The 35th annual International Trade Fair for Hunting and Sporting Arms, Outdoor Articles and Accessories, was held in Nürnberg, Germany, from March 14 – 17, 2008. Formerly the “Internationale Waffen Ausstellung” (International Weapon Exhibition) the show is frequently referred to as “IWA,” despite the change in name. As one of the largest European tradeshows dedicated to shooting, hunting, and outdoor activities, nearly 600,000 square feet of exhibition space was filled by 1,046 exhibitors from 51 countries, including over 100 exhibitors from the United States. Approximately 30,000 individuals from over 100 countries attended the show. Of note were several new product releases from well known and lesser known manufacturers.

Heckler and Koch, JS

Heckler and Koch Jagn und Sportwaffen (HK JS) displayed a new civilian version of the HK416 rifle, dubbed the MR223 rifle. While similar in exterior appearances to the HK416 rifle, subtle engineering differences were observed. The changes were explained as necessary in order to comply with European and Canadian firearm regulations.

The four significant differences between the MR223 and HK416 were the rear take down pin on the MR223 lower receiver was relocated 6mm to the rear, preventing the installation of a 416 upper receiver on an MR223 lower receiver. In addition, the MR223 chamber has a protrusion, preventing the installation of a standard AR-15/M16 bolt carrier into the MR223 receiver. In the event that an AR-15/M16 bolt carrier was installed in an MR223, the bolt would not fully seat within the chamber, and the rifle would not function. The MR223 bolt carrier has a corresponding notch to match the chamber protrusion, allowing the rifle to function properly with use of an MR223 bolt carrier. Finally, the firearm was not equipped with a flash suppressor, although the muzzle was threaded to allow the installation of a flash suppressor if desired.

As the distributor responsible for distributing Heckler and Koch firearms throughout Europe and Canada, the products on display by HK JS are not readily available for sale within the United States, but offer a glimpse into the company’s marketing strategy. Presumably, any civilian legal HK416 rifle sold within the United States would be made within the US, and would not be neutered in the same manner as the European version.

Sport Systeme Dittrich

Sport Systeme Dittrich (www.ssd-weapon.com) displayed six classic semiautomatic versions of German firearms. Manufactured to the same original manufacturing dimensions and specifications as the originals, Sport Systeme Dittrich currently manufactures semiautomatic versions of the FG42 machine gun, MP3008 and MP38 submachine guns and the STG43 and MP44 assault rifles. Already on sale within Europe, three models have reportedly been submitted to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) Firearms Technology Branch for examination, review, and import approval.

The BD42 (the semiautomatic version of the FG42) utilizes gas operated, closed bolt operation, and retails for approximately 6,000 Euros (approx. $9,400 as of June, 08). The BD44 (the semiautomatic version of the MP44) is also gas operated, fires from the closed bolt, and retails for approximately 2,200 Euros (approx. $3,400). Reportedly, the hardware between the semiautomatic and fully automatic versions are interchangeable, with the exception of the bolt. The semiautomatic receivers will not accept a fully automatic bolt, thereby precluding an easy conversion of the semiautomatic firearm from semiautomatic to full automatic fire. Given the current exchange rate between the Dollar and the Euro, the semiautomatic versions offered are quite costly, yet cost significantly less than the transferable fully automatic versions.

The BD38 (the semiautomatic version of the MP38) and the BD 3008 (the semiautomatic version of the MP 3008) both fire from the open bolt, and presumably could not be imported for commercial sale within the United States.

Glock

Glock (www.Glock.com) revealed two new grip patterns for the Glock pistol, and sought consumer input on a preferred pattern. Currently dubbed the “Rough Textured Frame,” both patterns seemed to offer increased grip and control via the use of an aggressive grip pattern when compared to the current production grip pattern. Both grip patterns functioned well, without affecting the overall function and reliability of the firearm.

Also of note, Glock has reportedly manufactured a disposable wet suppressor made entirely of plastic. According to a Glock representative, the suppressor is intended for use with one or two magazines of ammunition before losing effectiveness. Upon completion of use, the suppressor is thrown away. Admittedly, a disposable plastic suppressor would challenge the current US consumer suppressor market. Luckily, the disposable suppressor is reportedly still in the developmental stage, and not for sale. Although on site at the show, the plastic suppressor was not on display and requests to view the available model were politely refused.

Madbull Airsoft and Red Wolf Airsoft

Red Wolf Airsoft (website at: www.redwolfairsoft.com) in conjunction with Madbull Airsoft (website at: www.madbullairsoft.com) has reportedly received an exclusive license to manufacture an airsoft version of the Transformational Defense Industries (TDI) Kriss Super V submachine gun. Previous communications with TDI have reported the planned sale of a semiautomatic Kriss Super V rifle, however for those enthusiasts that desire a fully automatic submachine gun, this may be the only way to possess a realistic look-alike, without resorting to the purchase of a post-86 dealer sample machine gun. The airsoft version is still in the developmental stage, with only a wax model available on display at the show. Full production is expected by press time.

German Sport Guns

The recent release of the German Sport Guns GSG-5, .22 caliber HK MP5 look-alike is well known throughout the firearms industry. However, German Sport Guns announced the production of a .22 caliber AK47 look-alike, endorsed personally by General Mikhail Kalashnikov. As the inventor of the AK47, this is reportedly the first AK47 rifle to be personally endorsed by Kalashnikov. No price for the planned .22 caliber AK was discussed.

