History in your hands: Springfield Armory's new M1 Garand: the most significant rifle of the 20th Century is once again available to the American shooter

Guns Magazine, Oct, 2002 by Charles Karwan

The rifle is heavy in my hands. Its finish is spotless--no wear, no corrosion. Beautiful, dense and dark, the stock is perfect, sans dents or damage. I've just returned from the range, and I know the rifle shoots as good as it looks. A lot of M1s have passed through my hands, but none that looked as good as this.

It should look good. This Garand is not a beat up, reworked, abused veteran, but rather brand new production from Springfield Armory. I'm anxious to describe it to you in detail, but you can't speak of John C. Garand's masterpiece without understanding a little history.

The Service Rifle That Nearly Was

The same stodgy folks who armed most Civil War Union soldiers with muzzle loading percussion muskets when excellent metallic cartridge repeaters were available finally got one right with the Ml Garand.

When the Army Ordnance folks conceived of the idea of developing a semiautomatic rifle just after World War I, they very intelligently hired two top-notch gun designers for the job--John Garand and J. D. Pedersen.

Eventually Garand's design won out but it was originally scheduled for adoption in a novel cartridge designed by Pedersen, the .276 Pedersen.

I have handled a .276 Garand prototype in the West Point Museum collection and it is an intriguing rifle. It is much slimmer and trimmer than the .30-'06 Ml, about a pound and a half lighter, and generally handier.

Recoil must have been quite mild, and its magazine capacity was 10 rounds instead of eight. While the .276 Pedersen was less powerful than the .30-'06, it was more than adequately powerful for service rifle use--typically launching a 125 grain 7mm bullet at 2,550 fps.

In 1932 the recommendation for adoption and production of the .276 Garand rifle was approved all the way up to Army Chief of Staff, General Douglas MacArthur. Unfortunately, MacArthur unilaterally disapproved it. He wanted the rifle but in .30-'06.

This was done and the .30-'06 Garand eventually passed its tests just as well as did the .276 version. In January of 1936 it was officially adopted as the "U.S. Rifle, Cal. .30 M1."

MacArthur's decision caused a four year delay in getting the Garand adopted and in production. Our military forces might have been far better prepared when the war eventually broke out if that delay had not taken place.

Desperate Need

When World War II broke out, only about 40,000 .30 M1 Garand rifles had been produced, and few were in the hands of troops. The new rifle was particularly scarce oversease, but it soon took over as the primary combat rifle of the entire U.S. Army.

The M1 went through a series of changes and refinements as the war progressed and evolved into a truly exceptional combat rifle. There is no doubt the M1 Garand was one of the crowning achievements in the rather checkered history of the U.S. Army Ordnance system.

While I believe the .276 Garand would have been even better, the .30 M1 Garand was unquestionably the best combat rifle of its day. It was also the first semiautomatic rifle to be adopted as the standard, general issue rifle of any nation in the world. Combat use proved the M1 Garand was actually more rugged and reliable than the bolt action M1903 Springfield it replaced.

Eye-Witness To History

To quite from the book Shots Fired In Anger, authored by LTC John George, who served as an Army officer at Guadalcanal and in Burma as one of Merrill's Marauders:

"In the matter of jams and malfunctioning it seemed very doubtful if the Springfield proved as reliable as the Garand, round for round. The old faults of the M-1903--a frequently broken firing pin assembly and a delicate front and rear sight--seemed to account for as many stoppages in combat as feeding difficulties did with the M1... And most of the stoppages encountered in M1 firing are not 'stop-pages' at all. The greater part of them merely nullify the semi-auto feature, leaving the soldier yet armed with a weapon that can be hand operated almost as fast as a Springfield in perfect condition."

Superior Fighting Rifle

In addition, the M1 Garand has, in my considerable experience with both rifles, a much higher level of practical accuracy than the M1903 Springfield. Please note that I said "practical accuracy." In combat the only thing that counts is hits. The M1 is far easier to get hits with in the field than the old M1903. There is simply no comparison.

The primary reason is that the M1 has perhaps the best combat sights ever put on a military rifle, while the M1903 just might have the worst. Also the Garand sight is extremely fast to use while the M1903 sight is extremely poor in this regard, particularly in dim light.

In combat this difference in speed is significant because of the fleeting nature of the typical combat target. Which is why I say the M1 Garand has better practical accuracy than the rifle it replaced. Actually it's not even close -- the M1 is that much better.

As good as it was, the M1 had its drawbacks. The two most prominent were its substantial weight (officially 9.5 pounds but actually well over 10 pounds fully loaded with sling and cleaning kit in the butt trap) and its eight round en-bloc clip feed system.