I saw this on farcebook and read the article and initially was going to hiss and boo the author, but as I read it, I realized that he was accurate. I own several other battle rifles used by the combatants of WWII,
I also have a couple of nagants
Carbine Mosin with the "Dog Collars" and Garand, I also have a mosin made in 1939, it is considered "pre war" because the fit and finish is really good. I have fired the bolt action rifles and yes the garand gave our guys the edge in a fight. You can use it like a rifle and if necessary, fix bayonets and go steel to steel with the other guys. more difficult with the modern rifles of today.
I clipped this from Scott Duff on farcebook as part of his CMP postings
The M1 Garand Wasn’t That Great… (Yeah, I Said It)
Let’s just get this out of the way:
The M1 Garand wasn’t that great.
Go ahead, pause, clutch your pearls, fire off an angry comment. I’ll wait.
Because if you’ve spent any time around collectors, shooters, or historians, you know that saying anything less than glowing about the Garand borders on heresy. It’s the sacred cow of American military rifles. The untouchable. The legend.
And that’s exactly the problem.
We’ve spent so much time polishing the mythology that we’ve forgotten something important: the M1 Garand wasn’t perfect. Not even close.
It was heavy.
It was long.
It had that infamous en-bloc clip that pinged like a dinner
bell.
It wasn’t exactly what you’d call “modular.”
And let’s be honest it wasn’t the easiest rifle to maintain in the mud, snow, and chaos of war.
By modern standards? It’s downright clunky.
So no, the M1 Garand wasn’t that great.
Now that I’ve got your attention, let’s talk about why that statement is both completely true and completely ridiculous.
Because here’s the reality:
The M1 Garand didn’t need to be perfect. It needed to be better than everything else on the battlefield at the time.
And it was.
While much of the world was still issuing bolt-action rifles, American soldiers were carrying a semi-automatic rifle as standard issue. That alone changed the equation. Faster follow-up shots. Greater firepower per soldier. A tangible advantage in real combat not just on paper.
The Garand wasn’t just a rifle. It was a force multiplier.
General George S. Patton didn’t call it “the greatest battle implement ever devised” because it looked pretty in a display case. He said it because it worked again and again, under conditions that would expose any weakness.
Sure, it had quirks. Every great tool does.
But those quirks came wrapped in rugged reliability, practical accuracy, and a design that could be mass-produced and trusted by millions of soldiers who depended on it.
And that’s the part we sometimes overlook.
The M1 Garand wasn’t great because it was flawless.
It was great because it was effective.
It was great because it gave ordinary Americans: farm kids, factory workers, clerks - a rifle that could stand toe-to-toe with anything they faced.
It was great because it helped win a war.
So yeah… the M1 Garand wasn’t that great.
It was something better. It was one of the greatest rifles of all time.
And if that stirs the pot a little? Good
Because maybe it reminds us to appreciate these rifles not as untouchable icons but as hard-used tools that earned their place in history the only way that matters:
By proving it when it counted.
The Garand weighed about the same as the Kar 98, the Mosin Nagant, the SMLE. The Arisoka and Carcano were about a pound lighter.
ReplyDeleteLengths are about the same (except for the Garbage Rod, longer, and the Carcano, shorter.)
Other than that, the ping isn't that loud and that nice walnut stock was great for smashing heads.
Compared to today's battle rifles, all of them sucked. But you aren't unarmed having any one of the major rifles of WWII.
I'm sure there were countless ground pounders who would say that it wasn't perfect but it was more than good enough.
ReplyDeleteMy "reactions" to the headline were much like yours and after reading the article, I agree with what the author wrote about the rifle at that time in history. It was the top of the game for general issue infantry rifles at that time. Out of the war were other designs with varying pros/cons (i.e. Takorev Soviet semi-auto, G41/43, etc.) The German Sturmgehwehr (Stg.43/44) was probably the only more "innovative" rifle of the war but was "too little, too late" for the Jerrys, but it set the precedent for things to come in the field of infantry assault rifles.
ReplyDeleteThe M-1 Carbine was a very innovative rifle. A less-powerful lightweight rifle that created the whole concept of 'personal defense weapon' that filled all the aspects of a full-fledged battle rifle at short to medium ranges.
Delete