View Single Post
  #9 (permalink)  
Old October 21st, 2009, 06:19 PM
brndirt1's Avatar
brndirt1OKF Moderator brndirt1 is offline
Saddle Tramp
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Billings Montana, USA
Posts: 4,313
Salute!: 545
Saluted 676 Times in 454 Posts
brndirt1 has a brilliant futurebrndirt1 has a brilliant futurebrndirt1 has a brilliant futurebrndirt1 has a brilliant futurebrndirt1 has a brilliant futurebrndirt1 has a brilliant futurebrndirt1 has a brilliant futurebrndirt1 has a brilliant futurebrndirt1 has a brilliant futurebrndirt1 has a brilliant futurebrndirt1 has a brilliant future
Default Re: Another semi-automatic rifle...

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScreamingEagleMG42 View Post
I feel like being able to easily "top off" the Johnson rifle with ammunition would be a good advantage. Trying to reload your garand to 8 rounds after only a few shots can be hectic. Eject the en bloc with four rounds left and it pops up with rounds falling everywhere.

Being able to easily maximize the rounds in your rifle during breaks in action would be a plus.
This is true, but in the tests; "The M1's were found to load and reload faster than the Johnsons but rate of fire in the rapid mode was identical with both rifles."

It was also pointed out that the greater number of small/intricate parts made the Johnson design the more difficult to field strip and assemble of the two. The action of the Johnson, a barrel which recoiled and activated the action, also made the use of a bayonet next to impossible.

While the bayonet was "loosing favor" in the Armed Forces, the requirement for the ability to attach and use one was still considered a "factor" in the tests. With the entire barrel in "motion" when fired to cycle the next round, the weight of the bayonet also impinged on the action somewhat.
__________________
Happy Trails,
Clint.
Reply With Quote