Also of note was the large inventory of realistic airsoft guns on display by German Sport Guns. A quick comparison between an airsoft MP5 to the GSG-5 .22 caliber rifle demonstrated well manufactured products, with an attention to detail. Given that the GSG-5 rifle is a faithful copy of the original Heckler and Koch MP5, the differences between the .22 caliber firearm and the airsoft version were very slight, and barely noticeable. Knowing the simplistic design and diminutive size of a .22 caliber rifle, one would expect additional models to be released in short order. Examination of the airsoft versions of the British L85 bullpup, French FAMAS F1, and SIG 550 series were promising, and .22 caliber versions of these rifles would likely sell very well within the commercial US market.

Smith and Wesson/Powertech

Smith and Wesson, together with Powertech (www.swflashlights.com) displayed tool room prototypes of a new weapon illuminator system. Powered by two CR123 batteries, the Mk-300 illuminator offers a 200 lumen CREE LED main light, a 10mW green laser/target designator, and two IR capable LED navigation lights. Designed to give the operator total control, the unit offers two switches: a four position rotary switch to power the main light and laser, and a second switch to control the navigation LEDs. The main switch allows the operator to choose from light only, laser only, light and laser, or power off. A secondary three position switch allows the operator to choose between powering one LED or both. In this manner, the operator could choose between utilizing an IR LED in conjunction with night vision equipment, while allowing the other LED to provide visible light. Finally, the unit allows the operator additional control via a switch integrated into the grip, allowing momentary on/off or constant light.

The pre-production model allowed the unit to be mounted to any mil-spec M1903 Picatinny rail system. The production model will reportedly also allow the use of a LaRue Tactical LT 107 rail mount. Retail price will be approximately $450, and although final production had not been initiated as of the show, the units are expected to be in full production by the time of publication.

IWA 2008 was a great success, and offered a glimpse into the European firearms markets. The 2009 show is scheduled for March 13-16, 2009, in Nürnberg, Germany. Additional information regarding the show can be found at www.iwa.info.

Jason. Wong is a Washington licensed attorney. He regularly provides legal counsel to manufacturers, importers, and exporters in the firearms and defense industries via his law firm, The Firearms Law Group. You can email Jason at jmwong@FirearmsLawGroup.com.

Most owners and operators of both the full auto and semiautomatic series of the .30 caliber Browning machine gun know of the difficulties in removing and reinstalling the driving spring and driving spring guide rod in the bolt. What most don’t realize is the ever present danger that these two parts represent.

When stripping the Browning and removing the bolt, the driving spring is compressed and locked in the bolt by the driving spring guide rod. The guide rod, under pressure, gets locked into the bolt by two little studs attached to the end of the guide rod that get turned just a quarter turn to lock the guide rod into two small recesses inside the bolt. These studs have been known to fail and when that happens the guide rod becomes a missile that can do great bodily harm to you or to someone nearby. The same result can happen if the guide rod has not been fully turned that quarter turn and seated correctly and the studs slip out of their recesses. The velocity is enough that if hit squarely in the chest, a cracked sternum and heart failure can occur, and, if hit in the eye area, besides blindness, is enough to actually enter the brain causing severe injury, or death. It is, in effect, like a loaded gun, and the rear of the bolt with the guide rod under compression by the driving spring should always be pointed in a safe direction, whether on the work bench or at the range.

The guide rod and driving spring should always be removed when the bolt is out of the gun, making the bolt “safe,” so as to not have to worry about where its rear is pointing, thus allowing one to concentrate better on the job at hand such as setting headspace, checking sear spring tension, firing pin protrusion, cocking lever action or cleaning. Additionally, if the bolt is stored out of the gun (always a good security precaution), the spring should not be kept compressed inside the bolt.

There are many hazards in removing and installing the guide rod under tension. Besides the danger of a parts failure of the guide rod studs breaking, or the guide rod is improperly seated, the screwdriver, coin or cartridge rim you are using to push the guide rod in or out under pressure can slip causing the guide rod to fly backwards at a great velocity. Additionally, trying to compress the long driving spring into its “well” in the rear of the bolt can cause the spring to kink, affecting operation. These problems have been endemic to the operators of Brownings since its inception: until now.

Often, the simple solution escapes everyone and it took 90 years for someone to recognize the problem and provide an easy and safe answer to it.

Dolf Goldsmith, world renowned authority on Brownings, has often warned of the dangers that the guide rod and driving spring represent. To that end, has devised a simple disassembly/reassembly tool consisting of just two parts that is easy to use to remove and replace the guide rod and driving spring safely. In this he was assisted by his friend, Gordon Harris.

This disassembly/reassembly can be accomplished with the internal bolt parts in place or removed. The two parts consist of a securing plate with two bolt guide studs and a spring/guide tube and a driving tool with a special cup that is affixed to the end of the guide rod.

Using the Tool

Instructions for using the Browning Machine Gun Bolt Driving Spring and Driving Spring Guide Rod disassembly/assembly tool are simple.

• 1) After removing the bolt from the gun, to disassemble the driving spring and the guide rod from the bolt, remove the extractor and place the bolt by its cocking handle hole and its extractor hole over the two pins of the bolt securing plate with the rod aligning with the tube.
• 2) Insert the driving tool through the tube and against the end of the guide rod, twist it to ensure the blade is in the slot at the end of the rod and give it a quarter turn in a counterclockwise direction until it can be felt that it is loose. Ease the guide rod and spring out through the tube under spring pressure.
• 3) To assemble, proceed as in 1) above, and insert the spring and the guide rod in the tube of the securing plate and into the bolt.
• 4) Place the driving tool against the slot in the end of the guide rod, and make sure it locks into place. Then, by pressing against the handle, compress the spring inside the tube. Push it all the way in until it stops, then give the driving tool handle a quarter turn in a clockwise direction to lock the small studs on the guide rod into their recesses in the hole at the rear of the bolt. Make sure by feel that the guide rod is turned all the way and that the studs are inside their recesses, and that the guide rod stays in place inside the bolt. While doing this, keep a firm grip on the driving tool handle so that the spring and guide rod cannot “escape.” The spring and its guide rod are now assembled into the bolt, which can now be lifted off of the securing plate and the extractor replaced.

