In 1909, further trials were announced. Fedorov would re-submit his 1906 model which was received with great acclaim from the military, for it was the only rifle that passed all endurance and shooting trials. This design would receive further development up to 1913, when Fedorov would also introduce a non-rimmed cartridge to pair with his rifle, 6x57mm. This 1913 rifle went as far as being ordered for field trials, 150 to be exact. However, due to the declaration of war in the following year, all developmental work was ordered to immediately cease.

A year passes, and the threat of a central power’s invasion dwindles and interest in automatic weapons picks up again, both in aviation and in the trenches. Fedorov is sent to France as an observer and there he examines the Chauchat automatic rifle and its deployment as a light machine gun. His findings inspire the Russian authorities to create an experimental battalion, the 189th Izmail division, to be armed with automatic weaponry, including C96 pistols, and most importantly, Fedorov M1913 rifles, some having been adapted to use Madsen magazines. This is one of the major myths permeating the Fedorov lineage, as the later 1919 rifle is often associated as being the version fielded during the Great War.

However, there was an actual model of 1916 Fedorov rifle which resembled, in part, the later 1919, being carbine length, using the 6.5mm Arisaka ammunition, and being fully automatic; These were designated for the air force, which received them with great enthusiasm, to the point where 25,000 automatic rifles, or “Avtomats” as they were now being called (to differentiate them from the infantry version) were considered to be necessary for the war. Obviously, for a country like Russia that lacked the manufacturing capacity to produce even bolt action rifles for their regular infantry, producing this number of complex automatic rifles was unfeasible. Even with this caveat, production of the Fedorov was deemed to be of great importance, leading to major factories like Putilov and Izhevsk to be built to produce parts for the Fedorov, which they allegedly did. By the end of 1917, the Kovrov Arsenal was also instructed to start production of the Avtomat. Although, this wouldn’t last long, for the Russian Revolution would temporarily halt any development or production of this new automatic rifle.

The Kovrov Arsenal, when originally built, was partially funded by the D.R.S. (Dansk Rekylriffel Syndikat) company to produce the Madsen light machine gun to the Russian forces, who were one of the first countries to field it in the Russo-Japanese war. When the Russian Civil War broke out, the Kovrov region fell into Soviet control and they confiscated all production of firearms from there, including the very few Fedorovs that had been produced to that point. These few guns captured did impress the recently created Soviet Army which contacted Fedorov to work as the main director of the plant. The Soviets also requested a further 15,000 Madsen rifles and 9,000 Fedorov rifles to be manufactured as soon as possible, investing heavily into the plant, with a new design bureau and manufacturing buildings.

For this effort, the Fedorov rifle was simplified to ease production, which resulted in the version that we identify as the Fedorov nowadays, the model of 1919. With a newly designed 25-round magazine, the iconic wooden front grip Even then, the task of manufacturing this order stalled quickly; supplies were hard to come by due to the Russian Civil War and lack of organization and manufacturing sophistication further killed the idea of producing the Fedorov in any significant quantity. Only about 100 guns were produced in the first year; peak production was in October 1923, with 822 guns.

Nevertheless, the Russians couldn’t let the opportunity of having such an innovative concept and (a genius firearms designer at their disposal) pass. Many prototypes and developmental models appeared in the early 1920s in an attempt to broaden the Fedorov system’s potential usage. Shpagin, famous for his WWII era submachinegun, collaborated with Fedorov in such an attempt. They worked to make an armored vehicle adaptation of the system, double-barreled, and with a ball mount. It was installed on early Soviet armor, such as the MS-1 tank and BA-27 armored car. Meanwhile, Degtyarev worked on a light machine gun version of the Fedorov, both a water-cooled and air-cooled, Lewis-style variant was tested with bipods and extended magazines. However, in 1925 the Soviet army canceled all firearm projects that used foreign calibers. As the Fedorov was still using the 6.5mm Arisaka cartridge, it was caught in the crossfire of the ban. Some projects would crop up later, but none would go past prototype stages. The remaining Fedorovs would end up being sent to depots.

An example of Shpagins and Degtyarevs modifications of the Fedorov, one porting a double barrel design, with inverted receivers and the other with a water-cooled jacket and bipod retrofitted.

Although it was such an innovative firearm, the Fedorov would not see much service along its troubled life. Around 120 rifles were used during the first world war, mostly converted semi-automatic M1913 rifles with extended magazines that were fielded by the 189th Izmail detachment in Romania, and a few others which were given to aviators. After that, it saw some use in the early history of the Soviet Union, but its main debut would be in the Winter War between the Soviet Union and Finland, where supply-starved Soviet troops were reissued with older surplus rifles, including Fedorovs. However, due to lack of maintenance of the somewhat complex mechanism and lack of spare parts, they were very quickly abandoned. For this reason, Finland has one of the biggest collections of Fedorov rifles.

To summarize, the history of the Fedorov has become quite murky due to the problems and conflicts that affected most, if not all, of this firearm’s history. From its humble beginnings as a semi-automatic Mosin conversion, to what some consider to be the first assault rifle ever fielded and made.
 

Most of the collection comes from the CITEFA, nowadays known as the CITEDEF, which is a research and development agency for the Argentine army. Some pieces were also donated by private citizens. Interesting to note that the guns that came from CITEFA were certainly tried and tested by Argentina. Many prototypes are present, of course.

Entering the museum, you’re greeted with a beautiful circular room, covered in marble and with a statue of General San Martín, Argentina’s national hero and founder. To enter the museum, there’s a fee of 2,000 pesos, around $2 USD in 2024. The staff was accommodating, but nothing out of the ordinary.

Now to the interesting bit, the museum itself. After paying, you’re greeted with the first room, consisting of swords, some replica armor, and two very interesting crossbows. The room itself is very well decorated and mostly nicely presented. Next, you go down a ramp and you’re greeted with the first indication this museum is going to be worth it; a room completely filled with gun cabinets full of very interesting and unique firearms including but not limited to:

One of the first interesting prototypes this museum has to offer, the Criollo rifle. Despite its odd name, its inventor was Angél Chiesanova. Made around the late 1800s, it chambers the 7.65x53mm Argentine cartridge and it operates in a very unique manner.

A second prototype I wasn’t even aware existed; an Argentine pattern Rolling-Block rifle modified by the Buenos Aires Arsenal, using the system patented by one Costa de Argibel.

There’s a lot in this room to appreciate, some other things of note was the variety of rare single shot, breech loading rifles they displayed, like the Mylonas rifle from Greece, a Robert II prototype from France, and an extremely unique Herteleup patent underhammer rifle. Also of note were Dreyse rifles and carbines, two Hall breech-loading rifles, a Russian Karlé needle-fire rifle, a Gewehr 98 trench rifle, and a Gewehr 98 in a grenade launcher mount.

The next exhibit is a progression of the Argentine firearms throughout history. Present are many flintlocks, including a replica of the first manufactured firearm on Argentine soil. There are Rolling Block rifles and carbines of all sorts of lengths, patterns, and models along with Argentine Mausers, sniper rifles and prototypes, and, finally, the FAL. There were also a few other miscellaneous rifles like a Spencer carbine, some breech-loading/single-shot rifles used by Argentina, and a Berdan I, Albini-Braedlin, Robinson, B.S. Roberts, Tabatiére and a few others. Also present were some heavy-machine guns.

