Gentlemen,
...are the two weakest parts on the M1 Garand Rifle, and why do you think they are the weakest ? Also if either of them were to fail they would have to put the M1 Garand Rifle out of action. The photo below has nothing to do with the above question, it is just for show.
By design features, I'd say 1.) the long, one-piece, bent, assymetrical piston/op-rod/bolt carrier and 2.) the complicated receiver design.
You could say I'm cheating but not really, because the first part is all three in one, but I have an issue regarding each purpose it serves.
1.) A long piece that isn't straight and is under compression stress is a prime candidate for bending. This is my complaint with its service as an op rod. A piston that doesn't have a distinct head is likely to need a lot more room and have a lot more gas escaping. The rear part that slides along the receiver isn't as strong as I think it should be, and I don't really like the fact that such a major component has to be bent during assembly. Finally, and this is sort of a double up with the second part, is the fact that it turns the bolt via an extension of one of the lugs, meaning that the receiver has to be open right in front of the bolt lug, an area where I think it's very important to keep it solid. And I don't really like the fact that it's entirely assymetrical.
2.) The receiver - I have to say I can't think of any more complicated. To think of all the machining operations done to it, I don't get how they didn't think of any way to make it any simpler. We're all aware of the danger of the receiver breaking as the bolt slams it home repeatedly. Which again seems like the darnedest thing to machine. Having complicated machine operations from each direction - why?? And perhaps the biggest deal with this is that if you have one piece do everything, if it fails in one regard you have to chuck the whole thing and start over, vs replacing or in the case of design improving the part.
So that, in an honestly critical nutshell, is what I think are the weaknesses of the M1 Garand. I could go on and on about the strengths of the M1 Garand. I could also take the other side and say why it's perfectly understandable why they designed it that way. Suffice it to say the M1 Garand is not a perfect rifle, but is certainly a great rifle, at least as much for what it did in the hands of good men as for it's mechanical merits.
__________________
Trust is earned, not... GIVEN away. - Worf
What are the weakest parts and those which will render the rifle unusable?
1. The firing pin. If it breaks, you don't fire. Period.
2. The extractor and/or extractor spring. No extraction = jammed rifle.
...And just for chuckles:
3. The clip latch spring. Yes, you can still single load, but you're now limited to the rate of fire of a Trapdoor Springfield.
Ben
Gentlemen,
The extractor is in my opinion the weak part. If you look at the bolt all the parts are held in place by the extractor. If it fails the bolt will come apart. I am talking not only the extractor but also the extractor spring and plunger, the ejector and the ejector spring and plunger. Add to that the firing pin and your rifle is out of action. Unless you carry a spare bolt which is complete and has been headspaced to that rifle. The reason for picking the extractor is it has a 90 % cut. Brass is better than steel cases because the brass will give a little. I used a old trick for the springs and plungers in the bolt. I use my wifes nail polish which is red. It can help you if you are looking for them in the green grass or on the floor at home.
Thanks again
Clancy
ps sorry about not posting this but wanted your input first. Remember, I am only a dummy with the M1 Garand.
How did they hold up in in the battlefield? All I ever hear is how great they were. Did these weaknesses cause guys to get hurt?(much) or reduce efficiency? The armorerers were pretty good back then keeping the troops supplied, but they would the be the ones who could comment on how durable the Garand REALLY was.
I can say the weakest feature was the loading system. i mean, we had the example of the carbine and BAR for being mag fed! thats what angers me! even the enfield was even mag fed. hint hint!
FutureMarine - You have to remember that the "Bean Counters" do have a BIG impact on designs of ALL products built for the US military and Naval Services. At the time the M1 Garand was in its initial stages of design, it was designed with a 10 round removeable magazine,, and in .276 Cal.
The "Bean Counters" would not accept a 10 round removeable magazine, and fought the 8 round en-bloc clip that was in the final M1 Garand configuration.
An M1 Garand en-bloc clip can be inserted and the M1 Garand back online faster than a removeable magazine (in say, an M14/M1A), with properly trained personnel, loading both. I like removeable magazines, too, but the "Bean Counters" didn't!
Thank General Douglas MacArthur for nixing the .276 Cal, and dictating the .30-06 Caliber, his justification was similar to the British who wanted to switch from the .303 to .276 for the P-13; by stating "The stock of existing ammo (.303) is sufficient for the coming war (WWI), and the logistics system will not be able to supply both .303 and .276." The P-13 (.276 Cal) was redesignated as the P-14 in .303 Cal (and was further redesigned to be the U.S. Enfield M1917 {some incorrectly call them P-17's} in .30-06)
I really do not recall seeing any USGI M1 Garand have the extractor failure, in combat; I will add, that I saw, ONLY, what was close around me.
I have seen a few M1 Garands have extractor failures at the shooting ranges in the past several years. Most had "After Market", 'Non-USGI" parts. It seems that the parts suppliers to the Government M1 Garand manufacturers had it right, and their parts work very well, with a minimum of failures.
For that matter I have seen a lot of Springfield Armory (Commercial) M1A extractor failures, which uses essentially the same bolt design. These were due to "After Market", 'Non-USGI" parts. For the past several years the M1A has been using "After Market", 'Non-USGI" parts.
i will quantify that my extractor that failed was a U.S.G.I part. but it must also be stated that one heck of a lot of rounds were extracted in its lifetime before it failed. hard to fault a small part that was 40-60yrs old when it finally gave up.
FutureMarine,
For the 20 rd mag guys. Neat trick, load first into the mag 3 or 4 Tracers. So when you see them going down range your almost empty. Garand guys you will know when your are empty. Sometime that trick was used in the M1 Garand. Placing the Tracers as the first in the last out.
Thanks again
Clancy
Also, what if you have to turn a corner and there are a bunch of enemies coming right at you, and you have 3 rounds. with a 10 rd box mag you could change out quick and be ready to go.
On the M1 Garand, the clip release will eject the clip and any remaining rounds to be ready to insert another en-bloc clip. Though it would be better to fire the remaining rounds, and then insert the new en-bloc clip.
As I said before, inserting a new en-bloc clip can be done faster than inserting a new magazine, for instance, the empty en-bloc clip exits the rifle when it ejects the last empty case, and the only needed action on the part of the rifleman, is to insert a new en-bloc clip. With a magazine, you need to remove the empty magazine, before you can insert the new full one (you can only hope that the magazines are clean enough and do not hang up when removing or inserting them).
I also said I prefer the magazine method, though the en-bloc clip works very well, and having used it, as well as the magazines, I really do like the en-bloc clip method of reloading. All of the M1 Garand rounds we received were loaded in en-bloc clips which were in bandoliers, and were easy to get to and insert into the M1 Garand.
If I remember correctly most of the rounds to be used in the magazines were in 20 round boxes, and had to be loaded in the magazines one at a time. The lost time to load the magazines was hopefully, when you were not engaging the enemy. They never did supply preloaded magazines, you had to load your own, and there were never enough.
