springfield armory conversion kit for 1911
 

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1195963134.jpg
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1195963160.jpg

haun,

Pre-WWII the Garand was in limited use, the standard infantry rifle was the 1903 Springfield, the USMC qual was out to 900 yards.

Garand is a great battle rifle. Easy to hit with and easy to reload w/8round enbloc clips. Very reliable once initial teething problems were corrected.

I think the Thompson is relatively easy to control, easier than most of it’s contemporaries. Various groups have put the shootability to a test using some variation of a comstock system. The usual winner over even newer (MP 5, Colt 9mm, etc.) is the Thompson. Obsolete due to cost, I remember (vaguely) the cost in WWII was over $200.00 per for even the most simplified M1A1 version. Huge costs in terms of both dollars and resources.

M1 carbine was envisioned as a replacement for the pistolearly in WWII. Not well thought of by most I know who used it but the Waffen SS prized them as much as possible.

1918 BAR. Most, in U.S. service, were select fire but some were full auto only. 20 round box magazine in 30 M2 (30-06). Didn’t fill the same niche as the Bren, that niche often being filled by a 1919 belt fed (though w/o a quick change). Very durable and reliable, post WWII a few folks have tested the BAR and found them very accurate, and outlasting all peers and subsequent squad automatic type weapons. Somewhat complex to clean.

FOG

All of my elk hunting has been done with a modified Enfield. Certainly a robust rifle, and extremely accurate and consistent. Mine had some sort of special competition barrel. But I will say this: It's like shooting a long anvil.

The only drawback to the Garand was that it couldn't be reloaded until the clip was spent!

I saw a show a few days ago and they talked about how the BAR was intentially held out of service, by Persching, until the very end of WWI for fear the Germans would copy it. We opted instead to supply our Doughboys with the worst POS light machine gun ever issued to any army - the French made Chauchat!!!! It seems the Chauchat would fire a few rounds and simply give up!! :)

Apparently we wanted to move away from the 30-06 and the Brits away from the .303 to a smaller cartrage and smaller faster bullet, but WWII came up very quickly and there was no time to retool...

I can tell you I had the opportunity to fire a full-auto Thompson and a "grease" gun. The Thompson was heavy, walked easily, and got hot real quick. In comparison, the "grease" gun was easy to control, didn't heat up, and was very user-friendly.

Your correct but its SO much fun putting a 50 round drum on the 'Tommy' and letting the .45 rounds fly.

Eric,

I have fired both and I’ll take a good Thompson variant over a M 3. Didn’t notice overheating, gets warmer than a M 3 but then again look at the rates of fire. Thompsons were actually tested out to 600 yards in machine rests. Not very heavy when compared a 30 caliber class belt fed machine gun. Bottom line is you could field approximately 15 M 3s for every Thompson based on weapon costs alone. Usage costs would narrow it down though congress critters and bureaucrats seldom notice that ammunition costs far exceed weapons costs, often above a factorial difference.

Actually the original version of the Garand had a detachable magazine and wasn’t in 30 M2. The Army CoS (MacArthur) killed both, not liking the magazine as it might promote the wasting of ammunition and interfered with the manual of arms. The original caliber was an intermediate cartridge (pre-dates German WWII 7.92 Kurz by about a decade) but it wasn’t a full powered round and there was no money for the changeover.

You can actually keep up a good rate of sustained fire with the en bloc clips versus magazines.

FOG