Caution

Remember, once the spring and the guide rod are locked inside the bolt, NEVER look at the bolt from the rear and always keep the rear of the bolt pointed in a safe direction. The assembled unit must be handled with the same care as one would give a loaded handgun with a hair trigger. It is possible for the driving spring rod to not be fully engaged and slip, also, the small pins holding the guide rod in the bolt have been known to fail. People have been injured and even blinded and caution is of paramount importance.

This disassembly/assembly tool should be in every Browning owner’s tool kit. The tool can be used with the bolt assembled or stripped. Not only does it ease the removal and insertion of the driving spring and guide rod, it has the added benefit of introducing a much needed safety factor for the process.

The Browning machine gun bolt driving spring and driving spring guide rod disassembly/assembly tool can be ordered from Dolf Goldsmith, Long Mountain Outfitters, LLC or ask your local Class III dealer. The cost is just $69.95 with shipping and handling included.

  Source:

Dolf Goldsmith
P.O. Box 791870
San Antonio, TX 78279

Long Mountain Outfitters, LLC
631 N. Stephanie St., #560
Henderson, NV 89014
Phone: (702) 564-0948
Fax: (702) 558-1728

If you read The Legal Side by our Firearms Attorney in this issue, it should now be very apparent to everyone just how important the NFATCA is to every NFA owner in the country. We played a major role in that decision. The NFATCA is working far beyond what anyone expected. We continue to work for the good of all of the community and hope that every NFA owner realizes that this one single effort has done more for our community as a unified organization than any other effort in the history of NFA ownership. And, we are currently on top of virtually every issue that faces the NFA community.

Most of you don’t know that for over a year now the NFATCA has been working closely with ATF on a matter that affects more than 1,700 transferable machine guns that are in many of your hands today. Unfortunately, there was some question as to whether the upper or the lower on the FNC rifle was the recognized receiver of this gun. To add to the confusion, on some guns, you could find the serial number of the gun on both places. So the question came up many times from within the Bureau, as well as within the industry, as to what is the recognized receiver on an FNC rifle: the upper or the lower?

Conversion of the FNC rifle with a registered FNC sear has been going on, with ATF approval, for over twenty years. In the early days of this conversion there was no defined written process as to how to receive approval for converting a gun using a registered FNC sear. In many cases an ATF representative would visit the manufacturer and look at the process and would say, “The manufacturer’s process was fine.” End of story. Because there was no formal approval process these guns were readily converted, sold and transferred, over and over again. Because the sears were properly registered and the guns were recognized in section “h.” (additional information) as the host gun, no one ever questioned the validity of the conversion. Literally hundreds of the FNC guns were converted and recognized as fully transferable machine guns. Then, all of a sudden, someone in the Class III community posed the question, “What really is the receiver on an FNC; the upper, or the lower?” Remember the old axiom to be careful what you ask for. In this case, that was surely true. What occurred next cost both the Bureau and the NFATCA countless hours of research and negotiation to reach a final and complete understanding of this single question.

Take into consideration that if the lower is officially recognized as the receiver, and the receiver was in fact modified to accept an FN sear, then you would have created a Post 86 machine gun because even though you are using a registered sear, you would have been modifying the receiver, in effect, making a “new” machine gun. Stop and think about that for a moment. It is truly scary to think that over 1,700 FNC converted machine guns would all of a sudden be re-classified as Post 86 machine guns, simply because the noted receiver of these guns had been modified to accept the sear. This was a huge problem and our greatest fear. What was once a $7,500 investment would now be, for the most part, worthless to the average owner of these converted machine guns. Once the NFATCA learned that this was a possibility we feverishly began working with the Firearms Technology Branch, ATF counsel, and executives within the ATF to defend a position for the entire community. Our position was that the true receiver in the FNC family of rifles was the upper, not the lower portion of this weapon, and modification of the trigger assembly for the use of a sear was in fact modifying gun parts and not the receiver. Nearly 70% of the FNCs imported into the US by HOWCO or Gun South saw a serial number on the upper only. In most cases the serial number did not appear on the lower. This is a great point to ponder when you consider the similarity on the conversions of the HK family of rifles: installing a sear in the trigger pack or gun part.

After much and lengthy discussion and work within the Bureau, the NFATCA successfully negotiated a position with ATF to protect the FNC and any future conversions of this weapon’s platform. Our efforts, and most importantly our relationship with ATF, are paying off for everyone. The ATF ruling, 2008-1, was a major win for the entire community and a key accomplishment, especially for the relationship that both the BATFE and the NFATCA have worked so hard to bring together. This single effort exemplifies what can happen when we all work as a team.

The NFATCA would especially like to extend our thanks to Acting Director Sullivan and his entire team in working so closely with us on this one single issue.

I would encourage everyone to read the ruling in The Legal Side column in this issue. It is critical for all of us to understand that the NFATCA is successful and is working to not only improve the relationship with our governing body, the BATFE, but to improve the communications, the understandings, and the many rulings that affect all of us. Yes, things can change, and our relationship with the Bureau allows us the opportunity to make things work.

Still wondering why you should join the NFATCA? This is a perfect example of the things we can accomplish. Come and join the spirit of a relationship that is working for all of our benefits. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: United We Stand, Divided We Fall. In the face of an uncertain political climate, join and support the only organization that is working on your behalf, the NFATCA. Visit us at www.NFATCA.org.

