M1 Nomenclature

The whole nomenclature system was changed with the M1 and dropped the year designation used on previous weapons. Burt Kellerstedt won top prize at the Ft. Washington, PA. show with a table that had only one Garand on it -- the rest were all items designated M1, from helmet to mess kit.

Before the GCA proposed standardizing the term "Gas Trap," collectors were all over the place trying to describe the early rifle. Terms in use were Model 1936, ca. 1936, 1936 Type, First Pattern, and several others. In 1992 member Steve Marvin wrote a great article for the Summer Newsletter titled "As Seen From Across The Counter" and used the term "Gas Trap" all through it. This rang a bell with me, so I checked with Art Tuttle to see if he agreed that it was the best description of the early front end, and that "Gas Port Rifle" would then fit for the later type. He thought it was excellent. I then wrote to Steve and suggested he propose standardizing the collector terms Gas Trap and Gas Port in another article. I waited several months and never heard from him, so I did it in 1993 (with full credit to Marvin). EVERYBODY liked the idea, and it became standard from then on.

To amplify Bob’s astute comments, prior to the early 1920s, the U.S. military used the year of a weapon’s adoption as its Model designation, i.e., Model 1873, Model 1898, Model 1903, Model 1917, etc., etc. ,etc. Among the last standardized gun to be designated by the year was the Model 1922 (.22 caliber Springfield). Interestingly, although not adopted or standardized, the prototype semiautomatic rifles developed by John Garand were designated by the year. These included the Model 1919, Model 1921 and Model 1924. However, by 1936 (the year the .30 caliber gas-operated Garand rifle was adopted), the practice of using year as the model number been abandoned in favor of the “M” with a number suffix designation. Since the Garand rifle was the first small arm standardized since the change in nomenclature from year of adoption to “M” (Model) was instituted, it was the “M1” (“Model 1”).

Thank you guys and I wished you emailed me before I argued the M1936 :) Rick B

Welcome to the forum Bruce. Finally!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by browningautorifle

Welcome to the forum Bruce. Finally!

---

Yes indeed BAR

Bruce, first off, welcome to the site. I know you will have a great deal to share with all of us. Please stay and enjoy.

Thank you for your information on the M1 rifle. I look forward to seeing any and all of your posts here on the Milsurps.com forums. :super:

Thanks for kind welcome and I hope everyone has a wonderful and Blessed New Year.:cheers:

Honor to have you here, Mr. Canfield.

Thanks for the interesting first post with the helpful information.

Bruce
Welcome to the forum. It is great to have you here. I am anciously waiting
for your new Garand book.:D
Tom

The manuscript and photos for the new book are in the hands of Mowbray Publishing. It will be a massive project and I do not know how long the layout and printing will take. Stuart Mowbray and his staff do a first-class job with all their publications. Bob Seijas graciously agreed to serve as technical advisor on the book and his input was invaluable to the project. Dave McClain was co-technical advisor. Many others, including some who frequent this forum, were also extremely helpful.

bruce, thanks for your help on the form. im sure i speak for most hear that we can't wait to see that new book .---charles
ps, but don't rush it

According to an article entitiled "Military Rifles - M1 to M14" by T.E. Cosgrove ( an engineer in the Infantry Weapons Group of Research, Development and Engioneering Directorate in the Army Material command) appearing in the March 1974 AMERICAN RIFLEMAN Magazine:
"The original alpha-numeric identificatiopn of the final experimental version of the Garand rifle was T1E2 and although the rifle was not officially adopted until 1936, , this designation was changed on Aug. 3, 1933 to U.S. Semi-automatic Rifle, Caliber .30 M1"
According to Cosgrove, the "M1"" designatin was continued and each modification carried the designation "M1E?" and went from "M1" through "M1E9"
FWIW

I like the gas trap and gas port terminology too but was curious as to the terminology used by the US Ordnance during the period when "both" types of gas cylinders were in use - the only information I could find was "screw-on gas cylinder" and later "spline type" gas cylinder.

Actually, the last of the "M1E" series was the M1E13 which was a refinement of the White-type gas system used on the M1E4 and M1E9.

Why did the designation jump from M1 all the way to M14 for the next service rifle? And then to M16?

That's a great question and I've been searching for a cogent answer for decades. The M14 to M16 is easy...there was a M15 which was essentially a M14 in squad-automatic weapon configuration. However, there was never a "M2" through "M13" standardized so why was the "M14" the next standardized service rifle after the M1? Melvin Johnson proposed that his semiautomatic rifle be designated as the "M2" and serve as a supplement to the M1 but, of course, that didn't happen.

The various selective-fire, detachable box magazine weapons developed to supersede the M1 from late WWII through the mid-1950s were assigned "T" designations (T-20 through T44). The final test variant was the T44E4 which was eventually standardized as the "M14." Go figure!

M2 Carbine. Rick B

Yes, but the M2 carbine was an entirely different class of weapon from the M1 rifle. There was both a M1 Rifle and M1 Carbine, but no "M2" rifle.

And the carbines follow in numerical progression. There was an M-1, M-2, M-3 and now the M-4 carbine.

This only applies to weapons??? I know equipment was still being designated by the year.

I would also like to welcome you to the board Mr. Canfield, I look forward to your knowledge and your company on the forums..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RCS

only information I could find was "screw-on cylinder" and later "spline type"

---

That's about it, Robert, that's all I ever found, too. They also used "new front end" a lot, how's that for clumsy!