OT: CMP Garand, Springfield 1903A3

Ad Astra

Ad Astra

Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
3,833
Recently looking at all the good stuff available on the surplus market. The Swiss K31. Yugo SKS. Enfield .303's, Russian carbines, all dirt cheap. Mitchell's Mauser K98. And AK-47 is back, military style again. The gun market changes; what's cheap & plentiful today can be gone forever tomorrow.

The CMP's Garands have been narrowed down too over time, it seems. They've got Greek loaners come home or some more expensive ones. Still; for $400 you can still get a couple of American classics: a Springfield '03 or a M1 Garand. These two rifles are a tangible part of the history of our times... I'm thinking either would be a great thing to have. Never a worry about ammo or parts, either.

Anyone ever bought a CMP rifle? I've read a few articles; parts guns but still a Garand, "the greatest battle implement ever devised by man." Or the 1903A3 Remington; my feeling is that they had perfected the '03 just when the Garand came out- in combat, which would you want? So these are probably low mileage. The '03A3 by Remington was a decent improvement- better sights, improved metallurgy, stonger stamped parts. See "Green Hills of Africa" - Papa Hemingway hunted with one on safari.

So should I get a foreign rifle that someone else grew out of, or an American classic? (that our guys grew out of?) :D


Mike
Ad Astra
 
I've owned four M1 Garands and miss them all. They say the collectable CMP program rifles are long gone, but you still get a good gun. I never did the paperwork.

I love my M1A, but still miss the Garand.

I actually pity people who've never roamed the desert with a Garand. Long distance boulder shooting.



munk
 
Dunno. Springfields and Garands are both good rifles, and tend to be quite accurate (as are most Mausers and the K-31). The Russkis are rugged and adequately accurate, as are the Enfields.

My pop used to shoot NRA matches and used both the Springfield and the Garand (CMP purchases). You could get a Garand for $100 in the early 80's, then they went to $200, now $400+ :( The older ones the CMP had were quite nice, don't know what they are putting out now.
 
http://www.odcmp.com/Services/Rifles/m1garand.htm

Here you go, munk. Not many left. Collector grade is almost gone. $1400.

Yup, exactly my point, stevo. The guns offered change with time and them that goes, is gone forever.

A Greek Garand. What if they cleaned it with olive oil? (no offense, mr. g_moutafis.)

Some euro wood stocks on these, it says.


Ad Astra
 
Ad Astra said:
So should I get a foreign rifle that someone else grew out of, or an American classic? (that our guys grew out of?)
Click to expand...

I'm surprised that you need to ask, Mike. The answer is quite simple: get both. ;)

I've got a bit of everything from that period of time as I took advantage of all those surplus sales. (Remember how the last couple of years have been with oddball surplus rifles being nearly given away?) I can't even find ammo for some of these damned things but when I do, it'll be interesting to shoot them. I've stuck to the Mosin Nagants more than anything else as they're the most widespread and generally the least expensive, but I've got a couple of neat ones that are hard to find.

I never got the itch for a Garand. They just don't seem to float my boat - too modern, maybe, or just not weird enough. (Now that SVT40, on the other hand...)
 
I have had one DCM/CMP M1 rifle. Did the paperwork, etc. Then it was a bit of a pain to go through the requirements and at the time you were limited to one M1 per lifetime. Mine was a fairly decent rifle. Fine bore, but somewhat beat up from handling. At some point I sold it to finance a "custom" 1911 project. This was before you could just buy a near custom 1911 off of the shelf. I now regret having sold the M1 as it felt very natural in my hands. Maybe someday I'll run across a reasonably priced example and buy it as I still have a .50cal. can of M2 ball in clips to feed the M1.

BTW there is or was some collector interest in these rifles (M1) and prices are quite high on the resale market. Fine rifle...but some of the prices for WWII/Korea vintage guns amazes me.

I say buy one if you can meet the new requirements. Determine if the rifle has collector interest before you modify it in any way.

Jeff
 
What's the difference between the Springfield and the Garand?

