Automatic grenade launchers (AGL) have been a mainstay of light infantry support weapons since the Vietnam War when the US Navy’s 40x53mm Mark 19 was introduced for use in riverine warfare operations in the Mekong River delta. Since then, there has been a number of first generation 40mm AGLs produced. All are similar in concept, are relatively heavy with an overall system weight of 50 kg or more and all have relatively simple optical sights. Saco Defense, however, is in the final stages of development of what promises to be the next generation of AGL. This new AGL, called Striker, is presently under consideration for adoption by US special operations forces and will shortly be available for international sales. SAR’s intrepid reporter was recently afforded the opportunity to be the first journalist to actually fire the Striker at Crane Division, Naval Surface Warfare Center, where the weapon is undergoing test and evaluation by the US military.

The Striker was developed as a private venture by a consortium consisting of Saco Defense (gun and overall system integration), Computing Devices Canada (fire control) and NAMMO Bofors (programmable ammunition). The overall design goals for the weapon were to develop a new generation 40mm AGL that provided improved lethality and suppression capability, significantly lighter weight, enhanced reliability and increased lethality, combined with reasonable cost. It was with these goals in mind that we approached our informal evaluation of the Striker.

There are several features that differentiate the Striker from all other currently available AGLs. The Striker is considerably lighter than any other currently available AGL. The Striker has a computer controlled fire control system developed by Computer Devices Canada that not only automatically sets superelevation and windage, but also programs the air burst munition developed by Nammo Bofors and significantly enhances the probability of a first burst hit. We will discuss these features in detail below. Table 1 provides a comparison between Striker and currently available 40mm AGLs.

The Striker operates via delayed blowback using a toggle mechanism to delay bolt opening sufficiently long for pressures to drop to a safe level. Saco did not allow photography of the interior of the Striker at this point due to patent sensitivities. We were, however, permitted to examine the gun’s interior and field strip it. The overall simplicity of the Striker and its ability to be field stripped, to include barrel removal, without the use of tools is impressive. The Striker fires from the closed bolt and is fed from a standard disintegrating link belt via a sprocket driven by the recoiling parts. Ejection is straight down. The round counter on the gun we tested indicated that it had fired nearly 20,000 rounds. According to Saco representatives and Crane personnel, overall weapon performance has been excellent and will equal or exceed that of the Mark 19.

The reader will note that the “full-up” Striker with fire control and tripod in place weighs less than the gun alone in some other available systems and weighs dramatically less than any other currently available AGL configured with sights and tripod. Striker’s weight saving has been accomplished in several ways, while at the same time reducing recoil by 60 per cent compared to that of the Mark 19. The toggle link delayed blowback system, for example, allowed bolt weight to be reduced by 11lb (5kg) in comparison to that of the Mark 19. Toggle link delayed blowback has been widely used in the past and is in itself no great technological breakthrough, although its use in Striker is an ingenious application of the technique. A second factor that reduces recoil is the bi-directional hydraulic buffer that operates in both recoil and counterrecoil to reduce felt recoil and stabilize the gun. The buffer, which acts as in internal soft mount, can also be adjusted to vary the Striker’s cyclic rate from approximately 230 to 300 rounds per minute.

All unstressed components of the Striker are made of either light alloy or polymer. The receiver of the Striker, for example, receives little stress and is made of aluminum, while the top cover receives no stress whatsoever and thus is of polymer. The reciprocating components ride on steel rails in the receiver. In comparison to the Mark 19, the total number of parts in the Striker has been reduced by 33 per cent. Essentially, the entire Striker system was developed by innovative application and integration of existing technologies. This not only helped to achieve the weight and reliability goals, but also enhanced the achievement of cost goals. The Striker is light enough that the entire system can be easily carried and placed into action by a two-man crew, although a third man is desirable to carry the 40mm ammunition. The lightweight tripod collapses into a very compact and convenient package for transportation. Extending or collapsing the tripod takes only a matter of seconds.

The Striker is fully STANAG compliant and fires all standard 40x53mm ammunition, although the system is optimized for the programmable air burst munition. The Striker is made to be as safe as humanly possible for the user. The manual safety is configured in such a way that its position can be determined by touch. The weapon will not fire if the barrel or buffer are incorrectly installed. The backplate cannot be removed if there is a round in the chamber. Since removal of the backplate is necessary to field strip the Striker, the gun thus cannot be disassembled while loaded. In addition, the firing pin is blocked until the bolt is in the fully closed position. Short recoils are precluded by a ratchet mechanism. As previously stated, the gun has a built in round counter to indicate scheduled maintenance.

Another innovative element of the Striker is the weapon’s computer controlled fire control system, which allows the gunner to achieve a high percentage of first burst hits, rather than having to “walk” rounds onto the target as required with other AGLs. The 8x-magnification sight uses video image processing and ballistic computer technology to enhance target acquisition and first round hit probability. The sighting system also allows Striker to achieve a greater effective range than current systems. All current systems have an effective range of approximately 1,500 meters, but Striker’s effectiveness is multiplied by its accuracy. The sight incorporates a Gen III Image intensifier for night operations. The computer provides a full ballistic solution, can be used with virtually any 40x53mm cartridge, has air temperature and barometric pressure sensors, automatically compensates for ammunition temperature, senses cant and angle and is self-testing. In practice, all the gunner has to do is range the target using the sight’s laser range finder to designate his target. He then moves the corrected sight aim point to coincide with the target he has designated and the weapon can then be fired with virtual assurance of a first burst hit. The computer automatically computes superelevation, the weapon’s elevation angle above the line of sight to ensure that the projectile hits the target. Not only is this system simpler to use, it allows targets to be engaged much more quickly than with any existing system. In addition to rapid target engagement, the ballistic computer provides the ability to predesignate up to eight targets and store them in the computer’s memory. These targets may subsequently be engaged regardless of optical conditions. The ballistic computer further allows the gunner to prepare electronic range cards with lateral limits to automatically prevent engagements outside the range “fan,” although this feature can be manually overridden. Future upgrades to the computer fire control system include automatic calculation of the speed of moving targets and incorporation of a global positioning system into the fire control computer to allow automatic indirect firing.

The ballistic computer also provides a direct interface with the programmable ammunition developed by NAMMO Bofors. The programmable ammunition, while extremely innovative, again is manufactured using a maximum number of available components. The warhead, for example, was designed by Diehl with Bofors fuzing that provides air burst, point detonation and self-destruct, while the propulsion element is a standard NICO component. As ammunition is an integral element of accuracy, along with the gun itself, NICO’s propulsion system is specifically designed for low dispersion. The NICO cartridge case to projectile interface is threaded rather than crimped to provide a consistent release at a predetermined pressure to reduce dispersion. The air burst warhead is electronically programmed by the ballistic computer just prior to firing as the rangefinder determines the range and computes the trajectory and time of flight to the target. Use of an air bursting munition allows engagement of targets in defilade or behind obstacles. The lethal area of the 40mm air burst round is approximately 100 square meters.

Our overall firing impressions of the Striker were extremely favorable. We fired the weapon from a pedestal mount and found it to be easy to control and pleasant to shoot. We were able to use the computer fire control to quickly engage targets after only a few minutes’ orientation and “dry firing” practice. The cyclic rate was set to approximately 230 rounds per minute, allowing easy burst control or even single shots if desired. We were consistently able to achieve first round hits with the Striker by simply engaging the range finder, matching the gun to the sight’s indicated point of aim and pressing the trigger. With very little additional training, we could easily have made use of the remainder of the fire control unit’s sophisticated capabilities. We fired two containers of 48 rounds each without incident. The first rounds in each burst hit precisely where we aimed, with the remainder of the burst clustered closely around the initial hit, consistent with Saco’s dispersion claims. Had we been firing high explosive rather than training rounds, we could have easily destroyed hardened targets with very few rounds. We did not notice any appreciable recoil through the “hard” pedestal mount; had we been firing any other AGL, an external “soft mount” would have been a virtual necessity. Striker’s inherent low recoil and light weight will assuredly simplify adapting the weapon to vehicle mounts. We did not fire the Striker from the lightweight tripod ground mount, but given the lack of felt recoil on the rigid pedestal mount and Striker’s internal soft mount, we believe that the eight pound (3.6kg) tripod will sustain the weight and recoil of the gun.

In sum, we liked the Striker. We tend to approach all manufacturers’ claims with a very jaundiced eye, but in the case of the Striker, our “hands on” experience, albeit brief, indicates that the weapon will probably live up to its claimed performance levels. In closing, we should point out that the Striker is not yet a fielded system. It is undergoing final developmental testing and is currently scheduled to enter production in late 2000 with initial deliveries shortly thereafter. In Europe, the Striker is sold by Bofors/Carl Gustav as the CG40. In the remainder of the world, except Canada, it is sold by Saco under the Striker name. Canadian sales are handled by Computing Devices Canada. Those seeking further information on this system should contact one of these firms.

The firearm that has become known as the assault rifle originated in Nazi Germany during World War Two, a fact that is fairly common knowledge to most students of small arms, given the weapon’s true milestone status. Details of its development history are less well known, however. In this brief article, we will give an overview of the design and development of the earliest assault rifles and describe most of the different variants. The reader who seeks a definitive and detailed history of German assault rifles should purchase The German Assault Rifle 1935-1945, by Peter Senich. (Paladin Press, 1987)

The assault rifle concept had its origins in the First World War, when the German military in typical methodical fashion, studied infantry engagements and came to the conclusion that the vast majority of infantry combat took place at ranges of less than 400 meters. A corollary of this conclusion was that the long-range effectiveness of the standard 7.92x57mm cartridge was generally wasted and the cartridge thus was inefficient under normal combat conditions. After the war ended in defeat for the Central Powers, German ordnance studied several “intermediate” cartridges, but nothing really came of the experiments until the late 1930s. In 1938, the cartridge manufacturer Polte was directed (or undertook as an initiative – history is unclear on this point), to develop an intermediate cartridge for use in an undeveloped family of infantry weapons. The Polte design was accepted in 1941 and designated “7.9 Infanterie Kurz Patrone.” (7.9 Infantry Short Cartridge) The cartridge was similar in many ways to the standard military cartridge, except in terms of overall length. The new cartridge essentially was a shortened 7.92mm cartridge case. The case was made of lacquered steel, with a 125-grain bullet whose jacket was either of copper washed steel or cupro-nickel clad steel. Standard bullets also had a steel core. By the time it was adopted in 1941, the new cartridge was ready for production, but required a weapon. The new cartridge’s ballistics were nominally 2,247 feet per second at the muzzle with energy of 1,408 foot-pounds, compared to the standard 7.9mm “S” cartridge’s 2,880 feet per second velocity and 2,835 foot pounds of energy, respectively.

Although the cartridge did not have a weapon at the time of its adoption, the German Waffenamt had not been idle. At almost the same time as development of the 7.9 Kurz Patrone was undertaken, the firm of C.G. Haenel Waffen und Fahrrad Fabrik was contracted to begin development of a weapon for the new cartridge. For those who do not speak German, the Haenel firm’s name indicates that they manufacture weapons and bicycles. At any rate, the Haenel firm’s head of design and development was Hugo Schmeisser, famed as designer of the MP38/40 submachine gun. The new weapon, however, was to be designated mascheinen karabiner (Mkb), which distinguished it from any previous firearm. Prototype weapons chambered for the new Polte cartridge were undergoing testing by 1940. Although Haenel was the official contractor, Walther also undertook an unofficial design in 1940 for an Mkb based on an earlier semiautomatic rifle. Walther submitted a prototype to the Waffenamt, and was also given a development contract in January, 1941. The two firms continued to develop their respective prototypes and by 1942 both had final prototypes ready. Haenel had actually produced about 50 of their Mkb42 weapons by July. It appears that Walther produced approximately 200 of their Mkb42 (W) assault rifles by autumn of that year, but the number cannot be confirmed. The exact history of the Walther design at this juncture is open to speculation. Small Arms of the World claims that some 7,800 of both the Walther and Haenel designs were produced and tested on the Eastern Front, where the Walther design was found wanting. Peter Senich disputes this in his authoritative The German Assault Rifle – 1935-1945, claiming that the Mkb42 (W) was never produced in significant numbers, but in the final analysis the reader will have to decide for himself which is correct. Whatever the case, by November 1942, the Mkb42 (W) had been taken out of production because its annular piston system was considered unsatisfactory.

The Mkb42 (W) and its piston system is worth a brief examination before we move on to the Mkb42 (H) and its successors, the MP43/44 and StG 44. Rather than a conventional gas tube, the Mkb42 (W) used a annular piston that encircled the barrel and operated inside a sheet metal sleeve that also formed the front handguard. There were two gas ports in the barrel and the piston acted on a sliding sleeve that operated the bolt, which had two front locking lugs. Without knowledge of the official reasons for the rejection of the Walther design, we can come to a number of reasons for doing so simply by examining the annular piston operating system. First, the system would be subject to stoppages if the outer sheet metal tube were to be dented or bent, as the piston’s travel would be interrupted. Second, since the hot gases from the fired cartridges were in direct contact with the outer tube, it probably got very hot in a very short time, especially when being fired on full auto. Although there is no concrete evidence to support these conclusions, the design of the Walther annular piston system logically leads one directly to them. Needless to say, the Walther Mkb42 (W) design has yet to be duplicated in a gas operated small arm.

The Haenel Mkb42 (H) was similar to its MP43/44 and StG44 successors in overall design, but differed in several ways, which are easily and readily distinguishable, even to the untrained eye. The MP43 which followed the Mkb42 (H) is difficult to distinguish from the MP44/StG44. The primary differences between the Mkb42 (H) and MP43 are as follows:

-The Mkb42 (H) fired from the open bolt, rather than the closed bolt like its successors.

-The Mkb42 (H) gas piston is slightly longer than that of the MP43 and is carried in a separate tube above the barrel, rather than in a tube that is integrated into the handguard, as with the MP43. The gas tube of the Mkb42 (H) is also visibly separate from the barrel and extends almost to the muzzle.

-The Mkb42 (H) has a bayonet lug, while the MP43 does not.

-The Mkb42 (H) has a receiver cut so that the bolt handle can be locked to the rear similarly to that of the MP38/40. This is not a very safe method of locking the bolt, was really only useful on weapons that fire from an open bolt and was replaced by a conventional safety on the closed bolt MP43.

It is at about this point that Adolph Hitler directly influenced the assault rifle development program. He ordered the program to be terminated. The “machine carbine” as it was then called showed so much promise, however, that the Herreswaffenamt covertly continued the program, changing the designation from machine carbine (Mkb) to machine pistol (MP). This suggested to all but those “in the know” that the new weapons were merely improvements on existing submachine guns. Hitler discovered the deception in March 1943 and again ordered the program ended, but allowed a limited production run restricted to those components already in the production “pipeline.” The proponents of the MP43, however, took a liberal view of what constituted components “in the pipeline,” and sufficient numbers of the new weapon were produced to equip a number of units on the Eastern Front, where Soviet “human wave” attacks usually overwhelmed German defenses. The reports from the east were so enthusiastic that Hitler finally gave in and approved production of the new weapon, which was officially designated Maschinenpistole 43 (MP43).

The adoption of the MP43 by the German military was one of the rare turning points in small arms history. The weapon would not be given the name “assault rifle” (Sturmgewehr) until December 1944, but the salient features of this new class of small arm have been retained by every assault rifle design since, including the latest ones. These include:

-Chambered for an “intermediate class” cartridge, in between pistol caliber and full battle rifle classes in terms of exterior ballistics. The MP43 was chambered for the 7.9x33mm cartridge. Virtually all assault rifles are presently chambered for the 7.62x39mm, 5.56x45mm, or 5.45x39mm cartridges, whose ballistics are similar to those of the original. A few Russian assault rifles and carbines, mistakenly called submachine guns in Russian literature, are chambered for a new 9x39mm cartridge. They are still assault rifles or carbines, NOT submachine guns, which by definition fire a pistol caliber cartridge.

