Bandolier Vs. Cartridge belt

[James Groover]

I have a question for the older Korean or WW2 Vets. On many occasions in my studies, I have read where a War Vet preferred a Bandolier over a cartridge belt to carry extra ammo. They go as far as say they won't put anything in the belt just use it to carry canteen and such. I can understand this thinking if one is in the prone shooting position, because like the combat vest of today the ammo is easier to get to since one is laying on a cartridge belt and must move the hips to get to some pouches. The bandolier on the other hand is like the mag pouches of today and easier to get to. Now Ive timed myself in the standing sitting and kneeling positions and I am much faster with reloads from the cartridge belt. For the clip always snags on the bandolier. Now after this long preamble is my question. Is there a technique you vets did to get the clip out with out snagging or did you just not care it was slower to reload from the bandolier? I have never seen a movie where the soldier reloads from the bandolier to see their technique compared to mine. Please no speculation. only facts please. Thanks Jim G

[Ron James]

Odd that, I was raised on the M-1, never did I wonder if there was a faster way to retrieve the clips from the bandolier.

[Art]

There aren't a whole bunch of people left who used the M1 as a service weapon. A while back there was a when/where did you serve thread and I think there was one WW II vet and two or three Korean War vets. I have a friend who joined the Marines in the early 60's and he said they used the M14 and boot camp and M1s in Infantry school. I asked him this question today and he said that frankly on the training when they did live fire he was always issued one bandoleer of ammunition and never thought about putting any of it in his cartridge belt so he said he honestly couldn't give an educated answer.

[2111]

Thanks Art, you are making me feel like I am STARTING to get old. LOL I did use the M1 rifle as my service weapon, but not in combat. I was lucky in that President Eisenhower, having seen war, kept us out of another one. Honestly during my 3 years in the Marine Corps I don't recall having ever seen a bandoleer. Only time I had ammo in my cartridge belt was when at the rifle range or during training when blanks were being used.
I am sure that during war time, depending on circumstances, bandoleers were used along with cartridge belts. I wouldn't doubt that the soldiers in this picture had extra ammo in there pockets, they seem to have it in all available spaces.
http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e372/joewill421/M1Slingnotekeepers_zps0480dfa8.jpg

[Mike]

Hi Jim, I was told and read that the bandolier was perfered during WW II. I read this in "US Infantry Weapons in Combat" by Mark G. Goodwin. I ask veterans about this, when I meet them and have gotten mixed information. I think that this was a subjective decision based on use during combat. I think that cawling on your belly might be more comfortable/efficent with an empty belt. I like 2111's response. I would think that for speed the belt would be easier if you are standing upright. Col. Hackworth in his biography "About Face" talks about hooking a clip around his rifle sling and when he hit the deck found it full of mud, regards, Mike

[Art]

Thanks Art, you are making me feel like I am STARTING to get old. LOL I did use the M1 rifle as my service weapon, but not in combat. I was lucky in that President Eisenhower, having seen war, kept us out of another one. Honestly during my 3 years in the Marine Corps I don't recall having ever seen a bandoleer. Only time I had ammo in my cartridge belt was when at the rifle range or during training when blanks were being used.
I am sure that during war time, depending on circumstances, bandoleers were used along with cartridge belts. I wouldn't doubt that the soldiers in this picture had extra ammo in there pockets, they seem to have it in all available spaces.
http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e372/joewill421/M1Slingnotekeepers_zps0480dfa8.jpg

My old daddy was a Sea Bee who served on Samar in the P.I. during WW II. He didn't carry an M1 there himself, he was issued a shotgun and was on a mortar crew when he wasn't working on the San Pablo Air Strip. He did tell me once that Marines were issued 80 rounds for their cartridge belt and as many bandoleers as they wanted, which would come to about 200-250 rounds give or take. According to him that was usually two or three. He and all of my other WW II relatives are gone now but if they were still here that would be an interesting question to ask.

Another interesting aside. The fellow I mentioned who trained with the M1 for the Infantry School part of his Marine training said that there were times he was issued ammunition for the M14 in five round clips in bandoleers along with his ammunition in magazines for his M14. He said if the ammunition in the magazines was expended loading an M14 from clips was a much, much slower option.

[Dave Waits]

I've always had a problem with both. I've had several Ammo-Belts and even when time was not of the essence, trying to retrieve an En-bloc from that Belt using only your thumb and finger was a PITA. Trying to get one from a Bandoleer was just as bad. You had to fight the dust cover to slide it over the butt-end of the En-Bloc, then half the time the En-bloc would come out with the Cardboard protector still attached to the loaded En-Bloc and you had to take that off also.

As an aside, I read somewhere that in a lot of the WWII movies they sewed expansion clothes into the individual carriers of the Ammo-belt so the actors could pull loaded En-Blocs out faster.

[PhillipM]

My old daddy was a Sea Bee who served on Samar in the P.I. during WW II. He didn't carry an M1 there himself, he was issued a shotgun and was on a mortar crew when he wasn't working on the San Pablo Air Strip. He did tell me once that Marines were issued 80 rounds for their cartridge belt and as many bandoleers as they wanted, which would come to about 200-250 rounds give or take. According to him that was usually two or three. He and all of my other WW II relatives are gone now but if they were still here that would be an interesting question to ask.

Another interesting aside. The fellow I mentioned who trained with the M1 for the Infantry School part of his Marine training said that there were times he was issued ammunition for the M14 in five round clips in bandoleers along with his ammunition in magazines for his M14. He said if the ammunition in the magazines was expended loading an M14 from clips was a much, much slower option.


