammo, despite the foreground dude not having a magazine in his Carbine-sized "M14").

But, the poster did embrace the stated notion of replacing M-3 Grease Gun, M-2/3 Carbine, M-1 Rifle, and the BAR in one do-it-all weapon.

 

[DustyGmt]

Did anybody ever make a decent drum for the M14 or even try?

 

[lysanderxiii]

but exposed grenades?

Even the first ALICE stuff had the grenades exposed.

 

[lysanderxiii]

. . . despite the foreground dude not having a magazine in his Carbine-sized "M14").

It's a ten round magazine. One Idea batted around in the early days was the rifle would get a ten round magazine, and the AR would get the twenty round magazine.

 

[lysanderxiii]

. . . but even at that age I found the boots and battle shorts a bit hard to swallow.

What's wrong with combat shorts?

 

[entropy]

It takes a California politician to imagine a flash hider is scarier than ...

View attachment 1137814

I noticed you went to the reliable old fireball maker, the Mosin Nagant carbine, for that stupendous ball of flame.

 

[Speedo66]

As a kid though, I was drawn more to the helmets in this illustration. I later learned this was Bashford Dean's Model 8 helmet, designed back during WWI. The helmet looked pretty cool to me, until I considered how it would restrict vision and interfere with other equipment, but even at that age I found the boots and battle shorts a bit hard to swallow.

Can you say gladiator....

 

[Dave DeLaurant]

What's wrong with combat shorts?

A little too British for me, I guess. Remember Bunker Hill!

 

[Dave DeLaurant]

Minor things, like a chest full of ammo pockets, but exposed grenades?

Considering it was published in 1952, the artist may have had the popular image of General Ridgway (affectionally referred to by some as "Old Tin Tits") in mind.

...the pockets aren't big enough for the magazines, so that's stripper clip ammo, despite the foreground dude not having a magazine in his Carbine-sized "M14"

Well spotted Cap! I've looked at the illustration for years but never caught that detail -- you can even see the exposed cartridges in his hand!

BTW, here's Tinsley's own enthusiastic description of the T47:



I had thought (but was mistaken -- development evidently didn't get that far) the T47 had a stripper guide on the receiver bridge, but the lack of an inserted magazine would make his next action look considerably less heroic. The thing that looks like a short magazine is supposed to be the mag well -- Tinsley exaggerated it's dimensions below the stock. Here's an actual photo of Harvey's two prototype rifles:

But, the poster did embrace the stated notion of replacing M-3 Grease Gun, M-2/3 Carbine, M-1 Rifle, and the BAR in one do-it-all weapon.

I like the guy on the left unloading full auto from the shoulder with no sign of muzzle climb. And Harvey's T47 was even lighter than the T44/M14. Imagine feeding this selective fire wonder rifle using 5-round stripper clips!