I borrowed a CMP Garand for a month to see if I liked it enough to get one. I didn't, at all.
As battle implement it was one war too late. By 1944 other armies already transitioned to widespread issue of assault rifles and submachine guns.
The Korean War, ouch. From Wikipedia on the PPSh-41.
"Though relatively inaccurate, the Chinese PPSh has a high rate of fire and was well-suited to the close-range firefights that typically occurred in that conflict, especially at night.[29] United Nations forces in defensive outposts or on patrol often had trouble returning a sufficient volume of fire when attacked by companies of infantry armed with the PPSh. Some U.S. infantry officers ranked the PPSh as the best combat weapon of the war: while lacking the accuracy of the U.S. M1 Garand and M1 carbine, it provided more firepower at short distances.[29] As infantry Captain (later General) Hal Moore, stated: "on full automatic it sprayed a lot of bullets and most of the killing in Korea was done at very close ranges and it was done quickly – a matter of who responded faster. In situations like that it outclassed and outgunned what we had. A close-in patrol fight was over very quickly and usually we lost because of it."[29]
You might not know it, but the M1 Garand was originally designed to fire the .276 Pedersen in 10 round enbloc clips. It was beefed up to handle .30-06 because we had millions of rounds of ammo sitting around after WWI along with BARs and light Machine Guns and the military didn't want another cartridge in the supply line.
The .276 Pedersen is pretty close to the modern 7mm-08, and would have been an excellent intermediate cartridge. The 2 extra rounds would have been a plus. Oh, and the rifle would have been 1.5 lb lighter too.
It wasn't one war too late so much as redesigned by bureaucratic decisions. It's still a fine rifle in .30-06, a rifleman's rifle as they say. Just on the heavy side.
Last edited: