Fed Ord M-1 Tanker

[duke133]

Pulling out rifles I will probably never need and thinking about disposing of them.
I have a Fed. Ord. Inc. So. El Monte KA. "U.S. Rifle M-1 Tanker" (.30 cal) that is probably going to go
with a couple other firearms. I'll take them to some dealers in the area and see what they might offer.

Anyone know anything about these Fed. Ord. rifles? I can't even remember when I shot this last.

Thanks for any advice.

[Sunray]

As I recall, Federal Ordnance was one of the many importers that built 'em(out of assorted parts on PI imports) without actually knowing what they were doing. Lot of 'em were apparently welded together receivers too. Lotta "depends" involved for a value. It a .30-06 or .308? Welded receiver? Etc., etc.
Not seeing any of 'em current an any of the assorted auction sites. Most recent was from 2008.
Fed Ord. was operating from 1981(until they filed Chapter 7 Bankruptcy in 2000) and bought a bunch of M1 Rifle parts from The PI in the mid 80's and bubba a bunch into "tanker's". Zero collector interest in a non-historical rifle.
There's a (well mixed among their M1 Carbine story) company history here.
http://www.m1carbinesinc.com/carbine_fedord.html

[Allen]

What Sunray said. I've heard good and bad. The company did a lot of different things so quality will be assorted. Some just badmouth them because of the cast receivers. Your gun has value though. My 2 cents worth thoughts would be about 2/3 what a Springfield is going for. There's a lot of tanker fans out there--you shouldn't have any trouble selling it. Might be good trading stock too.

[duke133]

I have inspected the rifle over the years and never noticed any of the clues you look for in a welded receiver. I'll take it down again and make sure. I figured if it has been sitting for so long (with periodic brushing down of the metal parts) I might as well dispose of it. It's one of a few long guns I have finally decided to part company with and maybe make room for possible additions down the line.

[joem]

I've had occasion to see 2 of them a few years ago. 1 was a weld job that was warped and wouldn't sit in the stock and POI was 24" off at 25 yards. The other had wear mark on only one bolt lug, yikes! Both receivers were trash.

[barretcreek]

My friend who was an armorer looked at my FedOrd barreled receiver and said they're a crap shoot. Some of the steel wouldn't have made a decent .22 single shot and others are servicable.

Thank you for the link, Sunray.

[Sunray]

No sweat. It's one of the absolute best sites on the net. Never mind Carbine sites. All done by one guy with some input from Carbine guys, assorted.

[duke133]

Sunray,
Missed the link until just now. I've read some of his stuff before.
I have the rifle out and will break it down tomorrow after errands.
Thanks.

[John Sukey]

Anyone want to explain how you get out of the turret hatch on a tank with a "M1 tanker"? or for that matter the drivers hatch?

[Herschel]

No one ever had to get out of a tank with an "M1 tanker". I understand, without researching it, that that there were only a very few prototypes assembled and it never became a
production item. I have had a strong dislike for these short barreled M1 rifles since I was once squaded next to one in a hipower match. The noise was terrible and that was a time
in my life that I was frequently on the firing line with numerous M1 rifle shooters.

[Tuna]

The original idea came out of the Pacific theater. Springfield Armory had gotten a request for M1 Garand's with short barrels for use in thick jungle. A short barrel was so much easier to carry in dense jungle cover. Some were made in theater and tried. But when SA made then up for testing they found that a round fired not only lit up the area in bright sun light but the noise of the burning gasses coming out of an 18 inch barrel was tremendous. So other then a few experimental rifles that were made the project was dropped as not being worth the effort. Jump ahead to the late 60's The likes of Fed Ordnance and a couple of others who had their own receivers,(not always of good quality.) but only had surplus barrels that had been cut by the government at the muzzle and the idea of Tanker Garand's came about. They not only made them in 30-06 but in .308 too. The Tanker Garand was never a real deal, just a marketing idea of a sales force out in California.

[PhillipM]

No one ever had to get out of a tank with an "M1 tanker". I understand, without researching it, that that there were only a very few prototypes assembled and it never became a
production item. I have had a strong dislike for these short barreled M1 rifles since I was once squaded next to one in a hipower match. The noise was terrible and that was a time
in my life that I was frequently on the firing line with numerous M1 rifle shooters.

35423

Same experience here. An M1 SOCOM is just as bad.

[joem]

That muzzle blast looks just like the one from a Russian M44 carbine.

