M-1 Garand sights

[steelbuttplate]

Best battle rifle of our time, yea probably was when that was said. My first two times out I had trouble sighting in, so finally shooting mainly 4" right I locked the rear sight down at bottom dead center. Leave it. Then I adjusted the front to the right, and got it shooting it's 4 " bullseye group. Since then I've read a report about battle action with M-1's and most all soldiers didn't use the yardage adjustment on these, just cowboy elevation on 300-400 yd shots. Whats your experience?

[Junk Yard Dog]

It still is the best battle rifle of all time. I never used the windage adjustment either, at the 100 yards or less range I was shooting them I didn't need to. You only mess with the front sight when doing the initial sighting in, it would be the armorers messing with that, not the guys in the field. After it's sighted in the windage is adjusted using the rear sight if need be unless you do something stupid like smash the front sight hard into something knocking it out of alignment.

[RazorBurn]

I've had three, and still have two. All of mine are CMP service grades and real tack drivers. Both were super easy to sight in for me. I can ring my 10 inch steel gong at 200 yards all day long easily with my Garands.

[WeldonHunter]

I didn't have a problem with windage but elevation was way high on mine. I forget exactly how bad but I seem to remember it was like 5+ inches high even with the elevation turned all the way down. Keep in mind this rifle was an Arlington Ordnance (formerly Blue Sky) refurbed gun that is re-barreled with a brand new 7.62x51 NATO barrel. It was given to me by my uncle and while he had it he replaced the stock with a brand new walnut stock too. He got it in the 90s and I have no idea how it shot while he had it, he doesn't remember. I did some adjustments to the stock fit and op rod clearance. I was working with some of the guys here especially SGT. Rob who used to shoot Garands in competition. He had a bunch of left over parts from his shooting days he sold me and it included a front sight that once I received realized was taller than mine. I replaced it and that helped a lot but wasn't enough. I ended up buying a National Match front sight from Orion7 http://www.m1garand.com/store/m1_garand ... h_062.html that took care of most of the problem. This was after a lot of measuring and phone calls to them to find one that was the best one. It's hitting dead bulls-eye at 75yds now. The rifle shoots better then I do.

[steelbuttplate]

Yep when I'm shootin high and right 5 " the first few something gonna get adjusted. Mine does have the locking bar right side rear sight, and I just couldn't get it dialed in using it the rear windage.........So.....Set the Rear sight on bottom elev.0 windage, and moved the front sight in my shop where I wanted it....Bingo..... My question was really does anybody set the elevation, calibrate it, and try it @600 yd. by dialing it up? From what I've read, most WW11 Soldiers didnt' use it . Aim high Men them bastards are a half mile away

[WeldonHunter]

Yep when I'm shootin high and right 5 " the first few something gonna get adjusted. Mine does have the locking bar right side rear sight, and I just couldn't get it dialed in using it the rear windage.........So.....Set the Rear sight on bottom elev.0 windage, and moved the front sight in my shop where I wanted it....Bingo..... My question was really does anybody set the elevation, calibrate it, and try it @600 yd. by dialing it up? From what I've read, most WW11 Soldiers didnt' use it . Aim high Men them bastards are a half mile away

I can't help with actually sighting one in properly. I was just tinkering around to get it on paper close up. I don't shoot anything past 100yds. My eyes just aren't that good and I'm not steady enough anymore to do that. Plus I hate walking that far to check targets, lol. I did get some prescription glasses finally but I haven't done any shooting since I got them. Before it was tough because one sight or the other was blurry depending on which one I was concentrating. There is a procedure for sighting these in I believe but I forget how it's done.

[jones0430]

Considering that most effective engagement ranges in Europe were from 300 yards and closer there would be little incentive for a soldier to adjust their sites.

Also remember that longer range engagements were normally done with machineguns or company mortars. Long range marksmanship has never been the strong suite of the American infantryman.

[Longcolt44]

Considering that most effective engagement ranges in Europe were from 300 yards and closer there would be little incentive for a soldier to adjust their sites.

Also remember that longer range engagements were normally done with machineguns or company mortars. Long range marksmanship has never been the strong suite of the American infantryman.

Excuse me, I'll just stand over here until the dust clears. We have more than a few Vets that may take issue with that statement.

[jones0430]

I'm a vet as well. Infantry officer. And I spent time on the staff in the Infantry School at Ft. Benning.

Effective engagement distance in open terrain for infantry is 300 meters. Most riflemen have difficulty hitting a stationary target at greater than 300 meters.

The area fire of machineguns is far more accurate and effective at those distances against moving infantry than rifle fire. What rifle fire will do is provide suppressive fire, and the enemy can then be engaged with mortars.

