Gun and Game Forum banner

1 - 2 of 2 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,348 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Gentlemen,
Again, a question for the new guys. Here is a small file on the test between the Johnson and the M1 Garand Rifle. My question to you is do you think that the Johnson Rifle was given a fair test by US Ordnance and SA? Have fun with this one. BTW I know that the date is wrong it should read 1940.





Thanks again for taking the time and effort to read this data. I hope you learn some data on the M1 Garand.
Clancy

ps could use some hits
NRA Life Endowment
NRA Training Counselor
NRA Instructor
FSS 90% / BW X Speed Div by 1000 = PF
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,239 Posts
In one way yes - In one way no

The Johnson suffered from a larger number of smaller parts somewhat difficult to mass produce at the time of needed manufacturing. This would not be the case in our time. In that sense it was not necessarily the gun for WW2. On the other hand the lesser felt recoil of the Johnson made it a superior gun for the masses of soldiers who were not familiar with rifle shooting. A negative seen in the latter 1930's/very early 1940's was the metallugical weakness of the magazine (especially the exposed bottom which could be prone to denting). However, this could have been strengthened. Overall, the Garand was the better rifle for mass production which in all areas of military supply was a key factor in our WW2 success.
 
1 - 2 of 2 Posts
Top