The Firing Line Forums
Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > S.W.A.T. Magazine

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old August 21, 2015, 06:46 PM   #1
4V50 Gary
Join Date: November 2, 1998
Location: Colorado
Posts: 20,193
Leroy Thompson's M-1D article

As a side note to Thompson's M-1D article, prototypes of the M-1C by Griffin & Howe and John Garand's M-1D were submitted to the Army at the same time. Whereas to make a M-1C, a bare receiver was sent to Griffin & Howe in New York State where it was drilled, tapped and hardened and then had the mount installed and sent back to Springfield to completion, Garand felt his design was superior as it required fewer parts, was much easier to adapt as all it required was to turn down the barrel for the scope mount and shorten the handguard. That's a whopping total of three parts: scope mount, scope mount base and handguard. Everything to make a M-1D could be done less costly (cheaper), with reduced turn-around time (quicker) and in-house at Springfield Armory.

Why the M-1C was chosen over Garand's design in 1944? Not surprisingly, politics! It seemed that Griffin & Howe enlisted the support of its Congress Critters to pressure the Army. It worked and it kept the Griffin & Howe employees busy.
Vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt. Molon Labe!
4V50 Gary is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:28 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Page generated in 0.05219 seconds with 8 queries