FN-49 or M1 Garrand? Which is the better rifle?

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - FN-49 or M1 Garrand? Which is the better rifle?

Posted: 7/30/2005 2:38:18 AM EDT

Assuming they are both in the same caliber, which would you rather have from the standpoint of reliability, accuracy, craftsmanship and quality?

Posted: 7/29/2005 7:48:26 AM EDT

[#1]

M1 Garand for me.....Patton wasn't wrong, winner of WWII. Used by the US for more than 20 years...glowing testament.

Posted: 7/29/2005 7:50:55 AM EDT

[#2]

M1

Posted: 7/29/2005 7:51:45 AM EDT

[#3]

The Garand has a much quicker reload, the FN must be fed by 2 five rd stripper clips.

I love my FN49, but it was obsolete before it went into production. where as the M1 Garand was the right weapon at the right time.

It should be noted though, that the SAFN 1949 evolved into the FN FAL.

Posted: 7/29/2005 11:51:04 AM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Not by any major military, both the Garand and the FN49 became obsolete in an age where the whole world was switching from stripper clips to detachable box magazines.

It should also be noted that the Garand remained in service for many years after WWII, in far greater numbers than FN49s were ever produced.

Define major military? Egypt, some South American countries, Belgium...couple other I can't think of off the top of my head...

If by major military you mean one of the superpowers, then even the FAL wasn't adopted by more than one 'major military', that being the UK Commonwealth, and even then, it was in an Inch pattern...(Yes, it was adopted as the G1 by Germany for a while, but it was quickly ditched in favor of the CETME-based G3...)

True, the Garand was produced in far greater numbers; there was a war going on at the time of production, and production of the FN 49 was delayed by the same thing that spurred the Garand on. The FN49 also remained in service after the war, although again, not as profilic as the Garand was due to the glut/surplus of Garand rifles available.

The Garand was/is a great rifle; I've got a bunch. Someone said the sights were better on the Garand than on the FN...both used a peep-type setup. The only advantage that the Garand had was windage; it was easier to dial in on the Garand..and really, how often was that used. As far as balance and whatnot goes, both felt just fine to me when loaded.

The en-bloc clip reloading thing is to me the only real area where the Garand has the FN outclassed...I'm just not convinced it's the one true reason to go with it over the FN...

I guess I just have a thing for weapons that John Browning had a hand in somewhere along the line

Major powers post WWII: USA, UK, USSR, lesser powers, France, Spain......Iceland.....?

Belgium only bought them because FN=Belgium, Egypt was the biggest contract and I would not consider any of those little south American dictatorships Major powers.

Don't get me wrong, I love my Egyptian contract FN49, 8mm is cheap and I've put about 800 rds down that pitted bore

2" groups at 100 meters is the norm, I like the balance and feel of the FN better then the Garand, I think the gas system is better, sights not quite as good. Wish it had a better feed setup, though the fixed mag is part of the guns "personality".

I won't be parting with my FN49 any time soon.

Posted: 7/29/2005 7:52:59 AM EDT

[#5]

Tough call...from a purely technological standpoint, the FN49.

But, the Garand is still a good choice, and relavent...

Pros of the 49: Basically uses a FAL's gas system..10 round magazine that can be fed with stripper clips, or loaded singly...adjustable gas system.

Cons of the 49: The gas system actually needs to be adjusted depending on the ammo...loading with stripper clips sucks as compared to the Garand en-bloc clips...

Posted: 7/29/2005 8:09:06 AM EDT

[#6]

The M1 is easily the better of the 2 overall.

Posted: 7/29/2005 10:49:57 AM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
Not by any major military, both the Garand and the FN49 became obsolete in an age where the whole world was switching from stripper clips to detachable box magazines.

It should also be noted that the Garand remained in service for many years after WWII, in far greater numbers than FN49s were ever produced.

Define major military? Egypt, some South American countries, Belgium...couple other I can't think of off the top of my head...

If by major military you mean one of the superpowers, then even the FAL wasn't adopted by more than one 'major military', that being the UK Commonwealth, and even then, it was in an Inch pattern...(Yes, it was adopted as the G1 by Germany for a while, but it was quickly ditched in favor of the CETME-based G3...)