A wall of Rolling Block rifles, including many carbine variants used by different branches of the army.

Argentine Mauser rifles, complete with a sniper variant and a prototype carbine that uses a bayonet system, similar to the Carcano.

The next room is an exhibit about the Falklands war, or as the Argentines prefer to call it, “Guerra das Malvinas.” As it is still in recent memory in Argentina, I won’t delve much into the conflict or the exhibit. Of note, there’s a silenced Sterling submachine gun and a cabinet of the guns the Argentine marines captured when first landed in Port Stanley from the garrison stationed there. Here, the museum deviates into four rooms, only one of which I will be able to cover here. On your left is a room, again, full (from floor to ceiling) with gun cases, all with interesting pistols. Of note are a prototype 1911 pattern Steyr-Hahn in its case (complete with accessories), a prototype Astra semi-automatic dating to around 1921 in 9mm Largo, two Webley-Fosbery revolvers, a rare Celmi pistol from Uruguay, and many others including different patterns of Lugers, pocket pistols, presentation pieces, Spanish copies, etc.

Apart from pistols, continuing on you’ll have a couple of cabinets with submachine guns of various nationalities and dates ranging from the Villar Perosa all the way to the PAM-2, an Argentine copy of the American M3 Grease-gun. There are all sorts of other firearms, including a Vollmer V.P.K, an MP28, a ZK-383 and an MP-34, all used during the Chaco war. An original 1921 Thompson, complete with a selection of different barrels, and even a Maxim silencer! Possibly the exact gun that was tested by the Argentine military, an Italian FNAB-43, and a Walther MPK which was allegedly owned by Salvador Allende, Chile’s deposed president. And last but not least, there’s a Swiss MP43/44, a licensed copy of the Suomi KP/31.

At the back of this room, there are a couple of hand-operated machine guns including one I didn’t even know existed prior to visiting this museum, the Bavarian “Feld”. Dated to around 1870 and designed by Johann Feldl, it functions very similarly to a Nordenfelt as far as I could ascertain. It was chambered in 11mm Werder and being of such rarity that there hasn’t been a photo of an example on the internet yet published, so it is my pleasure to present this rare beast.

Also present are a collection of other European machine guns, dated to around the first world war. Included are an MG08/15, Fiat-Revelli M1914, and a Hotchkiss Mle 1914. Next to the machine guns, mounted in the wall, is a very interesting piece of Argentine military history, a locally manufactured Panzerfaust clone nicknamed “PAPI”, which stands for “proyectil anti-tanque para infantería.”
And finally, there’s a very out of place (in my opinion, but still interesting to check out) Japanese collection of Sengoku period armor and weaponry.

If you’re not sold already, look for a future article where we’ll check out the biggest room of the whole museum and briefly introduce another museum I visited while in Buenos Aires, the “Museo Historico Del Ejercito Argentino”.

(This is a multi-part series. Click here to read Part I.)

In the last chapter of this story, we talked about the conversions patented and made during the interwar period. The United States had set out requirements for a new semi-automatic rifle, one of them being to re-use as much tooling from the M1903 Springfield as possible. Brand new nations rose up after the end of the first world war, like Czechoslovakia and Poland, who had to scavenge as much equipment their former overlords had left behind while trying to keep up technologically with the other great powers, leading them into the “conversion” route. Italy followed a similar route as the United States, having interchangeability/ease of manufacture in mind.

With the ascension of Germany and the threat of war looming again, some countries resorted to drastic measures to arm themselves. By the start of WWII, semi-automatic rifles had progressed to a point where they were viewed viable as an army’s standard issue rifle, like the M1 Garand. However, their importance was neglected by other nations like the United Kingdom, who, even though ran many trials throughout the interwar period, failed to adopt a semi-automatic rifle in time for the Second World War.

Others tried to capitalize on this issue, companies like A/B Snabb marketed a way to convert “obsolete” bolt-action rifles into semi-automatic ones for a fraction of the price. Though an attractive proposal, these usually came with a few caveats. Most conversions, however, came from private inventors trying to help their countries in such a time of need.

THE SUN NEVER SETS

The Commonwealth had a rough start in the Second World War. Despite many trials conducted in the inter-war period, they never settled on adopting any kind of semi-automatic rifle or submachinegun, finding them superfluous. With Germany’s Blitzkrieg catching the British by surprise in Dunkirk, the advances made in Africa and the Japanese threat in the Pacific, it was realized that there was a need for desperate modernization of small-arms in the Commonwealth forces.

The most successful attempt out of all of the conversions submitted was the Charlton Automatic Rifle. In fact, it is quite likely the most successful conversion ever made. This system was the brainchild of inventor Philip Charlton, who noticed his country’s dire situation when Japan declared war while most ANZAC troops were fighting on the North African front. The rifle was tested and passed with flying colors, which was followed by an order of converting 1,500 rifles, mostly obsolete MLEs and Lee-Metfords left over from the Boer war.

The Charlton operated very similarly to other Lee-Enfield conversions, with a gas-tube being precariously attached to the right side of the gun. However, the New Zealand model was unique in a sense, since it was one of the few conversions that allowed for fully automatic fire. The other Charlton manufactured in Australia was a more conventional rifle, having most of the inner workings covered up and being semi-automatic only.

Another less well-known rifle from the Oceanic colonies was the Ekins, however there is no evidence that his rifle went farther than a surviving draft dated to 1944.

The Rieder was another proposal from the colonies, this time from South Africa. Henry Rieder, who tinkered with radios and televisions, proposed a simple conversion of the SMLE to the South African authorities in early 1940. 18 rifles were then modified, and some were sent to England for formal trials. It seems that by 1944 with the war almost at an end in Europe the Rieder rifle was finally set aside, with a single rifle being returned to Rieder on behalf of the Admiralty.

Also from South Africa, the curious Howard-Francis carbine, chambered in 7.63x25mm Mauser. It was shortly trialed by the Ordnance Board in London where it failed to meet even the most basic expectations. The feed system malfunctioned, had to be manually fed every shot, and the rifle was noted to have extremely poor accuracy. The Ordnance Board concluded that there was no point in any further interest due to its poor results in the tests. Information about other submissions from the Empire are, unfortunately, hard to come by. Included is the Brown machine-pistol adapter for the No.1 and No.4 rifles, apparently it was very similar to the American Pedersen device of the First World War.

Designs from other countries were also considered. Rehnberg and his company offered to convert an SMLE to the SNABB system, which as far as the author knows was never undertaken. The other was the Scotti system being applied to a P14 Enfield rifle, which was completed and sent to the British for testing before the start of the Second World War. The rifle had a rough start, as when it arrived from Italy, some parts were already broken off and certain accouterments requested for testing were not present, such as spare barrels. Nevertheless, the British continued trials of this rifle until 1941 when it was finally deemed unacceptable. Meanwhile in Canada, a curious SMLE conversion by the American Russel Turner was being tested against the M1 Garand. Unfortunately, even though in some aspects it performed better than its competitor, it still lost out because it was deemed too complex.

