H&R getting ready to make M1s again

[akinswi]

Found this on the youtube folks

Very interesting indeed…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vX0kEurikfg

You can skip to about 10 minutes into the video is where they start talking about
the M1

[JustJake]

Forged receivers? ... or cast, like the commercial "Springfield Armory Inc" M1s of the late '90s.

[HiBC]

While I'd agree some cast stuff is crap, Ruger has emerged as a master of casting. Nearly every gun Ruger makes is based on castings.
I don't know for sure,but I would assume the Mini-14 receiver is cast.

Most manufacturing processes can produce junk. I would wait and see what quality is produced. 8620 is a pretty good firearms steel and it works for investment casting.

FWIW the video said it would be forged.

[tangolima]

All is well. But I wouldn't want one myself. A brand newly made M1 Garand is just not the real thing. It doesn't have the inner being that makes the rifle attractive. I have 2 CMP M1s. I was a bit disappointed when I received them. They had replaced the original furniture with new.

I'm sure many people would be excited by the news. But I myself will put money on something else. A new M1A or a AR 10 is better.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[HiBC]

All is well. But I wouldn't want one myself. A brand newly made M1 Garand is just not the real thing. It doesn't have the inner being that makes the rifle attractive. I have 2 CMP M1s. I was a bit disappointed when I received them. They had replaced the original furniture with new.

I'm sure many people would be excited by the news. But I myself will put money on something else. A new M1A or a AR 10 is better.

The CMP is a wonderful thing. May they live long and prosper.

The day will come when the supply of CMP Garands is exhausted. Then what?

The games and competitions around the M-1 will fade if there is not a path for new shooters.

Imagine the future of a program if the entry requirement was a 1903 or 1903A3. They are pretty much dried up.

Part of the motivation for H+R is they have the original tooling and specialized machines to produce the Garand.

I don't know if they will have enough market to be successful. The CMP is still a great resource.
I understand the nostalgic connection to History with the originals.
Perhaps H+R can develop a relationship with CMP for distribution.

Time will tell,I guess.

[Polinese]

Newly made ones also open the door to setting them up in ways you wouldn't do to an original. Want it tacticool? you got it. Wanna make some M1-C or M1-D's? Do it up! Wanna engrave the receiver? Why the hell not.

I think it'll be great to have newly made ones. Just like all the reproduction old west guns out there. I love my Uberti 1873 even though it's not a real winchester.

[JustJake]

Most manufacturing processes can produce junk. I would wait and see what quality is produced. 8620 is a pretty good firearms steel and it works for investment casting.

S.A. Inc.'s cast-receiver Garands of the late '90s were (1) overpriced compared to CMP's USGI M1s and (2) often problematic otta the box.

[BobCat45]

Agreed! I am in awe of my Garand, it is slightly older than I am but still shoots better than I do, and there is no way I would modify or change it because it is a piece of History.

But a newly manufactured Garand? Maybe properly bed the action in a polymer stock, add an offset scope mount, who knows?

And - even though it is a semiautomatic rifle, can you imagine the ridicule anyone wanting to ban a rifle design that was adopted my the US Military in 1936 would experience? Maybe I'm totally off base, but I think anyone proposing that would be laughed out of town.

Edited to add: I was replying to the post above by Polinese

[SIGSHR]

A repro M-1 Garand ? On a par with all the BP repros, my M1875 Remington. Lacks the feel, the cachet of an original, but as a shooter...

[Armybrat]

I’d take a good repro M1 Carbine though.

[akinswi]

@ HiBC,

Setaside the forged receivers, Would H&R most likely use a stamped Trigger group? vs the older style milled trigger groups

Also would you think HR would make there own barrels or get them from Criterion.


Didnt springfield armory a few years back make some M1s or were those just from GI parts and they put a new barrel on them.

[HiBC]

@ HiBC,

Setaside the forged receivers, Would H&R most likely use a stamped Trigger group? vs the older style milled trigger groups

Also would you think HR would make there own barrels or get them from Criterion.


Didnt springfield armory a few years back make some M1s or were those just from GI parts and they put a new barrel on them.

You are the OP for this post! I learned from your video. I have no inside info. I don't know what they will do.

[HiBC]

S.A. Inc.'s cast-receiver Garands of the late '90s were (1) overpriced compared to CMP's USGI M1s and (2) often problematic otta the box.

OK. Assuming that is all the truth (just because I don't care to argue)....

What does an adventure by SA in the 90's have to do with what H+R might do today?
When it comes to H+R, the price or quality of what will be produced,neither you or I know what we are talking about. Period.

I have a CMP Garand. Hands down,unbeatable value! The day is coming they will dry up.