You need to read the current issue of American Rifleman. In it a Marine at Gitmo in the early 60's describes some Navy guys coming ashore to qualify. The Navy had garands and other than the NCO's the Marines were only familiar with the M14. Observing the Navy shoot, one private exclaimed to his gunny, "They just load their ammo straight from the bandoleer! No magazines! Why don't we have a rifle like that?" paraphrased.

I read a statement about the development of the M14 that said (paraphrasing again), "... of course the new rifle, being selective fire, would need a detachable box magazine"

From that statement I wonder if a detachable box magazine is the best way to feed a semi. Perhaps John C Garand had it right the first time.

[Art]

You need to read the current issue of American Rifleman. In it a Marine at Gitmo in the early 60's describes some Navy guys coming ashore to qualify. The Navy had garands and other than the NCO's the Marines were only familiar with the M14. Observing the Navy shoot, one private exclaimed to his gunny, "They just load their ammo straight from the bandoleer! No magazines! Why don't we have a rifle like that?" paraphrased.

I read a statement about the development of the M14 that said (paraphrasing again), "... of course the new rifle, being selective fire, would need a detachable box magazine"

From that statement I wonder if a detachable box magazine is the best way to feed a semi. Perhaps John C Garand had it right the first time.

Interestingly.... the former Marine I mentioned previously had this observation on the subject of the qualities of the feed systems of the M14 vs. the M1. He said the M14 was a superior weapon until you expended all of the ammunition in your magazines. If you expended all the ammunition in your magazines and had to load the magazine in the rifle from stripper clips using the charger guide the M1 took the lead. This is based on actual combat experience.

I carried the M14 as a duty weapon the whole time I was in the Army, very regularly in Korea and I have put a lot of rounds down range with the M1. I believe John Garand got it right both times. There is a good reason no first line military power today uses a clip loader.

As an aside, I was never issued ammunition in five round clips in bandoleers. If I expended the combat load I was issued in box magazines I was out of ammo.

The M1 was the finest weapon of its day, Patton was right about that, but, frankly, I would not have either an M1 or an M14 as my first choice today if I had to choose a shoulder weapon for "serious social interaction." Just my preference but it is based on experience with both weapons.

[Mike]

You need to read the current issue of American Rifleman. In it a Marine at Gitmo in the early 60's describes some Navy guys coming ashore to qualify. The Navy had garands and other than the NCO's the Marines were only familiar with the M14. Observing the Navy shoot, one private exclaimed to his gunny, "They just load their ammo straight from the bandoleer! No magazines! Why don't we have a rifle like that?" paraphrased.

I read a statement about the development of the M14 that said (paraphrasing again), "... of course the new rifle, being selective fire, would need a detachable box magazine"

From that statement I wonder if a detachable box magazine is the best way to feed a semi. Perhaps John C Garand had it right the first time.

Hi, I recently wrote a short article for Rawles' Survival Blog, http://survivalblog.com/the-cmp-americas-civilian-armory-by-uncle-mike/ ,where one of my contentions is that for civilians the fixed magazine has it's advantages. It does for me but YMMV, Regards, Mike

[James Groover]

Thanks for all your input guys your knowledge is invaluable. Jim G

[Sunray]

"...one private exclaimed to his gunny..." My boss at the gun shop, long ago, had been a CF reservist. Did an MG demo for USMC guys out of Buffalo. 1970's or so. The CF still used 1919 Brownings. Story was told that all the Marines thought t was some kind of brand new Canadian MG.
Peace time armies don't operate like war time armies do. Kit like ammo belts don't get loaded. Nor do pockets designed to hold C1A1 mags. Actually having something in said pockets is frowned upon. Forget the girl's name, but she said, "Me sir." when asked what she had in her shirt pocket.
Anyway, using a bandoleer vs a belt means you can drop the thing when having lunch but still have your kit on for when the RSM/Gunny/CSM strolls by.

[dave]

Thanks Art, you are making me feel like I am STARTING to get old. LOL I did use the M1 rifle as my service weapon, but not in combat. I was lucky in that President Eisenhower, having seen war, kept us out of another one. Honestly during my 3 years in the Marine Corps I don't recall having ever seen a bandoleer. Only time I had ammo in my cartridge belt was when at the rifle range or during training when blanks were being used.
I am sure that during war time, depending on circumstances, bandoleers were used along with cartridge belts. I wouldn't doubt that the soldiers in this picture had extra ammo in there pockets, they seem to have it in all available spaces.
http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e372/joewill421/M1Slingnotekeepers_zps0480dfa8.jpg

What is that 'soldier' holding in his hand? A cell phone, calculator? Are these guy reanactors? Actors? And his initials scratched in the stock? Hmmmm!

[psteinmayer]

Looks like a TV remote, LOL!

[emmagee1917]

Hershey chocolate bars.
Chris
PS , late '45 pic with ribbed keeper on the sling .

[sigman2]

I have asked my dad how much ammo he carried into combat. He said standard issue was 80 rounds in the cartridge belt, two bandoleers and eight in the rifle. He said many times thy carried an extra bandoleer or two plus a clip of tracers for spotting purposes. He said their cartridge belt was always full.

The bandoleers could be very useful. A man going back for extra ammo could carry a bunch of bandoleers. They could be easily tossed to another man trapped or cut off. They could double as a sling for a wounded arm, a tourniquet for heavy bleeding, binding for bandages or broken limbs, patches for clothing, fire starter, etc.