MISCELLANEOUS COUNTRIES & CONVERSIONS

By the time the Second World War started, most countries had already written out conversions as a possibility, instead opting for brand new semi-automatic rifles, like the SVT-40 in Russia, the M1 Garand in the United States, and the G41/43 rifles in Germany. Despite this, some minor nations still considered the idea viable. As I couldn’t locate many from a single country like I’ve done in prior entries in this series, this part is going to be an amalgamation of what I was able to identify.

In Greece, we have the Rigopoulos conversion. Being tested shortly before the German invasion of the mainland, it was apparently approved for adoption and requests were sent for its production. Despite this, the author has not been able to identify much information about this rifle.

In Russia, at least two conversions were tested before the adoption of the SVT-40; these are the Mamontov and the Goryainov. Both worked in a very peculiar way, by utilizing the slight movement of a cartridge between the bolt face and the chamber, comparable to earlier attempts by Georg Roth and Garand of making primer-actuated rifles.

In Sweden, during trials to adopt the Ljungman self-loading rifle, an inventor named Erik Wallberg submitted a few designs for converting the Swedish Mauser to be semi-automatic. They all utilized a simple gas piston. Wallberg would go on to build SLRs from the ground up instead of conversions using the same principle.

And finally, China. In 1944, engineers named Wen Chengding, Wu, and Liu developed an automatic rifle based on the Arisaka by simply attaching a gas-piston to the left side of the gun. It seems that the rifle was tested against a M1 Carbine, which the designers remarked that their rifle had a better muzzle velocity and range.

The Standschützen Hellriegel submachine gun could be considered the most notorious “mystery firearm.” Even before it’s infamous inclusion in the videogame “Battlefield 1”, internet sleuths were already looking into the almost non-existent archival material of it, that is, a whopping three photographs.

But what can these photographs tell us about this intriguing weapon? I believe that my colleague Frederick Clifford and I have identified some potentially breaking news about the Hellriegel, and by investigating other leads like the Standschützen members list, we can figure out who might’ve been the inventor, who he was related to, and other potential clues to solve this mystery.

The Who

The title given to this sub-machine gun in the official pictures is “Maschinengewehr des Standschützen Hellriegel” or, in English, Machine Gun made by Standschützen Hellriegel. The Standschützen were a type of regulated militia in the Austrian Alps, any male over seventeen was compelled to join a shooting range and train at least four times per year. Our most likely candidate is Dr. Richard Hellriegel (sometimes spelled Hellriegl). Full name, Richard von Hellriegel zu Rechtenfeld, who served as the medical officer of Standschützenbattalion Kitzbühel. His name is the only “Hellriegel” that has been found in the Standschützen archives, which would mean that he is our only option. Not much is known about Dr. Hellriegel. After the First World War, he became a priest and was arrested by the Gestapo later in World War Two, twice, but never convicted of any crime.

The What

There are very few pictures of the Hellriegel, though they do provide some important details about how this unique SMG worked. First, we have the two “buffer” tubes on the rear of a large receiver which thins out around where the chamber must be located. Second, we have the two types of magazines, one of which is a sort of linked/chute belt system held inside a drum magazine which does not attach to the gun itself, the other is a more conventional stick magazine, which looks to be single fed. The drum magazine seems to have a capacity of around 160 rounds, meanwhile, the box magazine seems to have accommodated 20 rounds. The gun also had a water-cooled jacket, some sort of tube underneath which also served as an ad-hoc front grip.

The photographs also depict some accouterments that went with the gun, there was supposed to be an assistant loader which carried a backpack with the drum magazines inside. Speaking of which, two people are seen in the photographs, one seems to have been a Zugsführer, a rank equivalent to Master Corporal. Sadly, his assistant’s rank isn’t clear, and only appearing in one of the photos. The Zugsführer seems to be wearing a special rig, possibly as a way to carry the drum magazines in the move, something similar being made after the First World War by Heinrich Vollmer.

Unfortunately, since no documents or any other material aside from the Hellriegel photographs exist, all we can do is speculate. That being said, here are two long theories and two short theories I’ve discussed with my colleagues.

Theory 1: The Visini-Fuchs connection

Franz Fuchs has often been referred as the creator of the Steyr P.12/16 machine pistol, however, according to new research done by Josef Mötz and Joschi Schuy in their book “Die Weiterentwicklung der Selbstladepistole II,” this has been proven false. No documents pertaining to the development of the P.12/16 machine pistol mention Fuchs, this possibly being made up by Lothar Sengewitz.

But what if he didn’t make it up? There are reports in old newspapers of the time of a few “Visini-Fuchs” semi-automatic rifles being captured on the Russian front. Looking deeper into this claim, we found a patent from Mr. Friedrich von Visini of a gas-operated semi-automatic rifle submitted in 1913, it features some peculiar design elements, such as two buffer tubes on the rear of the receiver to accommodate two large recoil springs, something very similar to what we find in the Hellriegel photographs. Fuchs co-signed the Visini patent and since he was in the Standschützen, he could’ve easily met with Hellriegel and discussed some plans to modify Visini’s design into a submachine-gun type weapon.

Theory 2: Dating the Hellriegel

It’s been well accepted by now that the Hellriegel dates to 1915, making it one of, if not, the first submachine guns ever developed. However, by analyzing the images in more detail and with some clarification on the writing in the back of one of the photographs, I believe the Hellriegel to be more appropriately dated to at least July of 1918.

To clarify, the Hellriegel has two sets of pictures, the National Library set and the State Archive set, the latter was sent to the War Press and is dated 1918. The other set came from the War Press itself and is the evidence we have for the 1915 date. That being said, the images dispatched to the War Press, and now in the possession of the State Archives, must have come before the National Library set, which disproves the 1915 date of the pictures. Even further, the description on the official ÖNB website claims that the back of the picture reads Okt. 15, not 1915 as it was previously thought.

More evidence that supports this theory is that there were plans for an Austro-Hungarian submachine gun trials occurring at the end of the war, the Schwarzlose SMG (this detail could explain the two different patterns of Schwarzlose SMG that still exist) and the previously “adopted” Sturmpistole M.17 were planned on being tested together in a few different calibers. This could coincide with the Hellriegel submachine gun tests we know of.

Theory 3: How did the left side look?

The only photos we have of the Hellriegel show only the right side of the gun, however, on one of the photos, specifically of the gun laying right-face-up on the table, you can see something on the left side which is propping the gun up slightly, could this be a mirrored bolt handle… or, some sort of safety perhaps?

Theory 4: Caliber

The last and shortest theory is what ammo was used in the Hellriegel. From analyzing the photos, I noticed the very peculiar primer the rounds had. They appear uncharacteristically large compared to other rounds of the era. I ended up landing on the 8mm Roth-Steyr cartridge, which also has a very big primer and the overall dimensions fit the gun well. Plus, it was technically the official “pistol” cartridge of the Austro-Hungarian empire, since they adopted the Roth-Steyr M.7 pistol as their standard sidearm.

