Gun and Game Forum banner

1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,348 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Gentlemen,
AS you can tell by these files Ordnance was given the power to bypass bidding and purchasing laws. This was done to speed up production for the M1 Garand Rifle. What I find of interest is the date it's 1938. Remember, we got into WW 2 in Dec. 1941. At that point in time SA and Ordnance and the War. Dept., were working almost around the clock as they watched what was going on in Europe, China and Asia.
I really thing these Orders are not only of interest but are very important in getting us ready for what was going on around the World. What do you guys think about this Special Order ?


Some of these posted before. Others are new data files.
Warning, before you go to my sites lower your volume as the opening page contains a sound file which has a loading and firing of the M1 Garand. So if you're at work or home it may be wise to check your volume control.
If you need a better copy just email me.
[email protected]
Gentlemen you know what to do. Not going great but some guys have bought Vol. 1 or Vol. 2 of the Garand Papers. TIA
Thanks again
Clancy
Looking for Sponsors
NRA Life Endowment
NRA Training Counselor
NRA Instructor
FSS 90% / BW X Speed Div by 1000 = PF
THA 63
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,218 Posts
True leaders know there's a time for public bidding...and a time for quick action. That was the time to start building armaments, and getting them in our allies hands ASAP.

Obviously, some vendors received windfall profits because of the letter above. Some of our leaders had to make tough decisions which wouldn't have been accepted except for the immediate threat of war. Better to have kept the war in Europe than let it drift to the U.S. mainland. It was already at our shores with german subs moving around like sharks looking for a feast.

The war department could deal with the flack later if there were to be complaints. This may have been what the secretary of defense was thinking.

It's sort of like looking at a building on fire. There's no time to bid out which vendor to buy extinguishers from at that point. Buy it from the quickest source and deal with the krap later.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
886 Posts
While these same people accelerated the development and production of the M1 Garand, it is my firm conviction that they did the USA a disservice, when they did not make the M1941 Johnson SAR an alternate standard. It could easily have been in the hands of the USMC, in quantity shortly after the USMC went into Guadalcanal, yet what they did was make the USMC wait until mid to late 1943 for M1 Garands. The USMC did have one Johnson LMG in Guadalcanal, and it was said to have been the best full auto handheld weapon on Guadalcanal!

An advantage of the M1941 Johnson SAR (and the Johnson LMG) was that they could be manufactured in any fairly well equipped machine shop, not just in the cradle of the USA gun industry (from Springfield, MA down through Windsor Locks and Hartford, CT), where Springfield Armory (US Govt) and Winchester were located. The M1941 Johnson SAR and LMGs could have been manufactured in St Louis, Denver, Dallas, Boise, . . . which would have made it nearly impossible for any potential saboteur to affect the production of these weapons. SORRY OX, in KC, too!

I love my M1 Garands, but I am firmly convinced that the best WWII semi-auto rifle, the M1941 Johnson SAR, was kept from being a major factor in WWII, by POLITICS! Yes, I have one, and everytime I take it to the range, I am more and more impressed with it! I still love my M1 Garands!

`
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,348 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 · (Edited)
Gyrene,
I have files on the Johnson Rifle and LMG. The main problem with it was Johnson himself. It seems that almost every time it was ready for testing Johnson himself would take it out of the tests!!
Oxford, some of my files deal with other Ordnance besides the M1 Garand. Ordnance was really building in the late 1930's
Thanks again
Clancy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
886 Posts
eclancy - I only have what has been written recently, and what I have heard form Marines that had the M1941 Johnson SAR and LMG in combat.

I recently met a former Marine who told me he was on the Marine Corps Board that evaluated the M1 Garand and the M1941 Johnson SAR. He had retired from the USMC in 1956 after nearly 40 years. He said that every member of the Marine Corps Board that he knew, could not figure out how the M1 Garand was selected, because all of them said the M1941 Johnson SAR was superior, in all respects.

My personal experience with the M1 Garand, is that I am convinced that it was a very good choice, it made the difference, and I doubt that any of our current services would go head to head, voluntarily, with a similar military unit equipped with the M1 Garand. They obviously would have to be similarly supported, or not, to be a fair comparison.

I have been interested in the M1941 Johnson SAR, almost from the time I first became aware of the M1 Garand, during WWII. I have had the opportunity to handle and fire about 75 to 80 of the M1941 Johnson SAR's, and NONE of them have convinced me that they were other than the equal or better of the M1 Garand. Since I have been able to purchase and use my own M1941 Johnson SAR, handle it, disassemble it, assemble it, and fire it. I am more and more convinced that the US Government should have accepted it and applied it.

What I am saying, is not that the M1 Garand should have been dropped in favor of the M1941 Johnson SAR. What I am saying, is that the M1941 Johnson SAR should have been selected as an alternate standard, much the same as the M1917 was selected as the alternate standard to the M1903 Springfield. Springfield had production limitations/problems on both the M1903 Springfield and the M1 Garand, so I see the situation as being similar. Since the M1917 could be put into production by simply turning on the Remington, Eddystone, and Winchester private companies to produce them, it was a natural. They had just completed British contracts for the P14 Enfield, and only needed to change the caliber and cartridge chamber.

The M1941 Johnson SAR was in a similar position, and it needed no special production facilities, as it could be built in any fairly well equipped machine shop. It also has the capability of barrel change in a matter of seconds (by the user), and the caliber can be changed simply by installing a barrel of a different caliber which has a similar cartridge in size, for instance 7 x 57mm Mauser and 7.7mm Japanese barrels were made for the M1941 Johnson SAR, and there is no reason that the 8 x 57mm, and now the 7.62 x 51. Simply by changing the barrel in a matter of seconds.

As to Mr. Johnson personally removing his M1941 Johnson from the comparison tests, I know that the information that you have in writing, was written by people with vested interests in the M1 Garand, and they controlled what was done. I do know that there were "HARD FEELINGS" between the personnel in the War Department along with those who ran the Springfield Armory, and Mr. Johnson. I believe that was due in part to the fact that the M1941 Johnson SAR was NIH (not invented here) at Springfield Armory.

Mr. Johnson was quite brusque when dealing with people whom he did not believe really understood what should be done. Because of this he irritated many, who under other circumstances, could have been very helpful to him and his rifle. To me that does not excuse them from responsibility when lives are lost in combat due to their personal vendettas!

Mr. Johnson may have had the last laugh on Springfield Armory, because he was involved in the design of the AR-180 (AR-15/M16/M4) the adoption of that design was the death knell for Springfield Armory (this saddened me very much). Mr. Johnsons' rotary bolt design and its radially located locking lugs from the M1941 Johnson and LMG became a big part of the AR-180 (AR-15/M16/M4).

`
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Top