SCUBA-SE Archives

July 2001

SCUBA-SE@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Lee Bell <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
SouthEast US Scuba Diving Travel list <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 20 Jul 2001 08:19:37 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (30 lines)
Bjorn Vang Jensen wrote:

> You obviously were in the light infantry or light Navy for them to give
you
> such a feather-weight weapon :-) Ours was the Garand, 5.23 kg or 11.5 lbs!

I dearly love the M-1 Garand.  It's one of the finest rifles I've ever
fired.  I almost owned a match grade one but, alas, dropped out of the
military weapon shooting competition and could no longer justify the cost.
I did, however, purchase a heavy barrel AR-15 (M-16) that is one heck of a
lot more comfortable to shoot in .223 than the 30-06 Garand.  With the heavy
barrel, it's also not a rifle I'd like to hold at arms length for long
(which I've had to do with both thanks to a demonstrated willingness to bend
orders).

> I have to say that on the range, that rifle was head and shoulders above
> both the German G3 and later the M16 that we were given as replacements
when
> the Danish army decided to enter the modern world :-)

I don't normally (as in almost never) shoot at ranges greater than 500
yards.  Generally speaking, I find my AR-15, perhaps because it is the
target model) to be comparable to teh M-1s I fired and my 1909 Mauser
Argentino (sport converted with a variable 3-9 power scope).

Lee

Oh yes.  Powerheads are available for the spearfishing challanged in both
.223 and 30-06 (mandatory scuba content).

ATOM RSS1 RSS2