-Select fire capability. Whether semi and fully automatic; semi, full automatic and burst; or semi and burst only, all assault rifles are select fire.

-Detachable box magazine with capacity of over 20 rounds.

-”In line” barrel/stock configuration to reduce muzzle climb when fired in fully automatic mode. This necessitates the use of a pistol grip for the trigger hand.

-Optimum use lightweight or nontraditional materials, such as sheet metal, aluminum extrusions or forgings for metal components and plywood or plastic for furniture.

There are two versions of the MP43 – the basic MP43 and the MP43/1. The two rifles differed in the method by which grenades were attached to the muzzle and by the front sights. The original MP43’s front sight was easily damaged or knocked off and lost, so the MP43/1 was fitted with a redesigned front sight of a more robust design. The MP43 used a clamp on type grenade launcher, while the MP43/1 used a screw on type. There is no apparent difference between the MP43/1 and MP44. All MP43/1 and early MP44/StG44 rifles have a “V” type mount for a telescopic sight on the right side of the receiver just below the ejection port. Later StG44 rifle eliminated not only this, but the threaded muzzle, as well in order to reduce costs and expedite production. The designation was officially changed from MP43 to MP44 in April 1944, but rifles bearing the designations “MP43, MP44 and StG44 were manufactured right up to the end of the war.

By late 1944, production of the MP43/44 rifles had increased, despite the Allied bombing campaign. One of the great fallacies of history was the notion that the bombing would both demoralize the German people and reduce industrial output. In fact, the bombing strengthened the resolve of the people and the Nazis were actually able to increase industrial production right up to the end of the war. This included small arms like the MP43/44 and total projected monthly production rates ran from 40,000 to 80,000 weapons through the final months of 1944.
The actual status of the rifle was clarified in December when the nomenclature was officially changed to Sturmgewehr 44. The new designation was most likely chosen to improve morale and give the impression that German scientists had come with yet another new “wonder weapon” in the face of certain defeat. Legend has it that the new designation was personally chosen by Hitler himself. Whatever the reason and regardless of whose mind coined the term, the words “assault rifle” not only distinguished the new weapon as different than submachine guns, but distinguished it as an entirely new class of small arm.

The final page of the German assault rifle story is the StG45 (M). After the success of the MP43, a number of German small arms manufacturers set out to design weapons that were lighter and easier to produce than the Haenel weapon. The only one which achieved any success was a Mauser design that weighed only 8.18lb as opposed to the StG44’s 11.5lb. Early versions of this rifle were designated GeratO6 (H) and functioned by a combination of gas and blowback operation. The final design was designated Stg45 (M) and introduced the roller bearing delayed blowback operating system that has been incorporated into several postwar rifles, including the German G3, Swiss StuG57 and several others. The Stg45 (M) was an innovative design in more ways than its delayed blowback operating system. Its production was “progressive,” with components welded together. The receiver was cylindrical and held a sleeve in which the barrel was assembled, along with ribs that guided the bolt assembly as it reciprocated. The magazine housing was designed to accept standard MP43/44 magazines. The trigger group was assembled separately and attached to the receiver via a hinge and pin similar to that of the MP43/44. It was not removable, but rotated downward clear of the receiver for field stripping and cleaning. Other than the barrel, bolt assembly and a few minor components, the StG45 (M) was made entirely of stamped steel. While not a true milestone weapon in the sense of the MP43/44, the StG45 (M) had a decided influence on modern small design that continues to this day in firearms such as the Heckler & Koch HK33 and 53 rifles, the MP5 submachine gun, and the Spanish CETME, in addition to those already mentioned.

In the final analysis, the German assault rifles of World War II constituted one of the rarest events in firearms history – a single design that defined an entirely new class of small arm. While Kalashnikov assault rifles may have been more widely distributed, that is because the Soviet government virtually gave them to client states. And while the AK was itself a significant design, it was basically no different in concept than the MP43/44/StG44 that preceded it. Kalashnikov claims that the MP43/44/StG44 did not influence his design, but given the configuration of the AK, this is doubtful. The German design also influenced many other small arms designers who used its basic configuration as the starting point for their own designs. From Eugene Stoner to the weapons designers of today, the basic assault rifle configuration and cartridge class established some 55 years ago by Haenel continues and shows few signs of fading into history. Despite claimed “revolutionary” small arms such as the American OICW and French PAPOP, these weapons will never have an influence on firearms design approaching that of the German assault rifles. They are simply too expensive, too complicated and too bulky to ever replace the assault rifle as a class of weapon. The MP43/44/StG44 will thus continue to influence small arms design for many years to come.

Colt’s M4 and M4A1 carbines will soon be the standard arm of the US airborne and special operations forces, where they will replace the M16A2. The venerable Heckler & Koch MP5 submachine gun is also slated to be replaced in special operations forces by the subject of this article, the M4A1 Close Quarters battle (CQB) Weapon. The M4 is essentially an M16A2 with a 14.5 inch (368mm) barrel, while the M4A1 is the shortened version of the “flat top” M16A3. The primary differences between the M4 and M4A1 are the detachable carrying handle/rear sight assembly of the latter which is mounted on a MIL-STD-1913 “Picatinny Rail” and the fact that the M4A1 is capable of full automatic fire rather than having the M4’s three-round burst feature. The M4A1’s MIL-STD-1913 rail mounting system allows the flexibility of quickly mounting various optical sights and other accessories without losing weapon zero. Also, the devices are generally mounted in a position that does not demand that the shooter crane his neck to see through them, as is the case with fixed carry handle AR-15 type rifles and carbines.

While the M4A1 offers more flexibility than the standard M4, the weapon’s users desired even more flexibility – a truly modular weapons system capable of being configured for optimum effectiveness in any tactical situation. The US Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) synthesized the inputs and requested Crane Division, Naval Surface Weapons Center, to develop the system that eventually became the Special Operations Peculiar Modification to the M4 Carbine Accessory Kit. This piece of bureaucratic jargon is abbreviated SOPMOD M4, but it is probable that many who use the term are unaware exactly what comprises the kit, to whom it is issued and how it is employed. Essentially, joining the SOPMOD M4 Accessory Kit to the M4A1 Carbine results in the M4A1 Close Quarter Battle Weapon. We should note at this point that the Army has experimented with a carbine designated M4E2 that is essentially a burst fire M4A1 with the rail interface system described below.

The purpose of the SOPMOD M4 kit is to provide the US special operations forces with the ability to adapt their weapons to meet virtually any mission profile. This is necessary because SPECOPS units have no heavy weapons and thus must optimize the operational effectiveness of the weapons that they have. The SOPMOD M4 kit allows the user to “tailor” his weapon to the assigned mission. The kit is intended to optimize the effectiveness of the M4A1 from CQB/CRE range of less than 50 meters out to the 600-meter maximum effective range of the weapon. While the components of the SOPMOD M4 kit are current as of the time of this writing (July 1999), it is probable that they will change over time, as the kit is intended to evolve to take advantage of technology developments that enhance the effectiveness of the M4A1. (Some are currently under development and will be reported upon in SAR in the near future.) Unlike many other military requirements, development of new items for the M4A1 does not require a change to the requirements documentation. This enables USSOCOM and Crane to act rapidly to bring new items into the inventory. It is significant that virtually all components of the SOPMOD M4 kit are nondevelopmental items/commercial off the shelf (NDI/COTS), are available in the open market and can be mounted on any AR-15 – type carbine. As we explore the components, the reader can determine which of the SOPMOD M4 Kit components, he or she might like to add to their CAR-15 or equivalent. Most of these components will also fit an M16A4 configured AR-15-type rifle, as well. (The M16A4 configuration simply is an M16A3 flattop rifle length with the Knight’s Armament Systems Rail Adapter System (RAS), M5, full-length handguard.)

SOPMOD M4 Kits are issued on the basis of one kit per four carbines and consist of four of the following components: Rail Interface System (RIS), optical scopes, forward vertical hand grips and combat slings. Other items such as the reflex sight, suppressor and Quick Attach M203 are intended to be fitted to one or two carbines out of every four. While the basic “one kit per four carbines” is a general rule of thumb, if more of some items are required, shortfalls are made up from kits which are not required by other teams. Present issue is three kits per Army Special Operations Forces “A” Detachment (SFOD-A), two kits per “B” Detachment (SFOD-B), three kits per Air Force STT and four kits per Navy SEAL platoon. Army Rangers and other special mission units are issued selected components rather than complete kits.

As previously mentioned, the requirements documentation that resulted in the current SOPMOD M4 Kit is written to accommodate changes and upgrades, generally without rewriting. As technology, threats, missions and requirements change, the kit will likewise evolve to keep pace with them. Capabilities that are within those originally identified in the original requirements document do not require rewriting. That is, if a new or improved item is developed that is a significant improvement over an existing component of the SOPMOD M4 Kit, no rewrite of the original requirement is necessary, nor is any change required. If, on the other hand, the capability is a new one beyond the scope of the original documentation, the capability must be validated by USSOCOM and the requirement modified. Once the requirement is validated, the program office at Crane will conduct a competitive evaluation of candidates for selection. Now that we understand the M4A1 Carbine and the overall concept of the SOPMOD M4 Kit, we can proceed to the heart of the matter – the components that make up the kit. First, the basic SOPMOD Kit for four carbines consists of the following components in the quantities indicated in the chart on the top of page 26.

A detailed description of these components and their use is the subject of the remainder of this article. The first is the Day Optical Scope (DOS), Trijicon’s Model TAO1NSN 4x32mm Advanced Combat Optical Sight (ACOG). The DOS is intended to extend the carbine’s effective range to 600 meters. This version of the ACOG has the Bindon Aiming Concept reticle as standard. This system is similar to that used so many years ago by the Germans and to that espoused by Jeff Cooper for his scout rifle concept. The system uses a low power telescope and the “both eyes open” aiming method. As the rifle is brought to the shoulder, the image is unmagnified, permitting extremely rapid target acquisition. Once the rifle is in a shooting position and the shooter is close to proper sight picture with the optic, the target “snaps” into magnification, providing not only faster target acquisition, but also greater accuracy. The central crosshair reticle of the DOS is illuminated by tritium and gives off an amber glow for use in low light or darkness. The wavelength of the amber light is beyond those which night vision devices can sense and so does not affect their use. The DOS is waterproof for eight hours at 66 feet (20 meters) depth.

The 2.25x Miniature (Mini) Night Vision Sight (MNVS) is a small, lightweight and compact night vision sight that provides the capability to identify and hit targets from 20 to 300 meters. The sight is adjustable for windage and elevation and may be mounted on the carbine or hand held. The MNVS reticle is a simple red light emitting diode that subtends 2.5MOA at 100 yards. The sight weighs only 1.85lb (0.83kg, is 7.5in (190.5mm) in length and is powered by a single “AA” size alkaline battery that has an operational life of approximately 16 hours.

The SOPMOD M4 Kit also includes Trijicon’s ACOG Model RX01M4A1 Reflex Sight under the nomenclature Reflex Sight (RS) as a compliment to the 4×32 sight described above. The RS is a 1x day optic intended primarily for CQB/CRE ranges while still enhancing target acquisition and accuracy to a range of 300 meters. Like the 4×32 sight, the RS uses tritium to illuminate the reticle dot for low light and night operations. The dot is also illuminated by ambient light through a fiber optic cable that gathers light from beneath the lens. The collimator system eliminates parallax, so that if the dot appears on the target, it is properly aligned, regardless of the angle from which it is viewed. The design of the sight also provides for a virtually unobstructed view of the target. Like the DOS described above, it allows the shooter to employ the “both eyes open” aiming technique that enhances speed and accuracy at all ranges. The amber dot of the RS is identical to the DOS reticle frequency and thus is fully compatible with all night vision devices. The RS can be mounted either on the receiver rail or forward on the Rail Interface System, at the option of the user.

The question of why amber versus red reticles were used may be raised by some readers and the answer is because of night vision. Simply stated, amber is less destructive of night vision capability than red. The human eye is actually “night blind” at its exact center, where vision is sharpest. This is why, in the days before night vision devices, infantrymen (this writer included) were trained to observe at night without directly scanning the terrain and then to focus once something was detected. The rods that provide night vision are not affected by the amber glow, which is normally centered in the “night blind” area of the eye. In addition, of course, the amber color of the SOPMOD M4 sights do not affect night vision optics. The RS is issued with a polarizing filter for use under special conditions or with a flashlight, where it improves aiming dot contrast. The filter is not compatible with night vision devices. The RS is also issued with an accessory dust cover for use in extreme conditions.

When the carrying handle/rear sight assembly is removed, the military recommends that the Backup Iron Sight (BIS) be installed at all times. This is an excellent policy because although modern optical sights are extremely reliable, one of Murphy’s Laws of Combat dictates that the most critical piece of gear will “go south” at the most inopportune time. Moreover, optical sights are complicated devices and thus susceptible to the “breakdown” law, while “iron” sights are about as simple as aiming devices can get. The sight used in the SOPMOD M4 Kit is simply clamped at the last notch of the receiver rail and folded down out of the way unless it is needed. The BIS is adjustable only for windage in .5 MOA increments. Elevation is adjusted using the front sight. The BIS is intended for use from CQB/CRE range to 300 meters. Once the BIS is zeroed, it can also be used to obtain an approximate zero for other accessory sights, although shooting with sights “zeroed” in such a manner is recommended only to a maximum of 100 meters.

The Knight’s Armament Company Rail Interface System (RIS) is a key component of the SOPMOD M4 Kit because it allows the mounting and operation of many of the kit components, including lasers, visible lights, the vertical handgrip and more. It is safe to say that without the RIS, the versatility and flexibility of the SOPMOD M4 Kit would be dramatically reduced; the RIS is truly the “core” of the SOPMOD M4 Kit. The RIS concept is a simple one. The system consists of two 6061 T6 aircraft aluminum hard anodized coated sections that replace the standard upper and lower M4A1 handguard sections. Upper and Lower RIS sections are not interchangeable. The lower section has a single MIL-STD-1913 rail and the upper has three such rails, 90 degrees apart, thereby providing four equally spaced rails when the RIS is installed. The top rail is slightly higher to align it with the top of the receiver. The RIS lower section has an aluminum heat shield on its inner surface. When there are no SOPMOD M4 Kit components mounted on the RIS, glass filled nylon rail cover panels are slid into place over the rails to provide a relatively even grip surface. The panels are available in varying lengths so that there is an even grip surface, even when accessories are installed.

The Forward (vertical) Hand Grip, another Knight’s product, is installed at approximately the mid-point of the lower rail, depending on the user’s preference. The Forward Hand Grip provides better control of the carbine, especially when several accessories are mounted on the RIS. It also provides additional insulation when the carbine is being fired on full automatic.

The Insight Technologies Visible Light Illuminator is a very high intensity rail mounted light intended for search and clear operations in what the army currently euphemistically describes as “military operations other than war.” In plain English, this means “peacekeeping” or other “pizza delivery” missions which presently seem to occupy the preponderance of our military’s efforts. Tactical use of “white lights” must, of course, be balanced against revealing one’s position. The visible light is sufficiently bright, however, to briefly dazzle adversaries in CQB/CRE situations, thus providing a moment’s advantage to the user. An infrared (IR) filter may be placed over the light to allow IR illumination of targets out to 50 meters. The light is powered either by three DL 123 lithium batteries or by six 1.5 volt “AA” size batteries.