Like primers,and M-1 carbines and Springfield 1903's, how are the prices?

I like 1903;s and M-1 carbines. IMO,prices over $400 or $500 are about scarcity rather than value. Rare collectables aside, todays prices are about $1000 worth of "I just want one.Thats what they cost"

Time will tell.

[bobn]

lol, cannot help myself. cast recievers, blah blah. I and almost everbody here would like a m1a. not to many usgi forged recievers on them. if you got one it was stolen from a armory somewhere. as atf said once a machine gun always a machine gun. selector switch welded shut or not.
...btw i have had a couple of the commercial springfield amorys M1a's in the 90s and still have one of the sa commercial garands and they are/was/is just fine....

except for the norinco m14 copies, has any hi end fulton, smith etc made a forged reciever for the m14 semi copies?

[BobCat45]

These guys claim to, but I've never seen one personally.
https://www.lrbarms.com/

[44 AMP]

I wish them luck and commercial success, but I don't have any great hopes for their long term prospects.

Its not that they won't sell some, I just have doubts that they will sell enough to keep doing it.

Its a really "tough room" these days, and re-creating the M1 Garand is going to draw some love and a lot of "hate" or at least complaints...

Some of the questions have already popped up in this thread. Cast vs forged, not original GI, price point? and that's tip of the iceberg I think...

As a desirable military collectable, ABSOLUTELY. The M1 Garand deserves all the honors and praise it has earned over the years. No question about that. However, the design has a number of limitations and restrictions.

Price point and quality of manufacture will be key issues. Are they going to make what they made during WWII, the same way they did then? And what will they have to sell that for, to make a profit, and how likely is the buying public going to be thinking its too much?? (no matter what it is?)

What's a decent price for a non-historically valuable 8 shot semi auto .30-06 that needs unique clips, and is designed to run on GI spec .30-06? (there is very little if any surplus ammo of that type left). Its a couple pounds heavier than needed for a hunting rifle, I would expect "service grade" accuracy, but nothing more.

Its not "tacti-cool" isn't going to have (and won't easily take) all the add on bells and whistles demanded by one part of the market these days.

As I see it, its got one niche, and that's people who want to have and shoot an M1 Garand without worrying about its historical value being damaged through further use. That IS a good slice of the potential market, but is it going to be enough? No idea, it will depend on many, many things we just don't know yet.

and then. there is this...not a complete ban, but restrictins...

And - even though it is a semiautomatic rifle, can you imagine the ridicule anyone wanting to ban a rifle design that was adopted my the US Military in 1936 would experience? Maybe I'm totally off base, but I think anyone proposing that would be laughed out of town.

No, sorry, they weren't laughed out of town, it became law a couple of years ago, in Washington state.

EVERY single semi auto rifle in WA was legally reclassified as a "semiautomatic assault rifle" in 2020. Every one. That includes the M1 Garand. Extra fees, 10 day waiting period, "enhanced background check, training requirements and several other things are needed to purchase one today.

Don't think the M1 Garand is immune to semi auto restrictions just because it doesn't look like AR or AK. Its not. All it takes is writing the law a certain way, which the anti's have finally discovered and put into practice.

[Rob228]

Man.... what if they made a short action. Every now and then a .243 M1A pops up on Gunbroker and I've always lost the fight with my budget when they do. Call it sacrilege but I'd buy a Garand in something other than 30-06.

[JustJake]

Man.... what if they made a short action. Every now and then a .243 M1A pops up on Gunbroker and I've always lost the fight with my budget when they do.Call it sacrilege but I'd buy a Garand in something other than 30-06

They don't need a short action to make a .308 Garand, nor for any other chambering where the cartridge is a derivative of either the .30-06 or .308. All you need is the barrel.

I've seen Garands chambered in .270 Win, 7mm-08, and .35 Whelen. As long as you can source an 'M1 profile' barrel for the build, there are - in theory - a lot of different possible chamberings.

Criterion offers (or used to) barrels in .35 Whelen and 6.5 Swede. While the Swede cartridge, technically, is not a derivative of the '06, the COAL and rim dimension is close enough to work in the clip-fed action.

https://criterionbarrels.com/product...v=7516fd43adaa

And unlike with the .35 Whelen, you don't have to modify the receiver to get a full 8-rds to fit and feed off an en bloc clip. Shuff's Parkerizing uses Criterion barrels for the .35W Garands that he builds.