How You Can Help

The First World War ended on November 11th, 1918. With that, many restrictions and demilitarization efforts very likely resulted in the destruction of the Hellriegel prototype. However, there is still a lot we can theorize and understand about this unique piece of firearms history.

I propose to you, the reader, that together we can solve these firearm mysteries. If you have any leads or additional information that I did not mention in this article, I urge you to send me an email at sircoutin@gmail.com.

Due to its popularity in recent media, such as its appearance in the popular video games Battlefield 1 and Battlefield 5, the mystery of the Luger rifle has become quite infamous. As a consequence, more myths and misinformation have been shared about this unique rifle than many of its contemporaries. My objective today is to clarify a bit of the rifle’s history and speculate on where it might reside nowadays.

The Origins of the Luger

Hugo Borchardt was an innovative firearms designer, having made one of the first-ever automatic pistols in the world. He was infamous for his arrogance, holding such a high opinion of his pistol design that he felt it was flawless. This has caused his legacy to be overshadowed by his successor, Georg Luger.

Georg Luger was born in March 1849 at Steinach on the Bremmer pass in the Austrian Alps. He would join the army as an officer-cadet in 1867, giving him valuable experience in his later career. By 1882, he was already registered as a “Waffentechniker” ¹ and in 1892, Luger would move to Berlin and be employed by Ludwig Loewe & Cie, later renamed to Deutsche Waffen und Munitionsfabriken. Although he was an aspiring firearms designer, he was employed as a travelling salesman for the company’s products.

By 1893, he was given permission to have his own creations patented by DWM. In return, DWM would reserve the rights to profit from Luger’s inventions. Although he is known today for his toggle-locked-action pistol, Luger started out his engineering career with bolt-action rifles. Notably, the United States Navy was interested in adopting such a rifle, though the deal fell short when Luger refused to alter his rifle to meet with the calibre requirements of the trials. When Hugo Borchardt abandoned his semi-automatic pistol project to work on gas-operated appliances, Luger took over the project and refined it, leading to the Parabellum model of 1900; More commonly known today bearing the name of its creator, the Luger.

The Kaiser needs a semi-automatic rifle

In 1896, Paul Mauser would personally demonstrate his C96 pistol to Kaiser Wilhelm II. He found it to be remarkable, asking Mauser if such a design could work for an infantry rifle. “Five years, your majesty,” he reportedly replied. Until Mauser’s death in 1914, he would try to perfect such a design for the Kaiser, but, to no avail.

Luger would join Paul Mauser in his attempt to provide a successful self-loading rifle for the German military. His first patent taken out in 1905 was simply titled “Recoil-loader”. However, Luger’s earliest semi-automatic rifle, the one that is well known today, would be made in around 1911, when trials were held against the Borchardt self-loading rifle and possibly the Schwarzlose rifle, though I was not able to confirm that this rifle was ever made. The Luger rifle operated in a similar way to its pistol counterpart; It had a 5-round internal magazine, fed by either a stripper clip or by releasing the base plate and inserting rounds from beneath, similar to a RSC but without the en-bloc clip and the stock, which was similar in construction to the G98.

After the war, Luger was involved in a lawsuit with DWM about the rights to the guns he made while he worked there. During this trial, he exhibited a letter DWM received in 1914 from the Allgemeines Kriegsdepartment, a part of the German war department, where they reject the Borchardt and praised the Luger design, writing, “The Department most earnestly requests that the Luger self-loading rifle is kept secret until further notice.” Though, due to the war being declared later in the same year, no further testing was ever done with the Luger rifle.

PostbellumLuger passed away in 1923, leaving his son, Georg Luger Jr., in control of his estate. Luger Jr. persevered in attempting to promote his father’s rifles to the post-WWI successor of the GPK, the IWG. Having finally rejected it on the grounds of cost and complexity in 1927, he would sell his example of the rifle to the IWG’s study collection, where it remained in inventory until 1945, when the Russians raided the building during the Battle of Berlin. Most of the collection was taken to the St. Petersburg Artillery Museum, where it remains today. However, it is unclear if the IWG’s Luger rifle survived, as some expeditions into their private areas have failed to locate it. However, a Borchardt Self-Loading Rifle was found to still be under their care, so it is possible that they still have it somewhere on-site.

The only Luger rifle we know of today is serial number 4, which was located at the Mauser factory collection until the French took over and plundered it in the final stages of World War Two. It would stay at the St. Etienne Arsenal until it was sold off to the collector market, specifically the company Interarms, founded by Sam Cummings. In a “Guns Review” article from March of 1994, the author J. W. Sawyers got permission to visit the Interarms facility in Manchester and closely inspect the Luger rifle. After that, it was sold off in a Christie’s auction in 1995 and subsequently resold at an unknown auction-house in 1999.

Where is it today?

Sadly, no one has ever come out with this very rare and elusive rifle, so it is still unknown where it is located. The last time it was sold, from an unknown auction house, only gives a number of “167,500”, almost certainly this is how much it was sold for but there is no specific currency attached to it. The weight of the rifle is given in pounds and ounces, nothing uncommon for either the U.K. or the U.S., and there are no words that would give away if it was written in British English or American English.

So it is probable that the Luger rifle is still in the United Kingdom, although it is also possible someone exported it after it was sold. Possibly to the U.S., Switzerland or maybe even Malta.

Geoffrey Sturgess, a possible candidate for its ownership, sold his firearm collection around 2014 and some of his very rare firearms ended up in Maltese collections, like the unfinished 1921 Furrer Maschinenpistole, serial number 1.

Unfortunately, it is unlikely that the Luger rifle will be found unless someone comes forward with it, or it ends up in another auction. As always, if anyone has any additional information or leads, you can always send me an email at sircoutin@gmail.com.

Most firearms of the early 20th Century have worn faint, but discernable trails through history. However, there are some mysterious guns that history all but forgets, save for a mention in the odd contract proposal, trial report, or journal of the day. These guns are the subject of this series of articles. Hopefully, with a little research and the help of our curious readers, we can learn about and solve some of history’s firearm mysteries.

Today’s topic is the Faletans semi-automatic rifle and its inventor. This is one of the very rare cases where no other articles or books have been written on this subject. What I was able to gather for this article was from reports I have read through and a very helpful and in-depth look into the Faletans family, courtesy of one of its living members.

The Who

The roots of the De Faletans family can be traced back to the year 1269. Being of a lower class of nobility, they took part in most conflicts that France got involved in. In 1871, Charles Constant dit Nicolas de Thierry de Faletans would become the new patriarch after his father, also named Constant, passed away. In the same year, he would marry Olga Aleksandrovna Naryshkina, giving us an important clue to his future inventions and deals with Imperial Russia.

Charles de Faletans is very likely the inventor of our mystery rifle. Being named the Marquis, he would be the only one in the family who could title his inventions and investments with his full title, which he did very often. He would invest in the Ouro Preto Gold Mines in 1884 and is only named in the certificate as “Marquis.” He was also nicknamed Balle-aur-couer (Bullseye) de Faletans, as he would frequent exhibitions of marksmanship on a regular basis.

Nicolas’s clear interest in firearms helps us understand how he began working on one of his first inventions in the field of gunsmithing. This was a small caliber conversion for the Berdan and Gras rifles, patented in the early 1890s. According to some sources, the Berdan conversion was allegedly adopted by Russia. So, it’s not hard to presume that his connections to Russian nobility helped his invention along the trial process, as his wife Olga was highly connected with the Tsarina of Russia.

The What

In the early 1900s, Britain would test a couple of semi-automatic rifles, including the Mondrágon, the Kjellman rifle (presented by Captain P. Möller), and the Cei-Rigotti. Another, mentioned in the Small Arms Committee (SAC) files is the Marquis de Faletan’s rifle and carbine, tested on the 4th of July of 1903. The SAC describes the rifle as follows:

“The thin barrel of a Mauser M1888 rifle, capable of sliding ½-inch to the rear within its steel barrel casing. Round the barrel was a spiral spring which forced the barrel to the front. Underneath the barrel was a projection slotted out longitudinally, in which were two pivoted levers; the front one retains the barrel in its rearmost position while the bolt is traveling to and fro. The bottom of the rear lever strikes a projection on the magazine, and the top of this lever throws the bolt with considerable additional velocity to the rear” 

“The bolt is locked by lugs on the front end engaging in recesses in the barrel immediately in the rear of the chamber. On the left side of the bolt is a longitudinal groove which is curved at the rear end. A stud pinned into the body works in this groove and unlocks the bolt on recoil taking place. The bolt is operated by hand by means of a slide on the right side provided with a handle.”

The rifle described seems to operate with a recoil system that pivots two levers when the action is operated. The Marquis continues by specifying that the rifle, in .311 caliber (described as being a short cartridge for Mauser rifles) was still in its early experimental stage while the short carbine, in 7.63x25mm Mauser, was more refined. In tests, the SAC did determine that, while the rifle version of the firearm did not perform well, the carbine version was remarked as working fairly well. He also offered to modify the current service rifle of the time, the M.L.E., to function with his system.

The Marquis would contact the SAC one more time to offer a full-sized caliber rifle for further testing by the committee, presumably in .303. But, following this letter, there was no further correspondence between the committee and Mr. De Faletans.

There are, however, reports of the Faletans rifle being tested by Switzerland in 1904. One year after that, Faletans’ rifle was submitted for testing in the United Kingdom. Even though I have seen some of the results of the Swiss trials, there is no mention of the rifle in the files I have gone through.

Where Does This Leave Us?

After this, the trail runs cold. To recap, the only mentions of this mystery rifle were found in the files of semi-automatic firearm evaluation conducted by the Small Arms Committee and on two old magazines which give no sources for the information they share. Even Faletans’ own patents don’t confirm the identity of our mystery designer, despite this, it can be presumed that only the current ruling member of the family could title himself as the “Marquis” which narrows down our choice to one member, Mr. Charles de Thierry de Faletans.

Nonetheless, I do have a few theories that I have discussed with other friends interested in this mystery;

Theory One: The Unknown Royal Armouries Example

There is a rifle in the Royal Armouries that somewhat fits with the description given to us by the Small Arms Committee. It’s in a very rough shape, like the rifle caliber version described in the documents, and it’s also a recoil-operated gun that uses two levers in a toggle position to operate the action. Despite this, the rifle might be the work of one Herbert Woodgate, more notable for his part in the Griffiths & Woodgate rifle. He took out a patent in 1906 which does resemble, although not perfectly, the gun in question.

Theory Two: The Mauser Connection

Mr. Rupert Willoughby, one of Faletans’s descendants, provided me with a chapter of the book he wrote about the Faletans family in which he mentions Charles Constant dit Nicolas’s inventions. He writes that in the summer of 1896, Nicolas was at Oberndorf am Neckar having two prototype rifles made by the Mauser company. This would explain the fact that the caliber of the two rifles were directly influenced by Mauser, as a reminder, one in 7.63x25mm and the other in what the inventor described as a “short cartridge for Mauser rifles.”

At the same time, this would mean that the first semi-automatic rifles ever made by the Mauser company were not even designed by Paul Mauser himself, predating the C98 flapper locking self-loader by two years. However, as far as I am aware, there is also no mention of Faletans in the Mauser literature.

How You Can Help

As mentioned before, I know of some sources that mention the Faletans, such as the Swiss trials reports of this rifle, but I have not been able to get a hold of these reports or any other comparable documents. I would also be very interested if anyone has a picture of something that might possibly be the Faletans.

I propose to you, the reader, that together we can solve these firearm mysteries. If you have any leads or additional information that I did not mention in this article, I urge you to send me an email at sircoutin@gmail.com.

In my last article, Early Bolt-Action Rifle Conversions – Automatic Service Rifles on a Budget, I began exploring the world of bolt-action rifle conversions into self-loading ones. However, as this story continues on after the end of World War I, the SAR team gracefully allowed me to continue on our journey. To recap, semi-automatic rifles were conceptualized in the late 1800s, mainly in Austria-Hungary (Mannlicher & Karel Krnka) and Italy (Cei-Rigotti). Other European powers of the time were also interested in the concept, although military doctrine at the time hindered the progress of this new invention. Nevertheless, trials and tests were carried out. Denmark, being one of those countries, was in the process of renovating their sea fortifications. At the same time, partners Julius Rasmussen & Vilhelm Oluf Madsen presented the Danish military a self-loading rifle of their design. The commission found that it was not suitable for army adoption, however, they saw a potential in arming their newly recommissioned forts with Madsens’ rifles, making the M1896 Rekylgevær the first self-loader to be ever adopted by a military power.

Skipping a few years to World War I, the French encountered themselves in a war of attrition and stagnation, where the machine guns of the German Army prevented any kind of frontal assault by allied troops. It was then that a portable, automatic rifle to suppress German machine guns whenever troops would infiltrate the enemy trench was requested by the French army. Chauchat, Paul Ribeyrolles, and Sutter quickly responded with a conversion kit for the old, obsolete stock of Lebel rifles that was permeating French stocks, although not many parts were re-used from the old rifles, the RSC rifle was still a success. After the end of the Great War, most co-belligerent countries were war-weary and therefore not interested in spending or giving attention to new matters and technologies developed during the conflict.

The Sleeping Giant Awakens

Colonel Isaac Lewis, of Lewis Gun fame, reported to the Board of US Ordnance that the United States was behind all the European powers by at least 10 years. During the World War I, the United States certainly came to realize that Lewis’s statement was correct. The U.S. Army lacked both machine guns and rifles when it declared war on the Central Powers in 1917, which led to a push for rearmament after the end of the war. Around 1919, the Army set out requirements for this new rifle which included manufacture using Springfield 1903 machinery, it should fire .30-06, and have a maximum weight of 4.3 kilograms (9.5 pounds). Even though the Springfield Arsenal and others considered that the conversion of the 1903 was a moot point, other inventors still threw their hat in the ring for the trials which would soon follow.

Thompson and Garand, both well-known names nowadays, submitted rifles for trials in the early 1920s, other designers, however, like Franklin Knowles Young (previously discussed in part I) were still attempting to save costs by converting stocks of Springfields which would soon be obsolete. He founded his own firearms company named “Young Gun Company” and got a patent in 1921 which described a gasiInertia operating system applied to a Springfield M1903 rifle. No records of it have surfaced, however, Franklin did not give up. He made one last attempt in a patent filed in 1929, a primer-actuated system that mostly used 1903 parts and a BAR magazine. One example surfaced in 2016 when it was sold by a popular firearm auction website.