The Insight Technologies AN/PEQ-2 Infrared (IR) Target Pointer/ Illuminator/Aiming laser allows the carbine to be used with any one of several night vision optics, including the standard head mounted goggles, a head or weapon mounted pocketscope, or the issue Mini Night Vision Sight (MNVS), described elsewhere. It is intended for use inside buildings and elsewhere where vision using the NVG would be problematic due to lack of available light. A neutral density filter that prevents “blooming” is used with the laser at close ranges.

Insight Technologies’ AN/PEQ-5 Visible Laser is mounted on the rail interface system and is used for close range engagements. The intent is not to replace the optical sights, but to supplement them in interior lighted areas or in dark rooms in conjunction with the visible light illuminator, or at night in conjunction with night vision equipment.

The Knight’s Armament Company sound suppressor is designed for quick attachment/detachment and reduces the M4A1 noise signature at the muzzle by approximately 28db. The suppressor also significantly reduces the flash signature. Taken together, the sound and flash reductions not only confuse adversaries, but also enhances team communications and reduces the need for hearing protection.

The M203 Mount and Leaf sight, although capable of being quickly and easily attached or removed, are rarely dismounted once they are installed on a particular carbine. Other than its shorter barrel, the M203 is identical to the version used with M16 rifles.

A special sling that provides secure cross body or patrol carry is used with the M4A1 CQB Weapon. Whether in column, “stack,” or moving in close quarters, the sling helps the user maintain control of the weapon’s muzzle. The sling has a removable mount that attaches at the front sight/gas block or to the rail interface system. The sling does not interfere with any components that may be mounted on the rail interface system.

Finally, the enhanced collapsible stock improves the M4A1 CQB Weapon’s ergonomics by enhancing the cheek weld for improved pointing at close range and enhanced aiming at any range. The stock also has compartments to accommodate spare batteries for kit accessories.

One of the keys to the success of the SOPMOD M4 Kit is the fact that the vast majority of its components are commercially available. As mentioned above, most can be purchased commercially by any owner of an M16/M4 type carbine who wishes to create a truly modular firearms system. Thus, any agency wishing to equip itself with M4A1 CQB Weapons can do so by modifying their existing M4/M4A1 – type carbines, regardless of manufacturer. Contact information for manufacturers of selected SOPMOD M4 Kit Components is included below. We do not include carbine contact information in this list, as ArmaLite, Bushmaster, Colt and Knight’s all produce carbines suitable for modification into SOPMOD configuration.

ACOG Reflex Sight
and ACOG 4x Scope
Trijicon, Inc.
49385 Shafer Ave.;P.O. Box 930059
Wixom, MI 48393
Tel:248-960-7700; Fax: 248-960-7725
On-line: www.trijicon-inc.com

Visible laser, AN/PEQ-5;
IR Laser Pointer/Illuminator,
AN/PEQ-2; Visible Light
Insight Technologies, Inc.
10 Tinker Ave.
Londonderry, NH 03053
Tel: 603-626-4800; Fax: 603-626-4888

Rail Interface System; QD Suppressor; Forward hand Grip; Backup Iron Sight; M203 Quick Detach Bracket
Knight’s Armament Company
7750 9th Street, SW
Vero Beach, FL 32968
Tel: 561-562-5697; Fax: 561-596-2955

The author wishes to express his sincere appreciation to LTC Mike Harris (Ret) whose assistance made this article possible.

The military shotgun has been in use, primarily by the American armed forces, for well over a hundred years. Throughout its history as a military small arm, the shotgun has been called by many names. It was first termed a “riot gun” and later a “trench gun.” Later still, the military shotgun came to be called a “fighting shotgun” or “combat shotgun.” While the latter terms still prevail among some, we prefer the term “tactical shotgun” because it precisely describes the use of the gun – as a tactical small arm. While the terms “combat” or “fighting” have a certain macho appeal and the acquisition program was for a “combat shotgun,” neither term precisely defines the role of the shotgun as used by today’s law enforcement or the military. Therefore, we prefer to use a more precise designation – tactical shotguns. The shotgun came into its own as a military small arm in World War I, when American “doughboys” came to France equipped with Winchester Model 1897 “trench guns.” The shotguns were so effective in the trench warfare of the time that Germany lodged a formal protest against their use as “inhumane.” The German protest should give the reader a hint as to the devastating effectiveness of the tactical shotgun in close combat when loaded with the proper ammunition, but the shotgun was judged to be no more inhumane than other weapons and the German protest was disallowed. The tactical shotgun has been a fixture in warfare since, usually in jungles, cities, or in other military operations where an effective close combat weapon was required. Although the American military has been the primary user of tactical shotguns, recent developments in ammunition, most notably non-lethal and specialized shotgun ammunition, coupled with changing military roles and missions have brought the shotgun to the attention of the rest of the world. Many of the world’s small arms manufacturers now produce tactical shotguns, but the recent focus of the world’s potential tactical shotgun market has been the US military’s selection of its most recent tactical shotgun, the Benelli M4 Super 90, officially adopted as the XM1014 in April 1999. Once the first articles under the contract pass their testing, the “X” designation will be dropped and the new gun will take on the designation M1014 and begin replacing the Mossberg M590 and other slide action tactical shotguns in US inventory.

Selection of the XM1014 began with a US Marine Corps requirement for a “combat shotgun” that was established in the early 1990s. The requirement was subsequently revised to include the entire US military with the Marine Corps retaining overall program management. The initial shotgun competition was terminated in early 1998 due to technical problems and the program restarted in May of that year. The US military M4 Super 90 project was managed by Heckler & Koch while the gun itself was developed by Benelli. This was probably due to Heckler & Koch’s extensive experience in dealing with the US military and the firm’s demonstrated expertise in managing military small arms projects. Sales of the M4 Super 90/XM1014 will be handled by Benelli, save for US shotguns produced under the current military contract, which are H&K’s province.

The M4 Super 90/XM1014 is a semiautomatic, gas operated, tubular magazine fed tactical shotgun. The bolt assembly is similar to that of the Benelli Montefeltro, with a bolt carrier and rotating two lug bolt that locks into a barrel extension. The shotgun’s gas operation system incorporates a novel design, called Auto-Regulating Gas Operating, or “ARGO,” by the developers. The ARGO system uses two gas ports and tappet type pistons that ride in short cylinders beneath the gun’s barrel. The pistons impinge directly against the face of the bolt carrier to cycle the gun each time the trigger is pulled. According to the manufacturer, the system is unaffected by fouling, requires little or no maintenance and functions reliably with all types of standard shotgun ammunition from low brass target loads to 3 inch (76mm) magnum rounds. We verified this claim in testing, as discussed below. The ARGO gas system is a simple design that we estimate will be extremely reliable in service, based on our brief, but detailed, evaluation and examination of the gun.

Thus far, testing has proven that the XM1014 will reliably function for at least 25,000 rounds of standard ammunition without replacing any major parts. We tested the XM1014 using a variety of ammunition ranging from low-brass target loads, tactical reduced recoil through full power shotgun ammunition, including three-inch magnum and found that the XM1014 functioned flawlessly, regardless of the type of ammunition we used. The XM1014 will not, however, semiautomatically cycle non-lethal ammunition such as rubber buckshot, “bean bags,” or any other similar non-lethal ammunition. This must not be construed as a criticism, because there was no military requirement for the shotgun to function semiautomatically with these types of ammunition. It is merely a statement of fact of which the reader should be aware. The only military requirement was that the gun be capable of manual cycling to operate with non-lethal ammunition. Given the increasing use of the military for peacekeeping operations, however, non-lethal ammunition will probably be used more frequently than in the past. However, the inability to cycle non-lethal ammunition was a conscious decision on the part of the military and we must emphasize that the HK/Benelli gun meets or exceeds every military requirement.

The M4 Super 90/XM1014 is modular in construction so that the user can quickly exchange major components, including barrel, buttstock and forearm to meet changing mission requirements. In its basic configuration with collapsible buttstock, the XM1014 gives the appearance that it would be awkward to handle, but this is not the case. We found the XM1014 to be very comfortable to fire in all configurations. The overall design coupled with the ARGO gas system has the effect of reducing felt recoil and muzzle rise regardless of the type of ammunition used or stock configuration. Available buttstock configurations are collapsible with pistol grip, fixed stock with pistol grip, semi-pistol grip fixed stock and pistol grip only. Changing the XM1014 into any of its various configurations was easily understood and simply accomplished even without written instructions. Disassembly and assembly for reconfiguration or cleaning is straightforward and can be performed without tools in less than a minute’s time. External finish is heavy phosphate black on steel parts and hard anodizing on aluminum components.

Standard XM1014 sights are of the “ghost ring” type with a large rear aperture sight and blade front sight for quick target acquisition. These open sights are adjustable for windage and elevation using the rim of a cartridge. The front sight is fixed in place with a hex nut and can be replaced with a tritium unit if desired. The gun is fitted with a semi-fixed MIL-STD-1913 rail on top of the receiver that will accept any standard optical sight or targeting device. The rail is held in place using locking screws and can be removed, should the need arise.

The XM1014’s 18.5in barrel has removable choke tubes to accommodate virtually any type of ammunition or tactical condition. A 14in barrel is available as an option. Magazine capacity varies with barrel length. The XM1014 with standard 18.5in barrel will accommodate seven shells (6 in the magazine, plus 1 in the chamber) whether they are 2.75 or 3 inch type, while the 14in barrel reduces total magazine capacity to six (5 + 1) 2.75 inch shells or five (4 + 1) 3 inch shells. Overall length of the XM1014 is 39.8 inches with stock extended, 34.9 inches with stock collapsed and 30.3 inches with short barrel and stock collapsed.

Ammunition can readily be changed from type to another as the tactical situation changes. The shell in the chamber can be ejected without feeding a new round onto the elevator by simply pulling the charging handle to the rear. A fresh shell can then simply be dropped onto elevator, the bolt release pressed and the new round chambered. If the user wishes to discard the chambered round and bring up a new round from the magazine, he presses the small magazine release button located on the receiver bottom near the trigger guard and pulls the charging handle, thus ejecting the chambered round and feeding a fresh one from the magazine. The magazine release button is shaped differently than the safety and must be pressed in a different direction for actuation. There is thus little possibility of confusing the two. As stated, the tubular magazine holds six rounds in standard configuration, but tactical reloads can be accomplished at any time during a break in firing by simply “topping off” the magazine through the loading port.

The XM1014 also comes equipped with speedloaders for quickly filling the magazine. This is accomplished by inserting the speedloader tube against the studs visible on the lower edge of the receiver on either side of the loading port. Once positioned against the studs, the speedloader button is shoved forward to recharge the magazine. Speedloaders, however, are bulky, cumbersome to carry and hold only four or five rounds of ammunition. Tactical (partial) reloads using speedloaders is difficult unless the magazine can accommodate all the ammunition in the speedloader. Moreover, ammunition carried in speedloaders is essentially “fixed.” Once the ammunition is loaded into a speedloader, it is essentially in place and cannot be readily changed if the tactical situation demands. The user is thus restricted as to the types of ammunition available, basically as many of the cumbersome speedloaders as he has with different types of ammunition in each. Use of speedloaders thus actually degrades one of the tactical shotgun’s greatest assets – its flexibility. It is for these reasons that the value of devices such as speedloader tubes is questioned by many professionals. Not only do they have all the disadvantages mentioned above, speedloaders are only marginally faster than manually reloading the gun from belt carriers, “on the gun” carriers, or over the shoulder bandoleers.

Our informal test of the M4 Super 90/XM1014 revealed that it is a superb semiautomatic tactical shotgun. The gun is very well balanced. It handled and pointed well, despite the awkward appearance of the collapsible buttstock. With the semi-pistol grip or full pistol grip stock installed, the gun handles even better, but we suspect that most operators will retain the sliding stock. The sliding stock is easily removed by pressing a release, turning 90 degrees and sliding the stock off to the rear, leaving the pistol grip in place. The collapsible stock configuration thus provides the greatest degree of tactical flexibility. The cross bolt safety is located at the rear of the trigger guard. It has an oversized and uniquely shaped head that is difficult to mistake for anything else, even if the user is wearing gloves, and can be reversed for left-handed users. As stated, the XM1014 functioned flawlessly with every type of ammunition we fed through it, from low brass # 7 1/2 light target loads to 3 inch magnum slugs. The example that we tested patterned well with a modified choke tube, placing all 12 “00” buckshot slugs on a silhouette target at 25 meters. Slug accuracy at 50 meters was impressive. Tactical Foster-type slugs fired from the M4 Super 90/XM1014 impacted essentially at point of aim with all rounds remaining within an approximately 4.75 inch circle. Brenneke or Sauvestre slugs would almost certainly be more accurate. The XM1014 field strips quickly and easily without tools, unless one counts the charging handle, which is withdrawn from the bolt carrier and used to remove the trigger group and disassemble the gas system for cleaning.

What didn’t we like about the M4 Super 90/XM1014? First the fact that it is a semiautomatic. This writer may be considered a troglodyte, but he still prefers a slide action gun for tactical work, as even the best semiautomatic will not function with the full spectrum of tactical ammunition now available to military and law enforcement agencies and stoppages are easier to clear with a slide action gun. We find that manually cycling semiautomatic shotguns to operate the gun with non-lethal ammunition to be cumbersome due to the (usually) small charging handle and the necessity to remove a hand from the gun to accomplish the task. We should note, however, that this is a subjective judgement and must be balanced against the fact that a gas-operated semiautomatic shotgun such as the M4 Super 90/XM1014 greatly reduces felt recoil, thus enhancing accuracy. For the average soldier or law enforcement officer, semiautomatic operation also enhances target engagement and eliminates the possibility of “short stroking” the gun, thereby causing a stoppage. All of the preceding attributes are decided advantages in a tactical shotgun. These attributes, coupled with the influx of women and smaller framed men into law enforcement and the military lead us to the conclusion that the semiautomatic tactical shotgun will gradually replace slide action guns, even though the former will not cycle with all types of ammunition and slide action guns can be equipped with recoil reducers. In the final analysis, the user will have to judge for himself which type of shotgun best suits his agency’s requirements. The sole minor criticism we have of the HK/Benelli M4 Super 90/XM1014 is the recoil spring tube that protrudes almost a foot to the rear of the gun’s receiver when the stock is removed and the gun used with only the pistol grip in place. Despite the fact that the tube is used to retain the stock and pistol grip, we found that it was somewhat inconvenient when the stock was removed and the gun was used with pistol grip only. Again, this is a subjective judgement and others may not find this to be the case due to differences in human anatomy. This one minor complaint must be balanced against the other excellent attributes of the shotgun.

Overall, the HK/Benelli M4 Super 90/XM1014 offers the user desiring a semiautomatic tactical shotgun what is arguably the best “off the shelf” semiautomatic tactical shotgun available today. It is reliable, relatively lightweight, well balanced and has outstanding ergonomics. It is without doubt the most flexible semiautomatic tactical shotgun available not only in terms of function, but from the standpoint of configuration. The M4 Super 90 can be arranged into virtually any tactical configuration imaginable, from entry gun with 14 inch (355mm) barrel and pistol grip to full length barrel and fixed buttstock. The MIL-STD-1913 rail allows employment of any standard optic or night vision device. We can thus close by stating that any agency that has a requirement for a semiautomatic tactical shotgun would do well to follow the US military’s lead and look very closely at the HK/Benelli M4 Super 90.