[Drm50]

Back about the time Ruger put Mini 14 on the market they had a 308/ 7.62 nato
version. I think XGI was model. They got so far as to catalog it and must have made a few. They pulled it because the cast receivers couldn’t take 308s.
Ruger is king of cast. If they can’t do it I wouldn’t trust H&R. My M16a1 in RVn was made by H&R. I’ve always wondered how many of the contractors actually produced their own receivers.
I grew up in small town that had a International Harvester Plant. In 60s I use to bust my butt to get M1s made by IH. It was before the craze and MIs were cheap.
The “old” guys that worked at IH would buy IH rifles even if they didn’t shoot. I hope to get a few of them back.

[bamaranger]

I've always wanted a "tanker" or a mini-G. Reluctant to mod one of my complete rifles, a uncertain about the quality of tanker acquired commercially. But a "new" rifle or better, a new tanker, would be appealing. In .308, of course.

[44 AMP]

They pulled it because the cast receivers couldn’t take 308s.

and did RUGER tell you that? because if THEY didn't, I'm calling it BS...

The story I've heard (and believe) is that Ruger abandoned the XGI project because they couldn't get the prototypes to shoot as accurately as they required.

Remember Bill Ruger Sr was still running HIS company in those days and Bill Ruger was an opinionated fellow about a great many things.

According to the story that was circulated at the time, Bill Ruger killed the gun, because he wasn't going to have his company put out what he felt was an inferior product with his name on it.

The very first (and only time) I ever heard anyone state Ruger's "cast receivers can't take .308s" is your post.

That being said, there have been cast recievers that "couldn't take it" but not because they were cast, but because the maker didn't make their casting "good enough" for the job.

Casting has been around as long as we've been melting metal, and its just a process that covers a huge range of possible results. Very easy to cast low quality stuff, not so easy to cast high quality steel, but Ruger knows how, and does it.

They don't need a short action to make a .308 Garand, nor for any other chambering where the cartridge is a derivative of either the .30-06 or .308. All you need is the barrel.

If you want to convert an M1 Garand to 7.62mm NATO you don't even need a new barrel, all you need is a chamber insert. IIRC the US Navy did that, and used those rifles in competition for some time.
'

[HiBC]

While the discussion of cast vs forged is all good fun, if you actually listen to the video interview the OP provided,
It was clearly stated the receivers would be FORGED. Not cast.

Its kind of funny how some wet blanket negative Nellie can dig up a fear from the dark shadows of their mind ,put it out there, and it transforms into fake news of the day. They'll be forged,not cast.

So,does anybody really think a Ruger 77 won't take a 308? They are cast,too.

The original Garands and M-14's I believe were made of 8620 steel. Forged.

But 8620 steel is also good for investment casting. I forget the fine details,but its a high strength alloy steel like 4140 and 4340. It will heat treat,for strength,but it does not get real hard. Maybe low 40's Rockwell C ? Don't quote me. It may be less.
It will,however, nitride or case harden. There is something in the mix that helps prevent it from getting brittle.
Now,a disclaimer, I wrote all that about 8620 from memory. I have not refreshed that memory for some years. Take it with a grain of salt,and look it up yourself.

And a PS. I think the chamber insert conversion to 7.62 came about with the Italian BM 59 project.

[zaitcev]

Spud Nodak was acquired by PSA in order to take over and revitalize the H&R brand. And Spud Nodak is primarily known as a forging company.

[jetinteriorguy]

This is the way I remember it with the project that eventually became the Mini 30. I followed this pretty closely at the time and wanted one real bad, so I wound up getting one of the first production Mini 30’s for deer hunting. At first accuracy was dismal, this and owning a .41 Mag are what got me started in hand loading. With a little sear polishing and removing 1 1/2 coils from the disconnect spring plus a good load my rifle shot pretty reliably at 1.75 MOA out to 200 yds.

(This was in response to post #21)

[JustJake]

They don't need a short action to make a .308 Garand, nor for any other chambering where the cartridge is a derivative of either the .30-06 or .308. All you need is the barrel.

If you want to convert an M1 Garand to 7.62mm NATO you don't even need a new barrel, all you need is a chamber insert. IIRC the US Navy did that, and used those rifles in competition for some time.

You recall wrongly ...

The Navy did try a "7.62 chamber insert" to accomplish the conversion but only for a brief time and abandoned the use of this device when problems developed. The chamber insert was never viewed as a permanent solution over simply re-barreling M1s to 7.62/.308.

Lots of info available thru Google-fu on this topic ... Here's one:

https://www.forgottenweapons.com/m1-...nd-conversion/

Also, accuracy with the insert wasn't nearly as good as with a dedicated barrel. The fame that Navy Garands garnered in Match competition was due to using high-quality barrels chambered for an inherently more accurate cartridge (7.62/.308).