At the same time as Young’s first patent, two others were also patenting their conversion systems for the Springfield 1903, Creedy Sheppard, mentioned in the last part, and John Pedersen, of Pedersen device and rifle fame. Pedersen’s patent was an underbarrel secondary firearm, closely resembling his 1918 device that allowed the soldier to have both short-range, semi-automatic fire, or 30.06 as a normal Springfield. In 1929, the final competition of semi-automatic rifles for the army would take place, and as its victor, the famous M1 Garand. The cost of tooling and manufacturing of this new rifle would heavily weigh against adopting another rifle, as it happened with the Johnson rifle controversy. However, one last attempt by Halvor Olsen Eiane would be patented in 1938 (. It described an M1903 rifle with two gas pistons attached to both sides of the receiver.

Also of note, a mystery M1903 conversion with a slanted bolt was sold in February of 2021, It’s my opinion that said rifle might be the work of either Edmund Browning or David Marshall Williams.

From the Ashes of Empires

After the Great War, many nations, like Poland and Czechoslovakia, were carved out of the German Empire and Austria-Hungary. These new countries had to muster new armies from the remnants left behind by their old overlords, including weaponry and personnel. Lieutenant General Tadeusz Rozwadowski was a distinguished officer in the Austro-Hungarian army during the first world war and in 1918 was made commanding officer of the newly formed Polish Army. In 1920, he recommended the creation of a new self-loading rifle based on old stocks of Mannlicher straight pull rifles, mainly the model of 1890 to be completed by the major state arsenals in Poland, being praised for this endeavor by the then Minister of military affairs, General Kazimierz Sosnkowski. This new rifle was named the Wz. 1921 and nicknamed the DOG after the General Region Command “Lwów” (Dowództwo Okręgu Generalnego “Lwów”) who manufactured this prototype, operated with a very simple gas piston attached to the right of the receiver which operated the bolt directly, which could be turned off to return the rifle to manual fire. A wireframe pistol grip was added to make handling better while retaining the 5-round magazine which still used Mannlicher clips.

Czechoslovakia, also gaining independence from the Austro-Hungarian empire, had the same problem as Poland, with large quantities of outdated Mannlicher rifles which they tried to replace as soon as they became a state in 1918. Following trials of rifles submitted by Josef Netsch and Rudolf Jelen, a reserve lieutenant by the name of Josef Holub presented a Mannlicher M1888 operated by a gas piston on the right side of the receiver, with a front grip and a pistol grip attached to the magazine which retained the old five en-bloc clip design but now sported a cartridge counter mechanism. The rifle could be operated either as semi-automatic or fully automatic, hampered, of course, by the lackluster capacity of the Mannlicher clips. It was tested in 1921 but rejected in 1923 by the Minister of National Defense František Udržal.

A Hungarian inventor by the name of C. Bessemer offered a conversion system for the later Mannlicher rifle, the model 1895. However, the Czech army at that point was less interested in adopting a self-loader. Also in Hungary, a patent in 1939 by Karolý Wolff consisted of a conversion system similar to the Holub rifle, however, applied to an M1895 rather than the older M1888.

The Italian Job

Italy, being one of the few countries which recognized the importance of submachine guns as a way to give more firepower to their assault troops, decided to experiment with the predecessor of the assault rifle concept in 1921. Another article written for this same magazine has gone more in-depth about these guns, however, they are important for our subject today because Marco Morin, one of the most important authors about Italian firearms, described the Terni model 1921 automatic rifle as being a Mannlicher-Carcano conversion. It’s my opinion that this is a very far-fetched claim, however, Morin examined an example of this rifle closely and came to this conclusion, so it is difficult to determine the veracity of this claim.

Nevertheless, other rifles are worth talking about within this subject, those being the Scotti, the Castelli rifle, and Maefassi carbine.

Alfredo Scotti-Douglas, a descendant of Scottish and Italian nobility, was a firearms inventor in the interwar period. He designed machine guns, aircraft-mounted cannons, and, most importantly, self-loading rifles. His Model T.S. Carbine, dated to the tenth year of Mussolini’s fascist regime, was developed as a response to Italian requirements for a 6.5mm semi-automatic rifle that used as many Carcano parts as possible; utilizing the barrel, sights, and magazine housing of a standard Carcano bolt-action but with the caveat of having the bolt, receiver, trigger mechanism, and stock being all brand-new parts. He followed his carbine with the Scotti Model X, which also tried using as many common parts as possible with the Carcano. Outside of Italy, Alfredo would offer to three other countries his rifle system as a means of the conversion of their bolt-action rifles, those being Germany in 1934, the United Kingdom in 1938, and Switzerland at an unknown date. Recently, more information has surfaced about another conversion, as well. A Swiss archival report describing the Scotti system mentions some rifles that were worked on by Scotti, including the previously mentioned Mauser and Mannlicher, but also a previously unknown Arisaka conversion.

The Maefassi and the Castelli rifles are less documented. Carlo Maefassi was an Italian officer stationed in Addis Ababa after the Second Italo-Ethiopian war. While being posted there, he and a few colleagues designed the Maefassi self-loading rifle, which was a simple modification of the Mannlicher M1895, which now had a gas tube under the barrel. Vittorio Castelli, of Brescia, allegedly presented, in 1930, a rifle of his design to the semi-automatic trials that were happening in Italy. I was not able to locate any drawings or patents of this gun, however, I do have a decent guess on what it might’ve been. There is a patent under Breda, which Castelli worked for, that contains a possible conversion system.

Intermission & Addendums

A fellow researcher, Bas Martens, contacted me about a visit to the St. Petersburg Arsenal Museum in the 1990s where he photographed many unknown rifles, even some conversion systems! Seemingly of German origin, since they use Gewehr 98 parts. Next time, we’ll be looking into the emergency conversions developed due to the outbreak of the World War II and other posterior designs.

Click here for Part III of this series.

The first documented attempt at making a self-loading rifle comes from Austria-Hungary when Czech designer Karel Krnka attempted to convert one of his breech loading firearm designs into a self-cocking and ejecting firearm by the means of a primer-actuated system, in which the primer of the cartridge would return the firing pin back to its cocked position and then extract the spent cartridge. Later, in 1884 and 1885 respectively, both Maxim and Mannlicher made attempts at self-loading rifles of their own. Mannlicher made the first original design of what he called “Handmitrailleuse,” which is called a semi-automatic rifle today.

The last decade of the 19th century saw various inventors tinker with automatic repeating systems; Ferdinand von Mannlicher in Austria, Paul Mauser in Germany, Julius Rasmussen & Vilhelm Oluf Madsen in Denmark, Paul Darche and the Clair brothers in France.