Most civilians and law enforcement agencies that equip themselves with 5.56x45mm carbines, choose a semiautomatic AR-15 – type firearm, although the Ruger Mini-14 is also a favorite. Carbines are usually purchased from one of the major manufacturers of AR-15 – type firearms, Armalite, Bushmaster and Colt, to name a few. There are other 5.56x45mm carbines available, however, and it is Bushmaster’s non-AR15 rifle that is the subject of this evaluation.

The Bushmaster M17S is not well – known and generally is not even considered by either civilian or law enforcement purchasers, primarily because Bushmaster has not given the little rifle wide publicity. When questioned by the author, Bushmaster’s spokesman stated that orders for their AR-15 – type rifles and carbines had been so heavy that the firm hadn’t been able to publicize the M17S as widely as they would have liked, despite the fact that the M17S may well be better suited for those situations demanding a compact 5.56mm NATO carbine than any version of the AR-15. This is a strong statement, but the author has over 30 years’ experience with AR-15 and M16 type weapons, plus other Stoner weapons and the fact is that Eugene Stoner designed several other rifles that were fundamentally superior to his AR-15 in their basic design. The M17S is derived from one of these superior designs, the AR-18.

Although it is a bullpup, the operating system of the M17S is almost identical to that of the Armalite AR-18 and semiautomatic only AR-180 of the 1970s. The AR-18 was never fully developed because the US military had already committed itself to the AR-15. Without entering into a full technical analysis of the two designs, there are fundamental differences between them. Everyone who has ever used an AR-15 or M16 is keenly aware that the rifle requires a great deal of maintenance and is a “dirty” weapon. This is because excess gases and carbon are vented back into the receiver from the gas tube as the bolt carrier moves to the rear. Carbon from these hot gases essentially “plates” onto several portions of the bolt carrier and the interior of the receiver and after a few rounds are fired, the entire interior of the rifle is coated with a film of carbon. If allowed to build up, this carbon will eventually lead to stoppages, so the rifle must be cleaned frequently. A second problem with the AR-15 design is that the bolt carrier rides directly on the interior surface of the receiver. Because of the ever-present carbon fouling, most operators keep the bolt carrier well-lubricated, which turns it into a “dust magnet” unless the ejection port cover is kept closed at all times when the rifle is not in use. Excess dirt will cause the bolt carrier to eventually slow down and fail to fully chamber a round, which is why the “forward assist” button was installed. In Desert Storm, many After Action reports stated that the troops involved were having to make frequent use of their forward assists because of fine dust getting into the receiver of their weapons.

The AR-18 solved the problems of the AR-15 by changing the gas system to a rod and piston arrangement that vents excess gases into the atmosphere just aft of the front sight/gas block. The piston is fixed; expanding gases drive the rod back into the bolt carrier, which rides on two fixed rods surrounded by recoil springs. The bolt carrier does not touch the interior surface of the receiver. Operating the bolt carrier on these two “action rods” gives minimum surface area for dust buildup or fouling. The design is inherently more tolerant of dust that the AR-15 system. In fact, weapons using the AR-18 operating system do not actually need an ejection port cover, although most have them. Because of this improved design, rifles based on the AR-18 system require less maintenance than AR-15 type weapons. There were many shortcomings in the AR-18s that were manufactured in the 1970s because they were not fully developed.

Although it uses the AR-18 operating system, the M17S is otherwise a completely different rifle. The M17S story begins 1982 as a response to an Australian military requirement for a new 5.56x45mm rifle. The initial rifle was developed by Armstech, a small company organized specifically for the purpose of designing and developing a new Australian military rifle. In the face of almost overwhelming odds, Armstech presented the Australian government with a rifle design, test weapons, and full technical data package in a matter of only a few months. There were four other Australian competitors for the new rifle, but the government selected two foreign designs for the final competition – the American M16A2 and Austrian Steyr Armee Universal Gewehr (AUG). The latter was eventually selected as Australia’s service rifle and the indigenous weapons were all but forgotten.

Armstech, however chose to pursue the design of its rifle for export sales and proceeded with development of the C30R, an advanced technology rifle using caseless ammunition. Although the concept of the C30R was highly publicized in Australia, it was developed in haste and premature demonstration before full development in front of news media led to the worst nightmare of the gun developer – poor reliability and an explosion while the rifle was being test fired, apparently an “out of battery ignition.” This disaster led eventually to the demise of Armstech, but not before the firm had decided to pursue a conventional rifle with the basic features of the C30R. The company went into receivership in 1990 after having transferred rights to the rifle to Keith Greenwood of Edenpine, where it was developed into the Sak 30, the direct ancestor of the M17S. By June 1990, the name of the rifle had changed again, this time to ART 30 and the salient features of the M17S were essentially in place. The prototype rifle was tested in Guns Australia and received a highly favorable review, but the handwriting was on the wall as far as sale of firearms in Australia was concerned and Edenpine’s management realized that while the primary market for the rifle would be the United States, restrictions there would make importing it difficult and so Edenpine began searching for a US manufacturer to produce the rifle. An agreement was reached with Bushmaster, who completed development of the rifle, redesignated it M17S and began producing it for domestic sale in early 1994.

The original Bushmaster rifles can be distinguished by a flat black finish and short throw captive retaining pins to retain the upper and lower receivers. After the second year of production, the upper receiver external finish was changed to matte Teflon. During the third production year, a long throw captive pin retaining system for the upper and lower receivers was implemented, upper receiver weight slightly reduced and a steel cam pin track was added. In the wake of the Great Clinton Semiautomatic Rifle Ban of 1994, some changes were necessary to make the M17S legal for civilian ownership. The only visible change to Post Ban rifles is the lack of a flash hider. To preclude installation of a nefarious and deadly illegal flash hider, the barrel was shortened slightly and the length of threads at the muzzle end reduced so that if a muzzle device was installed, it would not stay in place. There were also some improvements made to the “post ban” M17S rifles. Emergency open sights were installed, the trigger linkage was improved and a new optical sight mount was added.

The M17S is a bullpup design. Many shooters do not like bullpups, usually because they fear that a “catastrophic failure” – a rupture of the barrel or blowing the bolt out will injure them. With the M-17S, such an event is unlikely, and even if it were to occur, the upper receiver is a one-piece tube of extruded aircraft aluminum that is approximately 1/8 inch thick, which should contain any unlikely explosive failures. The lower receiver of the M-17S is molded polymer. Although it is quite different than either the AR-15 or AR-18, those familiar with the other rifles will find operation of the M-17S to be virtually identical to the AR-15/M16. The non-reciprocating charging handle is atop the upper receiver and actually forms the aft portion of the carrying handle. The magazine release is virtually identical to that of the M16, save for the fact that it is ambidextrous – there is a button on both sides of the rifle, which is very handy when removing the magazine using the left hand and thumb. The bolt release is also virtually identical to that of the AR-15/M16 and functions in precisely the same manner. Other than appearance, the only real difference between the manual of arms for the M-17S and the AR-15/M16 is not having to remember to close the ejection port cover after releasing the bolt.

The M-17S uses standard AR-15/M16 magazines. The rifle is provided with one Bushmaster 30 round magazine from the factory, but we used many types of M16 magazines during the course of our evaluation and had not a single malfunction, although we fired the M-17S with every type of 5.56mm ammo we could find, from 40 grain frangible ball to 68 grain match. The M-17S functioned absolutely flawlessly over hundreds of rounds and was highly praised by all who had the opportunity to fire it.

Operation of the M-17S, is as mentioned, straightforward and essentially identical to the AR-15/M16. In fact, the only difference is the location and operation of the safety, which is a simple crossbolt located just behind the trigger that is easily engaged or disengaged using the thumb or forefinger without changing grip. Once engaged, it physically blocks the trigger. A red dot indicates that the rifle is ready to fire, while “safe” is indicated by a white dot on the rear of the safety button. The fact that the safety does not block the rifle’s sear or hammer may be a point of complaint for some, however. The single-stage trigger of the M-17S breaks at about 8.5 LB, heavy enough to avoid potential accusations of having “hair triggers,” but it doesn’t feel as heavy in actual use. I estimated it to be approximately six pounds until I checked it with the trigger scales. Some users may wish to have a “trigger job” performed on their rifles, but we do not believe that it is necessary, as the M17S is not intended to be a precision match rifle. The M-17S’ trigger is actually better than some AR-15/M16 rifles fired by the author in terms of creep and “break,” despite the long connecting rod running back from the trigger to the sear.

Disassembly of the M-17S is similar to the AR-15, except that the M-17S has three push pins, rather than two. The two rearmost pins are pressed out from the left side of the rifle until they run against their stops. The upper receiver can then be pivoted forward and the bolt carrier assembly removed. There is no further disassembly required, nor is any recommended for routine maintenance. The bolt carrier assembly has a built in buffer mounted on the action plate at the rear of the bolt carrier group which absorbs the shock of the bolt carrier as it reaches its rearmost position. Since there is no carbon “blowback” into the receiver of the M-17S, normal cleaning consists of wiping the interior of the receiver, bolt, bolt carrier and locking lugs with a rag or patches. The bore is cleaned via the usual method and that is it. Cleaning an M17S requires none of the pipe cleaners, dental picks, reamers or any of the other paraphernalia necessary to clean an M16. With the M-17S, all that is required is a cleaning rod, patches, solvent, a soft rag, a small brush to ensure that the locking lugs are clean and gun oil. The latter is used to lube the action rods on which the bolt carrier rides (2 drops each), the locking lugs and the camming slot that unlocks the bolt as the carrier moves to the rear. According the manufacturer, the gas system requires no maintenance whatsoever.

As to the utility of the M-17S for self defense and law enforcement work, it has a lot going for it along with a few shortcomings. First and foremost, the little rifle is handy! The M17S’ overall length of 30 inches is shorter than 16 inch barreled CAR-15s or M4 Carbines with stock collapsed, while the M-17S has a full 21.5 inch chrome plated barrel! This makes it an ideal size for use in a vehicle or on a camping trip, where space is at a premium and deployment of any long gun generally makes exiting a vehicle or enclosure cumbersome. The M-17S can be taken by the pistol grip and deployed essentially “at the ready.” The placement of the pistol grip at the balance of the rifle enables it to also be comfortably carried and fired with one hand if necessary, unlike M4s or CAR-15s, which are awkward and muzzle heavy at best when fired in the this mode. We cannot overemphasize the outstanding balance and overall handling of the M17S. Another benefit of the M-17S is price. Suggested retail of the rifle is approximately $700, although the author has occasionally seen M17S for less.

The M-17S is not without its faults, however. First, it cannot be fired by left-handed shooters due to placement of the ejection port, a problem inherent with most bullpup designs. Second, an after-market sight of some sort is virtually mandatory, which adds to the expense of the rifle. Sights on the M-17S can charitably be described as rudimentary, although the “tunnel” through which the shooter must look in order to use them forms something of a very large “ghost ring” that might be used for very close engagements. Nonetheless, we feel that an after-market sight is virtually mandatory. The M-17S has a military standard “Picatinny rail” and thus will accept all Weaver-type mounts. We used an Aimpoint Comp ML with GG&G’s excellent mount that not only positions the sight lower than the factory original, but has space for a spare battery as well. With the Comp ML installed, we were able to engage targets from CQB distance out to 200 meters without difficulty. A sight such as the Aimpoint, EO Technology’s Holographic sight, or Trijicon’s ACOG is of great benefit because sight alignment is eliminated and there is no parallax, enabling the shooter to simply place the red dot or cross hair on the target and shoot. This type of sight also greatly enhances the speed of target acquisition. If the rifle is properly zeroed, the bullet will strike nearly at point of aim at typical carbine engagement ranges of 25 to 100 meters, with “Kentucky windage” enabling quick and easy 200 to 300 meter engagements. Optical sights such as those mentioned are also of great benefit to individuals whose eyes, like those of the author, make the use of iron sights difficult due to their inability to focus on close objects.

We tested the M17S using the Aimpoint Comp ML at 100 yards and were able to achieve 2.5 inch groups from a rest using Black Hills and Remington 62 grain match ammunition. We also tested the rifle using Longbow 40 grain frangible and Cor-Bon 52 grain ball ammunition and achieved groups that ran in the three to 3.5 inch range. Considering that the Aimpoint dot virtually covered the standard bullseye at 100 yards, we considered the accuracy of the M17S to be excellent. We suspect that with appropriate sights the little rifle could probably group in the 1.5 inch range, but we did not have time to test this aspect of the rifle. Bushmaster has graciously agreed to allow us to keep our test M17S for an extended evaluation over the coming year, so we will be conducting some experiments with sights other than the Aimpoint and a few other modifications as well. Plus, we will be reporting on the overall reliability of the rifle under extended use.

In sum, we find a lot to like about the M17S, along with a few shortcomings. The little rifle is probably the best balanced and handling rifle we have fired in many years. Its ergonomics are superlative with one exception. Under sustained fire, the forearm tends to heat up, a problem which was only partially ameliorated by the installation of a home workshop fabricated heat shield. The only solution is to move the supporting hand back to the forwardmost part of the polymer lower receiver. Most of those who fired the rifle did not find this inconvenient or uncomfortable; in fact, many felt that it was a better position than a more conventional one with supporting hand under the forearm. Moreover, everyone who fired the M17S was taken with just how enjoyable the rifle was to shoot, a tribute to the overall excellence of its design.

In sum, Bushmaster’s M17S is a highly reliable and compact rifle best suited for carry or storage in vehicles or in locations where space is at a premium. It is a short range – i.e. 25-300 yard – rifle, the distances at which most land combat occurs. The rifle is ideal for its intended purposes, which are self protection and informal shooting. Because of its size, it makes an nearly perfect vehicle or camp rifle. For the same reasons, the M17S is ideally suited as a law enforcement carbine, a role in which it far outclasses pistol – caliber carbines now offered by other manufacturers. In the final analysis, while the M17S has a few shortcomings, we believe that these are far outweighed by its attributes.

The Avtomat Kalashnikova has been a centerpiece of the world’s military small arms since 1949, when it was fielded in the Soviet Army. In the years since its introduction, the basic AK has been updated and improved several times. The basic AK-47 was modified and refined through the 1950s until 1959 when it was redesignated AKM after a major “product improvement” redesign. In 1974 the AK-74, a further modified and improved version of Kalashnikov’s rifle, went into Soviet military service. The AK-74M continues in Russian military service to this day, along with similar rifles which make up the AK-100 series Kalashnikovs(AK-101 through AK-105) manufactured by Izmash in Izhevsk, Russia. At the time of the AK-100 series’ introduction several years ago, it appeared that the Kalashnikov rifle had reached the end of its modernization capacity, but recent developments at Izmash have proven that the AK not only still has life, but that it can be modernized and made competitive with most assault rifles of more recent design. The latest manifestations of the AK are the AK-107/AK-108 rifles. These rifles are chambered in 5.45x39mm and 5.56x45mm, respectively, and mark the most significant change of the basic AK design since the introduction of the AK-74.

What differentiates the new rifles from any of their predecessors is the introduction of a “balanced” gas counterrecoil operating system that essentially functions on the principle of Newton’s Third Law of Physics, which can be summarized as, “For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.” This new operating system also has mandated other changes in the basic AK design, as we shall presently see.