“The Gun That Made the Twenties Roar”

Many stories involving the Thompson have been written over the years. The first near complete historical publication was The Gun That Made The Twenties Roar by William J. Helmer, first published in 1969. Prior to this publication, most stories on the Thompson were only a rehash of old news and magazine articles – some accurate, some not. Mr. Helmer’s attention to detail from the beginnings of General Thompson’s dream in the early 1900s until the end of World War II is exceptional. However, instead of continuing his scholarly efforts, he chose to end the story with a brief summation about what happened after Maguire Industries, Inc. sold off the Thompson submachine gun.

In a few short paragraphs, Mr. Helmer told of a corporate re-organization where the once famous Auto-Ordnance Corporation was renamed as a division of Maguire Industries, Inc. and how later, the Thompson was transferred from Maguire Industries to Kilgore Manufacturing Company, then to Frederic A. Willis and finally to Numrich Arms Comapny.

According to Mr. Helmer’s footnotes, much of this information was provided by George Numrich, the last party in this series of transactions. Of course, it was all new information at the time so everyone was pleased just to learn how the Thompson actually made the move from Maguire to Numrich.

Until now, this is all that has been recorded about the Thompson during the last years at Maguire Industries. In 1945, the Thompson submachine gun at Maguire Industries was packed away in crates and lay dormant in a warehouse taking up space until an unexpected offer to purchase the Thompson in 1949 came from the Kilgore Manufacturing Company of Westerville, Ohio. Kilgore reportedly had no interest in the Thompson, but apparently thought a market existed for the Thompson in Egypt. Kilgore reportedly paid Maguire $385,000. The Kilgore deal with the Egyptians never materialized and Kilgore later sold off the Thompson without ever opening the crates.

Maguire Industries

Why Maguire Industries sold the Thompson can be resolved in one word: money. Russell Maguire was a very capable businessman who saw a great opportunity with the nearly defunct and broke Auto-Ordnance Corporation; a business entity that had been going nowhere for many years. With Maguire’s money, talent and hand picked management team, he turned this soon to be liquidated business into a great and profitable manufacturing empire. Maguire also had the foresight to look past the end of World War II and realize the Tommy Gun business was going to end. After all, under his watch, the Auto-Ordnance Corporation was responsible for the manufacture of over 1,750,000 Thompsons – all the world would need for many years to come. Actual production of the Thompson ended in February 1944. Maguire wisely packed away the Tommy Gun at the end of the war and diversified his business enterprise for the years ahead.

Unfortunately, the years after World War II were not very kind to Maguire Industries. Part of the reason may have been the loss of his Executive VP and Chief Operating Officer, Eugene Powers, who left Maguire Industries in June 1945. Powers had been with Maguire since the beginning of the Thompson venture; he was actively involved in the negotiations to purchase the Auto-Ordnance Corporation and the creation of the Thompson Automatic Arms Company. By 1949, Maguire Industries was having serious monetary losses. Powers came back to Maguire Industries in 1950, shortly after the sale of the Thompson, and returned the corporation to profitability.

Frederic A. Willis

The president of Kilgore in 1949 was Henry Watkins. In a short letter to Mr. Helmer in 1964, Mr. Watkins disclosed how Kilgore Manufacturing was introduced to the deal that led to the purchase of the Thompson from Maguire Industries by a man named Frederic Willis, a former Vice-President of the Auto-Ordnance Corporation. Specific details of the actual deal brokered by Willis involving the sale of the Thompson between Maguire Industries and Kilgore Manufacturing are unknown.

The revelation that Frederic Willis actually brought the Thompson deal to Kilgore is very revealing. Willis was hired as a Vice-President of the Thompson Automatic Arms Corporation (TAAC) and its subsidiary, the Auto-Ordnance Corporation (AOC), by Russell Maguire in June 1940. Willis was a former Army officer and a veteran of the Mexican border service and the First World War. His first assignment was the arms expansion program at TAAC/AOC. Willis was quoted in a 1940 New York Times article as saying, “With current methods of warfare, the submachine gun is to modern military units what the blitzkrieg is to modern military tactics. It steps up tremendously the firepower of the individual soldier or unit.”

It appears Russell Maguire sought out one or more of his former executives in an attempt to sell the Thompson business. The bond between Maguire and Willis must have been very strong. During his tenure with Maguire Industries, Willis authored a book on the Thompson submachine gun, privately printed at least one copy, and presented it to Russell Maguire.

With Kilgore looking to expand its business line and Willis looking for a buyer of a product no longer needed by Maguire Industries, a deal was struck. Eugene Powers was not involved in the 1949 deal between Maguire and Kilgore, but he related to Mr. Helmer in a letter dated May 1, 1964, that, “The drawings, blueprints, dies and other assets strictly related to the submachine gun were sold, I believe, to Kilgore.”

George Numrich reported to Mr. Helmer that he had heard the deal between Maguire Industries and Kilgore “was transacted from start to finish in less than 48 hours.” Obviously, this could have only happened if Russell Maguire was directly involved in the sale.

The Kilgore Manufacturing Company

The Kilgore Manufacturing Company was started in 1912 by Joseph D. Kilgore in Homestead, Pennsylvania to manufacture small cast iron cap pistols and mechanical toys. In 1918, Kilgore moved its operation to Westerville, Ohio. At one time, Kilgore was the largest toy cap pistol maker in the United States. Kilgore expanded its product line in 1929 with the establishment of the International Flare-Signal Division in Tippecanoe City, Ohio. During World War II, Kilgore became very active in the manufacturing of munitions and pyrotechnic devices. The Westerville plant had a north and south side that was separated by a main highway. The north plant was engaged in the manufacture of toy guns and caps. The south plant was used to manufacture items for government sales, mainly pyrotechnic devices. Interviews of several former Kilgore employees disclosed that after World War II, Kilgore was searching for ways to supplement the toy line and expand its business operation.

