56 Comments
User's avatar
Theodric's avatar

I have been fortunate to shoot most of the WWII battle rifles and I have a soft spot for one you didn’t mention here, the 03-A3. Smooth action, a pistol grip “C-Stock”, and more Garand-like peep sights make it pretty handy compared to the WWI era ‘03.

Expand full comment
Jesse Slater's avatar

That's definitely an oversight. Mostly because I have no direct experience with the springfield. But, the Marines especially did good work with them in the early part of the war.

Expand full comment
Theodric's avatar

It honestly makes sense to exclude it, as it’s not really part of the “evolution” of battle rifles. And in some sense it’s a distinct downgrade, with lower grade stocks and stamped parts. But I like it. And it was good enough to become the standard US sniper during WWII and Korea, so it’s got that going for it.

My uncle has a Smith-Corona one I hope to inherit (in many years).

Expand full comment
Jesse Slater's avatar

Another stubby branch on the family tree is the 1917 Eddystone. Although my memory fails me at the moment whether there were still any of those in service by the second war.

Expand full comment
Theodric's avatar

Yes! The American Enfield. Actually more numerous in WWI than the Springfield, and the gun used by Sergeant York. Kind of an ugly duckling, and I’ve personally never liked the cock-on-close action (but I’ve never had to rapid fire one under stress). Still a nice piece that shoots great.

I think by WWII they were mostly relegated to lend-lease and Canadian/UK Home Guard use.

They used to be available at the CMP so I have at least one Eddystone in the inheritance arsenal as well (My dad, uncle, and I had a memorable road trip that ended with a trunk full of Garands, 03s, Eddystones, and lots and lots of Greek ammo).

Expand full comment
Jesse Slater's avatar

Now that's a road trip I envy!

Expand full comment
Uncle Juan's avatar

Happily, I own a Garand… a Father’s Day gift from my sons. Dated 1945.

Great gun to shoot, but I am still nervous when I reload. Garand thumb…

Expand full comment
Parker McCoy's avatar

Very in-depth breakdown of the history of the M1 Garand. I learned a lot. A buddy of mine used to drive a Jeep Commanche. Those were cool, little trucks. Hehe. Good post, Jesse.

Expand full comment
gmf's avatar

Great story about a great rifle.

Expand full comment
Peter From NH's avatar

My father was drafted a week before Pearl Harbor (at least what he told me). He trained with a Springfield before receiving a modern arm. My great grandfather had an Austrian cap roll rifle in the Civil War until he received a Springfield. Funny how they both had crap until the industrial production caught up.

Expand full comment
Jesse Slater's avatar

That's great family history! I had a bunch of ancestors and relations in the ACW, (and RevWar, too,) but no details like that. ❤️

Expand full comment
Joel's avatar

Maybe but the m14 never got to show all its capabilities before they made the switch to the m16. The 14 was an incredible weapon. Wish I had one because they have semi and automatic fire and are very accurate and are a larger round to be able to put done the bad guys like the garand.

Expand full comment
Jesse Slater's avatar

I agree whole- heartedly. Tune back in for the M-14 part in s few weeks. 😉

Expand full comment
Dr.Don Hall's avatar

Next to the Sword,the Most Reliable.

Expand full comment
Tom Hamilton's avatar

Damn straight. That and the 1911.

Expand full comment
Jesse Slater's avatar

I love me a good 1911. I've even got a couple of posts about them, if you're interested. 😉

Expand full comment
Braden Delamater's avatar

This may be the first article I’ve read on a while that made me want to slow down and reread everything. Absolutely fantastic history, super detailed and an amazing piece, thank you for sharing this with everyone!! You’ve got my subscription!

Expand full comment
Jesse Slater's avatar

Thank you!

Expand full comment
Itsuki Matsumura's avatar

I have an M1 Grarand that was made in 1941. It still fires the good ole 30-06 beautifully. I am so glad I was able to find one some years ago. I also have a Mosen Nagant that was made in 1926 and an SKS (paratrooper version with 2 39 round magazines) that was made in 1972. Also both great shooting guns. Old military guns are awesome.

Expand full comment
Jesse Slater's avatar

That is excellent. ❤️

Expand full comment
Kemper Williams's avatar

I inherited a Remington 81 .300 Savage from my grandfather. Very cool gun. Will give it to my grandson soon.

Expand full comment
Jesse Slater's avatar

Ooooh. Your grandson is a lucky man. I love the long recoil shotgun I've got, a Remington Model 11, and have always wanted to try one of the rifles, 8 or 81.

Expand full comment
Kemper Williams's avatar

It’s never had a scope but have shot many deer with it.

Expand full comment
Jesse Slater's avatar

I wouldn't try to scope one, either. But then, I'm mostly an iron sight shooter. Something like alignment receiver sight though, a precision adjustable aperture, I think would be about perfect.

Expand full comment
GeorgeTirebiter53's avatar

Except for the “PING” when the clip is ejected.

Expand full comment
GeorgeTirebiter53's avatar

I like to shoot a .303 Enfield. But at my age, I need a bipod. I did find a good supplier of surplus ammo.

Expand full comment
Jesse Slater's avatar

I'm not sure how much of an issue that would be. If 8 .30-06s just went off, can you really hear a little *ping?*

And presumably the .30-06s brought their friends who probably didn't just say ping... 🤷‍♂️

Expand full comment
Derek James Kritzberg's avatar

The "wasting ammunition" part was in fact a very important and logical consideration for old empires whose soldiery were peasants with commitment issues. The purpose of an infantryman, especially by the 20th century, was to lay down suppressive fire until artillery did all the work (90% of casualties in most wars are from artillery). Lazy, fearful, unindoctrinated troops who don't believe in your cause have a maximum weight limit, and will fire off all their rounds as a way to escape the ire of their sergeants when they then proceed to keep their heads down.

Another contributing factor to the Garand's timing is USAs unique abilities with logistics. It's a wonder what committed people from a free society are capable of.

Expand full comment
G Bobbi's avatar

90% of the wounded casualties may have been from artillery, but 75-90% of ALL casualties before and after the fight were from disease.

Expand full comment
Derek James Kritzberg's avatar

Important detail

Expand full comment
Daryl Poe's avatar

The one time I fired a few rounds through a .30 cal Garand, the recoil was surprisingly less than a modern day .556 caliber.

Expand full comment
Jesse Slater's avatar

It's a big, heavy gun. That soaks up a lot.

Expand full comment
Daryl Poe's avatar

My first read of one of your essays. Very informative, thank you.

Expand full comment
Jesse Slater's avatar

Thank you for reading!

Expand full comment
Dutchmn007's avatar

Have one & an M-1 Carbine. Great rifles! Stock though of the M-1 Garand is a little bulky when compared with that of the Mauser K98; ergonomically the latter is superior IMHO. And as advanced & forward-thinking as John Garand was in designing/developing the weapon - & the U.S. Army to approve it - the U.S. was still way behind the curve when it came to machine guns, the water jacketed M1917 & the air cooled M1919 being the main squad machine guns throughout World War II & Korea. How this happened is inexplicable when the revolutionary design of the German MG34 & MG42 was well-known. MG 34 tech was nearly 20yrs old by the time Korea began. The Browning BAR was/is great, but can only support 20rnds in the mag.

Expand full comment
G Bobbi's avatar

You could burn out the barrels in those German MGs in a heartbeat if you weren’t careful. Spare barrels were a must.

Expand full comment