I know a little of the differences between the M1 and the M14 and their similarities. Both look alike to the untrained eye at a distance of 10 feet or so in my experience and IMO.
What's kinda funny is how the old timers talk about the M1 and its accuracy. I qualified as expert with the M14 and it may have just been the M1 or that the sights weren't set properly for me on the one I fired but I couldn't hit the broad side of a barn with the M1 at the rifle range.
We were a medical unit and not qualified to have a BAR but our Top was an old infantry man and loved the BAR.
When we went to the rifle range he borrowed a BAR from the infantry unit across the building from us.
Now that was fun to shoot!!!! Hard for any of us to manage to squeeze only 3 rounds off when the trigger was squeezed though. The best I could get the best I can remember was 5-6 rounds.
I was one of the lucky ones to get to fire it as our ammo was limited.
 
Cool. By the time I went through, we had M16A2s, M249 SAWs and M60s. Now, Pop went through basic with the M14. My Granddad had to qualify with the 1903 and was issued an M1 when he got to the Pacific.

I'd start with a Garand. For 400.00, it's a great deal. But I'm a semi-auto kinda guy.

Brian
 
All this talk of carbines and stuff is getting to me. Think I'll go down to the local Big5 today and see what they've got. After I make a spear for my son, out of an old hinge, of course.
 
I'm not sure what the question between 'Springfield" and Garand, meant, but Springfield usually refers to the O3 bolt action rifle developed using the Mauser as a model. The US grudgingly paid Mauser some small compensation.
Springfield also made Garands. The stocks on the two rifles are similar- a fact I like. ONe is a bolt and one a semi auto. The final evolvement of the Garand, the M14, lost most of the moving parts that were supposed to make the Garand an antique design. The funny thing is, despite the little parts, Garands were known for reliabilty, interchangability, and accuracy. The M14 also has a bottom feed detachable mag well. I'm well satisfied with my M1A

(The Italians modified the Garand to be a bottom feeder and that version is kinda neat.)

I didn't know there was a search for the 'best' here. I like them all. I wouldn't even mind an Old Russian ragweed bolt action- though I'm not going out of my way for one! Our military heritage (humans, that is, major forces) during the last hundred years has had some outstanding models and advances in firearms.

I loved the days of Cosmoline. There was nothing better than getting some 'surplus' semi auto or bolt cheap in a box, maybe kicked around a little, but still wonderfully made and very desirable as a tool.

Rusty loved 'em too. All Bill would say during one of our long weapons threads was that he'd trot out that old .38 he had.


munk
 
Yvsa, the Springfield is an older, classic bolt action, similar to the German K98.

Marines on Guadalcanal fought with them but switched to the semi-auto Garand by the end. Picture elephant grass and Japanese bayonets; semi auto anything sounds good.

CMP paperwork is a minor hassle. Have passport, considering C&R license. For $30, neat 'ol stuff to the door.


Ad Astra

http://www.odcmp.com/Services/Rifles/m1903.htm

Still packed in cosmoline, waiting for someone who appreciates rifles and remembers American history. :thumbup:
 
Actually, Yvsa knows very well the difference between the various weapons. When we toured the firearms museum together his knowledge surprised me on many occasions.



munk
 
That site's going in my favorites section. Thanks for the link, AA. I've been interested in an M1 for awhile.

Bob
 
Possibly he was referring to the Springfield arsenal, which made both. During WWII, SA switched to making only Garands and Remington continued making the 03A3- I think.

Just sent for my C&R license paperwork.

Had a friend who had an FFL. Man, he had some guns. One of about everything. Oddly, he didn't shoot much- three small kids probably had something to do with it.


Ad Astra

"Thanks for the link, AA. I've been interested in an M1 for awhile."

Me, too, Big Bob. Just hadn't pursued it in a while. Possibly missing out on all the YBBB's friday had something to do with it. :D :foot: :p

No, it was that "Surplus Guns" magazine I picked up at the newsstand. It's got a review of about everything for sale out there.
 