Military theory of the time valued accuracy over any other attribute, therefore the trials of the Darche in France and the Griffiths & Woodgate in the UK were negative as they were not as accurate as the service rifles of the day, the Lebel and Lee-Metford respectively. Denmark tested the Madsen-Rasmussen self-loading rifle, finding similar problems as France and Britain had, as well as many problems with reliability and weight. Though they did see potential on the rifle as a supplement to their newly built coastal fortresses along the Copenhagen port, since they had cleaner environments and didn’t have to be carried on the march by troops. As such, 110 rifles of the 1896 pattern were bought by the navy and artillery departments, making the M1896 Rekylgevær the first self-loading rifle to be used in a military scenario.

Cost cutting is the way to adoption

While some inventors were busy with creating automatic mechanisms from the ground up, others took a different approach. If it was possible to convert the standard, already manufactured, bolt action magazine rifles of any country, it would be more attractive for adoption as new machinery and especially new rifles wouldn’t have to be manufactured.

However, modifying certain types of bolt actions was a complex, difficult task, and the resulting rifle was often not good enough by the military standards of the time. The biggest hurdle being the four-step movement of the bolt, with its vertical and linear movements. Systems had to either perform those four actions automatically, usually with a gas system plus a camming surface to guide the bolt, or they could be modified to run with only linear movement, akin to straight-pull rifles. These could be of any automatic system, including gas operated, recoil operated, primer-actuated and even chain-operated.

The first attempt, Italy

Amerigo Cei-Rigotti, at the time lieutenant of the Bersaglieri, presented his rifle on the 10th of October 1886 to the colonel of the general staff Gandolfi, head of the 19th Army Corps and to Deputee Palizzolo. It consisted of a modified Vetterli rifle, built to fire in semi-automatic using a gas-piston attached to the right side of the rifle. Cei-Rigotti also regarded that it was of such simple construction that it could be fitted to a Gras or even a Mauser rifle. The response of the attendees was very positive as they found it to be extremely cheap to modify said rifles, only costing one lira each, and it functioned very well in testing.

In 1895, he presented a more refined version of his rifle to the Prince of Naples in Florence and to the Minister of War in Parma. Both were very impressed and went ahead with ordering 2000 rifles for the Royal Italian Navy, to be used against enemy torpedo boats, just like the Danish Artillery Corps. Although, for reasons still to be uncovered, the adoption did not go through and the 2000 rifle order was never completed. Still, Cei-Rigotti persevered.

At the same time however, Count Gaspare Cesare Freddi also had been modifying the Vetterli rifle, except his system would only extract the spent casing automatically, the soldier would have to rechamber it manually. Freddi, nevertheless, persevered as he would provide another rifle for testing in 1900 which was properly self-loading, using a long recoil system. He presented it as being able to chamber any cartridge and being able to adapt it to fit in any magazine-fed rifle of the time.

Cei-Rigotti, now a captain, submitted a new rendition of his rifle again to the Italian officials on the 13th of June 1900, this time around they weren’t so impressed as the gun quickly overheated while being fired at around 900 rounds per minute. In the same year, Cei-Rigotti was in talks with the British small arms committee over having one of their service rifles, at the time the Magazine Lee-Enfield, sent to the Glisenti small arms company to convert it to the Cei-Rigotti system. It is unclear if this conversion was ever done. However, he proceeded to present one of his standard rifles to be tested anyhow. The British found it to be highly inaccurate while being fired in full automatic and they had problems with the reliability of the firearm, as they were provided with faulty ammunition.

Other countries, like Russia and Austria-Hungary, also tested his rifle. Recently an M95 Mannlicher converted with Cei-Rigotti’s system was uncovered in Russia, it is unknown how it got there but it clearly shows the interest of the Austro-Hungarians in this new system. There have been reports of a Mosin-Nagant modification as well, but no pictures have surfaced. It was even tested in the Americas, where there have been reports of the Cei-Rigotti in Argentina and Brazil.

As much attention as Cei-Rigotti got, he had a problem in his own home country. The Genovesi-Revelli rifle, a short-recoil conversion of the M91 Carcano, had recently been offered to the Italian government for a million lira. It was put to the test in the Terni state arsenal where it failed miserably. However, the Italian war minister did not reject the rifle outright. He instructed the Terni factory to fix the problems with the rifle, which they did after two years. The redesign was so different from the original Genovesi-Revelli system that the million lira price, paid for the original patent, was deemed worthless.

From Russia with Self-Loaders?

The Berdan was a breech-loading, 10mm rifle that Russia adopted in 1868. It proved to be remarkably advanced up until the advent of smokeless powder and automatic firearms were introduced in the 1880s. However, some entrepreneuring officers of the expansive empire took notice of the developments going on outside of their borders and worked on advancing this Russian rifle up to the modern age. One of these was a woodsman by the name of Rudnitsky, who presented a modified Berdan Rifle, now utilizing a short recoil system that had a tube magazine under the barrel. He began to work on this project in 1883. By 1887, he was ready to present it to the Russian artillery committee, although they were interested, the rifle did not perform well when tested.

After a couple of years and some other failed attempts at standalone self-loading rifles, a private and blacksmith by the name of Yakob Roschepei presented in 1905 a Mosin-Nagant modified to be delayed blowback. It worked well enough that he got employed at the Sestroryetsk Arms Plant where he continued to develop his concept until the Russian Civil War.

Vladimir Fedorov also presented one of his plans for converting the Mosin with an unknown operating mechanism in 1907, however, it did not function well. He would go on to improve his design and some of his rifles, now converted to fire from fully automatic, would serve in WWI and later, his model of 1919 would be used in the Winter War.

Another well-known Russian designer, Fedor Tokarev, would also start his lengthy firearm career by tinkering with the standard Russian service rifle. In 1909, he presented his first model for testing, which was outright rejected. His 1912 model fared better as 10 units were ordered for formal testing, though, they did not manage to get past the three sets of rigorous trials that the Russian commission had stipulated.

His final design in 1913 saw the best reception of them all, the commission indicated that his rifle deserved serious attention as it worked better than all other rifles submitted. However, in 1914, the war had been declared and further work would not be continued as Tokarev would be sent to the frontlines.

Also present in those same tests was Karl August Bräunings’ rifles, an engineer working for Fabrique Nationale in Belgium. They were both converted using the same action as his standalone automatic rifle from 1906, one of them having Braunings’ rotary magazine design and the other the standard of the Russian rifle.

The results were favorable enough that 10 rifles were ordered to be converted in 1913. Although with WWI beginning one year after, there was not enough time to properly test and adopt these rifles.

Another Inventor would be Pyotr Frolov, master of arms of the Tula State Factory, who in 1912 converted two Mosins to fire the Nagant M1895 cartridge in semi-automatic. Frolov also tried unsuccessfully to adapt his self-loading system to work with the Mosin-Nagant’s original cartridge. No reports have surfaced about any testing carried with this conversion system, so it is unknown why it wasn’t developed any further.

In 1916, having captured some Mannlicher rifles from Austria-Hungary, one Russian captain by the name of Yasnikov, added a gas-piston to one of those rifles and offered it for testing. The Russians found that with the added weight of the gas piston, the rifle became awkward and heavy and the rifle, now fully automatic, was seen as another negative.

