Mad Minute: M1 Garand 

Not if you can get a bunch of cheap peasants and arm them with cheap rifles.

Eh, it was really more about supplying men better.

Yes we do

You might get a complete card with the Brown Bess. Either no hole, if not loaded in time, or one large space.

@@myparceltape1169 if you load the brown bess with "buck and ball" does that count as multiple hits?

Epitoma Rei Militaris Those were darks times for me as well, friend

Would it be easier if I said "your litres per 100 kilometres may vary"? :D :D :D

Bloke on the Range as a matter of fact yes.

same

Sedan57Chevy "Timothy", as I have stated previously

I like the idea that John Garand was like "Who cares how they say it? They'll remember the name, right?"

Clint Ambrose at 20m, everyone is fearsome with most any arm

That rapid fire at 9:30 was something to behold.

@@28pbtkh23 Sorry, I don't mean to do anybody down, but have you ever thought of what can be done with Editing? More seriously, there used to be something called a Sound Stage where the actors could speak their lines without interference from cameras or passing traffic including the overhead type.

the lee enfield only slower by 0.5 secounds -- not bad for a bolt action

slower in what conditions? bench rested? there's no comparison here. you wont hit shit with that enfield firing as fast as you can with it but I will take someones head off at 100yds with my garand every 2 seconds with ease. bolt actions are accurate for sure but not in rapid fire...that's just the honest truth.

geezerp1982 Nothings faster than a semi-automatic, and where is this based from?

Korean era M2 Carbine 30 round magazines.

I participated in a historical competition (all guns designed before 1945) where on one stage we had 2 minutes to shoot a target at 150 meters as many times as we could. The M1 Carbine completely outclassed anything else in firepower. No jams like SVTs do... Well a Suomi smg with drum magazine came close.

@@werre2 I am not surprised at all. With its light recoil, good peep sight and high magazine capacity the M1 carbine should beat the crap out of anything shoulder fired from the WWII era at that kind of distance.

@@werre2 ​ Was it in full auto or semi? I ask because I heard that the M1 Carbine in full auto could fire all of its rounds off before the first hit the target.

@@theminnesotan592 that was the m2 carbine a korean war variant of the m1 carbine.

Same here! God Bless The Garand!! And God Bless America!!

Me neither, I’m very glad to own an example

Maybe; I know the MAS-36, Lee-Enfield, and Karabiner 98k(Yes I went there and no I actually hate Nazism) were brilliant too.

@@jeffreygao3956 - amazing. You have replied to my comment and I have just noticed that I made it three years ago. That’s not a criticism though. I meant that the Garand had some semi auto function (sorry but I don’t know the exact term) and so had a higher rate of fire. Mind you, I have read the memoirs of a few British soldiers and they certainly loved their Enfields. Very accurate and reliable apparently, as I’m sure the Garand was as well.

Perhaps I will. That'll be a lot of money turned into noise though! :D

Bloke on the Range I mean 30 rounds of basically zero recoil go by very fast, even aimed.

I support this proposal! The cat is out of the bag with the M1 anyways, so using an intermediate cartridge rifle for further comparison would be a natural continuation. I didn't know that Bloke has an AR, though.

I do have one, but it's an HBAR with a freefloat tube, skeleton butt, extended sight radius, match trigger and other non-mil adaptations :D

darkspire91 Any minute chunk of those “can we melt this barrel/flash hider/suppressor” vids will give you that satisfaction. :-)

Give it a twist. Mad Minute: hand cranked Gatling Gun. I'm sure someone out there will loan you one.

darkspire91 Crank in one hand, cup of tea in the other.

With Hitlers buzz saw!

Ppsh mad minute

Done, but could only load 4 per clip. Still gets splits data and reload time data though! I guess I can edit it to fake a 5-shot reload.

About 20m. With a correspondingly small target :)

Don't do it Chap. My finger is hovering over the dislike button on the No 4 mad minute video as we speak ;-)

simonferrer Threatening me sir? Name your second sir! Handbags at dawn, be there or be square.

Challenge accepted sir! However, as the challenged party, I reserve the right to choose the weapon. I propose a bullseye competition at 50 paces with Tacti-Toks. The last person to go mad in sheer frustration at their particular piece of Four Year Plan arms production wins. I still haven't forgiven you for leading me down this obsessive road of Combloc Rubs Goldbergism ;-)

simonferrer Even more frustrating with my tonne of Sovblock click-bang ammo. You never know if it’s going to go.

This reminds me of a recent video I watched about why the M4 Sherman was what it was. Pretty much it was about everything you "know" is wrong. Aside from temperature issues pretty much everything the US Army used in WWII worked. Perfectly, no. And the M1 worked pretty damned well. Is the video boring? No it isn't. What it is, is a tour de force.