True, the Garand was produced in far greater numbers; there was a war going on at the time of production, and production of the FN 49 was delayed by the same thing that spurred the Garand on. The FN49 also remained in service after the war, although again, not as profilic as the Garand was due to the glut/surplus of Garand rifles available.

The Garand was/is a great rifle; I've got a bunch. Someone said the sights were better on the Garand than on the FN...both used a peep-type setup. The only advantage that the Garand had was windage; it was easier to dial in on the Garand..and really, how often was that used. As far as balance and whatnot goes, both felt just fine to me when loaded.

The en-bloc clip reloading thing is to me the only real area where the Garand has the FN outclassed...I'm just not convinced it's the one true reason to go with it over the FN...

I guess I just have a thing for weapons that John Browning had a hand in somewhere along the line

Posted: 7/29/2005 9:00:46 AM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
The M1 is easily the better of the 2 overall.

How so?

It's only advantage is it's quick reload time...everywhere else, it loses or ties.

It's operating rod can be easily bent
It only holds 8 rounds
It's gas system is more vulnerable (ever had a gas cylinder screw back out? I know I have...)
Only two locking lugs on the bolt (arguably, the FN49's system can be said the same about..)

There's a reason why the M1 Garand wasn't adopted by other places after the war, but the FN49 was...and after the FN49, the FAL was adopted almost everywhere on the planet, and the FAL is a very direct decendant of the FN49.

Posted: 7/29/2005 9:06:44 AM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
Quoted:
The M1 is easily the better of the 2 overall.

How so?

It's only advantage is it's quick reload time...everywhere else, it loses or ties.

It's operating rod can be easily bent
It only holds 8 rounds
It's gas system is more vulnerable (ever had a gas cylinder screw back out? I know I have...)
Only two locking lugs on the bolt (arguably, the FN49's system can be said the same about..)

There's a reason why the M1 Garand wasn't adopted by other places after the war, but the FN49 was...and after the FN49, the FAL was adopted almost everywhere on the planet, and the FAL is a very direct decendant of the FN49.

Not by any major military, both the Garand and the FN49 became obsolete in an age where the whole world was switching from stripper clips to detachable box magazines.

It should also be noted that the Garand remained in service for many years after WWII, in far greater numbers than FN49s were ever produced.

Posted: 7/29/2005 9:12:02 AM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:
Quoted:
The M1 is easily the better of the 2 overall.

How so?

It's only advantage is it's quick reload time...everywhere else, it loses or ties.

It's operating rod can be easily bent
It only holds 8 rounds
It's gas system is more vulnerable (ever had a gas cylinder screw back out? I know I have...)
Only two locking lugs on the bolt (arguably, the FN49's system can be said the same about..)

There's a reason why the M1 Garand wasn't adopted by other places after the war, but the FN49 was...and after the FN49, the FAL was adopted almost everywhere on the planet, and the FAL is a very direct decendant of the FN49.

Easier and quicker to load. Stripper clips are NOT an advantage on a semi-auto rifle. That is more that enouh to secure the win.

A much better feel and balance when shouldered.

Better sights.

Because of the Better sights and feel it is easier to shoot and repeat shots.

A lot of things can happen like cylinder screw backing out, or operating rod bending but ther is NO question the M1 is one of the most robust and reliable battle rifles ever fielded and to try and argue otherwise is laughable.

Plenty of countries used the M1 I would guess far more than used the FN-49. Probably more in Central and South America alone not Including Italy, Netherlands, South Korea, ect…

Posted: 7/29/2005 9:12:57 AM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
The Garand has a much quicker reload, the FN must be fed by 2 five rd stripper clips.

I love my FN49, but it was obsolete before it went into production. where as the M1 Garand was the right weapon at the right time.

It should be noted though, that the SAFN 1949 evolved into the FN FAL. hr

What about the Argentinian FN49? it was chambered in 7.62x51 and had a detachable magazine. Gunbroker has it for $800.

Posted: 7/29/2005 9:13:32 AM EDT

[#12]

You really don't know? The M1 of course.

Posted: 7/29/2005 9:22:25 AM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
Quoted:
The Garand has a much quicker reload, the FN must be fed by 2 five rd stripper clips.

I love my FN49, but it was obsolete before it went into production. where as the M1 Garand was the right weapon at the right time.

It should be noted though, that the SAFN 1949 evolved into the FN FAL.

What about the Argentinian FN49? it was chambered in 7.62x51 and had a detachable magazine. Gunbroker has it for $800.

