m1 garand v.s. mauser

Any rifle can jam, that being said the M1 was used in many extreme environments and was well liked for its extreme reliability. The M1 is just as accurate as most bolt guns to include the K98 and Springfield, at any range an infantryman would engage at say out to 800 yards. It would take a superior marksman to outshoot the rifle. Out past 800 yards the bolt gun would the advantage but then it's probably in the hands of a highly trained/specialized shooter that's taking extreme range shots.

 

I have shot a M-1 to empty on several occasions but the thought came to me what if you shot 3,4,5 rounds then quit. Can you eject and reload a fresh clip or can you top off that clip , assuming you have access to loose rounds? They feel very tightly packed. If you cannot and happen to be short on ammo this seems like a problem. I know US logistics were great but ammunition shortages must have occurred at some point. The K 98 can be loaded singles or by stripper clip with ease. This is really a question .

As for quality '98 quality declined as the war progressed fron samples I have seen. Early guns were beautifully made. That does not necessarily mean less reliable but might .

 

You can eject the clip manually, but it requires a clip and not single rounds to be inserted (although it is unclear if it is possible to manually add single rounds to a clip with any ease);

M1 Garand - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

under features.

AFAIK the usual procedure was to empty the clip before reloading. Although box magazines make it much easier to put a new magazine on a weapon before running out of rounds, the small number of magazines actually carried by any infantryman means that at some point you have a collection of partially filled magazines to choose from which isn't always a good situation. Top loading bolt-action rifles like the Lee-Enfield could be topped up whenever you had at least 5 rounds space in the magazine, although it is possible to use a clip to feed less than 5, it's more trouble than it's worth. The K98 only had space for 5 rounds so although you could add individual rounds, loading a new clip before the mag was empty was unlikely to be easier than single rounds if just 'topping off'.

 

Yeah like the Tiger and Panther...or my BMW at times arghhh.

 

Sure you can eject a partially shot M1 clip and reload with a full magazine, done it many times in my dozen years re-enacting.

 

YouTube - topping of the old M1 Garand rifle The actual topping off starts at about 1:00, although it does seem relatively simple its not a process i would do if i was in immidiate danger. But hey thats just me

 

I have to say that anyone claiming the K98's sights are better that those on the M1 Garand is not very well informed or experienced. I'm a very experienced shooter and use my K98's quite often, but in a comparison with a Garand there really is little comparison. The same basic sights on the Garand were used in the M14 and are still on the M16A2, reason being is that they are very good and very effective. However, unless you are military trained or taught by someone who was on how to properly use the sights on the Garand you probably can't get the full benefit.

Does your Mauser sight look like this?
http://www.biggerhammer.net/manuals/garand/nm-rear.gif

Use the top of the post to bisect your target's center. aka "Center Mass" and maintain a proper sight picture after getting a good "zero" and viola..... another expert shooter with the Garand

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...sight_alignment_FM_3-22.9_(23-9)_Fig_4-17.png

 

Thanks guys, The usual good answers. I was aware you could not add single rounds to an M-1 but mainly wondered during a lull could one feed single rounds into a partially full clip. From just looking at one it appears possible but not easy. Certainly not easily doable under fire. It appears that if one had a partially loaded gun you would eject it and insert a full one. In a tight ammunition situation this seems slightly wasteful and may have lead to the box magazine in the M 14 thought the requirement of a 20 shot capacity may also have been the reason. Speaking of wasteful, the M 14 on full auto would be a candidate !

Were M-1's with that laced on cheek pad and scope issued in WW2 or is that later?

 

I'm not sure about the laced on cheek pad, but Garands with scopes were issued (the M1C and M1D)and were adopted in June 1944 and Sept 1944 respectively where the main difference was the scope mounts (I believe). They saw limited service in WW2 as few made it to the front lines but i think they were also used in the Korean conflict.

Bear in mind this is from memory and M1 sniper varients are not my forté , so do some research on the M1C and M1D. Much more rewarding than reading one persons condensed down version

 

ok after reading alla the post here is my oppinion.....
the kar98 is more reliable as far as safety of the user and jumming problems are concerned
the M1 is faster to reload and has better fire rate.....
1 the kar98 is almost imposimble to jumm (being bolt action)
2 the sightes of the kar98 are much better than the M1 (my personal oppinion)
3 the kar98 has clips that make reloading simple and fast....
4 being a bolt action rifle makes it a precition rifle....
5 when empty you only know.... ther is no "DING" = shoot me i am empty....