In British practice, that was pretty much 75% of the section commander's job, directing fire, mouvement etc. Still is.

I once read where military discipline was described as, 'Knowing when to STOP shooting' :p

Thanks, but those figures you're quoting there are way outside the limits of mechanical accuracy of either of those rifles, even fired from a machine rest.

@@BlokeontheRange Aye, I don't disagree about the MOA being far too ambitious, it probably being just hyperbole by the instructor to inspire the recruits, but the timing was intriguing. Roughly five seconds an aimed shot for the boltgun being dropped to around 2.5 for the Garand seemed to fit with your own experience of not having the bolt-action interrupting your firing process.

It probably did partly make up for it, although rifle fire is much less concentrated than LMG fire. BTW it was the M1919's they put bipods on.

Yes, a tank, or a flight of ground attack aircraft, or 155mm Artillery or perhaps even a naval gun barrage. :-)

Steve Whipp Or just a good light mortar. Much faster, too, even by US standards in WW2 or Korea.

Treblaine i

Unless of course you are mistaken in your wording and that what you actually meant was the Squad Automatic Weapon. Well actually in that particular Role i'd argue the B.A.R was better than the MG42, not quite the Bren though but that's a gun that was based off the BAR so its a generation ahead. before I go into anymore we need to learn what the ideal SAW is and it's role, The Squad Automatic Weapon is essentially the Walking fireman, the heavy hitter of the squad (and remember a squad is 10 men), He is the one who suppresses the enemy typically on a bipod or Mows them down if they are caught in the open. He can't sit in 1 spot though and he has to move quickly and sometimes Hip fire on the move or even shoulder fire. BUT that not all that he has to do, he's the walking fireman so he also has to be right up front storming trenches and buildings with the SMG guys typically walking while hip firing a wall of powerful bullets to anyone in the narrow choke point/ corridor. The Ideal criteria of a Squad Automatic weapon is a machine gun that has good enough firepower and good enough ammo compacity BUT is light, controllable, reloadable and ammo carryable enough to be operated by just 1 man. A squad will quite often have a SAW assistant ammo barer who might carry a few clips/belts but ultimately is still 100% capable in his own role and the SAW gunner by himself can manage just fine without him. Now if by that criteria you might see the problem with the MG42 as a SAW, the MG42 is a whopping 11.6kg empty and chews through so much ammo that atleast 1,000 rounds is required as well as atleast 2 spare barrels (because after 300 rounds or so at an incredible 1,500rpm they're finished). Now this is WAY too heavy for 1 man to sufficiently carry along with the rest of his gear and as a result a bare minimum of 2 men are required with a 3rd assisstant ammo barer. This 2nd man who carries a lot of the ammo has now been reduced to Walther pistol as a result so his role as a rifleman is gone to cater for the MG42. the MG42 is also completely useless at storming trenches and buildings, because again it's too heavy and because it has a 1,500rpm Rof they're no way in Hell that an individual can fire it standing up without falling over (except for a special technique where you ram your feet into the ground far apart and ram the stock of the MG42 into your hip/gut and fire a less than 1-second burst and you can't move while doing this nor shoulder fire it and even then you'd slide backwards.) So it can't be shoulder fired or hip fired while walking, but even if it could the MG42 drains a 50 round drum in 2 seconds and it's too heavy for him to carry more than 1 of those. the M1918A2 BAR weighs a fairly heafty 8.8kg's empty and carries say 12x 20 round magazines and well doesn't have a quick change barrel so no spare barrels which is far from light BUT is still manageable operated by just 1 man (so no other man in the squad has to be reduced to a pistol). The M1918A2 Bar is VERY easily hip fired and very controllable and is also very easily shoulder fired, The M1918A2 BAR comes with 2 ROF settings, 800-900rpm or 300-400rpm and under the 300-400rpm the BAR is extremely controllable while shoulder firing and because the BAR has a rear apperature peep sight it could actually be used like an Assualt rifle this way, A really big one that goes tac tac tac tac tac tac tac in full auto which is really accurate or even percision fire with a quick pull like the M1 Garands along side, it is accurate enough and have good enough sights take the role of an M1 Garand if required all be it much heavier ofc. and obviously, this makes it very good at storming buildings and trenches Now back on this issue on men required, you might think "Oh so what if the MG42 takes 2 men compared to the BARs, it still offers far more firepower in a 1v1" and you'd be correct.........except it wasn't always 1v1, the US noticed the fact that the MG42 required 2 men compared to one and noticed that as a result they had far more SAW firepower and at a certian point in 1944 US squads weren't given 1, but *2* Bar gunners, so it's now 2v1 per squad. However even 2 BAR's can't quite match the volume of fire that the MG42 Can BUT if the squads split up into 2 Fire teams of 5 men with 1 bar gunner in each and attack the MG42 from 2 differnet positions and angles that will seriously give an MG42 problems, and obviously 2 BAR's under 2 men are twice as good at storming trenches and Buildings and 2 Bar gunners can still shoulder and hip fire on the move. And Thus i think although the BAR far from the perfect SAW it is better at that role than the MG42 all round. Remember i'm definitely not saying the BAR is better than the MG42 overall, Hell fucking no, just in the SAW role. the BAR gets alot on unwarrented hate thrown at it like the M4 sherman, and to be fair the BAR was getting a bit outdated (awkward magazine reload, no pistol grip, no quick change barrel, awkward bi-pod) and they were better options such as the Bren gun and FM 24/29 (which were heavily inspired by the BAR btw) but it was still a very viable and solid piece of kit in that role. The BAR (like all John browning guns) was a victim of it's own success, it was good at the end of ww1 and blew away things like the Lewis gun and the Chauchat so far that by the time ww2 came around US ordinance said it didn't quite need to be replaced although a replacement would be helpful. In my opinion they should have adopted the FN Model D, which is essentially the BAR improved by the Belgians with a pistol grip, quick change barrel and better bi-pod. (fun fact, the FN Model D was the weapon that the FN FAL was based on, yes thats right, the BAR is the grandfather of the FN FAL.)