That was the exception, very few were made, the whole story would be different I think if they had used detachable mags from day one. The fact is, that the FN49 was a prewar design that was put into production just to help get FN back on its feet after WWII. As soon as they were able, FN took the best features of the SAFN and incorperated them into the FAL.

Posted: 7/29/2005 10:03:41 AM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The M1 is easily the better of the 2 overall.

How so?

It's only advantage is it's quick reload time...everywhere else, it loses or ties.

It's operating rod can be easily bent
It only holds 8 rounds
It's gas system is more vulnerable (ever had a gas cylinder screw back out? I know I have...)
Only two locking lugs on the bolt (arguably, the FN49's system can be said the same about..)

There's a reason why the M1 Garand wasn't adopted by other places after the war, but the FN49 was...and after the FN49, the FAL was adopted almost everywhere on the planet, and the FAL is a very direct decendant of the FN49.

Not by any major military, both the Garand and the FN49 became obsolete in an age where the whole world was switching from stripper clips to detachable box magazines.

It should also be noted that the Garand remained in service for many years after WWII, in far greater numbers than FN49s were ever produced.

Both were good designs, I prefer the M1 because it's what I have and it's an American weapon that was carried by Americans in 3 wars, and En bloc clips are easier to find than the FN mags.

Ben

Posted: 7/30/2005 6:25:05 AM EDT

[#15]

They are both great and unique rifles for their time. IMHO all collections should have at least one specimen of each!

Posted: 7/30/2005 6:46:59 AM EDT

[#16]

I solved this choice by getting an NM Garand in 308.
Ammo is everywhere, recoil(to me)is less that the -06.
Laminate stock has never changed POI regardless of weather.

Posted: 7/30/2005 7:42:57 AM EDT

[#17]

M1

Posted: 7/30/2005 8:23:40 AM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:
I solved this choice by getting an NM Garand in 308.
Ammo is everywhere, recoil(to me)is less that the -06.
Laminate stock has never changed POI regardless of weather.

heresy!

Posted: 7/30/2005 3:23:48 PM EDT

[#19]

Garand, no contest.

Posted: 7/30/2005 4:25:08 PM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Not by any major military, both the Garand and the FN49 became obsolete in an age where the whole world was switching from stripper clips to detachable box magazines.

It should also be noted that the Garand remained in service for many years after WWII, in far greater numbers than FN49s were ever produced.

Define major military? Egypt, some South American countries, Belgium...couple other I can't think of off the top of my head...

If by major military you mean one of the superpowers, then even the FAL wasn't adopted by more than one 'major military', that being the UK Commonwealth, and even then, it was in an Inch pattern...(Yes, it was adopted as the G1 by Germany for a while, but it was quickly ditched in favor of the CETME-based G3...)

True, the Garand was produced in far greater numbers; there was a war going on at the time of production, and production of the FN 49 was delayed by the same thing that spurred the Garand on. The FN49 also remained in service after the war, although again, not as profilic as the Garand was due to the glut/surplus of Garand rifles available.

The Garand was/is a great rifle; I've got a bunch. Someone said the sights were better on the Garand than on the FN...both used a peep-type setup. The only advantage that the Garand had was windage; it was easier to dial in on the Garand..and really, how often was that used. As far as balance and whatnot goes, both felt just fine to me when loaded.

The en-bloc clip reloading thing is to me the only real area where the Garand has the FN outclassed...I'm just not convinced it's the one true reason to go with it over the FN...

I guess I just have a thing for weapons that John Browning had a hand in somewhere along the line

So an Argentine FN-49 would bring it over the top?

Justin

Posted: 7/30/2005 5:38:36 PM EDT

[#21]

+1 for the Garand.
Was the FN ever on the winning side in a major conflict?

Posted: 7/30/2005 7:35:23 PM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:
+1 for the Garand.
Was the FN ever on the winning side in a major conflict?

Umm....The one I own was dropped in the sand by a fleeing Egyptian soldeir back around 1967......was retreived by the Isrealis who then won the war.....so yes, it was on the winning side in a war.

Posted: 7/31/2005 5:09:52 AM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:
Quoted:
+1 for the Garand.
Was the FN ever on the winning side in a major conflict?