The 1964 letter by Kilgore President Henry Watkins also told how Kilgore Manufacturing Company purchased “the tools for the Thompson submachine gun” from Maguire Industries. Watkins stated Kilgore made the purchase intending to sell the tools to manufacture the Thompson to a foreign country. Watkins did not reveal the foreign country or the reason the deal did not occur, but did state Kilgore “never actually manufactured any (new) submachine guns.” However, Kilgore did acquire in the sale, or assembled from parts after the sale, some complete Thompsons. Watkins told how Kilgore had “a license issued by a Federal agency” and actually sold “about a half dozen guns” before getting out of the machine gun business.

According to George Numrich, who later purchased the Thompson from Frederic Wallis, Kilgore reportedly paid Maguire Industries $385,000 for all rights and interest to the Thompson submachine gun. As this story unfolds, it will become quite apparent that Willis would have been a very informed party regarding each sale of the Thompson since it left Maguire Industries.

The Thompson at Kilgore Manufacturing was described by retired Kilgore VP Robert Long as a “hush hush venture” that was run out of the front office. According to Long, the rank and file employees at Kilgore knew nothing or very little about this project. Mr. Long had very little contact with the “machine gun outfit” at Kilgore; however, he does recall seeing a machine gun at the plant one day that had a drum attached underneath it in a building on the south side of the plant. The building was broken up into various rooms and the machine gun stuff was located in one of the rooms. Mr. Long remembered the building was not in use before the Thompson parts were moved into it; he also recalled the building was last used to make chemical igniters for flamethrowers.

Was Kilgore only purchasing the tools to manufacture the Thompson with the plan to sell these assets off to a foreign government? The search for answers involved many interviews with every former and retired Kilgore employee that could be located. Unfortunately, due to the passage of time, many have passed away. However, one employee knew exactly what the author was taking about when the interview topic referenced the Thompson. Interestingly, this employee, Bob Tillman, was never at the Kilgore plant in Westerville, but was hired by Kilgore after the Kilgore operation left Westerville, Ohio in 1961 and moved to Tennessee. While searching for something in an old file cabinet that had been moved down to Tennessee from the Westerville plant, Bob noticed an unusual sales brochure with a picture of a gun and the Kilgore logo. It was definitely not a cap gun, and not something Bob had ever seen associated with Kilgore. This brochure was rescued and set aside; shortly thereafter, the file cabinet and all remaining contents were discarded. The brochure tells a story by itself and also reveals another business venture contemplated by Kilgore management officials who purchased the Thompson. The brochure’s striking resemblance to older Thompson catalogs is uncanny. Without doubt, someone at Kilgore used an original Auto-Ordnance catalog as a guide for the design of the Kilgore Thompson sales brochure.

In 30 short years the Thompson motto had gone from General Thompson’s, “On the Side of Law and Order” to Kilgore’s, “Fire Power Is Peace Power” – an uncanny similarity in message. Kilgore apparently liked the use of slogans or motto’s for the products it produced. The motto for the well known Kilgore safety flare was, “Light your way for safety.”

Page 4 of the brochure referenced how Kilgore is a manufacturer of the Thompson submachine gun. It also advertises that spare parts “are available for immediate delivery” for all models of the Thompson. This is the only Kilgore brochure on the Thompson that has been located to date – and the only Thompson brochure found in the aforementioned file cabinet.

The H.P. White Laboratory

Careful reading of Mr. Helmer’s treatise on the Thompson did reveal a small clue about the happenings at Kilgore involving the Thompson. Hidden away in the footnote section is reference to an event that indicates the officials at Kilgore did not just purchase the Thompson to store or sell parts.

It appears someone at Kilgore opened some of the crated parts and found at least two Model 1923 Autorifles that were submitted to H.P. White Laboratory, Bel Air, Maryland, for testing purposes in 1949. Inquires at H.P. White revealed that Kilgore was a customer of H.P. White Laboratory in 1949. Not only did Kilgore submit the Model 1923 rifles for testing, Kilgore also hired H.P. White to design a firearms range. Additional reports were made by H.P. White for Kilgore on a “comparative evaluation of a 7.92×57 prototype military rifle to the 7.62 Russian Tokarev rifle” along with reports on the Garand rifle, the Johnson rifle, and the MP43. The reports were dated July 13, August 5, August 10, and August 30 – all in 1949. The reports were addressed to: Dan Robinson, Ordnance Engineer, Kilgore Manufacturing Company, Westerville, Ohio

Interestingly, no report was located involving the Thompson Autorifles dated June 18, 1949. All efforts to obtain copies or review the remaining reports at H.P. White have been unsuccessful.

The Thompson at Kilgore

Numerous interviews of former Kilgore employees resulted in very little information concerning the Thompson at Kilgore. However, this all changed with the interview of former Kilgore employee John Ruyan. John started working for Kilgore in 1947 or 1948 as a chemist. He was later placed in charge of the south side of the Kilgore plant in Westerville. John recalled that Kilgore bought out a corporation that owned the Thompson and had the parts shipped to the Westerville plant. He does not know the exact reasoning behind why Kilgore decided to purchase the Thompson, but he believes the company was trying to expand its product line and thought the Thompson would fit right in with the other ordnance work it was doing. At the time, Kilgore made explosives and flares for the US Army – but John never did see the connection between the explosives, flares and machine guns.

