Audie Murphy's Army-issue weapon

Answer 1

as he was in the infantry he would have had an M1 garand rifle

But A. Murphy was slight-of-build (5'6", 140lbs.), would he have maybe been issued an M1 carbine? Is there any military or scholarly documentation?

after further checking I noted Murphy did have a M1 carbine during the war. Also, weapons were not issued base on weight or height. Officers and NCO were issued carbines in lieu of the 45 pistol.......whereas infantrymen were issued M1 garands.............

But Murphy began as an infantryman, so did he have a Garand at that time? He eventually received a battlefield commission to 2nd Lt. (late 1944?), but had already served in Sicily, at Anzio, and in the Anvil-Dragoon landings in southern France in mid-August, 1944: did he use a Garand in those actions? The Garand would be the superior weapon at longer ranges; it was also more reliable than the M1 carbine. I will ask a retired Army Col. I know (who used Garand, M1 carbine, M3 "greasegun," M14, and M16A1) whether the stature of the soldier was taken into account in issuing weapons. I know Murphy was rejected by the Marines, Navy, and Army (initially) for being too small. At that point he was 5'5", 110lbs. But he had extensive experience with rifles as a young hunter in Depression-era Texas, and was an excellent shot.

For clarification I served 22 years of service with the US Army. When I entered serice I weighted about 135 pounds. I was issued an M1 garand, not a carbine. I also fought in Korea 1951, and I still had an m1 garand (although I was a little heaver). I will say again, size and weight had nothing to due with the issuing of a weapon. Infantryman were issued M1 garands, certain crews, tank, artillery, mortor squads, machingun crews, etc, were issued the 45 pistol or a carbine. And, carbines and 45 pistols were also issued to officers and NCO's. It was job assignment not weight whereby which type of weapon was issued..............I will add that an infantryman always preferred the m1 garand over the carbine because it shot further and killed more effectively. I'd be glad to answer any question you may have on this matter in case you cannot contact the Colonel.....

P.S. as a veteran I am well aware of Lt Murphy's exploits in WW2.......

Well, as a battle-experienced veteran, I will take your word for it re type of weapon issued to new infantrymen. I know motorpool, tank crews, and other troops performing certain tasks were given shorter, more compact personal defense weapons. In the (first) Gulf War, truck-drivers were even issued dusted-off .45 greaseguns.

Re A. Murphy's battlefield commission: it was given on 22Feb.1945 (2nd Lt.), not late 1944, about a month after the action cited in his Medal of Honor award. Thank you for your input.

My friend who was an Army Col., had an M1 carbine with full-auto capability. He said it was prone to jamming. He said the greasegun was too heavy, but good for putting a lot of large caliber bullets down-range. He has great affection for the M1 Garand. I have yet to ask him his opinion of the M16A1.

by the time the m16 hit the field I was about to retire so can't talk to much about that piece. Can relate to the grease gun. It could be fired with one arm and stay on target, I found.

The M2 carbine could fire single or auto. It had to have the 30 round clip or it would be dry after couple trigger pulls. The 30 cal. light machine gun needed a nack to shoot slow. The right hand was kept flat in front of trigger then swept back and forth, creating short bursts of fire. The 50 cal heavy machine gun had a slow rate of fire and somewhat easy to control fire direction and keep on target area...........Never played with mortars.......or artillery.

Thank you very much for this additional information. Did you find the Garand to be an excellent combat weapon in Korea? Any problems keeping up rate of fire with 8 round enbloc clips? How many clips would you take with you on your person into the field? Would the clips mainly be in cloth bandoliers? Or in ammo-sacks? Or both? I am sure you also got resupplied in the field.

What is your opinion of the BAR? I know its HEAVY, and has only a 20 round magazine; but I also know it is an excellent weapon (like all of John Browning's designs), and was used extensively in Korea, often in urban combat.

I owned an AR-15 civilian version of the M16A2, with a heavy barrel. I found it quite fun for plinking. It was extremely accurate; light-weight; and, in my experience, reliable, with low recoil so that many rounds could be fired quickly but accurately. Of course I cleaned it after each use. But the .223 round, while deadly, does not have the killing-power and penetration capability (into fortifications or dense jungle) of the .30-06.

Again, many thanks for your combat-veteran's feedback...I value it highly. (And thanks for your service to the USA.)

My next rifle purchase will be a Garand.