my garand book says that their was no such thing as a tanker Garand  - not in that people didn't commercially rechamber them to 308 and shorten the barrel, but that there was never such a wepon in that caliber or thirty ought six issued to anyone, much less tankers, at any time.

What do have to say bout that?
search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?userid=Xz6BD1EABo&isbn=0873649842&itm=1

Interesting...I held a very nice example of one in 1993 and regret not purchasing it to this day. But if it is written in a book it must be true. I am sure this could have been some armorer's adjustment to satisfy a need. It may never have been issued in the configuration but somewhere along the way someone thought it up and made a beautiful short-rifle.

MT

direct quote from p/ 26,27

QUOTE
The t26 was never really a factory rifle, was never a 'tanker', and was never issued to anyone except for testing purposes (and no, your neighbors is not the ;only' authentic one that actually saw service).  The t26 was an airborne project, and the intention was to replace the M1 carbine - which troopers ...strongly disliked - witha shorter version of the M1 Garand that paratroopers could deploy fullyassembled on drops.  The experiment was found to generate excessive recoil and muzzle blast in .30/'06  and was brought to its conclusion way too late to see World War Twoservice anyway.  The 'tanker' monicker is strictly postwar and strictly commercial, and it has absolutely nothing to do with reality.

In .308 or7.62 NATO though (especially with a compensator / flash hider attached), the 18-inch barrelled shorty can be a handy rifle and is small enough to carry in the field as a hunting rifle.  

ENDQUOTE  - only visual difference (other than barrel) of pictured t26 is that the forward hanguar dis a mere two inches and in teh second prototype is copmpletely absent.

just proving (once again) that I am WAAAAY below 'common'.  I thought the name implied some kind of historical validity related to the smallish confines of a tank.  turns out it was an airborne idea.  

And, btw, what exactly constitutes a violation of copyright, ehehehe

Quoted: I thought this was common knowledge?

+1

In July 1945 the Pacific theater requested 25,000 shorter Garands for teh close-in jungle fighting that they were experiencing.  Army Odrnance took the M1E5 action (an experimental M1 for paratroops that had an 18" barrel and a folding stock) and put it in a standard stock.  The result was the T-26.  The Ordnance Corps ordered 15,000 of them, but the order was cancelled in August of 1945 because of the end of the war.  None were produced or issued.  The only ones to exist were the very few prototypes fabed together by Ordnance.

Now open your mind to the way things happen in the Army.

At the same time (towards the end of the war) the Army also developed the T-26 tank.  It later became the standard US tank, known as the M-26 Pershing, used in Korea.  A handful were made and sent to the European theater where they did some good work and the rest is history as far as the tank goes.  But remember the number..."T-26"

At the time the Army used a different numbering system for experimentla stuff.  Rather than the "XM" of today, the Army used a "T" for technical model, or prototype, or what we would call experimental.  

So as time passes, the true history of the T-26 rifle and the T-26 tank get blurred.  People start confusing the "T-26" with the "T-26" and the "Tanker Garand" is born.  It gains further status as a military urban myth since the T-26 rifle is shorter and would logically be better for use in the confines of the tank.  Rumor, myth and BS what it is, and the result becomes that the Tanker Garand was made for tank crews.

The fact is it was made for the Pacific Theater, for the same reasons the XM-177 series was made for Vietnam.  There was a need for a handier, shorter long arm.  The "Tanker Garand" myth comes from the confusion of the experimental designation of the "T-26" and the "T-26".

Ross

Teh Fort Meade Museum had one on display years ago....genuine US Ordinance made one.

So as time passes, the true history of the T-26 rifle and the T-26 tank get blurred. People start confusing the "T-26" with the "T-26" and the "Tanker Garand" is born. It gains further status as a military urban myth since the T-26 rifle is shorter and would logically be better for use in the confines of the tank. Rumor, myth and BS what it is, and the result becomes that the Tanker Garand was made for tank crews.'

GREAT SUMMARY - book also mentions the ORDNANCE samples.  warns to stay away when they are being fired.

Quoted: I thought this was common knowledge?

+2

I do have a sweet 1942 USSpringfield "Tanker" M1 still in 30-06, re-arsenal'd by Fulton, and rebuilt (had bad barrel) by Smith Enterprise, Inc., it's one of my favorite shooting rifles. Nice 4# two stage trigger which Ron did and rifle has NEVER had FTF, FTE or any malfunction whatsoever since Ron fixed her up. (also had a stock/op-rod problem, as cop I bought it from installed a new walnut stock and forgot to inlet it for the "tanker" op rod, which got bent to shit, first time he tried to shoot it...., good thing I got it at a good price 'cus it was fubar till Ron tweaked it)

Yes they wanted me to re-chamber it to 308, but I prefer '06......

Mike

Actually the "Tanker" name was coined by a big California surplus gun dealer in the late 50's.
I can't remember the dealers name, but I "think" he owned Golden State Arms.

He had a batch of M1 rifles that weren't selling due to the higher cost.
In those days, there was a FLOOD of surplus rifles from all over the world.  There were photos of the wharf at SamCo/InterArms in Virginia showing 3 or 4 large freighters at a time unloading huge pallets of rifles in crates.

A foreign surplus Mauser or Lee-Enfield in excellent to like new condition could be bought for as little as $12.00.
The M1's the California dealer had were not selling at $65.00.

On a trip back East, he visited Springfield Armory and saw the T-26 in the museum.
He thought a carbine version of the M1 might help him sell his stock, so he had a batch of standard M1's converted.
These early Tankers were in the original 30/06.

Looking for a catchy name to help sell them, he coined the name "Tanker" from the T-26 designation and started the story that General Macarthur has ordered them for use by tank crews.

His "Tanker" carbines sold out, and the Tanker Garand was born.

When I worked at Fulton Armory, back in the early '90s, I recall him making up a "tanker" Garand for a customer in .308, and it seemed pretty handy. Enough so, that a former employee, turned police officer, got one in .30-06 for his patrol car. He claimed he was using APs in it. I don't know if he ever got approved for such a gun in his patrol car (doubt it, since it was PG County, MD), but it sure would have done a number on a vehicle.

Good reporting guys! Great to hear several views of this M1 adaptation.   I see one once in a while at the bigger gun shows, will have to look and see who made them from now on as it would seem that anything on the gun show circuit is a commercial built variation.

Just so we all know what we're talking about; here's my 308 "Tanker."