.276 Pedersen: Debunking the Myth

[stanc]

I have to say that 12oz. less rifle weight is not a trifle matter, nor is 10rds vs. 8 rounds. The combat power that could be projected by riflemen equipped with 10rd clips vs. 8rd clips may seem trifle to us now, but would have been pretty decisive back then, especially against the German mix of bolt-action Mausers and MP38's and MP40's.

It would certainly have helped, but I just don't see any reason to think it would've made a significant -- let alone, decisive -- difference. But, maybe I'm overlooking something.

Perhaps it could be tested, by running typical WWII scenarios, first with mags loaded with 8 rds, then with 10 rds?

This rifle concept raises an interesting point, as I tend to agree that the M1 carbine might not have gained favor with Infantry, but what about the support troops the M1 Carbine was meant for?

If you have a 9.5-lb, 44-inch long rifle as your standard infantry weapon, there is considerable logic to fielding a "PDW" that's 4 lbs lighter and 8 inches shorter, even if it fires a different round.

However, if you have a 6.5-lb, 36-inch long carbine as standard, would you complicate your logistics to get a completely different, 5.5-lb, 36-inch long carbine for support troops?

Is that photoshopped, BTW?

Yes. It started out as this T20E2 Garand:

I agree that a .30 Remington case with less taper would be better for mags, but if I could have been influential back then, I would like to have seen it necked down to .26 caliber of course, learning from the Swedes.

I might have, too, but I stayed with .30 as the most realistic choice for this concept because of the fixation on .30 caliber in that time frame.