At 300 meters a personnel target is just a bit more than twice the height of the M1 front sight, making accurate target acquisition over iron sights difficult with a moving target.
Once the range closes to under 300 meters individual rifle fire becomes more effective.

[BuckeyeSgt]

Got to agree with Jones here. Of course the key term was infantrymen. Snipers on the other hand, we have had a lot of good ones.

[Junk Yard Dog]

Considering that most effective engagement ranges in Europe were from 300 yards and closer there would be little incentive for a soldier to adjust their sites.

Also remember that longer range engagements were normally done with machineguns or company mortars. Long range marksmanship has never been the strong suite of the American infantryman.

Marksmanship has been emphasized in the US military since before there was a USA or even a Continental Army. Militia members in the colonies were all predominantly farmers and hunters, they learned the tools they had at their disposal as well as they could. We all see things written about the inaccuracy of smooth bore muskets and all that, that only applies to the casual shooters of today of course. The smooth bore can be accurate enough if used within it's design parameters with loads tailored for it. They knew what sort of powders they were using, what sort of wad they needed with the cast balls they had, how to sharpen a flint and keep a frizzen properly sparking, how much priming powder was just enough. They practiced with them endlessly, this has been entered into the historical record more than once. farmer Bob of 1775 was a marksman. Yea, the soldier knowing his weapon and how to use it goes all the way back to the first adventurers from Europe who set foot on these shores. The riflemen of the continental army were few in number and highly prized, they taught the British Army some lessons about the value of marksmanship on the battlefield and the havoc that targeted shooting of officers and noncoms can cause. Every single weapon the US military has issued since the first rifle muskets has been a tool for marksmanship, time and again ordinary infantry rifles have received upgrades so they will shoot even more accurately. The current plastic fantastic isn't my favorite weapon, I am not much for modern black rifles, but you will not hear me say the rifle can't shoot straight, it also is a rifleman's tool that carry's on the tradition of aimed marksmanship rather than massed fire or spray and pray. Not every soldier will be a trained sniper any more than I could drive the Indy 500, but all are provided with the tools and training to best bring out whatever skill they have.

[redhat10]

On the target subject...back in 1967, i was issued a M14 semi-auto rifle...fire selector removed, at Fort Polk , la..Basic infantry training involved firing about 400 rounds i guess... one of the last firing sessions, we fired at automatic Man-shaped targets..We were not to adjust the sights for this target...watch for it to come up and aim head high at it..the standard round, guessing 147 gr., would strike the target in the chest...RANGE 450 Meters.. the effective range at the time for the standard rifles..the target was almost covered by the front post, plus you had to watch close to see it come up from the ground...Point being just how far can you pick out a target, esp. if camoflaged to match terrain..Now I have some l118 in 168 gr that is supposed to be good for 900 yds, plus a nice telescope.. IF I can spot the target..

[entropy]

I'm a vet as well. Infantry officer. And I spent time on the staff in the Infantry School at Ft. Benning.

Effective engagement distance in open terrain for infantry is 300 meters. Most riflemen have difficulty hitting a stationary target at greater than 300 meters.

The area fire of machineguns is far more accurate and effective at those distances against moving infantry than rifle fire. What rifle fire will do is provide suppressive fire, and the enemy can then be engaged with mortars.

At 300 meters a personnel target is just a bit more than twice the height of the M1 front sight, making accurate target acquisition over iron sights difficult with a moving target.
Once the range closes to under 300 meters individual rifle fire becomes more effective.

I'll second that, with the addition that your definition of accuracy and effectiveness varies with the role of the fire at a given time. If you have mortars(or Arty) handy, then yes, rifle fire is good to pin an enemy in place while the tubes are set up and zeroed. KIlls can be made past 300, but not reliably enough. Your mortars will flush the enemy out of hiding, where you can rake them with MG fire and aimed rifle fire, though as pointed out, at moving targets, hits will be fewer. If you don't have mortars available (or time to set them up), then the MG's pin the enemy while the riflemen advance to advantageous positions within killing range.

Or nuke 'em from high orbit, it's the only way to be sure.

[steelbuttplate]

I thank you all, My question, Was the yardage adjustment used? Sounds like NO it was not, so I'm not gonna screw with mine. On a 91/30 however, I've had success hitting man size rocks at 500yd using the 400-500 setting in a dry lake bed.

[Junk Yard Dog]

Sure it was used, on the target range by competition shooters with time and a target 900 yards away. In combat nobody touched the sights, I asked the WW2 combat infantry man I see every day, his response to my question if he ever had to adjust his M1 sights while touring France, Germany, and Austria - " what the fuck for?"