Garand in 6.5 x 55?

[Garandimal]

And then in a fitting sense of irony they still had to go back and make the M2 ball load because the M1 load was a bit too much on the M1 op-rod over the long term.

Actually, it was the Stateside Rifle Ranges.

Most were designed for .30 ball (1906).

The M1 174 gr. boat-tail round was capable of exceeding the designed safety limits of these ranges.

And, since the long range machine-gun barrage had been abandoned as a tactic, they requested a replacement round that mimicked the .30 ball (1906).

What they got was the M2 ball/AP.




GR

[Ronin6]

Not Long Range but the MG34/42 was the primary weapon with the nearly obsolete K98’s providing “support”……..in both Offense and Defense. The MG was the corner stone.

The perfect US WW2 Assault Team would be built around the M1919 Browning MG with Carbines, Bazooka, Flame Throwers maybe BAR too………….No Garand

Thoughts

[Verdha603]

The issue is that the M1919 wasn't a "general purpose machine gun"; the M1919A6 was meant to close the gap with the MG-34/42 to make it useful for infantry use as a more mobile machine gun, but was significantly heavier and bulkier by comparison. The M1919 still fell under the WWI-era thinking that a belt fed machine gun was a defensive weapon that needed to be emplaced in a defensive position on a tripod or mounted to a vehicle to be effectively utilized, while a light machine gun (or in the US case an automatic rifle) would be used for an offensive automatic weapon as the squad moved up to take ground.

The other issue is that flamethrowers were a specialty weapon that only proved useful in a limited number of situations, and oftentimes was as much a liability as it was useful; it's big, it's bulky, it's easier for you to spot the guy lugging the flamethrower, and you wouldn't want to be near him if the tank ignites.

Come up with a variant of the MG-42 in .30-06 and give the MG team members M1 Garand's for ammo compatibility while everyone else in the squad lugs M1 carbines and you'd be a lot closer to the mark.

[Verdha603]

Actually, it was the Stateside Rifle Ranges.

Most were designed for .30 ball (1906).

The M1 174 gr. boat-tail round was capable of exceeding the designed safety limits of these ranges.

And, since the long range machine-gun barrage had been abandoned as a tactic, they requested a replacement round that mimicked the .30 ball (1906).

What they got was the M2 ball/AP.


GR

Hmmm....well, the more you know. Then on a separate note, what was with the big deal about cut/uncut op rods when it came to Garand production? May have been me taking a few too many gun shop guys too seriously, but they tend to make it sound like a real big deal about whether your Garand had a "cut" or "uncut" op rod or not.

[vf111]

Hmmm....well, the more you know. Then on a separate note, what was with the big deal about cut/uncut op rods when it came to Garand production? May have been me taking a few too many gun shop guys too seriously, but they tend to make it sound like a real big deal about whether your Garand had a "cut" or "uncut" op rod or not.

The original "uncut" op-rods were cracking at that juncture. The "cut" was to relieve the stress and solved the problem.

[Verdha603]

The original "uncut" op-rods were cracking at that juncture. The "cut" was to relieve the stress and solved the problem.

Were they cracking as a result of the M1 ammunition or was it from something else like regular wear and tear issues in the manufacturing process? That may be why I jumped the gun and attributed the op-rod issue to the ammunition when it may have been a different factor entirely.

[Garandimal]

Were they cracking as a result of the M1 ammunition or was it from something else like regular wear and tear issues in the manufacturing process? That may be why I jumped the gun and attributed the op-rod issue to the ammunition when it may have been a different factor entirely.

The right angle junction, coupled w/ the dissimilar areas of the joining part components, created a stress riser.

The "cut," both OEM and retro, simply transitions the junction, mitigating the problem.




GR