Umm....The one I own was dropped in the sand by a fleeing Egyptian soldeir back around 1967......was retreived by the Isrealis who then won the war.....so yes, it was on the winning side in a war.

Hadn't considered it that way but I have to admit that would qualify.

Posted: 7/31/2005 5:11:46 AM EDT

[#24]

The main reason the M1 was adopted alll over post WII is because we gave them away.

Posted: 7/31/2005 11:29:03 PM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:
The main reason the M1 was adopted alll over post WII is because we gave them away.

And because they worked.

They were converted into 7.62 Nato and used by at least the US Navy well into the 60s, I dont think this would be the case if loading the thing involved two 5rd stripper clips

Posted: 8/1/2005 3:30:56 PM EDT

[#26]

Does anyone know where to find surplus Argentine FN-49's in 7.62 NATO?

Justin

Posted: 8/1/2005 3:58:51 PM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:
Does anyone know where to find surplus Argentine FN-49's in 7.62 NATO?

Justin

Check out FAL Forums. Just post what you're looking for and someone will respond with one for sale.

Link FAL Forums

Posted: 8/2/2005 7:17:51 PM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Does anyone know where to find surplus Argentine FN-49's in 7.62 NATO?

Justin

Check out FAL Forums. Just post what you're looking for and someone will respond with one for sale.

Link FAL Forums

Thanks TacStrat!

I didn't know you joined the team, welcome.

Posted: 8/3/2005 4:46:06 PM EDT

[#29]

The FN49 is notorious for parts breakage, especially the firing pin.

The M1 Garand is better.

Posted: 8/3/2005 5:16:16 PM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:
The FN49 is notorious for parts breakage, especially the firing pin.

The M1 Garand is better.

Interesting.

Posted: 8/4/2005 1:02:31 AM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:
The FN49 is notorious for parts breakage, especially the firing pin.

The M1 Garand is better.

Notorious? Bullshit.

In twenty years of shooting these, talking to other owners, I've never experienced any sort of parts breakage or heard of anyone else having anything "break". And I did shoot my rifle, back when I first bought it private sale, for $150. including 800rds of 8mm, it was just a fun gun I took everywhere, kind of like a truck gun. I would put a few hundred rds through it, clean just the bore and put it away, being dirty never stopped it from working, wet and -0 cold never stopped it, and when sand pit "grit" caused it to cycle slowly, a quick turn of the gas regulator had it flinging brass 30ft. Problem fixed.

The only issue the FN49 has is that on some of them, the one piece firing pin has not been replaced with the correct two piece pin. Should the one piece pin fail, you can have a slamfire episode.

This is a problem discovered and corrected about 50 years ago, its just that some of these tin pot dictatorships from wence our guns came never read the memo.

Posted: 8/4/2005 3:25:08 PM EDT

[#32]

Both are good battle rifles, and will do if you will do.

That said, spare parts for the M1 abound, a condition which cannot be said to the '49.

Moreover, the M1 is readily converted to 7.62 NATO: such conversion on an 8mm '49 being problematic, to say the least. 7.62 NATO '49s are fairly uncommon, fetch a collector-grade price, and introduce further spare parts problems.

Out-of-the box, both are reliable, reasonably accurate battle rifles. However, a great deal of development, especially in relation to accuracy, has been done with the M1. I am unaware of a commensurate amount of work having been done with the '49.

Given its (relatively) better loading system, better sights and trigger, ubiquitous spare parts, and the existing knowledge base in case of needed service/repairs, the Garand must win out, at least in this country.

A Garand converted to 7.62 NATO, and sporting a good synthetic stock is still a viable battle rifle.

Posted: 8/4/2005 5:14:32 PM EDT

[#33]

My vote's for the M1, mainly due to its track record in WWII.

The FN49s seem relatively fragile. On the C&R list I used to hang out on, there were always a lot of them breaking for some reason.

Posted: 8/6/2005 2:22:25 AM EDT

[#34]

Both have serviced their respected countries well. I have own 8 M1s and 1 Venezualian FN49 in 7x57. Both had very good combat records in Korea.

However, the Germans did not just dump the G1 because the G2/G3 was better. It stemmed from the fact that FN would not license Germany to built the G1. That's when Germany went to Spain and had them chamber the CEMTE in 7.62x51.

CD

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - FN-49 or M1 Garrand? Which is the better rifle?

Armory » General Firearm Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us