Why did Ruger make the mini magazine
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Joined
·
1,287 Posts
garand ? they take clips. The m1a rocks in.
does it? I wasnt sure.. Does that mean the M-14 rocked in too?
Joined
·
8,460 Posts
Hi whofarted;
The original Garand clip pushed straight down into a fixed magazine.
The T20E2 experimental (used modified M1918 BAR mags & was select fire) which was hoped to be ready for the invasion of Japan in 1946 used the same rocking style of magazine insertion as the M14 and the Mini 14.
Interestingly, the Mini 14 magazine is truly a miniature version of the M14 magazine, albeit with a curved rather than straight body. If you examine the pictures carefully, you can see the essentially identical magazine catches and magazine feed lip structures. Aside from size, the biggest change is in construction technique, with Mini 14 mags having a folded rear lug and M14 magazines having a welded on rear lug. Unfortunately I don't have any T20E2 magazines available for comparison.
For the US Rifle M14 to use a "straight insertion" magazine would have involved some sort of external structure, like the magazine tunnel at the front of an AR lower. This probably would have been regarded as adding to cost and weight of a rifle that was already over-cost and at the limits of its allowable weight. Moreover, the magazines of the US Rifle M14 were not regarded as disposable, unlike the late '50's conception of the Armalite magazine (ammo comes loaded in mags, use 'em once, hit the release, shove in a fresh box and don't bother to pick up the empty). The disposable "battle pack" concept comes up from time to time in new weapons designs and always has been dropped (early AUG, etc) by the time it hits the field.
Thus any mechanism such as the "rocking" motion latch that forces the soldier to retain his magazine is a plus. Note that the AK similarly used a rocking latch for exactly this reason (which is why AKM mags are so stout - you really are not supposed to toss 'em after one use). That was also the idea behind the "heel mounted" pistol magazine catch - it forces you to retain possession of the magazine rather than dumping it on the ground. European armies tended to favor this kind of thinking since they would rather lose an occasional soldier rather than pay for lost magazines*.
Hope I didn't put you to sleep!
All the best,
Grumpy
*PS If you think that style of thinking is too callous for a European army, consider that in WW2 the British paras were not issued reserve parachutes, as the cost of "wasted" parachutes was deemed to be more than the worth of the statistical few paratroopers whose lives they would save.
Joined
·
8,460 Posts
No problem. Dug up a pic of a T20E2. Interesting comparison to the M14 and Mini, isn't it? The FCG is essentially pure M14, right down to the connector rod and the flipper type FA selector, but the gas system is a modified Garand. Ironically, Garand himself didn't like the White gas system that gave the M14 its distinctive look. However, the White gas system did allow a shorter, straight op-rod that is a good deal stouter and less likely to be bent by high pressure loads.
Best,
Grumpy
PS - Interesting historical trivia question: Why did the Garand mag hold 8 ctgs? Because it was originally designed to hold 10x .276 Pederson ctgs and when the Ordnance Dept. insisted they keep .30-06 as the service caliber without starting over, Garand just dropped the capacity by two shots.
I believe that was MacArthur's decision, as he was Army Chief Of Staff around that time period.
Reasoning was due to the expense of changing out cartridges in the middle of The Great Depression, and the millions of rounds of 30-06 left over from "The Great War." (They had no idea that an even wider war was on the horizon.
By the way, The Brits did much the same thing when FN engineers, (who had fled Belgium with the blueprints for what became the FN-49.) Offered them a new semiauto service rifle. Too expensive and the logistics nightmare of changing rifles in the middle of a war.
Joined
·
8,460 Posts
Not crazy at all Old Navy. That's one of the alternate ideas I'd played with in case of a ban. Problem as I see it is one of re-engineering in all the hardware that got taken out when they went to a detachable box. Need a follower and pivot arm assembly shrunk, along with a redesigned op rod guide and some fairly hefty reworking on the receiver, not to mention a new FCG housing similar to the Garand's. Do-able but $$. That's why I gravitated to something that would be a lot less re-work for existing pieces, as we discussed. Got a couple of other ideas but I want to see how the ban plays out before I post outside of PM.
If you want to get some really dangerous ideas, look also at the Johnson Light Rifle of 1941. Lots of alternate systems for getting ctgs into the rifle that were good but were dropped (often for economic reasons more than anything else).
Best,
Grumpy
Me calling you "crazy" would be a whole lot like Mathew 4:3.
"And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?"
Having said that, I see two problems with the Garand en bloc loading system.
1) there is no way to "top off" a partially emptied clip.
2) in combat, having run through your loaded clips, you could end up hunting for those ejected clips and trying to refill them manually from loose rounds or machinegun belts.
And no, I don't consider the "ping" of an ejected clip, announcing "I'm empty" a valid complaint. Is someone going to hear that "ping" in the middle of a firefight. And IF hearing it, your opponant runs the very real risk of being ventilated by you buddies with loaded rifles.
The Garand, warts and all, was still the best rifle, all things considered, fielded during WWII.
JMHO as an Armchair Commando.
"And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?"
Having said that, I see two problems with the Garand en bloc loading system.
1) there is no way to "top off" a partially emptied clip.
2) in combat, having run through your loaded clips, you could end up hunting for those ejected clips and trying to refill them manually from loose rounds or machinegun belts.
And no, I don't consider the "ping" of an ejected clip, announcing "I'm empty" a valid complaint. Is someone going to hear that "ping" in the middle of a firefight. And IF hearing it, your opponant runs the very real risk of being ventilated by you buddies with loaded rifles.
The Garand, warts and all, was still the best rifle, all things considered, fielded during WWII.
JMHO as an Armchair Commando.
Joined
·
8,460 Posts
Yep. A lot of really good ideas were implemented in firearms design during the period 1880-1950 or so that got dropped for economic reasons. The Johnson Light Rifle is one of 'em. With modern MIM parts and CNC machining it could be possible to make one economically viable in 5.56x45.
Funny thing is how many features on guns are misunderstood. The beauty of the Glock's polymer frame was the reduction in production cost, the forearm/pistol grip/stock rifle configuration allowed the use of short pieces of junk quality wood instead of long pieces of high quality birch or walnut, the strong suit of the AK was that the receiver could be made in any sheet metal shop, etc.
Something like an FN49 or a Ljungman AG42B in 5.56x45 would also be do-able. Sort of a Mini 49 or Mini 42b if you would. And there's always the SKS - I would not be surprised to see a shrunken version of it in 5.56x45 if Kali gets its new ban through. Its just a case of someone being willing to invest the time, effort, and $$ to put together something that works based on a proven design.
Best,
Grumpy
Don't know about current production, but while my Factory Ruger 20 rounder has the described folded rear lug, my Factory Ruger 30 rounders (As well as my PMI 30 rounders) have the welded rear lug, just like the M-14.
As a SWAG, maybe they felt the added weight of 30 rounds might overstress a "folded" lug.
Joined
·
8,460 Posts
Interesting! I suspect you're right. No Mini 30 over here (nothing against it, but my 7.62x39's are all ComBloc origin).
Doing a bit more digging it looks like at least part of the reason for the mag type on the T20E2 was an attempt to maintain compatibility with existing BAR mags. They weren't able to quite work it (T20E2 mags worked in BAR but the reverse was not true) but it still would have been a nice feature in the invasion of Japan, had the atomic bombings not pre-empted those events. One magazine type for every man in the invasion force - yes I can definitely see the advantage to that.
Thanks for the info,
Grumpy
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