He knows that, he was a competitive mad minute shooter for years.

Look in the spreadsheet. You'll find one of them there...

Whaaaaaat you actually did a MAS36? Fantastic!

MAS 36 might actually do pretty well, (go watch Alex C. from TFBTV run and gun with one) but the garbage rod would fail miserable, rimmed ammo, a bolt the you have to slap harder than a mail order bride in order to operate, and non-self ejecting chargers, no chance in hell.

With or without a 2x4 handy for the M-N's bolt? ;^)

With! No doubt definitely with!

It's a Danish one made by Beretta indeed.

If you have a polished clip, its pretty quick.

The best thing a Mosin-Nagant is good at is turning money into noise.* *I own two. They are surrounded by US Rifle Cal .30 M1s guarding them to keep them in the lockup. The M1s are much easier on the shoulder than the M-Ns are.

gravelydon they also make very good throwing spears

And paddles/oars.

Ahh the good old Moist nugget

I actually paused it because I was confused about the music.

Indeed

The M1 easily achieves sub minute-of-angle to the point where precision at *typical engagement distances* between say a 1903 Springfield (basically a Mauser) and the M1 Garand is fairly negligible. I've shot both at 100 and 200 yds on a benchrest. Using M2 ball.

@@getmeoutofsanfrancisco9917 sub 1 moa...? Theynwere only manufactured to a tolerance of 5 moa so I'm guessing you've done a lot of work to that

In films they're firing blank so there's no recoil ;)

Why not time this video and the corresponding one with the No.4? Then you'll know :)

more like mad second haha

Frankenrifle fires 7.62x39

Dakota Miles it’s a competition shooting jacket

I think he will break his arm off trying to do a mad minute with a Mosin.

No. It's how it's supposed to function.

One from Brownells

It's actually the 2nd vid we've demonstrated this effect in. If you're interested, it also appears here with an SLR vs an SMLE: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Y3YiJDgddWk.html

Stg44. Paradigm shifting weapon that changed how we think and arm ourselves even now, 80 years down the track. And if you were armed with one even now you would NOT feel outgunned or hard done by as it is still an excellent serviceable weapon. M1? Not even the first issued-in-large-numbers self loading rifle. The op rod idea was bad design. The whole upper receiver is open to muck and shit. 'Great' design. The enbloc clip was 19th century thinking (and good then). It mostly worked ok. But they ditched it as SOON as they got a detachable box magazine working with the basic design. Then they ditched the oprod concept as soon as they could too. Better than any bolt gun tho. Even an SMLE. I think they should have gone with the Pederson in .276.

Done it, but with only 4 rounds per clip since 5 wouldn't feed. Vid will come at some point.

MUUUUUUCCCHCHHHHHH slower.

en-bloc clips are vastly faster than chargers

should make no appreciable difference since .308 was made to replicate the performance of .30-06 military ball ammo in a shorter case length.

well, I can tell the difference when shooting a Garand.......

There is no difference in recoil between .30-06 M2 ball (150gn @ 2800 fps) and the ammo I'm shooting there, which is also 150gn @ 2800 fps. 150gn @ 2800 fps is 150gn @ 2800fps..

not quite - the weight of the powder charge figures into the equation too - gas jet effect & all that. I can tell the difference, but it seems you don't notice it.

A couple of grains extra powder to get the same velocity? This is princess-and-the-pea territory. Or you're shooting heavier bullets in .30-06.