"Jim Knoyle" wrote in message
...

"Paul J. Adam" wrote in message
...
In message , tw
writes
I've always wondered, what are the differences between the M1, the M1
Garand
and the M14?

M1 rifle was named the Garand: chambered for .30-06 and feeding from an
eight-shot charger.

Right-ho. That's the one with the full length stock, right?

M14 was very similar, but was chambered in 7.62mm NATO, used a
twenty-round box magazine, and in some versions had a full-auto
capability (little used and often deleted)


Also, there was the cal .30 carbine.

This is what has me confused I think - so there is the M1 Garand (which
never seemed to have a magazine - that tallies with Paul's description of
the 8 round charger) then there was a carbine which looked rather like my
old BSA Meteor air rifle with what looked like a 20 round box magazine. Were
these the same rifle but with different barrel length/stock length/magazine?
(M1 carbine and Garand)


Per TM9-1276:
M1 Carbine with wooden stock, semi-automatic.
M1A1 Same but folding metal stock.
M2 Carbine with selector for semi or full auto.
M3 Same but accepts sniper-scope. ( see TM5-9341)

Thanks for that

Now, for lethality you want a Martini-Henry

I believe we used to fire them in CCF, though they had been rechambered for
..22 instead. That was the underlever rifle we used to "slosh the fuzzie
wuzzies"* wasn't it? .45 calibre originally? That must have hurt...


*Although Corporal Jones would have you believe the cold steel was the
better option. They DO NOT like it up 'em.