The AK-107/108 are essentially updated versions of the experimental AL-7 (AL: Avtomat Lehkiy – “Light assault rifle”) rifle of the early 1970’s. Most of the illustrations for this article are of the AL-7, as detailed photos of the AK-107 and AK-108 are currently not available in the US, but the functioning and internal configuration of the AL-7 and AK-107/108 is virtually identical. The AL-7 was the brainchild of Yuriy Alexandrov, at the time a promising young designer and protégé of Evgeniy Dragunov. In 1969 Alexandrov was assigned the task of designing a new rifle to take advantage of the then-new 5.45x39mm cartridge, using the AKM as a starting point. The rifle he designed and which unsuccessfully competed against the AK-74 in 1972 was very similar in external appearance to today’s AK-100 series rifles with the exception of a thick gas tube cover and ribbed receiver cover, but internally there were radical changes. With the exception of the plain receiver cover, today’s AK-107/108 is virtually identical in every respect to the 1972 experimental rifle. In fact, the original designer of the AL-7, Yuriy Alexandrov, now a senior engineer, headed the team that brought his original rifle up to date to produce the AK-107/108. It should be noted that the new designation does not denote Avtomat Kalashnikova as it has in all previous AKs. The AK designation of the new rifles stands for Alexandrov/ Kalashnikov, indicating the integration of the Alexandrov operating system into the Kalashnikov receiver.

The reason for the introduction of the 5.45x39mm cartridge was a desire on the part of the Soviet military for a reduction in recoil with a concomitant increase in both accuracy and lethality as evidenced by the US experience with cartridges of that class. The net effect of the AL-7 operating system was to almost totally eliminate felt recoil. Despite the virtual elimination of perceived recoil, the AL-7 probably was too radical a change and was too expensive to produce at the time it was designed in comparison to its competitor which eventually was fielded as the AK-74. Why the AL-7 was too expensive in the 1970’s but is considered reasonably priced for production today will be explained below.

There are a number of external differences between the AK-107/108 and their predecessors in the AK-100 series. First is the method of attaching the receiver cover to the receiver. The new operating system eliminates the traditional AK “button” at the end of the recoil spring guide that protrudes through the center rear of the receiver cover and is depressed to lift the cover and disassemble the rifle. The new AKs have the receiver cover retained by a integral latch at the rear and retention at the front is via the rear sight. This can clearly be seen in Figure 6, which shows the AL-7 receiver cover partially lifted. The rear sight is fixed to the receiver cover and mates with a lug at the rear of the gas tube cover. Another external difference is that what appears to be a larger square gas tube is actually a cover that houses the bolt carrier connecting rod, counterrecoil upper rail and associated springs. The shape of the ejection port has been modified to accommodate the altered bolt travel and ejection pattern of the AK-107/108. The selector lever now has four positions rather than three to allow selection of safe, semiautomatic, three round burst or full automatic functions, in contrast to the original AL-7, which had a standard three position AK selector and was capable only of semiautomatic or fully automatic fire.

As mentioned, the original AL-7 essentially eliminated felt recoil via a “balanced” counterrecoil system which has been incorporated into the new AKs. The operation of the balanced system is fairly straightforward, but the reader will probably understand it better by referring to the accompanying illustrations. Because the functioning of the rifle other than the counterrecoil system is typical Kalashnikov, we will not describe it in detail, concentrating instead on the operation of the counterrecoil system. The components of the system can be seen in Figure 3, which shows the AL-7 field stripped and Figure 4, which shows a “top down” view into the AL-7 receiver. The bolt carrier and “connecting rail” and lower connecting rod are shown in Figure 5. The concept of the Alexandrov counterrecoil system is simple – the operating forces are simultaneously transmitted both forward and to the rear, countering each other. As can be imagined, timing and synchronizing the counterbalancing forces is the key to the efficacy of the system. This is accomplished by the bolt carrier’s perforated connecting rail and the six toothed sprocket shown in Figure 5b. The sprocket can be seen in Figure 4 engaging the second perforation of the bolt carrier connecting rail. Note in Figure 3 that both the bolt carrier and lower connecting rod have gas pistons, but that they face in opposite directions. Note also that the short gas tube atop the barrel just forward of the forearm is open at both ends. When the rifle is fired, gas is tapped from the barrel gas port and enters the gas tube, driving the bolt carrier to the rear and the counterrecoil upper rail forward. As with most semiautomatic and automatic firearms, timing is everything with the AK-107/108 and this critical element is attained by a six-toothed sprocket mounted in the lower rail (Figure 5b). The sprocket links together and synchronizes the rifle’s reciprocating parts, causing both components to reach their maximum extension, or null points, where forces are exactly equal, simultaneously. The bolt carrier and lower rail thus counter each other, thereby virtually eliminating felt recoil and muzzle rise. As soon as the carrier and rail reach their null points their respective springs cause them to begin to reciprocate and the sprocket results in their return to battery simultaneously, again countering each other’s forces. The distance the reciprocating parts must travel in the AK-107/108 is shorter than the AK-74M and other members of the AK-100 family, so the AK-107/108’s 850-900 round per minute cyclic rate is appreciably higher than its immediate predecessors, which had a cyclic rate of only 600 rounds per minute.

As mentioned, the AK-107/108 are select fire with three round burst in addition to semiautomatic and full automatic fire. The three round burst feature is accomplished by a ratchet and pawl device. The pawl is part of the bolt carrier and the ratchet is part of the sear mechanism. In basic terms, the ratchet has three teeth and when the selector is placed in the “burst” position, the ratchet moves into position for interaction with the pawl on the bolt carrier, also disabling the disconnector. As the trigger is squeezed, the pawl on the bolt carrier moves the ratchet one tooth, preventing the sear from catching the hammer. As the third round is fired, the ratchet is released and returns to its original position, releasing the disconnector thus allowing the sear to engage the hammer and interrupt the operating cycle. When the trigger is released, the ratchet returns to its original position and is reset. When the trigger is again squeezed, the process repeats. This system provides a three round burst each time the trigger is squeezed and the selector is in the “burst” position.

This, then, summarizes the technical background to the new AKs, but given that the AK-100 series rifles are improved versions of the venerable Kalashnikov design, why resurrect and update a design that is nearly 30 years old? There are actually a number of cogent reasons for this. First, sales of the AK-100 series rifles have not been very great. This is not because they are bad rifles, but they actually offer little improvement over older AK versions and despite the introduction of AKs in 5.56mm NATO, former Warsaw Pact nations are either rebuilding their own small arms industries, in many cases beginning manufacture of their own rifles, or buying rifles from Western sources. Moreover, Kalashnikov rifles have flooded the world market. A functioning AKM, for example, can be purchased in parts of Africa for less than $50, while a new AK-101 costs approximately $230 f.o.b. Izhevsk. Again, although the AK-100 rifles are modernized, they are not significantly improved in accuracy, reliability or function over their predecessors. The new AN-94 is a dramatic improvement in every respect over AKs, but the new rifle is very complex and costly to produce – some five times more than an AK-101! It became apparent to the marketing managers at Izmash that simply making marginally improved AKs would not result in sales, and the AN-94 was too expensive to be competitive in the world small arms market. What might sell, they reasoned, was a version of the proven AK design, but one with real improvements such as better accuracy and increased effectiveness. The AK-107/108 rifles provide notable levels of improvement, while maintaining the legendary Kalashnikov reliability, simplicity at only a moderate cost increase. The AK-107 and AK-108 are claimed by the manufacturer to achieve 1.5 times the accuracy of their comparable AK-100 series rifles using identical ammunition. As we have noted, the new AK-108 and 108 rifles are really no more than AK-74Ms with the operating system of the AL-7, which itself was essentially an AKM in 5.45x39mm with a new operating system. Despite the improvements made, the question remains whether or not the new AKs will sell in a highly competitive world small arms market that is for all intents and purposes “flat” at the moment. Only time will tell whether or not the new rifles will result in sales for Izmash, but the 1990’s is generally not a good time for anyone to be in the military small arms manufacturing business.

The recent introduction of Steyr’s Scout Rifle has created a great deal of interest in the world’s firearms community, mostly among firearms aficionados. The fact is, however, that the rifle has definite capabilities for use by military scout-sniper teams and for law enforcement. In this article, SAR evaluates Steyr’s new rifle and its military/law enforcement potential.

The scout rifle concept dates to the Second World War when the German Wehrmacht introduced the Karabiner 98k mit Zielfernrohr 41 (Model 98k Carbine with Model 41 Telescopic Sight -Kar98k-ZF41). The ZF41 telescopic sight was not intended to be a precision sight, but rather a sight for quick shots in combat. Its magnification was only 1.5 power and the rifle-telescope combination was very popular with the German military; nearly 90,000 were produced and plans called for 370,000 more when wartime exigencies caused telescope orders to be canceled. After World War II, the scout rifle idea lay dormant until it was resurrected by one of the firearms fraternity’s legends, Col. Jeff Cooper. Col. Cooper set the requirements for the modern scout rifle which differ somewhat from the WW II original. Before examining the scout rifle concept, however, we must understand the advantages of an intermediate eye relief low powered telescope mounted on a lightweight rifle.

Shooting a rifle well is a true challenge, especially when using open sights. Traditional “V” or “notch” rear sights are especially challenging because the shooter must concentrate on three points at once – the rear sight, the front sight and the target. The aperture or diopter sight ameliorates this problem somewhat, but the challenge of achieving correct sight alignment and sight picture remains. Sight alignment, particularly, is critical when using open sights of any type. Optical sights eliminate the need for obtaining correct sight alignment and picture, but introduce another set of problems all their own. When using optics of any magnification greater than approximately four power, target acquisition is slowed, with the difficulty of target acquisition in direct proportion to the degree of magnification. Probably the best of both worlds are “collimator” or “red dot” sights, such as Aimpoint, which have no magnification whatsoever. Many of these require batteries for power, however, and thus do not fit within the guidelines for a scout rifle because of the propensity of batteries to fail at the worst possible time as a corollary of Murphy’s Third Law. (Anything that can potentially go wrong, will – at the worst possible time!) Low power optics require no external power source, however, and thus are as reliable as such a device can be. From a shooting standpoint, their effect is to decrease the target acquisition time of the shooter while enhancing his accuracy. The method of using such sights is easy to learn and essentially requires only that the shooter keep both eyes open and on the target as he brings the rifle to his shoulder. As he shoulders the rifle and attains his shooting position, the crosshairs of the optic fall almost directly onto the center of the target, essentially where the shooter’s eyes are focused. This system is far superior to open sights in this respect. The sole disadvantage to the use of an intermediate eye relief, low power telescope is the fact that it is more fragile than open, or “iron” sights. Most quality modern optical sights are fairly rugged, however, and unless dropped directly onto a hard surface they can be expected to weather most exigencies. The scout rifle is envisioned as a general purpose rifle, suitable for any use from sport to combat and thus must be of a caliber suitable for killing any living target up to about 1,000 lb, eliminating current military calibers of 5.56x45mm (.223 Remington). The scout rifle will thus be chambered for a “full-power” 7.62mm (.30 caliber) cartridge, which for military use virtually mandates 7.62x51mm (.308 Winchester). Other points with regard to the ideal scout rifle are as follows:

A -The rifle should be a “repeater.” It should permit successive shots to be taken without reloading. The rifle will probably be a bolt action, as semiautomatic rifles tend to fall above the established weight limitation.

B -The rifle should be handy. That is, it should not be excessively heavy or overly long. Length should be no more than one meter (approximately 39 inches) and weight should be no more than about 3.1kg (seven pounds), the weight that most persons in relatively good physical condition can comfortably carry in one hand for an extended period. Rifles beyond these parameters are considered too cumbersome.

C -The buttstock of the scout rifle should not be too long, which renders the rifle slow and unwieldy. An adjustable stock is not mandated in Col. Cooper’s requirements for the scout rifle, but it is clear that an adjustable buttstock would be ideal.

D -The rifle should be “friendly.” Essentially this implies good ergonomics, with a line of sight as low as possible over the bore and the position of the shooting hand when ready to fire no more than three inches below the bore axis. A third component is the relationship of the bore axis to the stock. If the bore axis is above the stock, recoil forces are directed down, increasing felt recoil and making follow-up shots more difficult. Thus, the bore and stock should be as close as possible to straight line alignment.

E -The rifle should have a functional sling, preferably a “Ching Sling,” probably the best of its class due to its three-point attachment.

F -The rifle should not be intimidating. This implies that recoil is manageable and muzzle blast not overly loud.

G -The trigger should break like a “glass rod.” That is, there should be no perceived movement in the trigger as the sear is released. This is not to say that there should be no “slack” as is the case with all two-stage triggers. Once the slack is taken up, however, the trigger should release the sear without the shooter feeling any movement whatsoever.

As the military established a requirement to meet a perceived shortcoming, we have explored the perceived shortcoming and what qualities a scout rifle should have to fill it. This begs the question of how well Steyr’s new rifle meets the need and Col. Cooper’s vision. To preclude suspense, and so the reader can avoid slipping to the end of this article, we will go straight to the heart of the matter. This writer can think of only one word to describe the Steyr Scout Rifle – excellent, with one reservation. Now, let’s see what attributes justify such high praise from one who was a true skeptic about the entire scout rifle concept until he actually shot Steyr’s latest product.

First, the Steyr meets or surpasses all of Colonel Cooper’s requirements. It is light at only 3.1kg (7 lb) with telescope. It is handy, with its 748mm (19 in) barrel and overall length of just over one meter (39.57 in). The trigger is two-stage military style and once the slack is taken up there is no “creep” whatsoever and it truly breaks like the proverbial “glass rod” at 1.7kg (3.75 lb) on SAR’s test rifle. An English saddle leather “Ching Sling” accompanies each Scout and the rifle is set up with ambidextrous quick mounting points, so the sling can be quickly mounted and dismounted as desired. And finally, the recoil and blast of the rifle in 7.62x51mm (.308 Winchester) are not at all intimidating, at least not to this writer. This is attributable to the rifle’s design as much as to the cartridge, as we will presently see.

Other attributes of the Steyr that surpass the original concept are the detachable box magazine that has a double detent which allows it to be positioned so that single cartridges can be fed while maintaining a full magazine of either five or optional ten rounds. A spare magazine is carried in a buttstock well for quick reloading. Although the 2.5x Leupold telescope is mounted forward of the receiver ring, there is provision for accommodating a conventional telescopic sight using standard NATO mounting. Backup open sights are folded down out of the way until they are required. The cold hammer forged barrel is fluted for extra stiffness. The non-slip Zytel buttstock features spacers for adjustment of the length of pull to suit shooters of any conceivable size and has an integral fold away bipod, plus an accessory mounting rail beneath the forearm. Fit and finish of all parts is excellent, although it must be noted that this rifle is made for hard use, not to decorate the gun case of an admiring collector.

Recoil is managed in several ingenious ways. The 7.62mm NATO cartridge does not recoil excessively and can be handled by most shooters, but many smaller framed shooters might find the recoil of any full-power cartridge excessive, so the Steyr Scout incorporates a virtually “straight line” design which aligns the barrel and stock in such a way that recoil forces are directed straight back to the shooter’s shoulder. This not only reduces felt recoil, but facilitates quick recovery for successive shots. The trigger guard is “faired” at the rear to ease the forces on the shooter’s middle finger and the butt incorporates a recoil pad. Atop the receiver, controls such as bolt handle and ambidextrous safety are placed so that they will not impact the thumb of the shooter in recoil, regardless of how the rifle is held. The rifle comes ready to shoot upon delivery. It is pre-zeroed at the factory and although this writer was very skeptical, we found the Scout to shoot nearly at point of aim at 100 meters using Black Hills or Remington 168 grain and Cor-Bon 125 grain match ammunition. Bringing cross hairs of the Leupold telescope to the exact center of the target required only one click adjustment in windage and elevation. The shot groups were within minute of angle (MOA) at 100 yards using all three brands of ammunition in the (unfortunately) limited firing time that we had available in preparation of this evaluation.