The British Empire looks for a suitable self-loading rifle

The Small Arms Committee was formed in 1900 as a way for Britain to experiment and determine their own standing in the modern military world of the time. That included testing the growing numbers of semi-automatic systems developed across Europe. However, Britain had already tested a design dated to 1892 by Captain Herbert Woodgate and financed by William Griffiths. Tests of the Griffiths-Woodgate rifle would be favorable, though it was described as being too complex and too fragile in its current state. Griffiths’s financial support quickly dropped after realizing the rifle would go nowhere. Woodgate, the inventor, would later patent a conversion system for any magazine repeating rifle in 1895, however with no financial support, the project seems to have gone nowhere.

One of the other rifles tested by the SAC was the “De Faletans” rifles, named after its inventor’s title the Marquis de Faletans. The two rifles would be presented for testing in 1902, with the Marquis remarking that his proposed system of a semi-automatic system could be readily adapted onto the standard British service rifle, the MLE.

Franz Kretz and Edmund Tatarek, colleagues working for FÉG, both presented rifles for testing in March of 1914. Both rifles were gas operated conversions, utilizing a gas-trap system similar to the later General Liu rifle. Kretz’s submission utilized a complex chain mechanism to cycle the bolt, which when examined was found to be bulky, weak, excessively heavy, badly balanced, liable to break down, difficult to strip, and even more difficult to re-assemble. Tatarek’s rifle was of simpler construction, being compared to a combination of the Farquhar-Hill and Bang systems, however it was seen as never being able to be practical for field service.

During the Great War, Joseph Huot provided a machine gun that he built from a Ross Mk.III. It fared very well in tests and was sent abroad to the U.K. for trials against the Lewis gun, the Farquhar-Hill light machine gun, and the Hotchkiss Portative where it was formally rejected by the British Army.

Austria-Hungary stumbles into the scene

Austria’s standard service arm was the M1895 Mannlicher rifle, a straight pull bolt-action invented by Ferdinand von Mannlicher. As soon as 1900, patents would be taken out by one Franz Tobisch for a recoil-operated, gas delayed machine gun which utilized the bolt of the Mannlicher rifle as a savings cost method. It would also be applicable to Mauser-type bolt-actions. Although, until the later Franz Kretz conversion, as far as the author is aware, none of these conversions were ever produced for testing.

The next designs would only emerge in 1911, as Austria-Hungary would be having a competition for semi-automatic rifles. Siegmund Martineks conversion consisted of a gas-system attached to a Mannlicher M1895 fed by an offset magazine using Mannlicher’s clips. It was of relatively simple construction as the straight-pull bolt system of the Austrian rifle would lend itself well to semi-automatic actions. The other inventor, Michal Karl, had patented a semi-automatic rifle of his own design in 1910. In 1912, he built a hybrid gas-operated recoil system attached onto another service rifle which used gas pressure to lift a flap on top of the barrel to cycle the weapon. Franz Kretz, previously mentioned, would in 1913 also provide an M1895 converted to use the same type of system that he used on the Lee-Enfield rifle.

Finally, on the 28th of July 1914, Austria would declare war on Serbia which ignited WWI. With that came a realization that the stockpiles of machine guns weren’t enough to support such a modern conflict. Designers like Kretz and Ignaz Shrnitsitsa would provide the Austrian Army with machine guns based on older Mannlicher rifles which were outdated at that point, mainly the Mannlicher M1888.

The United States joins the semi-automatic craze

At the turn of the 20th century, the commanding officer of Springfield Armory contacted the Chief of Ordnance to suggest that the United States should buy and test examples of semi-automatic rifles being developed in Europe at the time. This attracted the attention of many civilian inventors who thought they could develop a capable semi-auto rifle for their country.

One of them was W.D. Condit who submitted a patent in 1905 for a Gas-Operated M1903 Springfield conversion. His rifle would be tested in the same year and feedback was promptly given, however for some reason Condit did not re-submit any modification of his system in the following years.

The American next attempt would be by Franklin K. Young who dabbled with a more unique form of semi-automatic mechanism. He would patent a Springfield 1903 conversion in 1902 that used a primer-actuated system to cycle the firearm, although, only in 1910 was the rifle actually tested by the Ordnance department. The rifle was subsequently modified to remove 23 parts of the original design and it was noted that his system used three fewer springs than the standard 1903 rifle. Young continued developing his rifle and in 1913 his final prototype was tested by Springfield Armory.

The third conversion would be the Hammond & Darlington, a gas operated, modified M1903 Springfield. The Ordnance Department tested their rifle in 1909 and found many negative points. To add to that, it was seen as too expensive of a conversion, costing about $35 per rifle.

Despite the previous failed attempts, the Rock Island Arsenal presented a rifle by a foreman named Woodbury which modified the standard M1903 with a gas piston attached to the side of it. The rifle was tested in 1913 and it failed after firing only two rounds. Then came the Murphy-Manning, built in Springfield as a competitor to the Woodbury rifle, tested in 1915 – although I have not been able to locate any information about its performance. Later in 1916, Rock Island would again attempt to convert the U.S. magazine rifle and now Springfield Arsenal would join in the trials. Both guns were gas operated and would be tested in Springfield. John Moses Browning remarked to Julian Hatcher after he was shown the two conversions that they reminded him of two mouse traps rather than semi-automatic rifles.

In 1917 and 1918, two more rifles would be made. Joseph C. White, working for the White-Greenman Arms Company, patented his means of converting the standard American service arm of WWI in 1917. Tested in the same year, the results were promising for his semi-automatic rifle. Pedersen’s device for the Mk.I Springfield rifle, the M1917 Enfield and even the Russian Mosin-Nagant is the most well-known conversion of the period, as it was planned on being used in the 1919 spring offensive that never came to be. The standard bolt mechanism of the Springfield M1903 would be replaced with a straight-blowback system, in .30 Pedersen, when the command to attack was given.

Honorable Mentions & Addendums

Other countries, while interested in developments of the conversion ideas, were more interested in adopting a newly developed semi-automatic rifle. France, for example, started their trials in 1894 and finished them in the 1910s with the limited adoption of the Meunier rifle. Not many were produced and when push came to shove in the Great War, Gladiator provided a partial conversion of the Lebel rifle with the RSC 1917 rifle and Delaunay-Belleville manufactured a Berthier conversion using a gas impingement system.

Germany, hoping that Paul Mauser would provide them with a suitable semi-automatic military rifle, did not incentivize other weapon factories to submit their own rifle systems. They were however, interested in testing developmental self-loading rifles of other European countries, those including Gewehr 98 conversions like the Swedish Sjögren around the 1910s and the Austrian Franz Kretz rifle in 1913.

Neutral countries like Sweden and Switzerland also developed their own self-loading rifles. The Friberg-Kjellman rifle and the Sjögren were top contenders in European automatic rifle development. Sjögren, in 1909, modified an M/1894 Swedish Mauser carbine to work with his inertial system. Switzerland had the Stamm-Saurer rifles, the Mondrágon being produced at SIG and the Rychiger rifle which was a short-recoil M1911 Schmidt-Rubin conversion. The Rychiger, even being tested abroad in the United States, being further modified by Major Elder.

Click here for the second story in this series.