Springfield vs. M1 vs. BAR vs. Thompson
 

Reading the section on infantry weapons in the Composition of the Force chapter in the 1940 USMC Small Wars Manual, it talks (very briefly) about each of these guns and their roles in small wars.

Anyone have some interesting insights into these guns, when they were used, time period, used effectively for, politics, etc.?

Pics?

"social history of the machine gun" , by john ellis. interesting stuff.

Thet're different types of weapons used for different situations. Each was used from about WWII through Korea.

David Hackworth writes about the BAR and Thompson in his book About Face. He said the BAR was the best weapon of the war and that a good gunner could cut grass with its high rate of fire.

The Thompson was officially taken out of inventory after WWII but many were given to the Chinese Nationalist government before the fall of the government in 1949, when they were captured by Chinese Communist government and given to the North Koreans. At which point many were captured by Allied forces and were the preferred gun for close-in fighting. Hackworth refered to it as "The snazzy, more reliable Thompson" and said if SF types could get their hands on them they were the preferred weapon.

The M1 was of course the basic infantry rifle of WWII and the carbine version was fully automatic. S.L.A. Marshall wrote in his analysis of fighting in WWII that the first man in the infantry to start firing was almost always the one with an automatic rifle and the rest of the troops would start firing outward from the guys next to the automatic rifle. According to Marshall combat soldiers without fully automatic weapons often never fired a shot during the battle. The M1 was used as the primary infantry rifle through WWII but as tactics developed the US tried to mix in as many fully automatic rifles as possible by Korea. The M1 was phased out in favor of what became the M-14 which was fairly quickly phased out in favor of what became the M-16.

The carbine was .30 cal while the Thomspon was .45. The BAR was .50. The M-14 was also .30 cal. The M-16 is .223 or 5.56 mm. The M-16 A1 was fully auto but the updated versions were limited to the more accurate 3 round bursts.

A slight correction on the above poster, the BAR was .30 cal not .50 as indicated above, it was used well into the late 60's and 70's by African nations in many brush wars there, and chambered for a variety of rounds, the last rendition was the D model and has several need updates. All BAR's had the ability to either fire in a rapid mode or a slow mode, in the slow mode single shot fire was very easy to master.

A better weapon by far of the same time period is the UK Bren, also a .30 cal weapon, it gave the additional benefit of a quick change barrel and top mounted magazine for better prone firing position.

ToddSmileWavy

Bar was not .50, it used 30-06 cartridges, the same as the spingfield and the M1.

The M2 is the Browning Machine gun and it was .50 Cal, but the earlier Browning 1919 was only .30 cal.

Arg. Of course you are correct. It's early here.

What was the General Patton quote? Something about the M-1 Garand being the greatest battle weapon ever made? It semi-auto 30-06 while the German troops still had bolt action.

Wasn't the Springfield from around 1900 a direct ripoff of the Mauser design?

Tobra - " ripoff " is a strong word, the 1903 Springfield was an improved design based on the Mauser action.

Our first bolt action the Krag was basically a Swedish design adapted by us in 1898 and carried into battle by Roosevelts rough riders and chambered for the .30-40 cartridge using a side loading box magazine.

Todd :D

Ripoff is not too strong of a word. We did ripoff the Mauser design and the US courts agreed. Mauser sued the US and won a patent infringement case in our own court system. The US government was forced to pay "rights" for every 1903 Springfield they made. Expensive to make because of "improvements" which were really not suitable for the battlefield, but worked great on the range.

The M1 Garand was the first semi-auto battle rifle adopted by any military in the world. It fired the .30, '06 cartridge which was the ballistic equal to the British .303 and the German 8mm. The Germans responded by developing the first assault rifle with intermediate cartridge (the direct ancestor to the M16) in the last 3 years of the war.

The M1 Carbine fired a special .30 Carbine cartridge which was akin to a .357 Magnum cartridge ballistically. Not at all in the same league as full power service rifle cartridge like the .30,'06. Much more like a sub machine gun than a true rifle (in fact Winchester designed it to be a direct replacement to the sidearm issued second echelon troops).