Our sole complaint about the Steyr Scout is that our test rifle initially produced several misfires with each brand of ammunition we fired in it. We queried Steyr’s US. representative regarding these unexpected malfunctions and found that it was the fault of the factory striker spring setting. The striker tension was lightened because some members of the American firearms press complained about excessive resistance when lifting the bolt handle of pre-production models of the rifle. Rectifying the problem was very simple and involved no more than removing the striker assembly, which is covered in the operator’s manual, and then adjusting the striker spring tension. After tightening the striker spring, we found no discernable difference in effort required to lift the rifle’s bolt handle and the misfire problem disappeared. Those who encounter misfire problems should contact their Steyr representative to obtain exact procedures for making the adjustment. This was our sole complaint about the rifle’s performance while we had it for evaluation. It would also be welcome for a left-hand version to be made to accommodate the approximately 20 per cent of the population who are forced to operate an otherwise superb rifle essentially backwards.

What is the military or law enforcement usefulness of the bolt-action Steyr Scout in this day of fully automatic military firearms? Colonel Cooper claims that one of the primary roles of this rifle is its use by a military scout, although the traditional lone military scout has been replaced by reconnaissance teams, long range patrols, or scout-sniper teams, however it should be noted that some snipers occasionally operated alone during the Vietnam Conflict. Lone snipers would not, however, arm themselves with a scout rifle, but with a purpose-built sniper rifle. The long range patrol or reconnaissance team will have a variety of fully automatic weapons available should it encounter enemy forces of any size and be forced to fight. For such missions, the Scout Rifle is clearly not suitable. It is for the spotter member of a scout-sniper team that Steyr’s Scout Rifle is suited. It is the same caliber as most standard military sniping rifles and has the requisite accuracy to serve as a scout-sniper team’s “backup” rifle. Two man scout-sniper teams move by stealth and avoid firefights at all costs. Even if they were armed with fully automatic weapons, a two man scout-sniper team caught in enemy territory would be quickly overwhelmed. Indeed, current military thinking is for the spotter member of the scout-sniper team to be armed with a semiautomatic 7.62x51mm rifle, sometimes termed a “Designated Marksman Rifle” (DMR) while the sniper is armed with a heavy precision built bolt-action rifle. The role of the spotter is to back up the sniper and provide covering fire if necessary using a rifle of somewhat less accuracy and range than the sniper’s high – precision rifle, but capable of delivering a higher rate of fire. The Steyr Scout with optional 10 round magazine could fill that role and would be as reliable as any semiautomatic rifle of equivalent accuracy. Indeed, some military forces have already purchased the Steyr Scout rifle, although they have not disclosed the purposes for which the rifles were purchased.

For law enforcement, the Steyr Scout is a very viable option as a patrol carbine, although we would recommend either frangible or limited penetration ammunition if it is used in this role due to the possibility of overpenetration and ricochets in an urban environment. Typical police encounters are at under 150 meters and at this range 120 grain frangible bullets would be more than adequate for use against any perpetrators, even those wearing body armor. At the same time, frangible ammunition such as that manufactured by Longbow does not overpenetrate or ricochet. Limited penetration ammunition is also an option for urban use in a 7.62mm NATO rifle such as Steyr’s Scout. Limited penetration 168 grain match grade 7.62mm NATO ammunition such as that manufactured by Black Hills will typically penetrate body armor and then break up in the target without exiting. In fact, such ammunition will not overpenetrate a target without body armor. In addition, the attributes of the Scout Rifle’s optical sighting system that simplifies target acquisition and sighting while enhancing accuracy should be a major attraction to law enforcement officers whose opportunities for regular shooting practice are almost nonexistent.

We can sum up, then, by stating that the Steyr Scout Rifle we tested was a very pleasant surprise, save for the easily corrected misfires. It is light, accurate and appears to be sufficiently robust for consideration as a scout-sniper backup rifle and for use in law enforcement. Military customers will probably wish to add some modifications, such as camouflage buttstock and perhaps a flash suppressor, but Steyr’s little Scout Rifle is excellent as it is. Although we were initially skeptical about the entire idea of the scout rifle, the Steyr product convinced us of the concept’s efficacy. We believe that the Steyr Scout Rifle deserves consideration as a candidate for the spotter member of any military scout-sniper organization and by law enforcement as a patrol carbine in combination with the appropriate ammunition.

In Part I of this article(SAR Volume 1 Number 12), the author followed the early development of the USP pistol series. In this final edition, he presents the present tactical forms, as in the USP Tactical pistol and the OHG, or Offensive HandGun.

The Mark 23 Mod 0 USSOCOM Offensive Handgun

As we have already mentioned, the USP was already under development when the US Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) issued its requirement for an offensive handgun, at the time designated the Offensive Handgun Weapon System (OHWS). While the OHWS designation was used throughout the development of the pistol the OHWS became MK 23 Mod 0 USSOCOM Pistol when the pistol was officially adopted and type classified. Pistols for civilian sale are designated Mark 23 and so marked on the slide rather than “MK23 USSOCOM.” We will use the designation Mark 23 to avoid confusion and to maintain continuity.

Before entering into the history of the Mark 23, we should examine the term “offensive handgun” or “offensive pistol,” which to many is an oxymoron. The handgun has traditionally been the weapon of last resort or a backup to one’s primary weapon, and hence not truly a weapon of preference, at least in military terms. The handgun is traditionally a defensive weapon, used in the military by officers as a backup and by others such as machine gun crewmen as a secondary weapon. While the pistol may be the law enforcement officer’s primary weapon, it is still considered essentially a defensive weapon.

Nonetheless, the handgun has been used offensively by the military. The first notable instance of this was the LeMat revolver used by Confederate cavalry in the War Between the States. This large 40-caliber revolver held nine shots, and its cylinder revolved around a 16-gauge shotgun barrel. All in all, the LeMat was a formidable weapon for its time. Confederate cavalrymen preferred to carry two of these big revolvers and used them for close combat in lieu of their sabers. A more recent offensive use of the handgun was in Vietnam by “tunnel rats” who searched Viet Cong tunnels armed with only a handgun and a flashlight. The essence of both operational uses of the pistol was the fact that it was used to carry the battle to the enemy rather than to defend against him. This single characteristic defines the essential difference between the offensive and defensive use of the handgun. While almost any handgun may be used offensively, few are specifically designed for that purpose. The ultimate determining factor between the offensive or defensive use of the handgun is the nature of the mission and as such no pistol can truly be said to be solely intended for offensive or defensive uses. However, the Mark 23 is intended to be used by special operations personnel to carry the battle to the enemy and kill him, not to drive him away, hence its “offensive handgun” designation. As such, a few of its essential required characteristics are worth noting.

The first of these is lethality. The .45 ACP has proven to be more lethal than any other military pistol cartridge in the world. Large magazine capacity is another salient characteristic of the Mark 23, with its 12-round (10 round civilian) magazine capacity. One-handed operation is another desirable offensive handgun characteristic because the operator will more than likely be using his other hand for some other purpose. This summary is not intended to be a comprehensive discussion of the characteristics of the offensive handgun concept or design, but to give the reader an idea of the thinking behind the requirements that eventually became the Mark 23.

The history of the current offensive handgun concept dates to 1987 when the naval special warfare community became dissatisfied with the M9 pistol. The Navy adopted the SIG-Sauer P226 in 1989 as an interim special operations weapon until a fully satisfactory pistol could be developed. In June, the Navy approved a requirement for an improved 9mm handgun. Later in 1989, the Navy and USSOCOM joined forces to develop a new pistol for special operations. The Army and Air Force both expressed interest in the program, but the Navy took the lead under their improved 9mm pistol requirement with the program office established at Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane (Indiana), (NSWC, Crane) in December 1989. In February 1990, the USSOCOM Joint Service Operational Requirement (JSOR) for an offensive handgun was issued. The stated purpose of the JSOR was,

“To provide special operations forces (SOF) an offensive handgun for close-quarter battle and sentry incapacitation during target-site infiltration firing a family of .45 cal ACP munitions. This handgun will provide SOF a handgun with extended service life, greater reliability, increased environmental soundness and greater one-shot incapacitation than current service pistols.”

The requirement went on to specify four components of the offensive handgun system: The pistol itself, a laser aiming module, a suppressor and a new .45 caliber +P+ rated cartridge. The new cartridge was dropped from the requirement when no ammunition manufacturer could be found to produce it. The new.45 Super round which was mentioned earlier is similar to the original USSOCOM requirement and is now being tested for certification in both the Mark 23 and the USP45. Requirements for the pistol were stringent and definitive. The pistol was required to have a service life of 30,000 rounds of +P ammunition with minimal parts breakage before requiring depot level maintenance. It should be recalled that modified M1911A1 pistols currently used by some special operations units must be rebuilt to maintain accuracy after only about 12,000 rounds. The JSOR went on to require that the pistol demonstrate another 30,000 rounds service life on the frame and slide after depot level maintenance. Pistol reliability was set at 2,000 mean rounds between stoppages. Accuracy was required to be 2.5 inches average extreme spread for nine out of ten five-round shot groups fired at 25 meters. This constitutes near match accuracy from a service pistol and some at the time believed that the accuracy and reliability requirements were mutually exclusive. Subsequent events have proven that they were not.

Environmental requirements were that the pistol still function after having been immersed in 66 feet of sea water for two hours, after having been exposed to sand and dust for 96 hours, after continuous exposure to mud for 96 hours and after two hours exposure in surf and then 96 hours in a humidity chamber.

The initial suppressor requirement was for noise reduction of 24 dB dry and 33dB wet using M1911 ball ammunition, a 75 per cent flash reduction, less than two inches change in point of impact at 25 meters and a service life of 5,000 rounds. It should be noted that M1911 ball ammunition is subsonic and thus will not produce a “crack” as the bullet breaks the sound barrier upon exiting the muzzle of the suppressor. .45 ACP +P ammunition is not subsonic and a suppressor is therefore less effective when used with this type of cartridge.

Two competing contracts were issued in 1991 for development of the Mark 23. One, of course, was to H&K; the other went to Colt’s Manufacturing. By 1993 it was clear to all who had the opportunity to fire both pistols that the Heckler & Koch candidate was superior and would probably be selected. Colt’s candidate appeared to be based on the hapless All-American 2000 and the prototype that the author fired in 1993 was clearly inferior to the H&K pistol in terms of ergonomics and overall handling. Each competitor completed 30 pistols, suppressors and laser modules for Phase I of the development program. At the end of Phase I, Heckler & Koch’s candidate pistol was selected. Laser module selection was delayed. For Phase II, the refinement phase of the pistol’s development, H&K and Knight’s Armament Company teamed to provide 30 additional pistols and suppressors which were further evaluated prior to final production and fielding in Phase III.

The Mark 23 was a success in that it met or exceeded all of the rigorous demands placed upon it by USSOCOM. The fact that the Mark 23 exceeded most of the requirements, rather than simply meeting them is a tribute to the overall excellence of the basic design. For example, the Mark 23 was required to have a mean time between stoppages of 2,000 rounds when in fact, it exceeded the norm three times over! Accuracy was far better than the requirement, with group size averaging only 1.56 inches for all Mark 23’s tested. Service life also far exceeded the requirement. Mark 23 pistols tested showed no signs of accuracy degradation after having been fired 30,000 times with +P ammunition. This remarkable level of accuracy and durability is due to an ingeniously simple, but “high-tech” solution to the problem of achieving consistent “lock-up” of the barrel to the slide of the pistol. Heckler & Koch engineers placed a high-temperature rubber O-ring at the forward end of the barrel to seal it to the slide until the pistol unlocks. This rubber O-ring has a tested service life of over 20,000 rounds and can be replaced by the user without tools in a matter of seconds.

All told, though, the Mark 23’s design success has been tempered by the fact that not all of the US special operations commands purchased it. In fact, only the Navy currently uses the Mark 23 in quantity. As we have previously seen, this is not because of any qualitative faults with the pistol. Part of the reason may be the size of the Mark 23. A glance at the specifications table will reveal that it is a very large pistol, although it is not particularly heavy when compared to other contemporary military handguns. It is only marginally heavier than the M9 when empty. In fact, the Mark 23 weighs less unloaded than a M1911A1! Another problem may be the Mark 23’s price. At the time of the Mark 23’s initial operational capability in 1995, each pistol with three magazines cost the government $1186.

As we have already mentioned, Heckler & Koch has addressed potential shortfalls of the Mark 23 with its USP45 Tactical Model, which combines the best features of both the Mark 23 and the USP into a somewhat smaller, but highly accurate and reliable package with definite military potential. The cost to the military will be approximately $600. Given these facts, one is tempted to ask why H&K didn’t produce the USP45 Tactical Model as the Mark 23 in the first place. For one reason, the USP45 didn’t exist when the Mark 23 was in development; the USP45 owes much of its life to the parallel development of the Mark 23. Moreover, the USP45 was not what USSOCOM asked for; the Mark 23 precisely met or exceeded the USSOCOM requirement in every way. In point of fact, there are as many differences as similarities between the USP45 Tactical and the Mark 23, as a quick glance at Table 2 (SAR Vol. 1 No. 12) will reveal. For the immediate future, however, both pistols will be available to customers whose mission or personal needs require high-quality pistols of different size which offer slightly different capabilities.

I would like to express my sincere appreciation to Mr. Jim Schatz of Heckler & Koch, Inc., without whose assistance this
article would not have been possible.

Heckler and Koch’s Universal Self-Loading Pistol, better known as the USP, is a true firearms success story in what has become a highly competitive worldwide handgun market. In order to succeed in this arena, a handgun must not only meet the criteria for which it was designed, but must actually exceed most of them. In essence, a good firearm is synergistic – it is greater than the sum of its parts. The USP is such a pistol. It combines the best of traditional firearms with the best of state of the art firearms technology. While not as widespread in police use as Glock pistols, the USP is nonetheless just as reliable, while being much more flexible in its ability to be modified to meet specific user requirements. Moreover, the USP is a traditional pistol in the American idiom, while at the same time taking full advantage of the most modern materials to achieve levels of reliability and longevity that would have been unimaginable just 25 years ago.

The genesis of the USP can be traced to the “Miami Shoot-out” which caused the Federal Bureau of Investigation to change from 9mm Parabellum to 10mm. H&K wanted to compete for the FBI 10mm pistol contract, but had no pistols in 10mm caliber, nor any conventional double action/single action (DA/SA) pistol as required by the FBI specifications. In fact, H&K had no pistols other than in 9mm caliber and the company came to realize that if it was to maintain its viability in an increasingly competitive handgun market, it would have to expand and diversify its product line. Moreover, management realized that as good as their pistols were, several, such as the P7 were unconventional, although most people who purchase handguns are essentially conservative, preferring more conventional designs. Further, Heckler & Koch realized that P7 pistols for the most part had become so expensive that they could not effectively compete against companies such as Glock and Smith & Wesson in the US market.

The company decided to begin with a clean slate and gather input from the shooters themselves to influence the design of the new pistol. H&K also decided that their next pistol should be developed primarily for the US market. Accordingly, H&K conducted a market survey to determine the preferences of American handgun shooters of all types, including military, law enforcement and civilian. This study was completed in July 1989.

