[NGROVCAM]

I am proud to be a member of the
excellent Garand Collectors
Association (GCA)...an amazing group
of dedicated folks who revere and
value the greatest combat implement
ever devised. I am certain many of
our M14 Forum colleagues are as well.

My question is, why do we not hear
more about the J.C. Harrison book
on the Garand? Or, any of the others
he did, e.g., the M1 Carbine?

They are not deep technical or
narrative texts. But, as field guides
and detailed presentations of typical
all-original rifles from different
periods and different manufacturers,
they are invaluable.

Yet, they always seem to be MIA in
many discussions and bibliographies.

Any thoughts?

Thanks!!!

 

[ripcord]

I have Harrison's book on the Garand. Very well-researched and easy to read and use. Not 100% accurate but very, very close! Excellent line drawings and data tables.

 

[DudleyDR]

I don't know why they aren't more "mainstream". Maybe they are an insider's "secret", I don't know. Serious enthusiasts know about them. I have and use his books on the '03 Springfield, Garand, M1 Carbine, and M1911's. They are a handy "ready reference" and are of a convenient size to take to gun shows. Everything is not in "the cloud".

 

[Orlando]

Harrisons Garand book is full of inaccuracys and experienced Garand colllectors do not use it for reference

 

[DudleyDR]

Harrisons Garand book is full of inaccuracys and experienced Garand colllectors do not use it for reference

In the PREFACE of the book, Harrison states this about his book: "It is not a takedown manual, a reloading manual, or the complete historical development of the M1 Garand. It is only a Field Guide (stated on the cover) to collecting the Garand. Its purpose is to allow a quick basic determination of originality on the various models of the M1 Garand before any money changes hands." It was never intended to be the final authority on the Garand until the end of time. No publication can do that as there is always something new learned about a subject. In modern slang, "It is what it is".

FWIW, the very experienced collector who evaluated my Lend-Lease Garand used Harrison's Field Guide. The second printing of "Collecting the Garand II" is now 13 years old and I would not assume it to be current in all aspects. Regards.

 

[jimthompson502002]

I rather disliked Harrison's use of nomenclature which was not only NOT official, but which was often pure nonsense, and the easy but erroneous presumption that use of a particular part ended ABSOLUTELY at a particular time, most particularly with wartime specimens.

However, the line drawings are way better for simple parts i.d. than photography, in most respects.

The version I gave away to a novice collector about 2005 was one of the most foolish errors I made with literature. Reason: I had located about 100 or more errors and corrected them with marginal notes and stickies. Most I didn't care about, frankly, since my own material was long since wrapped up, but the details represented years of scraping around.

 

[case42so]

What Orlando said! Not to be used by collectors to ensure rifles are correct.
Brian

 

[mnhusker]

No book wil ever be "correct" save the Bible as knowledge is always growing on a subject like the Garand.
I like Harrision's book for the drawings and as a quick reference at gun shows as it's the easiest to carry with me.

Is it perfect, no it's 13 years out of date lacking the additional knowledge on the subject gleaned in that time. That's why I have Jim's book, Canfield's book, GCA journals, comb the CMP web site daily, etc.

I sure love learning about that rifle!

John

 

[Orlando]

Bad information is worse than no information. Duffs pocket, blue book is probably the best out there

 

[DudleyDR]

I learned early on in dealing with car repairs that one book / source never contains it all. One needs a "library". Picking the brains of knowledgeable "old-timers" can also be a good source.

 

[Skeet6]

Harrisons Garand book is full of inaccuracys and experienced Garand colllectors do not use it for reference

This.
Mike B

 

[Ted Brown]

I don't think Harrison's book is bad, but it was published in 1995 and there has been a great deal more published on the subject since. I think most all the books have some inaccuracies , but newer books have fewer. I have most of them in my library and use them as references while ignoring the conflicting information that has been refuted in more resent studies. There is too much information still in question or unknown about the M1 and most other military weapon systems.