History of all things has proved that SIMPLE ALWAYS WORKS.... Take cars planes etc..... even in weapons of our times it is the same..... for example ak47 and M16......

 

Sentences like that are obviously going to create OT debate. Lets keep this about Garands and Mausers

 

Not true, failure to feed issues are quite common on internal magazine bolt guns. So no, almost impossible to jam is not true, extremely reliable however would be accurate.

Like Black6 stated, the M1 Garand has outstanding sights. The sights on the K98 while very good are less advanced. But you did specify that this was your personal preference.

The M1 uses an 8 round en bloc clip, reloading time is easily as quick as for the K98.

The M1 is capable of extremely precise fire, the very slight increase in accuracy of the K98 or '03 Springfield is really unusable. There is probably not one shooter in 10,000, with the requisite training and skill to outshoot the M1, and even then the difference would only be noticeable at extreme range.

This is a sea story. Think about it, it makes no sense. The German soldier hears the clink over all the other battlefield sounds, and there must only be one American because I'm sure they won't all have the spent clip ejecting at the same time.

 

Never shot a Garand before but I will say the Kar98k is an amazing rifle. Great accuracy and iron sights, but it's drawback is that its bolt-action. Nonetheless, it's still a great rifle and probably one of the best of it's time. I know someone mentioned earlier they got to shoot a G43, has anyone here been lucky enough to get their hands on a G41?

 

I've shot my 91-30 once (so far!), and just reading your mention of the G41 has me drooling!

 

I've owned a Garand, and a Springfield 03. The '03 was a fine rifle, and close enough to the Mauser I think for the point I have in mind.

When the Marines landed on Guadalcanal, they came with Springfields. When the Army landed later, they had Garands. There's a story that Marines would attach themselves to Army guys to get first dibs on their Garand if they became a casualty.

That tells me volumes if true.

 

The Mosin Nagant is a nice rifle, but it's probably my least favorite out of the 98k, Enfield, and '03. Currently there's 2 G41's on Gunbroker for 5 and 7k. If I had that money, I'd buy one in a heartbeat!

 

I have both models of G41 and they shoot the same as the G43 (even if they are internally different) and all have the same sight picture as the K98. The G41M is pretty heavy and probably the most accurate from a bench rest because it has less recoil (lesser weight in internal moving parts in relation to the weight). With less recoil and 10 rds you can shoot a nice tight group out to 200 meters. The G43 is best since you can just slide on a scope and comfortably shoot 400 meter targets. My particular G41W isn't a favorite, it frequently fires two rounds with one trigger pull which makes me a bit uncomfortable that it might fail or break.

I'd take a G43 over a K98 anyday, but the Garand over the G43 (unless it came with the scope).

 

Alright, a few things first...try to be less vauge and also try to compare boltaction's to boltaction's.

M1 Garand,
The M1 Garand obviously faster firing, and the M1 Garand has an 8 round "Enbloc" clip which compared to the Mauser 98's 5 round "Stripper" clip, is very good and bad in diffrent situations. In terms of clips I'd prefer a Garand although the Garand can only be Re-loaded after firing all 8 shots in your "enbloc" clip. In terms of cartridges; The Garand fires the 30-06 Springfeild round but it also has the ability to fire the 7.62x51 which is a NATO round.

Mauser 98k,
The Mauser was more of a long range weapon with it's bolt-action capability and it also had a round that had a bit more of a "Punch" in it. The round used in the Mauser is the infamous 7.92x57mm IS which was also used in quite a few other weapons in the German arsenal like the G40K. The effective range is about 500m and the Garand's is about 400m. The close range capabilities are very bad and in my opinion i'd rather have a P38.

If all these comments don't help you then try some of these:
M1 Garand - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Karabiner 98k - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
K98k Mauser Page
M1 Garand Rifle <------- VERY VERY good website I found.

 

The Garand has to been rechambered and rebarelled to accomodate the 7.62x51 (.308 Win) NATO Cartridge. The Navy converted a few rifles to the 7.62x51 NATO; but, I think it was only about 500.

 

Just curious, why would you mention the G40k? They made a handfull and never even did a troop test.
As far as the 30-06 round and the 8mm they can both reach out 1000 meters and still kill, but how far can the naked eye see a target? Regardless of people's preferences here, the Garand has the more technologically advanced and precision set of sights than the K98 or G41/43 series.