The H&K study revealed a number of facts regarding the American handgun market which many firearms manufacturers would do well to heed. Perhaps most important was the fact that people who were serious about handguns were conservative. Whether they were professionals or simply serious enthusiasts, they preferred a handgun of conventional design. This is not to say that the American market is hostile to innovation – far from it. Americans have traditionally been enamored with innovation and technology, but technology alone cannot replace that which is of proven efficacy unless it improves upon it. Heckler & Koch concluded that a conventional pistol incorporating as many high-tech innovations as possible would be most attractive to the American market. Affordability was another major concern. While many people might well have purchased an innovative H&K P7, its high price made that pistol a non-starter for most individuals and law-enforcement agencies. Other major considerations were high quality, durability and reliability, safety, accuracy, magazine capacity and low recoil. And finally, the science of ergonomics would play a large part in design of the new pistol. After their market study, Heckler & Koch compiled and prioritized the characteristics of what would eventually become the Universal Self-loading Pistol, now simply known as the USP. In addition to the characteristics already noted, it was decided early in the design process that the pistol would be a double-action/single-action (DA/SA) with the capability for straightforward conversion to a number of different configurations to satisfy the requirements of as many users as possible. H&K also decided that the pistol would be initially chambered for the .40 S&W cartridge with other calibers to follow. This decision was based on the increasing popularity of the .40 S&W, which delivers ballistics nearly on a par with those of the venerable .45 ACP, although with less recoil. Also, a pistol designed from the outset for .40 S&W would have no problem accommodating the less powerful 9x19mm cartridge. H&K had noted that some .40 S&W pistols that were modified from 9x19mm designs had durability problems and they wanted to ensure that there were no such problems with their new pistol. In fact, the USP was the first pistol specifically designed for the .40 S&W cartridge. Design development began in September 1989 and took nearly two years. The head of the design team was Helmut Weldle, designer of the P7 pistols.

By May 1991, basic USP design work was nearly completed and the desired characteristics agreed upon. Shortly thereafter, in August, H&K began design work on the Offensive Handgun Weapons System (OHWS) for the United States Special Operations Command. This design was later type-classified as the Mark 23 Mod 0 USSOCOM Pistol, hereafter referred to as the Mark 23. While development of the Mark 23 pistol was concurrent with that of the USP and the final products shared many similar characteristics, they were developed independently within H&K.

The fact that the USP went into production after the Mark 23 prototypes were delivered to the US Government for testing is not indicative that the USP design was derived from the USSOCOM handgun. On the contrary, if anything, many of the Mark 23’s features were derived from the USP, which was already under development when the US Government’s request for proposal (RFP) for the OHWS was announced in December 1990. At the same time, development of the USP was influenced by the Mark 23’s development process. The development of the Mark 23 will be covered separately. While the Mark 23 is not a member of the immediate USP family, it is a first cousin and must be included in any discussion of the USP’s development.

By late 1991, the first prototype of the USP had been constructed and the USP name assigned to the new pistol. Two further prototypes were produced and tested during 1992. Testing was successful and the basic design was “frozen” in December of that year. Reliability testing on the USP prototypes was unfinished at the time of the design “freeze,” but since both pistols had fired 10,000 rounds of their 20,000 round reliability test without incident, it was decided to freeze the design and proceed with production planning and formal introduction of the USP at the January 1993 Shooting, Hunting and Outdoor Trades (SHOT) Show. Actual production of the USP40 was undertaken in February 1993.

At this point, it is worth noting the testing process that the USP underwent in the final stages of its development. The fact that the pistol passed a 20,000 round reliability test without meaningful wear on any component or any effect on accuracy has little meaning until one considers that the tried and true M1911A1 pistols which still serve in some military special operations units (not all have purchased the Mark 23 at the timeof this writing) require a depot-level rebuild after approximately 12,000 rounds to ensure accuracy and reliability. Another measure of the rugged design of the USP is the fact that unmodified USP45s have presently fired over 6,000 rounds of the new .45 super ammunition without incident. M1911-type pistols must be modified to reliably fire the .45 Super cartridge. Both USP45s and the Mark 23 are being tested with this new cartridge with a view towards certifying both pistols for its unlimited use. .45 Super testing should be complete by mid-1998 and results made pubic shortly thereafter.

USP testing was heavily influenced by the development of the Mark 23, which had to meet stringent military durability and reliability standards. The tests of the USP paralleled the NATO military test protocols of the Mark 23, which are much more stringent than commercial standards. The USP pistols were subjected to test firing in various attitudes and were checked every 1,000 rounds for damaged or broken parts and for accuracy. After each 10,000 rounds, the slide was manually cycled 1,000 times. A bullet was driven into the forcing cone of the USP barrel, a live round chambered and the pistol fired. There was no damage to the pistol and accuracy was unaffected. Another bullet was driven 30mm into the muzzle of the pistol and the pistol fired, again with no damage or degradation in performance. The pistols were dropped onto rubber on all sides and at a 45 degree angle onto the muzzle from a height of four feet with a primed case in the chamber, 13 dummy rounds in the magazine and the safety/decocking lever set in the “fire” position without incident. The pistols were then dropped six times onto a cocked hammer from a height of three and nearly seven feet onto a steel/concrete surface. There were no primer indentations in any of these tests. For ammunition compliance testing, USPs were tested using every type of commercially available ammunition.

Environmental testing of the USP was virtually identical to that of the Mark 23. The USP had to function in temperatures as low as -51O Fahrenheit and as high as +145O Fahrenheit. It functioned after a ten minute mud bath, after a ten minute exposure to blowing sand, freezing rain (water spray on the pistol to a thickness of 1 to 3mm). After these torture tests, the parts of four different pistols of different caliber were interchanged, except for barrel, slide and magazine. The USP passed or exceeded all tests and the .40 caliber pistols were placed on the market in the United States in April 1993. The 9mm USP followed in September.

The USP is, as we have stated, largely a traditional pistol design executed in nontraditional ways. It is a short recoil, modified Browning system similar to that used in the Browning M1935. This system is simple, very reliable, inexpensive to produce and makes barrel replacement easy. Unlike the system used in the M1935, the H&K locks on the front and rear edges of the ejection port, rather than using locking grooves machined into the slide and barrel.

The safety/decocking lever, called a “control lever” by H&K, is positioned at the same relative location on the frame as that in both the M1935 and M1911 pistols, and functions in the same fashion – up is “safe,” down is “fire.” There is one difference, however. Pressing the lever down past the “fire” position usually decocks the USP when the hammer is cocked. The lever then automatically returns to the “fire” position, enabling the USP to be operated in the double action mode for the first shot. This feature also allows the USP to be safely carried in “Condition One” – cocked and locked, which is favored by many armed professionals who are intimately familiar with the M1911 Colt Government Model and its many copies. Unlike the M1911, however, setting the USP to the “safe” position does not lock the slide. The control lever can easily be set up for left hand, right hand, or ambidextrous use. It should also be noted that besides having controls which are very similar in function to those of the M1911, the grip angle of the USP is identical to that of the venerable Browning design. Thus, an individual familiar with the M1911 or M1935 can pick up a USP and become familiar with it with very little familiarization training. Not all USPs, however, incorporate this system. The versatility of the USP allows it to be configured without a safety or decocking position in some versions. The different versions into which the USP can be configured are shown in Table 1.

Table 1: USP & Mark 23 Specifications

The slide release of the USP is also located similarly to that of the M1911 and M1935 and like the earlier designs is used to disassemble the pistol. The ambidextrous magazine release, however, is a real improvement over the traditional M1911 “push button.” The magazine release of the USP is located in essentially the same position as the older pistols, but instead of having to push in to release the magazine, the release button is pressed down to drop the magazine. To the author, at least, this is a much more natural movement than pressing in. The release is actually shielded by the trigger guard to prevent inadvertent actuation. We should also note that the magazines of the USP drop free when the release is pressed, an important tactical consideration. Despite this, there are “tearaway grooves” on the sides of the grip just in case….

The USP incorporates three or four separate safety mechanisms, depending on variant. Two of these safeties, the disconnector and the firing pin block, are passive. All USP pistols incorporate these two passive mechanisms. Six of the nine USP variants have a manual safety/decocker. Variant Seven has the double action safety with no manual control lever at all. Variants Three and Four do not have a manual safety, but have a decocking lever. The reader can determine the specific features of USP variants by referring to the chart accompanying this article. While Variant Eight is listed in the chart matrix, it was never produced except in very small numbers for US Immigration and Naturalization Border Patrol testing. Variant eight was essentially a Variant Seven USP with European tritium sights.

The barrel of the USP is cold hammer forged. Early pistols had six lands and grooves with a right hand twist. .40 S&W USPs were rifled with 1 turn in 14.96 inches, while 9mm Parabellum pistols had rifling at a rate of 1 turn in 9.84 inches. In November 1994 the rifling was changed from conventional lands and grooves to polygonal rifling, an H&K innovation. Twist rates remained the same as in earlier guns, but the cold hammer forged polygonal rifling has several benefits. Muzzle velocity is increased versus standard rifling due to a tighter gas seal. Because there are no sharp edges, bore wear and erosion are reduced, thus providing longer service life. Barrels with polygonal rifling are easier to clean and maintain because there are no grooves, per se, in which fouling and metal deposits can accumulate. Finally, polygonal rifling increases accuracy. The USP45 was never manufactured with conventional rifling.

The polymer frame of the USP continues a Heckler & Koch tradition that dates back to the mid-1960’s VP70, P9S and other H&K firearms. The precise makeup of the polymer frame is proprietary, but it is glass-fiber reinforced with metal guide rails on which the slide runs. As previously mentioned, the grip has “tear away” grooves to enable the shooter easy access to the magazine floorplate in case the magazine does not drop free when the release is pressed. The trigger guard is oversize to allow use of gloves and is shaped so as to help prevent the magazine release from being inadvertently pressed, which could prove highly embarrassing, not to mention fatal! The entire surface of the frame is textured for a positive grip, even with wet hands. The USP’s texturing is very similar to that of the Mark 23 and incorporates stippling on the grip side panels and deeply embossed grooves on the grip front and backstraps. A lanyard loop is molded into the heel of the grip as part of the insert that retains the hammer spring. The magazine well is beveled and stepped to facilitate reloading.

Another feature of the USP frame is the molded in grooves for mounting accessories such as laser, tactical lights, optical sights, or muzzle compensators. The grooves are parallel with the bore of the pistol, so any accessory mounted is boresighted when mounted. H&K claims that the grooves are more secure and resistant to recoil forces than trigger guard mounts in addition to providing automatic bore alignment for attached accessories.

H&K makes a full range of accessories for all versions of the USP, including a tactical light, designated the Universal Tactical Light (UTL), a UTL carrying pouch which allows the UTL to be attached to long guns, tools, bicycles, etc. H&K once manufactured the “Quik-Comp” muzzle brake/compensator which attached to the mounting grooves. This may still occasionally be found as a used component. Finally, H&K has an Optical Sight/Scope Mount available for the USP. This mount incorporates a Weaver mounting rail, can be used either with or without the “Quik-Comp,” and does not interfere with the pistol’s iron sights. The popularity of the USP has caused after-market manufacturers to begin producing similar accessories for the USP pistol family.

Magazines of the .40 S&W and 9x19mm pistols are of polymer with a stainless steel insert, while that of the USP45 is steel. Magazine capacity is 13 rounds in .40 S&W, 15 rounds in 9x19mm and 12 rounds in .45 ACP, except for civilian use pistols, which are all equipped with the silly federally-mandated “politically correct” ten-round magazines. The reader should be aware that there are no unmarked “pre-ban” .45 magazines for the USP. Any “pre-ban” magazines for the USP45 are in fact stolen Mark 23 magazines. Caveat emptor! The .45 caliber magazine was made from steel to keep grip circumference down while maximizing magazine capacity. The .45 magazine design is virtually identical to that of the Mark 23 USSOCOM Pistol. All magazines drop free when the release is pressed, contain “round count” holes with numbers and can be disassembled for cleaning and maintenance by the owner, even the “politically correct” ten-round civilian-use magazines.

A unique feature of the USP is its recoil reduction system, again virtually identical to that used on the Mark 23 USSOCOM Pistol. Essentially, the recoil reduction system consists of two concentric springs held in place by a guide rod. The outer recoil spring is a lower rate than the inner buffer spring, which slows the slide at the end of its recoil movement, prevents the slide from impinging against the frame of the pistol and buffers the unlocking of the barrel from the slide during the first three to four millimeters of movement. The buffer system reduces recoil forces by approximately 30 per cent and provides a number of benefits. First is reduced felt recoil to the shooter, resulting in reduced muzzle “flip” quicker recovery time after each shot and increased accuracy. Another benefit is reduced stress on components, which is one of the reasons for the extremely long service life of all USPs. The USP recoil reduction system is “transparent” to the shooter; it is insensitive to ammunition, requires no maintenance and has an indefinite service life. On early USPs, the recoil spring could be removed from the guide rod, but in September 1994, a “captured spring” design was incorporated, which makes USP disassembly and reassembly easier and safer. The new recoil reduction system can be retrofitted into earlier USPs without modification.

USP Compact pistols have a different recoil reduction system than the larger pistols because there is insufficient space for a dual-spring system and because the compact designs use a flat recoil spring to save space and facilitate shortening the barrel and frame. The buffer in the H&K USP Compacts is therefore a high strength polymer bushing that surrounds the recoil spring and cushions the blow of the slide against the frame as the slide recoils. Life of this polymer buffer is stated to be over 20,000 rounds.

The polymer frame of the USP is virtually impervious to wear or corrosion, but the USP, like all firearms, also incorporates metal components, which are subject to corrosion and wear unless protected. Heckler & Koch applies a proprietary Hostile Environment (HE) nitrogen/carbon finish to the USP slide. This finish is not only extremely hard (732 HV1 Vickers), but highly corrosion resistant, as well. The non-reflective HE finish has been used on the G3SG1 sniper rifle since the 1970’s and has proven itself in service. A stainless steel slide is available for all USP models. All other USP components, both external and internal, are finished with Dow-Corning’s “Molykote,” a very tough corrosion-resistant finish which also incorporates low-friction qualities.

Two versions of the USP which are not available in the United States are H&K’s German military P8 and P10 pistols. The P8 replaces the Walther P1 (modernized P.38) in Bundeswehr service, while the P10 is being issued to German police. Both are versions of the USP9 and USP9 Compact, respectively, but with two differences in comparison to other USP versions. Indeed, these pistols could be considered a new USP variant, were they commercially available. One difference is the functioning of the control lever, which reverses the “safe” and “fire” positions of the Variant 1 USP. The uppermost position of the lever on both German pistols is “fire,” rather than “safe.” The mid position is “safe,” and fully down decocks the pistol, as with other USP variants. The second difference is that when the trigger is released on the P8 and P10, the control lever automatically returns to the “safe” position. Some 20,000 USP “P8” variants have been issued to the German military.

Table 2: Mark 23 & USP45 Tactical Pistol Comparison

(Only items where specifications differ are listed)

*Fixed sights. Weight with adjustable sights is 32 ounces.
** Fixed sights. Height with adjustable sights is 5.78 inches.
*** Five shots, 25 meters, service ammunition.

The USP45 was a follow-on to the original USP40 and USP9 pistols and was introduced in January 1995 at the SHOT Show. The pistol became available for sale in May of that year. The change to .45 ACP caliber was not as simple as changing barrel, slide and recoil spring. As mentioned earlier, the USP45 steel magazine was essentially carried over from the Mark 23 USSOCOM Pistol because use of polymer magazines would have caused the grip circumference to be too large. The recoil reduction system was lengthened to accommodate the longer .45 ACP cartridge while providing an identical 30 per cent reduction in recoil forces. The USP45 was the first pistol to incorporate an improved trigger system which is not only smoother and lighter than the original, but also virtually eliminates “stacking,” or increased resistance as the trigger is pulled back in double action. In the USP45, the double action trigger take-up does not begin until the trigger reaches the “half-cock position. This enhanced trigger feature was incorporated into all USPs in early 1995. As stated, the USP45 is different than its smaller caliber sisters. While the USP9 and USP40 share virtually 100 per cent parts interchangability, only 78 per cent of USP45 parts will interchange with the earlier guns. The USP45 was subjected to and passed all the tests of the earlier firearms, including a durability test of 24,000 rounds of +P ammunition.

