M1 Garand vs. M1941 Johnson Rifle Debate

[Bunny]

I have several M1's and I love shooting them. Was the Johnson a little ahead of its time? The bolt sure sounds like M10/M16/AR15! If it was mag feed down the road have seen more service?

Ian McCollum on Forgotten Weapons states that the AR rotating bolt and cammed bolt carrier were copied by Stoner and Sullivan. Ian speculated that Stoner may have seen a M1941 on Guadalcanal in the hands of Para Marines or Raiders during the fighting there.

 

[John Youhouse]

I own a 1941 Johnson Rifle which I occasionally shoot. I received it after my Uncle died. He served in the OSS during WWII in Czechoslovakia and Burma/China. He carried a Johnson primarily because he said "you could top it off." After the war he bought one.

 

[BarryinIN]

I have several M1's and I love shooting them. Was the Johnson a little ahead of its time? The bolt sure sounds like M10/M16/AR15! If it was mag feed down the road have seen more service?

The AR-10 bolt was indeed Johnson-based. ArmaLite hired Melvin Johnson in an advisory role when they were working in the AR-10. I do wonder if that was some sort of legal trick to get around using the design.

 

[BarryinIN]

I should add that maybe it was just something with the mag's feed lips and the stripping angle as off a bit. HA! I don't remember even thinking of that. Geeesch.

The feed lips, if that’s what they can be called here, are part of the receiver. The magazine pushed the rounds up against the bottom of the receiver, who opening is shaped more or less like feed lips.

The Johnson Automatic Rifle was the same way. The side-feed magazine was single-stack (Johnson felt that was more reliable) and has a spring-loaded cover. When not in the rifle, the cover holds the rounds in. When inserted in the receiver, that cover is pushed out of the way for the rounds to meet the receiver feed lips.

 

[BarryinIN]

Also a garand cost $85.00 whereas the Johnson cost $125.00. That certanily did not help.

I’ve never seen that figure. If correct, it must have come from the Johnson’s prototype costs. Production costs should’ve been less than the Garand.

Melvin Johnson went around to various manufacturers to see what they could build, should it enter wartime production. A lot of it could’ve been made on non-gun production factories. For example, he got the head of a headlight factory to look at parts and say he could be in production within a month. An electric fan company was another.

I think the only parts that couldn’t be made in little factories scattered here and there were stocks and barrels. In the case of both, the machinery make them was all in use and/or claimed by the government.

 

[BarryinIN]

I have held a johnson but never fired one and i know i'm bout to catch hell for the holding a johnson remark.

Trust me, I’ve heard every Johnson joke. Told most of them myself.

 

[BarryinIN]

The Johnson is one of the could have been guns.

I’ve looked at it and thought the same thing, but maybe in a different way.

The Johnson rifle is very MODULAR rifle. The magazine for example, can be swapped out easily. Pull two pins and you can take it off and replace it with a box magazine well.

Change to the 7.61x51? Press a bullet tip the barrel catch and you can pull the 30-06 barrel and put 7.62x51 barrel on.

Select fire? Trigger group.

Synthetic stock? Pistol grip stock? It should only take a minute.

So I’ve wondered before if we had the Johnson in service at the end of WWII, could it have become the M-14?

Another change that could’ve come: That receiver and what they call the “radiator” is all one piece. The bolt does not lock into that. It locks into the barrel extension, as on the AR10/15. So that big hunk of steel could easily be aluminum and trim a lot of weight.

Lots to “What if?” about.


I’ll take some pictures later.