[Clark Howard]

Over the years, I have had the occasion to repair two Fed Ord "tankers". Both had parts to fail in the trigger group. Most of the parts used to assemble these rifles appeared to be scrap parts that had been repaired/refinished. Regards, Clark

[dave]

Any 18" barrel on a hi-pwr. rifle of any caliber will have an extreme muzzle blast and flash. One reason "assault rifles" have cartridges shorter and lower power.

[duke133]

Well, the blast from the muzzle is a little different, if memory serves, than my Garands. I never really liked the rifle but I couldn't dump it until my collection or her vision of firearms "matured". In other words, once I had (to her) a lot of guns, I knew I could eventually dump this tanker. It's just taken me a few more years to get there. If I want to shoot an M1, I'll shoot one of my real M1's.
Thanks all for your input. Good discussion.

[coastie]

Once upon a time, before the internet, before cell phones, you went and bought was in front of you. Evan if it was 9pm something in the back of a boatshed from a guy who needed to pay a boat repair before leaving Kemah, on Galveston Bay.
"Santa Fe.." Two groove barrel. Tanker Garand. Have you heard of those?
Yeah, '03 Springfield barrel "grafted" to base of an M1 barrel cut.
More careful exam.....slight difference front and rear of receiver. Operating rod looked like "metal peckers" had been at it.
So, it is a "safe queen".
And a prime example of bring a flashlight and be more aware of what you are looking at.

[dryheat]

Back when Fed Ord was a going concern I returned one of their "tankers". The oprod was jumping out of the track. I don't know what they did but it was better when I got it back. I sold it shortly thereafter. I own a tanker now. Works like a charm. My buddy has one too, but he is a tech guy who likes to build them. They are cool and fun. On Gunbroker they go for a little more than the average Garand. Here's a post from the past- Kind of long...

had told me about your father and you along with your interest in the T26 rifle. First, let me say that even though I did not know him, I was saddened to hear of the death of your father who was one of our own. As to the rifle, it is of the greatest interest to me, because I had the early experience with it, and especially because of my great love for the M1 (Garand) Rifle.
There is very little that I can tell you other than the information you received from John Lindgren (article on page 101 of Duff's book). As far as I can remember, Major Alexander came to us on Noemfoor Island, New Guinea, in order to have his weapon test. He was newly arrived from "stateside".
I did not know that anyone in our outfit ever acquired the converted M1. As I remember, Army Ordnance had converted the weapon which Alexander carried. It was my impression that this relatively simple conversion of the M1 was done in an ordnance shop in the U.S. In fact I did not know until later that Alexander remained in the Southwest Pacific being assigned to 6th Army Headquarters.
Major Alexander was convinced that he had the perfect parachutist's weapon. After the test committee submitted a negative report he was quite disappointed and questioned the reliability of the nine-Lieutenant-platoon leader-committee. Evidently he took his case on to senior officers including General MacArthur. These nine lieutenants had just concluded a successful operation destroying the Japanese force on Noemfoor. The committee had been selected because of their leadership and ability displayed during the campaign. I feel our attitude toward the M1 rifle was the same. This was that the M1 was the ultimate rifleman's weapon. We loved it. Most of us disliked the carbine and felt it was too light in its hitting power. Many, like me, carried M1's rather than the TO&E prescribed carbine. We would have been overjoyed to accept any suitable conversion of the M1. Unfortunately the great muzzle blast of the cut down model ruled this weapon out.
This is a prime example of how the troops are sometimes denied the best weapons. Some high ranking officers in their infinite wisdom over rule subordinate's decisions.
Lt. Col. Alexander should be able to give you much information if you are able to contact him. John Lindgren is an expert at locating retired officers, if Alexander is a retired officer. If he left the Army after WWII he might be found by going through the VA. A friend of mine found me after almost forty years through the VA.
I'm sorry I have no more information on the T26. I hope to learn more in the future. If I do I will certainly pass it on to you. I hope you will do the same for me.
Good luck in your quest.
Sincerely,
Bill

I tried contacting Lt Col Alexander but was unsuccessful in my attempt. John Lindgren has since passed away. I don't know about Bill but am sure he's probably gone now as well. The only thing I remember my father saying about the T26 was that the barrel was only 18" long and that he had one.
I hope this sheds at least a little light on the subject of the T26 and puts to rest the myth that the T26's never existed.

[duke133]

dryheat,
Thanks for the post from the past and insight.