Pretty close... it's for the White rifle that lost to the T3E2 Garand. The White gas system was used in the M14.
Attachment 117394
Pretty close... it's for the White rifle that lost to the T3E2 Garand. The White gas system was used in the M14.
Attachment 117394
Real men measure once and cut.
The action on that looks similar to the Pederson .276; which makes me wonder what it would be like loading an enbloc clip in a toggle action like the Pederson.Originally Posted by bob seijas
I'd like to take it for a test drive too, but the tag suggests it's not fit.
Regards, Jim
Boy, you can really see why the Garand was built for eight, can't you? That middle section is lardy!Pretty close... it's for the White rifle that lost to the T3E2 Garand. The White gas system was used in the M14.
Bob
"It is said, 'Go not to the elves for counsel for they will say both no and yes.' "
Frodo Baggins to Gildor Inglorion, The Fellowship of the Ring
Yes, pretty pregnant. Imagine doing an equipment march carrying that by the balance in one hand and the box of .30 caliber in the other... I wonder how it made out in the bayonet assault course?
Regards, Jim
The 10 shot .276 Garand had that pregnant look too. I believe that is why the .30 Garand was trimmed down to 8 round and not because of the minimally larger base diameter .30 caliber round; .447 for .276 vs. .473 for the .30
Here's the closest to a test drive I could find. Loading the 10 round clip at about 2:09. Definitely looks clumsy compared to loading a Garand. After the loaded clip is inserted, the bolt overrides the top round and closes on an empty chamber which indicates that one could easily get Pederson thumb when loading a full clip; something that is not possible when loading a full clip into a Garand.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiorirT0C_Y
I saw that one too. I'd like to take some of these for a run...
Regards, Jim
Respected military historians such as Chris McNab, who pens the “Weapons Check” column for Military History Quarterly, embrace the story. “The sound of the clip ejecting could be a useful auditory alert for an enemy that his opponent’s gun was empty,” McNab wrote in A History of the World in 100 Weapons.
So does William Atwater, former director of the U.S. Army Ordnance Training and Heritage Center and a Marine combat veteran. During a Military Channel documentary detailing the characteristics of the M-1, Atwater said American soldiers even carried empty clips to throw on the ground in an effort to lure their German and Japanese enemies out into the open.
And if family history means anything, my father and an uncle – one a veteran of the U.S. Army during World War II, the other a veteran of the Marine Corps during the same war and the Korean War – both told me the same stories.
The M-1 was an amazing rifle, they said, but that ping could get you in trouble
He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose
There are no great men, only great challenges that ordinary men are forced by circumstances to meet.
1) the ping
It may have happened once or twice, but there is no possible way it was a common practice that worked. iv been in quite a few firefights, u are not hearing a ping coming from the enemy. also 99% u are with multiple people pinging all at diffrent times, but fire is still being put down. Its bullshit. Here is another thing no one wants to admit to. Vets Lie or missrember. They will addopt stories they hear from other people as their own. Iv served just shy of 20 years, and have deployments, iv seen it, and im sure i probly exaggerated myself or missrembered events.
2) Magazine vs Clip
i will take a magazine any day over a clip. even if its same amount of ammo. its faster to reload and more ergonomic to do so. It also allows u to change out mags to top off during a low in the fight at anytime.
the military back then and before had a mind set of "we dont want our guys to waist ammo" well suppressive fire is not wasting ammo. and is vital to modern tactics. more rounds shot, more the enemy is fixed and more of a chance they will be hit. One shot one kill is unrealistic, dangerous mindset and ineffective for infantry in a firefight.
Posting Permissions
PM