John recounted the following story about the Thompson at Kilgore: “The crates containing the Thompson parts were locked in a building on the south side of the Kilgore plant. The north side of the plant, separated by East Broadway in Westerville, manufactured the cap guns, caps, toys and later, plastic items. The south side of the plant manufactured flares and munitions and was where the government business was conducted. The building that stored the Thompson parts had bars on the windows and doors installed before the Thompson parts arrived, and only one person, the project manager, had the key. While at Westerville, Kilgore Manufacturing was a very secure plant with fences and guards. The officials at Kilgore would not have taken a risk of losing any guns or parts. I was only in the building that contained the Thompson parts two or three times. I do not recall the exact year or years all of this occurred, but I believe the 1949 to 1951 time frame would be about right. I was in the building one time to take measurements to build a manufacturing or production line for the manufacture of flamethrower igniters. I am pretty sure the Thompson Project Manager was a man named Dan Robinson. Dan would have been in his 40s or 50s during that time. Whenever anyone at the plant needed access to that building, they had to go get Dan and he would accompany them to the building, open the door and stay with them until they left. I always assumed the government was somehow involved with this project the way the Project Manager guarded the parts. The crates were about 4 or 5 foot long, about 1 foot wide and 2 foot deep. The crates were full of gun parts and the parts were labeled. I would guess the number of crates I saw containing Thompson parts was somewhere around twenty, maybe less. The crates were stacked around the floor beside tables in what appeared to be the set-up for a production line to assemble the guns. I do remember a crate or two actually on the tables but most crates were on the floor beside the tables. I am fairly certain no individual parts were actually on the tables when I was in the building. I have set up many production lines over the years and it was obvious to me the intent of the layout I saw was to assemble guns. The set-up and parts I observed was in this building for approximately a year, maybe less, before being moved to make space for other government projects. I do not know what happened to the crates of Thompson parts.”

When asked to tell what story he remembers most vividly about the Thompson at Kilgore, John replied, the Thompson parts “grew dust” – he does not know of any activity involving the Thompson parts at Kilgore. The building that housed the Thompson parts is still standing, as are many of the buildings from the old Kilgore Manufacturing plant. In the ensuing years, the building has been partitioned inside for several different small business endeavors. Two new additions have been added on to the building over the years – but the original building is still intact.

John was in the US Army during WWII and handled a Thompson with a side cocking knob. John thought the parts he saw were for a Thompson with a side cocking knob. He never saw a completed or assembled Thompson at the Kilgore plant.

All efforts to date to locate Dan Robinson or his family have been unsuccessful. Only a few of the former or retired Kilgore employees interviewed actually remember Robinson by name. Retired Vice-President Long believes Robinson was the employee that landed the munitions deal with Pakistan for Kilgore. These are the same munitions that exploded at a port in South Amboy, New Jersey on May 19, 1950, killing 31 people and injuring approximately 400 others. Dan Robinson is cited by name in a June 30, 1950, United States Coast Guard “Report of Investigation of the explosion at South Amboy, New Jersey 19 May 1950.” Robinson is introduced as the “Works Manager of the Kilgore Company” where he describes to government officials the specifications of the anti-tank and anti-personnel mines manufactured at the Kilgore plant.

The explosion at South Amboy Harbor had a profound effect on Kilgore Manufacturing and certainly could have changed any future plans Kilgore had involving the Thompson submachine gun. The explosion resulted in many years of protracted litigation for Kilgore, Hercules Powder and several other companies. The explosion had a major impact on the operation of the plant. At the time of the explosion, Kilgore was owned by the Commercial Credit Company. The potential losses faced by Kilgore as a result of the explosion caused a complete reorganization of Kilgore. In order to stay in business and preserve future assets from potential legal judgments, the Commercial Credit Company sold all the assets of the Kilgore Manufacturing Company to a new company, named Kilgore, Incorporated. Commercial Credit retained the liquid assets of Kilgore Inc. in escrow account to protect against the lawsuits then pending. When the lawsuits were later settled, the Kilgore Manufacturing Company was dissolved into the parent corporation, Kilgore Incorporated.

The Egyptian Thompson: Do They Exist?

In 1963, Mr. Thomas B. Nelson reported in his reference book, The World’s Submachine Guns, the existence of a submachine gun referred to as an Experimental Egyptian Thompson. This .45 ACP submachine gun was reported to have the following markings stamped on top of the receiver: Auto-Ordnance Corp., Bridgeport, Connecticut, Reg. in U.S. Patent Office. The Egyptian Thompson was reportedly made in Egypt in the early 1950s and is “very crudely manufactured.” Mr. Helmer also noted the existence of this Egyptian Thompson in his footnotes and understood the possible significance or link between this Thompson, Egypt and the Kilgore Manufacturing Company. Mr. Helmer believed this Egyptian Thompson could have possibly come from parts of one of the prototype guns designed by Auto-Ordnance Engineer William Hammond in 1942. Hammond was the designer of the Auto-Ordnance Model T2, a submachine gun with a tubular receiver that was designed to one day replace the Thompson. In a letter to Mr. Helmer dated August 10, 1967, retired Auto-Ordnance employee George Goll stated that he did not know anything about an Egypt submachine gun and added that “these guns could not have (been) made from any parts left over from Hammond Gun since there were only two Hammond Guns made.” George Goll was not involved with the Thompson at Kilgore.