As we have seen, the USP pistols were designed with the American market in mind and the success of the pistol in the US market and overseas clearly indicates that Heckler & Koch was “on target” with its design. One of the major trends in the US firearms market has been engendered by the spread of “shall issue” concealed carry laws in the majority of the states. As of this writing in early 1998, 32 states have “shall issue” concealed laws which mandate that any citizen of good character who applies must be issued a license to carry a concealed weapon, usually a pistol. This has engendered a demand for compact pistols and many manufacturers have begun producing pistols designed for concealed carry. Compact versions of the USP for concealed carry were therefore virtually inevitable. .40 S&W and 9x19mm USP Compact pistols were introduced in early 1997 and a USP Compact .45 followed that autumn. Aside from the shorter length and height, there are minimal differences between the compact USPs and their full-size sisters, most of which have already been discussed. First, of course is the fact that the pistols are smaller both in height and in length for concealment. Grip circumference and trigger reach are also reduced for improved handling. Dimensional differences may be found in the specifications tables.

Unlike many “scaled down” pistols, the grips of the USP Compacts accommodate the entire hand of most shooters, even without using the extended floorplate magazine. (The USP Compact is shipped with two magazines – one with a flat, flush-fitting floor plate for maximum concealability and another with an extended floorplate to provide maximum comfort for those with large hands.) In terms of overall size, the USP Compacts are very close dimensionally to the Colt Officer’s ACP except for the slide, which is slightly thicker. Other changes in the compact pistols were the previously discussed recoil spring and buffer mechanism. The author had the opportunity to test one of the USP45 Compact pistols in October 1997 and shortly thereafter purchased one for personal use. It has since had several thousand rounds fired through it without a single stoppage.

The next iteration of USP is the USP45 Tactical Model, shown at the 1998 SHOT Show and officially put on sale in April, although the USP45 Tactical Model will not be available in quantity until May 1998. The Tactical Model USP is essentially a “cross” between the Mark 23 and the USP, incorporating the best features of both. The USP45 Tactical Model uses the barrel developed for the Mark 23, which is threaded for attachment of a suppressor. USP45 Tactical threads, however, are left handed to prevent installation of the Mark 23’s suppressor, which was designed for a heavier slide. At the time of this writing, a Knight’s Armament Company stainless suppressor and a Brugger & Thomet aluminum suppressor are available for the USP45 Tactical. The sights on the USP45 Tactical are fully adjustable and are designed to look above an installed suppressor. Trigger pull is greatly improved over earlier USPs and an adjustable trigger top is incorporated as a standard feature. Magazines are of an improved design with an extended floor plate to improve retention. All USP45 Tactical pistols are provided with a cleaning kit, spare barrel “O” rings, and tools for sight and trigger stop adjustment.

It is clear that the USP45 Tactical was designed for military and law enforcement use, but this requires some explanation. Several US military special operations forces did not purchase the Mark 23 and continue to use modified M1911A1 pistols, which are reaching the end of their service lives, despite having been rebuilt by military special operations armorers time after time. Moreover, while the M1911A1 will continue to function beyond 20,000 rounds, it begins to lose its accuracy after approximately 12,000 rounds and must be depot rebuilt. The failure of all special operations organizations to purchase the Mark 23 was not engendered by any specific fault of the Mark 23 itself; the pistol was built to the specifications determined by USSOCOM and surpassed all of them. In the words of one special operations requirements officer, “The Mark 23 isn’t a bad pistol; it simply doesn’t meet our requirements.” The fact is that USSOCOM does not directly speak for all special operations forces, nor can it require them to purchase a pistol that does not meet their individual service requirements. This will be further discussed in the section on the Mark 23 which follows. Nonetheless, a military requirement exists for a .45 caliber pistol that is different than the Mark 23, while improving on the venerable M1911A1 and at the same time maintaining the operational characteristics virtually identical to those of the Mark 23. Although Heckler & Koch has made no official comment regarding the intended market for the USP45 Tactical Pistol other than the statement, “…the Heckler & Koch USP45 Tactical Pistol is designed for users who require the features of the H&K MK 23/Mark 23 pistol for tactical, combat, or CQB use in a smaller and more affordable package.” (boldface in original), it is clear that the Tactical Pistol is aimed (no pun intended) at this market, and if the basic characteristics of the USP45 Tactical Pistol are any indication, it can be expected to be seen in the hands of many military and police special units in the coming years.

What does the future hold for the USP? The immediate future for the US market will see the USP product line expanded to include .357 SIG caliber. This addition to the USP product line will appear in the second half of 1998. In Germany, Heckler & Koch is entering into IPSC Competition and has developed a “full-race” version of the USP for use by its IPSC team. The IPSC pistol, called the “Expert Model” goes on sale in Europe in late June and if it achieves success in European IPSC circles, it may well be added to the American USP product line. The proven excellence of the USP design means not only that the pistol will be available for many years to come, but that the variety of USPs available to the shooter will continue to grow as well.

The author wishes to thank Mr. Valery Shilin of Izmash, JSC, whose kind assistance made this article possible.

The AK100 Series Kalashnikov assault rifles is the latest iteration of the most successful such weapon in the world and probably the most successful military rifle in history. This newest generation of Kalashnikov rifles is manufactured by Izmash Joint Stock Company, Izhevsk, Russia, home of the Kalashnikov Design Bureau. There is no AK-100 rifle, per se. The term is derived from a factory code (Number 100) for Izmash from the “bad old days” of the Soviet Union. There are a number of different versions of the latest Kalashnikov assault rifles. The AK100 rifles’ designations run from AK101 through AK105, caliber and barrel length determining the actual designation. The latest version of the AK-74, the AK74M, is also included in the AK100 family. All are different from their predecessors in their execution while retaining the basic elements of the classic Kalashnikov design that make the rifle so reliable under adverse battlefield conditions. Before discussing the latest products of the Kalashnikov Design Bureau, however, it is appropriate to briefly discuss the history of the AK weapons family, setting aside a few misconceptions along the way.

Mikhail Timofeyvich Kalashnikov is commonly thought to have designed the AK47 while recuperating from battle wounds, but this is not true. Kalashnikov was wounded in 1941 and while recuperating, he did dream of Soviet troops armed with thousands of submachine guns attacking the hated Nazis. But the AK47 did not spring from his fertile mind on the spot. Kalashnikov was released from the hospital and sent home to recuperate, but his hand did not heal properly and the young sergeant eventually found himself working in the political office of a railroad depot in Alma-Ata while local medical specialists continued to treat his wounds. It was while working there that Kalashnikov designed his first weapon, a submachine gun chambered for the 7.62x25mm TT-33 cartridge. Kalashnikov’s design was good enough to reach trial production, but it was not adopted by the Soviet military. What the design got Kalashnikov was the attention of very influential people in the Soviet small arms industry, who recognized his innate genius and ensured that he was first properly trained and then put to work to exploit his remarkable talent for small arms design.

Kalashnikov was assigned the task of designing an avtomat, or assault rifle, in 7.62x39mm, a cartridge which had already been adopted by the Soviet military as the M1943. The Soviets had been very impressed by the German Sturmgewehr (MP43/MP44/StG44, et.al.) designs and began working to improve on them and adopt the assault rifle concept to their own military doctrine. There are several myths surrounding the 7.62x39mm cartridge and the AK-47 rifle that fires it, not the least of which is that both were copied from earlier German designs. In fact, the Soviets had begun working on intermediate cartridge designs as early as 1939 and the M1943 cartridge was the result of that research, not the result of modifying an existing German cartridge. The fact that the Soviet cartridge was adopted in 1943 is virtual proof that the 7.62x39mm was not copied from the Germans as there would hardly have been time between the introduction of the German 7.62x33mm for the Soviets to develop a cartridge of their own based on it. Likewise, the AK47, while probably inspired by the Sturmgewehr concept introduced by the Germans, was not simply a copy of German firearms. There is only superficial resemblance between the AK47 and any of the German assault rifle designs of World War II.

Along with the young Kalashnikov, several other Soviet weapons designers, including Simonov, designer of the SKS, and Sudayev, who designed the PPs43 submachine gun, were working on avtomat designs for the Soviet government. This practice is typical of Russia and the Soviet Union. A number of competing designers will be assigned to develop a new weapon, the competing designs evaluated, and one selected. Compared to Simonov and Sudayev, Kalashnikov was a “Johnny come lately,” and Sudayev’s candidate weapon was considered to be the prime candidate for adoption, as he had prototypes under development and test as early as 1944. Tests of Kalashnikov’s rifle did not begin until 1946, but it was so clearly superior to all others in early testing that it immediately got the attention of the highest levels of the Soviet military. There were a few problems in testing, but these were resolved and the rifle was type-classified in 1947. Sudayev did have a part in the final AK design, however. Kalashnikov’s final design that was type – classified as the AK47 used Sudayev’s magazine. Despite the AK47 designation, the rifle did not actually enter into service until 1949.

Three types of AK47 were produced by the Soviet Union. The Type I AK47 with a stamped sheet metal receiver was manufactured for three years. There have been a number of theories as to why production was transitioned to the weapon that has come to be known in the west as the Type II AK47, none of which is fully satisfactory and all of which are beyond the scope of this article. (See Birth of an Assault Rifle in this issue of SAR) For whatever reason, the Type II AK47 with a machined steel receiver went into production in 1951. This type of AK47 was also short-lived and was noted for its machined receiver that began life as a 5.7lb block of solid steel and emerged 120 machining operations later as a 1.41 lb AK47 receiver. The Type II was also noted for its unsatisfactory method of stock attachment and this type of AK47 was supplanted by the Type III rifle in 1954. The Type III is essentially the “definitive” version of the AK47, as it was the most widely distributed and was produced in the largest numbers. Interestingly, the Russians do not distinguish between different AK47 types; this categorization is a product of western small arms analysts. The Type III AK47 remained in production until 1959, when it was replaced by the AKM (Avtomat Kalashnikova Modernizirovanniyi).

The AKM marked the return to a stamped receiver, but one that was far different from the original AK47. The AKM receiver was more complex than the original AK stamped receiver, but it reduced weight and production costs over the machined Type II and Type III versions with no sacrifice in reliability. The AKM was also the first production AK to incorporate a muzzle device to offset muzzle rise on full-automatic fire. This version of the AK remained in production until 1974 and is the “definitive” Kalashnikov rifle, if such a claim can be made. The AKM was produced in greater numbers and by more countries than any rifle in history. It is still in production in some countries, but was replaced in Soviet use in the mid 1970s by the AK74. One version of the AK-100 Series is essentially an updated version of this rifle, as we shall see.

The AK74 is the direct predecessor of the AK-100 Series and the latest AK74 version, the AK74M, is included as a part of the AK100 family. The AK74 was originally developed to reduce recoil and increase accuracy according to authoritative Russian sources, but the rifle was only partially successful in achieving those goals, despite having a very effective muzzle brake/compensator. This ultimately led to the development of an entirely new rifle, the AN94, which will ultimately replace the AK series in Russian service. Meantime, the venerable AK has been upgraded into what is probably its final permutation, making use of modern materials and manufacturing processes along with modifications to enhance the weapon’s operational capabilities. The new rifles were developed in the late 1980s when Izmash was approached by several customers who wanted new rifles in both 5.56x45mm and 7.62x39mm. Another factor was that Russian military orders for the AK74M were significantly declining in the wake of the Cold War’s end. Implementing different calibers was not difficult; tooling costs were minimal and the result was a much wider diversification of the AK product line, enabling Izmash to better meet the needs of its customers.

All versions of the AK74M/AK100-Series rifles have several features in common. All have a folding stock of a new and improved design, hard phosphate coating on exposed metal parts, glass-fiber reinforced furniture and a new bayonet. Magazines are all polymer, regardless of the rifle’s caliber. All retain the proven Kalashnikov operating gas operating system, rotating bolt and select-fire capability. Sights are typical Kalashnikov, round post front and tangent rear, with “U” notch. The sights are graduated to 1,000 meters, hugely optimistic for weapons of this class, which in the hands of average soldiers are capable of an effective range of no more than 300 to 500 meters. All of the new rifles have a standard mount on the left side of the receiver which accepts any one of several optics or night vision devices and all will accept the GP15/GP25/GP30 underbarrel grenade launchers. The stock cannot be folded with the optics in place.

Standard versions of the AK100 series include the AK74M in 5.45x39mm, the AK101 in 5.56x45mm (.223 Remington) and the AK103 in 7.62x39mm. The latter rifle is essentially a modernized and improved AKM. Izmash also manufactures carbine versions of the standard rifles. These not only have a shorter barrel, but also a modified gas system and AKS74U-type compensator/flash suppressor. In 5.56x45mm, the compact AK100 is designated the AK102; it is designated AK104 in 7.62x39mm and AK105 in 5.45x39mm.

As mentioned previously, these rifles probably represent the ultimate development of Kalashnikov’s superb rifle. No matter how good a firearm design, there is only so much that can be done to upgrade it before it no longer meets military requirements. There is little remaining that may be done to further improve the basic Kalashnikov design, which is truly the most successful small arm in military history both in terms of longevity and numbers produced. The latest Russian service rifle, the AN94, is quite different in concept than the AK rifles it will eventually replace and it signals a new direction in Russian small unit infantry tactical doctrine. Despite this, AK rifles remain viable military arms and the AK100 Series can compete with the latest rifles of most manufacturers on an equal footing. In terms of both reliability and accuracy, current versions of the AK are the peer of any other military rifle. Indeed, Izmash claims that their latest Kalashnikov product will equal or surpass the accuracy and mean number of rounds between failure of any competitor, as confirmed by testing at Izmash. Tests are not only for accuracy and simple test firing, however, but also include dust, salt fog, cold and hot climate and drop tests from several aspects. The weapon must function after each test.

The latest iterations of the Kalashnikov are clearly intended for export, where they would be attractive to nations seeking modern but proven rifles in 5.56mm NATO or traditional Russian calibers at very reasonable prices. AK100 rifles can be purchased for only US$230 FOB Izhevsk. Regardless, the AK100 Series carries on the Kalashnikov tradition of robustness, reliability and proven effectiveness at a very reasonable price. How well they sell, though, may well be determined not by the rifles of western manufacturers, but by earlier Kalashnikov rifles of both Russian and foreign production. During the Cold War, AKs of all types and national origin were provided by the millions to many governments and insurgent movements, and a huge number of these rifles remain in service. In sub-Saharan Africa, for instance, a serviceable AKM recently could be purchased for the local equivalent of US$14.00! Although rifles such as this are probably not in the best condition, they can be counted upon to fire when the trigger is pulled and this, coupled with the ridiculously low price, makes them a far better bargain for a poor African or Central American tribesman than anything the west or Izmash currently has to offer. Current sales do not approach a volume any where near that of Cold War days, but are sufficient to keep the lines open, US$6.5 to $8 million per year. Regardless of how well the AK100 Series sells, however, Kalashnikov rifles of some sort will be in the hands of the world’s military and para-military forces for the foreseeable future, whether they are beat-up vintage AKMs or current production AK103s.