I've three small kids and I don't shoot as much as I used to. Well, the Nine year old has his own .22 now.....we should be a shooting family soon enough. Heavily armed munks.




munk
 
I've never cared much for the M1 either, Satori. I had one briefly. Garand thumb... :grumpy:

I have sporterized 03 and 1917 right now. Between the M1 and 03- since *I* wouldn't really be looking for a battle implement- I'd go for the 03.

John
 
I have one Garand from CMP, got it about a year ago. It was the first thing I did after getting my US citizenship :D. The process went smoothly, I was already a member of a qualifying club (USPSA, and there are a bunch of others) and my CHL counted as shooting activity. The rules, like accepting carry licenses that have a shooting component, have eased a bit in recent times, so check it out if you've gotten discouraged in the past. There is no better or cheaper way to get a shootable Garand, except the rare case where you get lucky in a pawn shop or something. Plus, getting it delivered to your doorstep by FedEx brings up warm memories of pre-1968 laws.

Mine is not here right now, I've sent it out to California with a friend who had to leave all his fun stuff here with me. He had a M1A that would have worked in Cali, but only one or two small mags, so he took the Garand and all my clips instead as the best complete system available to him. I miss it, although he left me multiple black rifles in its stead. :D

Here's a pic from my first range session with the M1. That is a 50 yard target, so it would be a little over 2 inches at 100. More than happy with that. Despite the fun black-tip shown, it was shot with the standard .30-06 that the CMP sells.
Gar8-14-04.jpg
 
Okay I see now, thanks.:) I thought the '03 was a bolt action but wasn't sure.

When did the military go from the .30-06 to the .308 or 7.62 X 51 NATO?
Was that one of the differences between the M1 and them M14?
 
Yeah, with the then new ball powders they could get their performance requirements out of a shorter, thicker, cartridge case from that of the longer 06, which would be more friendly to a shorter semi auto or full auto action. They got rid of most the small moving parts on the Garand; the M14 has an 'action bar' activated directly from a gas valve in the barrel.

I love the M14 or M1A because it is the final Garand. It holds and points well, shoots great, is very reliable, and takes a lickin and keeps on ticken.



munk
 
Ah, the good old M14. I marched with an M16 in boot camp but learned to shoot on the M14. How does that work?

Like Munk said, they revised the Garand's gas system, rechambered it (and shortened the receiver appropriately), opted for a detachable magazine and calibrated the sights in meters instead of yards. It's not a big jump to go from one to the other.

Both utilize a big 'ole op rod for plenty of reciprocating mass; while this can disturb one's aim, it's a big aid to reliability. Kalashnikov went the same route (different implementation, but same idea) on the Avtomat for the same reason. The M14's gas system is better than the Garand's in theory but I doubt that anyone would notice a difference in performance.

The Garand will give you Garand Thumb if you're not careful. The M14 has its own method of dicing digits (the cutout along the stock for the op rod) but after it gets you once, you won't let it get you again - it's easy enough to avoid. The Garand gets to take a crack at your fingers every time you load it. ;)

My main complaint about the family is the way the front sight is attached. One good bump, the screw strips, and you now have a wandering zero. This was the #1 problem we had with M14's by a large margin. I'm also told that the tolerances on the flash hiders are a bit tight and can cause problems; I've seen two flash hiders that "streaked" at six o'clock (with accompanying high fliers) and one that took a direct hit and split. Interestingly enough, the rifle shot fine after the flash hider self-destructed.

The story of the M14's trials and adoption reminds one of a soap opera. There was deception, hype, and outright lies involved. If things had been done fairly the FN-FAL probably would've been adopted instead. They're both good rifles, regardless.

Yvsa, not sure about the date the 7.62mm was adopted - sometime in the fifties, I can say that. I want to say that the M14 wasn't produced until 1957 but I could be wrong. Interestingly enough, the Navy cheaped out initially and rebarrelled their Garands to 7.62mm after adoption; we didn't go with the M14 until everyone else was tired of it. Some time ago we placed an order for some M80 ball and it arrived on Garand clips - that was something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top