The reported Auto-Ordnance receiver markings have led to much speculation over the years that this Egyptian Thompson was somehow involved in the reported deal between Kilgore and Egypt. The Egyptian Thompson is currently on display at the National Firearms Centre in England, previously known as the Ministry of Defense Pattern Room. Noted British firearms enthusiast and researcher John Cross agreed to examine this Egyptian Thompson and reported the following information: “This submachine gun is very crudely made. There are no markings or numbers of any sort on any part of the gun. The gun pictured in Mr. Nelson’s book is indeed the same gun as on display at the National Firearms Centre. There is no background information on this gun at the Centre. However, a careful study of the Register of Firearms at the Centre indicates the acquisition would have been in the 1956 timeframe, around the exact time of the Suez Campaign of 1956. (A joint British and French armed expeditionary campaign that returned the Suez Canal back to British and French control after it was Nationalized by the Egyptian government.) The buttstock appears to be sawed off from an Italian Carcano rifle and has a poorly fitted alloy No. 4 buttplate. The foresight is similar to the Thompson Model M1A1 but homemade, and the rear sight is taken from some old military rifle, possibly a Martini. There is no provision for semi-automatic fire. It contains only two Thompson parts, the magazine and barrel – which is screwed only hand tight into the receiver. The extractor and the front part of the reduced diameter of the bolt have been brazed on the rear section of the bolt and then badly case hardened in an open furnace. The firing pin is machined into the breech face of what could possibly be the front section of a M1A1 Thompson bolt. Interestingly, the main spring cap is the sawed off base of an EC 43 steel .45 caliber ACP casing. The main spring was either originally not long enough or had broken and had been brazed together. The bolt body consists of a rear section of several sections welded together. The pistol grip is a machined block with the grips made of several sections of 1.5mm steel welded together in the same style as a Lewis gun. Despite appearances, the magazine catch is not from a Thompson gun.”

John made the following comment in regard to test firing this weapon: “As I had not remembered to bring my suit of armour or safety glasses with 1 inch thick glass, no attempt was made to fire this weapon!”

The mystery of the so called Egyptian Thompson was finally solved. With none of the reported Auto-Ordnance Corporation markings and obvious small workshop-like manufacturing techniques and parts, it can be positively stated this weapon is not related to the possible deal that Kilgore Manufacturing may have been negotiating with the Egyptian government in 1949 and/or 1950.

The Willis Syndicate

Approximately 3 months after the South Amboy explosion, Frederic Willis and three associates purchased back from Kilgore the “tools” for manufacturing the Thompson. Approximately fourteen months later, Numrich purchased the Thompson assets from Willis and a group of investors Numrich referred to as the “syndicate.”

Currently, the identity of only one of Willis’ associates involved in the Thompson deal with Kilgore is known. This associate is Theodore Hayes, most often referred to as “Teddy” Hayes. What is not generally known is Teddy Hayes was hired by Russell Maguire in the spring of 1942 as a Vice President of the Auto-Ordnance Corporation in charge of sales to the War Department and U.S. allies. While with Auto-Ordnance and later Maguire Industries, Hayes was described in the Washington DC Times Herald as “a natural for the post he holds, and important portals throughout the nation’s capitol open to him without a knock.” Hayes’ office was not at the Bridgeport plant, but in the nation’s capitol. His address as Vice-President of Maguire Industries was 726 Jackson Place, diagonally located across the street from the White House.

All efforts to locate members of Frederic Willis’ immediate family and identify the other two associates involved with Willis and Hayes have been unsuccessful. Very little information involving Mr. Willis has surfaced since he left Auto-Ordnance. Unfortunately, the man that brought the Thompson deal to Kilgore and later purchased and then sold the Thompson passed away in 1967.

It is interesting to note Frederic Willis is listed as the seller on several (maybe all) of the Thompson submachine guns and receivers acquired by George Numrich in 1951. The Thompson Collectors News lists Thompson submachine gun, serial number NAC 5, as being acquired by Numrich Arms Company from Fred Willis on December 1, 1951. In Gordon Herigstad’s excellent reference book, Colt Thompson Serial Numbers, Thompsons with serial numbers NAC 2 and NAC 15 are also listed as being transferred to Numrich from Fred Willis.

The Numrich Arms Company

It was very puzzling how the great majority of former and retired Kilgore employees knew absolutely nothing about the Kilgore Thompson. One would have thought the delivery of a huge quantity of machine gun parts to a small town in Ohio would have been a noteworthy event. Could the twenty crates of parts remembered by Kilgore manager John Ruyan be all the Thompson assets – and for $385,000?

The answer to the location of the Thompson assets packed away in crates and stored in a warehouse by Maguire Industries may have been answered in a Numrich Arms Company undated brochure published in what appears to be the mid 1950s. The introductory paragraph tells the reader that the brochure is a “little booklet showing a few scenes of our West Hurley, N.Y. plant.” It then states, “No pictures of our Bridgeport, Conn. or Long Beach, Calif. warehouses are included since mostly cased goods are kept there.”

In a 1964 letter to Mr. Helmer, George Numrich stated the Willis syndicate held the Thompson assets in a warehouse that they “never went near” prior to the sale of the Thompson to his company. While not completely definitive, it is certainly noteworthy that Numrich also stored cased goods at a Bridgeport, Connecticut warehouse; the home of the former Auto-Ordnance Corporation and location where the Thompson was packed away and stored in crates by Maguire Industries in 1945.

An Internal Revenue Service Investigation

An Internal Revenue Service investigation was started as a result of Numrich Arms Company registering with the IRS Alcohol and Tobacco Tax Division (ATTD) approximately 95 guns. A 1967 letter from the Director of the ATTD to Mr. Helmer revealed this investigation documented the Kilgore Manufacturing Company purchased from Maguire Industries in early 1949, “the equipment and inventory to manufacture the Thompson Submachine Gun.” Included in these assets from Maguire were “a number of assembled submachine guns and sufficient parts to assemble others.” Kilgore later sold these assets to Frederic Willis and three of his associates on August 7, 1950. According to George Numrich, Kilgore “had not renewed their license” when they sold the Thompson “package” to Willis. The transfer of these submachine guns and parts from Kilgore to Willis resulted in a taxable event according to US laws and regulations relating to the transfer of machine guns – and the IRS wanted the tax that was due and owing. Representatives of Kilgore held several conferences with ATTD and the tax liability was “settled on a fair and equitable basis.”

