Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!linac!att!cbnews!cbnews!military
From: smpod@helios.lerc.nasa.gov (Stefan)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Using the rifle...(Errata, Additions, etc.)
Message-ID: <1991Jan18.004417.9132@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 18 Jan 91 00:44:17 GMT
References: <1991Jan14.012215.8066@cbnews.att.com>
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 14
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: smpod@helios.lerc.nasa.gov (Stefan)
In article <1991Jan14.012215.8066@cbnews.att.com>, drn@pinet.aip.org (donald_newcomb) writes...
| 
| 
|The '03 Springfield was hated by many troops. It had problems with cupro-nickel
|fouling and bore rust. Some blew up! The Marines rejected the Garand at first,
|preferring the tried and true Springfield. The Garand had many problems, some of
|which were only fixed after the war.
| 
I think more troop use the M1917 Enfield than the '03.

P.S. Good article.  Appreciated the references.