Armory Sponsor
Posted: 11/23/2007 8:21:16 AM EDT
|
Gentlemen, ...that other countries did not seem to take work on a semi-automatic rifle as important as we did? The Military from around the world were working on all types of new things but not a massive change in their military rifle, the Infantry man's best friend. Thanks again for taking the time and effort to read this data. I hope you learn some data. Clancy ps could use some hits NRA Life Endowment NRA Training Counselor NRA Instructor FSS 90% / BW X Speed Div by 1000 = PF www.garandm1rifle.com |
| The U.S. Army was so small when the M-1 was adopted it wasn't the expense that other larger armies would have faced if they had adpted a semi auto rifle. In addition, by the mid 1930's the U.S. had the capacity to mass produce interchangeable machine parts, (i.e. automobiles), while the rest of the industrialized nations were still largely hand fitting the same kind of machine products. Most industialized nations didn't have the manufacturing capicity to produce the variety of comsumer goods that the U.S. was turning out, and as such I think that their engineering minds werer't as open to the idea of developing such an advanced weapon as a self loading rifle. The German docterine of infantry firepower was based around the belt fed MG, which as we all know was something that they had no trouble producing in astounding numbers. The Russians had their industrial base almost completly wrecked by Stalin's five year plans, and didn't really start to produce real quantities of weapons until early 1943. The British Army was small compared to most major european forces, and they had what they felt was the best bolt gun on the planet. |
Hey, you stole what I was going to say. Word for word!!!!  And FWIW, I've heard some surplus bolt collectors say the enfield is one fine weapon. I wouldn't think it would be terribly much slower than a garand. |
Great minds think alike.  I have two Enfields, a No.1MK3 and a No.4Mk2. I can't do it, but a trained British infantry soldier could fire an Enfield at a rate of 30 aimed shots per minute. The Enfield also held 10 rounds vs. 5 for just about every other bolt action at the time, and it had a detachable magazine.
|
I've heard they never used the detachable mag. But 10 rounds on stripper clips is pretty fast reloading. And larger capacity then even the Garand. I should get one. |
The detachable magazine was to make replacing a damaged one easier. The feed lips are actually in the magazine well, and the tabs on the magazine body work in conjuction with them. I've read that some Tommies kept a loaded magazine on their person in case they ran completly dry. Also, the British competitive shooters used to polish both the stripper clips and the clip slot to make charging quicker. I got a British surplus target sight for my No.4 because the rifle is that accurate. They are really fun guns.
|
|
Gentlemen, I have reports and standard files that talk about the use for a semi-auto rifle and in one word the main reason was the "AIRPLANE". It was new in WW1 and its attack on Infantry was a very BIG reason for that semi. This gave ground units some type of defense against it. If you remember, not that long ago one of our NEW APACHE's was shot down by a group with AK-47's?? Reports in the late 1930's talk about how ground units went after target sleeves towed by aircraft with many hits thus giving the guys on the ground a chance to get through an air attack with some confidence. As to the time to build and test and get into production well, that's what my BOOKS ARE ALL ABOUT. Testing started before the ink was dry ending WW1. My books don't tell you what goes where it tells you how it got to be there in the first place. Thanks again guys this is just what I try to do get you to think and get into it. Clancy www.garandm1rifle.com |
Armory Sponsor