The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Art of the Rifle: General

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old December 25, 2019, 10:11 AM   #26
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,335
On the proprietary powder, apparently it is some type of fast burning, low-temperature powder that still produces a high-pressure. Since the temperature is lower and the overall burn time is shorter, it does less damage to the throat. Sounds good in theory at least.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old December 27, 2019, 01:45 PM   #27
Road_Clam
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 21, 2013
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 1,450
Quote:
Originally Posted by agtman
Sounds like someone's spent a lot of R&D $$$ trying to 'make the old new again.'

Are we back to the future with an updated .276 Pedersen?
I've been recently watching many of the Amazon Prime Video gun documentaries well commentated by historian Ian McCollum and they had an awesome segment "Iconic guns" on the complete development of the M1 Garand (involving history prior to the development of the actual M1). I never knew that John Garand was trying hard to convince the US Military to use the .276 Pederson instead of the 30-06 . Sorry for the thread derail !
__________________
"To be old an wise you must have been young and stupid"
Road_Clam is offline  
Old December 27, 2019, 04:48 PM   #28
agtman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 26, 2001
Location: midwest
Posts: 2,318
Quote:
I've been recently watching many of the Amazon Prime Video gun documentaries well commentated by historian Ian McCollum and they had an awesome segment "Iconic guns" on the complete development of the M1 Garand (involving history prior to the development of the actual M1). I never knew that John Garand was trying hard to convince the US Military to use the .276 Pederson instead of the 30-06.
Not only that, but the initial .276 prototype he submitted was designed with a 20-rd box magazine, 'sorta like' an M14 but looking more like an M1.

That was the first aspect of the weapon the Ordinance Dept rejected, believing detachable mags would encourage troops to shoot carelessly and waste ammo. So they asked JCG to modify the rifle with a top-loading, clip-fed system that held less ammo, which he did.

The modified M1 he next submitted for testing was a 10-rd clip-fed .276 rifle.

The Ordnance Dept. really liked it and ran with it, right up until the day then-Chief of Staff Douglas McArthur vetoed the .276 Petersen cartridge entirely and ordered JCG's proposed gas-powered, clip-fed, semi-auto rifle to be chambered in 30-06 and nothing else.

Hatcher's 'Book of the Garand' covers all this. Bruce Canfield's more recent tome, 'The M1 Garand Rifle,' covers all the history, political intrigue, and drama behind of the rifle's adoption in much greater detail. Just FYI.

Last edited by agtman; December 27, 2019 at 04:59 PM.
agtman is offline  
Old December 28, 2019, 03:05 PM   #29
Ben Dover
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 11, 2013
Location: High up in the Rocky Moun
Posts: 653
At the time, the U.S, used .30-06 machine guns and BARs and 1903A3 Springfields.
(And remember, the war had been going on for almost two years before the 03A3 was finally retired and replaced by the Garand)

.30-06 ammo was stockpiled deeply in the war reserve by literally billions of rounds. War with Japan was imminent, and military planners did not want to change calibres and create a logistical "whore's nightmare" at the very beginning of a major war.

McArthur had very little choice in vetoing the .276.
__________________
The soldier's pack is not so heavy a burden as the prisoner's chains. Dwight Eisenhower

It is very important what a man stands for.
But it is far more important what a man refuses to stand for.
Ben Dover is offline  
Old December 28, 2019, 04:34 PM   #30
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,335
By the way, the MAP for the Cross rifle is $1,599, with an MSRP of $1,799.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Reply

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 Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.04557 seconds with 8 queries