Increased dwell time

[firstflabn]

Nice job, NS. I enjoy measuring things within an inch of their lives and you gave me fresh fodder. Do you think the change in the profile of the inertia block was to keep the weight the same after reducing the rear wall thickness? Confusingly, J.B. Powers in CCNL #172 shows an M2 slide that weighs considerably less than the increased dwell L379. If this weight is representative of M2's, maybe a change in mass didn't matter to the M1 so much after all?

TR, Figure 58 in the 1953 TM 9-1276 shows the old slide as usable - again with no mention of dwell or internal dimensions.

[JimF4M1s (Deceased)]

Newscotlander wrote the article.

Thanks Brian.

And thanks to Newscotlander.

[Newscotlander]

Figure 58 in the 1953 TM 9-1276 shows the old slide as usable - again with no mention of dwell or internal dimensions.

I'm sure that the reason why the earlier slide was usable is that there were not enough of the 7160091 or 7161843 slides to put in all the 6+ million carbines. It does say that the 7160091 slide is preferred.