Gentlemen,
We all know that the USMC adopted the M1 Garand on March 5, 1941. However, in 1940 I have a group of files that tell us a different story. The USMC wanted the "Fleet Marine Force" which I will let you Marines answer what it was to these guys. Anyway the USMC is asking that this Force be issued to them M1 Garand Rifles before the USMC had adopted the M1 Garand Rifle.
I would really like you guys to tell me what you think of this move. Why did they do it this way ?
I hope some of this data helps. Even more data on this subject next post.
So guys what do you think about this file??
Sorry about the post again I am dealing with old microfilm. garandm1rifle@rcn.com
I hope you enjoy. http://www.garandm1rifle.com
If you need a larger copy just email me.
Thanks again for taking the time and effort to read this data.
Clancy
PS I do need HITS on my TWO sites. I have to ask or the sites wil go down. I can only ask for this on a few sites I post to
I know that the USMC (my CORPS) was attempting to arm the Marines with a semi-auto rifle and part of that effort was to get a partial allocation of M1 Garands out of the production efforts being made by Springfield and Winchester, this is evidenced by your microfilm. I also know that the only semi-auto rifle issued to Marines prior to late 1942 and early 1943 was the M1941 Johnsons that had been intended for the Dutch, along with some M1941 Johnson Light Machine Guns. Most Marines in the early part of WWII were armed with the "Beloved 1903 Springfield". It was not until late 1942 into early 1943 that Marines began to be issued M1 Garands, and had to give up their 1903 Springfields, and the M1941 Johnsons.
Only a few M1941 Johnsons were kept by the Marines, and they had to keep them well out of the view of REMF's (Rear Echelon M*****F******), but the REMF's finally got all of them.
I LOVE my M1 Garands, and I LOVE my M1941 Johnson! If I had to make a choice for a Main Battle Rifle, it would be difficult, but I think I would have to go with the M1941 Johnson. It seems that those who never had the privilege to own an M1941 Johnson, and shoot it a lot, have only bad things to say about them, those who have owned them and those who used them in combat, only have good things to say about them!
Gyrene,
The books I have show a few important files on the Johnson. His main problem was getting him for a test of his rifle. He would put it in for testing and just before the test he would pull it out. He was driving Ordnance nuts.
Thanks again for your comeback
Clancy
I THINK THIS INFORMATION, THAT I HAVE PROVIDED SHOULD PROBABLY BE IN A DIFFERENT FORUM. But, here goes:
I have read some of the same comments, but in most cases as were described in the book on the M1941 Johnson SAR, it commented about his rifle performing as well or better than the M1 Garand, in ALL of the US Army testing.
Don't get me wrong, I LOVE my M1 Garands, of which I have several, but from what I had read in the Army reports, their remarks were pointedly negative towards the M1941 Johnson, even when it outperformed the M1 Garand. In service with the US Marine Corps, it performed every duty it was called upon, to perform, and performed with excellence.
Then there was the Johnson Light Machine Gun which fired the same M1 & M2 Ball ammo as the M1941 Johnson, the 1903 and 1903A3, as well as the M1919 Browning .30 Cal Machine Gun, and the BAR. The M1 Garand had to have the M2 Ball round developed for it, and were subject to eventual failure of the Operating Rod, and/or the receiver if the shooter used M1 Ball only. The Johnson LMG fired more rapidly than the BAR, weighed only 12.5 pounds, and as shown by Melvin Maynard Johnson, it could be held out and fired with one hand. That can't be done with a 26 pound BAR. The First Special Service Forces, US Army used them in Southern Italy, and didn't want to give them up.
The development costs for the M1 Garand in the Springfield Armorys' effort to replace the "Gas Trap" system, far exceeded the total development costs of the M1941 Johnson. Even the costs for eliminating the "Seventh Round Stoppage" exceeded the total development costs of the M1941 Johnson.
I have heard that the Army didn't want to retool to build the M1941 Johnson, but the reality was that any fairly well equipped machine shop could build the Johnson, so Springfield and Winchester could have continued building M1 Garands, and the M1941 Johnson could have been built in every city in the US.
The versatility of the M1941 Johnson to adapt to various calibers, in seconds is unmatched to this day. It takes about 15 seconds more or less (depending upon who makes the barrel change) to change the barrel. The M1941 Johnson was known to be made in two calibers, the .30-06, and 7x57mm Mauser, though I have seen 7.7 Jap barrels, which were supposedly issued to the Marines who used the M1941 Johnson. You can change the caliber, by simply changing the barrel.
The magazine can be loaded on the fly with single rounds or with the 5 round stripper clips, and topping the magazine up can be done with the bolt open or closed.
Gyrene,
Sorry to say but asw you know my data deals with the M1 Garand. However, files from Ordnance do talk about other subjects that they are working on. There are alot more things going on in these Ordnance files. The problem is getting the data out. The books help deal with this problem. One thing I must say is that at least one other person besides me knows the story about M2 and M1 Ball.
Thanks again for your input Sir.
Clancy
I still LOVE MY M1 GARANDS and nobody can change my mind! I do really appreciate your knowledge of the M1 Garands, as it does fill in some gaps and even a lot of things I simply didn't know. I will stick to your subject rifle, though at times I have to let go of information that is somewhat related, and most people are not aware of.
Yes, the M1/M2 Ball issue was not widely known at the time they had to develop the M2 Ball, and still today there may not be very many who are even slightly aware of it! I work at a Rifle Range, and I see people every week that have no idea about corrosive and non-corrosive ammo, what it does or can do. One day I saw a guy shooting some "Proof Rounds" in his M1 Garand, and just couldn't believe it. It turns out that the guy found them at a gun show, and the price was about half of good Lake City 69 ammo, so he bought 4 .50 BMG Ammo cans full of it, all of the remaining stock at the gun show. When we stopped him, he only had about 100 rounds left! OH, WELL!!!
Gyrene,
Don't stop your input. If in my files I find data that you might enjoy I will post it. You and I have the same aim to get the correct data out to the new people.
Thanks again for your comeback
Clancy
ps what do you think about my Tanker data??