The BAR also fired the .30,'06 and was designed in WW I. It was a superb weapon for limited rapid fire (it had no quick change barrel system).

The Thompson was a .45 Auto sub-machine gun. It was made with beautiful workmanship and was easy to fire and control because it weighed loaded over 10 pounds! Expensive to make and too heavy for the firepower it was replace in more modern settings by better sub guns in 9mm.

Absolutely; the Springfield"s "improvements" over the M98 were suspect at best, at least for a service rifle. It was said (of the various WWI service rifles) that the U.S. went to war with a target rifle, the Germans went to war with a hunting rifle, and only the Brits went to war with a battle rifle.

When you refer to the British rifle, I assume that is the Enfield?

I recall you used to be able to get a surplus Enfield pretty affordably. Don't know if this is still the case. If is it, would it be a good rifle for casual range shooting? Can scopes be easily mounted? Does this rifle have hunting applications? Thoughts on the ammunition?

Just trying to generally learn about Enfields. I've always though they looked nice, but never have known much about them.

SOG for one still has SMLE's listed. Mounting a scope normally will involve some drilling a tapping, for myself it would make the gun worth less. I see a few every year come through with scopes already on, usually have the furniture trimmed also.
Jim

There are still "a few" Enfields in 7.62 NATO (aka 308 winchester) available out there, around $175 wholesale. Much easier to find ammo than 303...

Original SMLE's (Short, Magazine, Lee Enfield) are getting too collectable to mess with. The newer ones that are chambered in .308 are a dime a dozen and pretty darn good shooters. Last time I looked we were pretty awash in surplus SMLE's from around the world; I believe the .308's were made until very recently. Åmmo is much more plentiful than the original .303 British, at least here in the States. Any good gunsmith can mount a scope on one, but the receiver is not as well suited to this as the Springfield, Mauser, or Enfield.

Be aware, however, that some SMLE's were simply rechambered to .308, as opposed to having been originally manufactured as such or properly re-barreled. This is an important difference; .303 British bore diameter is .301 - .304, and groove diameter is .312. Standard for any .30 caliber, including.308, on our side of the pond is .300 bore and .308 groove. The long and the short of it is the standard .308 diameter bullet will not shoot well from the .303 British. They need .312 diameter bullets. So don't buy one of those rifles. The only way to tell for sure which bore they have is to slug them. Problem is, the British barrels were 5 groove, so you need v-blocks to accurately measure. The good news is, if it's a five groove .308, it's probably a rechamber job, so it might be really easy to tell just from that.

The Enfield is a different rifle than the SMLE. Called the "Pattern 17" it was almost entirely manufactured here to make up for shortages of Springfields. It is a big, clunky action; certainly not as elegant as a Springfield. Hell for stout, though, and much easier to mount a scope than the SMLE. They remain very popular today for larger caliber custom rifles. I believe A-Square uses it for their big stompers.

Why not just buy an old Mauser? Excellent actions and there are thousands around in just about any caliber you want.

I think they are advertised in the NRA mags for under $200 each.

Well then Jeffy pray tell us what a Pattern 14 Enfield is?

Good man, tabs. I'd love to say I was seeing if y'all were paying attention, but that was just a plain old fat-fingered fuch up on my part. I even proof read it; honest I did.

Just saw a History Channel thing on the Tommy Gun and the BAR and the M1 as well as the German Mauser.....BAR won hands down.

While reading the posts, I saw the BAR listed as being a .50, then a .30....ooh, ooh, I know that one then I saw someone catch it....

The French guy....RPKESQ has it down with the penetration of the 30.06 compared to the pistol round in the Thompson and the lower powered M1 and Mauser. The Mauser was in last place due to the 5 round clip versus the M1s larger capacity.

Also when watching a Thompson fire on full auto...you can tell when blanks are used. The lead exiting the barrel tends to throw it up and the shooter has a hard time controlling it....while blanks don't give it the telltale kick and the shooter can hold it flat.