ChatterBank1 min ago
M1 Carbine & semi-automatic rifles
7 Answers
Obviously some nation had to be first, but how was it that America came to design and manufacture the first standard-issue semi-automatic rifle? Not being disrespectful by this - what I mean is were American designers simply ahead of the rest of the world in this field of technology, or were other countries' economies incapable of the mass manufacture of such a weapon? The UK had the Lee-Enfield and Germany the Mauser - classic weapons both - but the benefits of having a standard-issue,mass-produced semi-automatic as opposed to a bolt action rifle must have occurred to people fairly early on in the piece, especially after WW1 (even though in practised hands they were capable of 15 rpm). Did other countries not look into this at all or was it just not viable? Or did they think machine guns made the issue irrelevant?
I ask as I recently read that it was one of the multitude of reasons that British soldiers were jealous of the Yanks! Can anyone help, or does anyone know of a good site?
Many thanks.
I ask as I recently read that it was one of the multitude of reasons that British soldiers were jealous of the Yanks! Can anyone help, or does anyone know of a good site?
Many thanks.
Answers
1 to 7 of 7
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ScreaminTree. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
This may interest you:
http://www.thegunzone.com/johngarand.html
As an aside, I've had one of these b4stards fired directly at me in N.I, if I'd been standing three inches to my left, my head would have been all over the Falls road, I felt the round go past my ear, massive strain on my underpants rthat day I can tell you
http://www.thegunzone.com/johngarand.html
As an aside, I've had one of these b4stards fired directly at me in N.I, if I'd been standing three inches to my left, my head would have been all over the Falls road, I felt the round go past my ear, massive strain on my underpants rthat day I can tell you
The standard .303 round would have been unsuitable for such a semi-automatic, and a new cartridge would have had to be produced, just as it was for the M1. With British war production so geared up for .303s, (even for Spitfire armament!!), the War Office and the rest of the government would have had hysterics at the very thought of introducing a new calibre.
Also, when it was developed in the US, the M1 was not really considered to be for use by front-line infantry, who would continue to use the older and heavier rifles.
Also, when it was developed in the US, the M1 was not really considered to be for use by front-line infantry, who would continue to use the older and heavier rifles.
Ummmm... I think we have to be sure to differentiate between the M1 Carbine and the earlier (1928) M1 Garand... I rarely disagree with the venerable heathfield but the M1 Carbine (1941) was manufactured in the .30 caliber (similar to the Britsh .303) while the Garand, being considered an actual assault rifle was produced in the more powerful 30-06 caliber. The Garand had been around quite a bit longer but a light weight, easily carried weapon was needed so the M1 carbine was produced in record time. Actually, the Germans as well as the Brits had produced semi-automatic weapons from earlier designs (The very first automatic rifle was invented by James Puckle in 1718... an Englishman... similar to later Gatling Gun)
I suspect heathfield is correct though, in stating, especially in the inter-WW period following the devastation and bankruptcy that followed WWI, that inovations in automatic weaponry followed the available calibers with little incentive, until outbreak of hostilities, to make such advances, as is mostly true of all such historical changes, in my opinion...
I suspect heathfield is correct though, in stating, especially in the inter-WW period following the devastation and bankruptcy that followed WWI, that inovations in automatic weaponry followed the available calibers with little incentive, until outbreak of hostilities, to make such advances, as is mostly true of all such historical changes, in my opinion...
Clanad, your suspicions are correct, and I was referring to the carbine. And your last paragraph sums it up.
In fact, the British powers-that-be have always been miserly over ammunition. The Army 'Rapid Fire' command in WW1 meant 6 rounds per minute!
Not until the Falklands conflict was opening up with everything available in the way of small arms finally approved. It was found to be one of the few ways of keeping the Argentinian fighter planes from closing in. A few pings and rattles against the fuselage would cause any pilot to think twice about coming any closer!
And, Thorfinn, welcome to AB. Since Clanad is one of our former colonialists, we generally overlook most of his spelling differences! lol
In fact, the British powers-that-be have always been miserly over ammunition. The Army 'Rapid Fire' command in WW1 meant 6 rounds per minute!
Not until the Falklands conflict was opening up with everything available in the way of small arms finally approved. It was found to be one of the few ways of keeping the Argentinian fighter planes from closing in. A few pings and rattles against the fuselage would cause any pilot to think twice about coming any closer!
And, Thorfinn, welcome to AB. Since Clanad is one of our former colonialists, we generally overlook most of his spelling differences! lol
1 to 7 of 7
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.