07 August 2017

Also Rans


What these two guns have in common is they're early '50's attempts to supplant the existing order.

The AR-10 was to replace the M1 Garand.  It lost to the T-44 which became the M14.

The S&W 39 falls out of an attempt to replace the M1911A1, which was showing its age even in 1950.  The 39 lost to the Army giving up on replacing their pistols due to budgetary concerns.  Sounds familiar doesn't it?
Posted by Angus McThag at 15:35
Labels:

5 comments:

  1. Anonymous07 August, 2017 21:48

    You can see the family resemblance of that S&W 39 to my wife's S&W 5906.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Old NFO07 August, 2017 22:08

    Yep, but the AR-10 DID make a 'comeback' as it were... :-)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Angus McThag07 August, 2017 23:32

      Considering how nobody agreed about how to make them, THE AR-10 didn't come back...

      But lots of AR-10's did.

      Delete
  3. Anonymous08 August, 2017 00:27

    Yeah, you've got to be super careful with AR-10s these days as they are not all fully compatible with each other, and most of them are not compatible with the original ones either. Most of them use a lot of OTS AR-15 parts, but even at that the dimensions of the lowers and uppers to hold them vary from maker to maker.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Angus McThag08 August, 2017 00:30

      The DPMS standard looks to be edging towards being the defacto standard. More than one company is doing LR308 compatibility.

      Delete

You are a guest here when you comment. This is my soapbox, not yours. Be polite. Inappropriate comments will be deleted without mention. Amnesty period is expired.

Do not go off on a tangent, stay with the topic of the post. If I can't tell what your point is in the first couple of sentences I'm flushing it.

If you're trying to comment anonymously: You can't. Log into your Google account.

If you can't comprehend this, don't comment; because I'm going to moderate and mock you for wasting your time.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)