The ATTD investigation also included the sale of the Thompson assets by Willis to the Numrich Arms Company on October 23, 1951. Willis was found not to be a qualified dealer or manufacturer under the National Firearms Act, hence the resulting assessment of transfer taxes against “Willis and his three associates” in what the ATTD termed a “business venture.” The investigation goes on to say that after a complete review of all the facts, the tax liability against Willis and his three associates was “compromised in an appropriate manner.” George Numrich later informed Mr. Helmer that he believed Kilgore paid $15,000 in taxes. Numrich also heard the Willis “syndicate” was trying to settle with the IRS for $300.

It is now very clear why Kilgore was assessed the transfer tax. Kilgore had definitely opened at least some of the crates, understood the need for federal licensing to manufacture and sell National Firearms Act weapons and sold at least a half dozen submachine guns. In addition, a quick review of the Kilgore brochure explains why the officials at Kilgore could not claim they did not contemplate a plan to manufacture and market the Thompson in the United States. Additional information on the Thompson guns sold by Kilgore or what happened to the Thompson parts at the Kilgore plant is still a mystery.

Kilgore Today

Kilgore, Inc. relocated from Westerville, Ohio to Tennessee in 1961. Around the time of the move, Kilgore merged with another company owned by the Commercial Credit Company – the Harvell Corporation. At the time, Harvell was well known for its houseware products. Two plants were initially opened, one in Bolivar, TN and one in Toone, TN. The plant in Bolivar manufactured toy cap pistols and houseware products, the plant in Toone manufactured caps and military pyrotechnics. The name Kilgore, Inc. was changed to Harvell-Kilgore Corporation. In 1963, Commercial Credit sold the Harvell-Kilgore Corporation to the American Snuff Company of Memphis, TN. American Snuff later became the Conwood Corporation. Because of declining sales, Conwood later ceased production of houseware products and dropped the name Harvell from the corporate name. In 1981, Allegany International purchased the Kilgore Corporation. Around 1985, Kilgore stopped the production of cap guns. In 1991, the production of caps ended when the cap making machines were sold to a company in New York. The Kilgore Corporation was acquired in 2001 by a British company and is now known as Kilgore Flares LLC, a member of the Chemring Group. Kilgore has been involved in many ventures throughout its history, but two areas, toy cap pistols and pyrotechnics have always been the mainstay of the business. Today, the toys and caps are no more, but Kilgore Flares is a known leader throughout the world in the development and production of airborne expendable countermeasure decoy flares.

The Kilgore Tommy Guns

Kilgore did produce a toy Thompson while located in Tennessee. It was part of a toy set known as the “Special Agent Playset.” This toy first appeared in the 1973 Kilgore Toy Catalog.

The Special Agent Playset was featured in Kilgore Catalogs until 1977 or 1978. In 1979, a new Playset, “Tactical Assault Command Squad,” was featured with a similar Tommy Gun. This Playset was also included in the 1980 Kilgore toy catalog.

Tim Goss, a prominent Kilgore collector from Westerville, Ohio, reported all the Tommy Gun Playsets, along with the individual toy guns and accessories contained in the Playsets, are quite scarce today.

The End of the Kilgore Story

Unfortunately, the end of the Kilgore story is far from complete. Given the passage of time it is going to be very difficult to obtain additional first hand information from the parties involved at Kilgore. Many parties interviewed for this story were in their 80s and 90s. Additional documentary evidence will certainly surface in the future, much like the information in this article that came to light. However, one issue that can now be laid to rest is what Kilgore planned to do with the Thompson business. Kilgore was (and always has been) a manufacturing company. The Kilgore brochure clearly shows Kilgore planned to be a manufacturer of the Thompson submachine gun. Of course, the manufacturing of the M1A1 Thompson by Kilgore did not take place – other than the possible assembly from parts of a few guns. The IRS investigation and other sources cited above, established that Kilgore purchased the Thompson from Maguire Industries and firmly established ownership of the Thompson for Kilgore Manufacturing, the Willis group and the Numrich Arms Company.

New Panther Sportical 7.62 Rifle from DPMS

DPMS Firearms, LLC takes the affordable 5.56x45mm Panther Sportical to the big-bore market with the introduction of the 7.62 NATO Panther Sportical. This introductory level, large-bore rifle is capable of transitioning between the forest and the rifle range with ease thereby bridging the gap between the sporting and tactical markets. Chambered in 7.62 NATO, this lightweight rifle features a 16-inch chrome-moly steel heavy barrel, a slick-side upper receiver and carbine length GlacierGuards. The aluminum upper and lower receivers feature a uniform, Mil-Spec hard-coat anodizing. A semiautomatic trigger group, integral trigger guard, A2 Pistol Grip and the Pardus 6-position, telescoping carbine stock complete the introductory rifle. Two 20-round steel magazines, a cleaning kit and hard case for storage come standard with each rifle. The rifle weighs just 8.3 pounds when empty. Optic is not included with the rifle. Available now, the 7.62 NATO Panther Sportical retails for $989. DPMS Firearms, LLC is an industry leader in providing quality AR-style rifles, components and accessories. No other company offers more styles or configurations of AR rifles. DPMS also provides choices for high-power and small-bore shooters by offering several rifles chambered in .204 Ruger, .223 Remington, 5.56×45 NATO, .243 Winchester, .260 Remington, 6.5 Creedmoor, 6.8×43 SPC, 7.62×39, .308 Winchester, .300 Remington SAUM and .338 Federal. For more information on this new rifle please contact them at DPMS Firearms, LLC, Dept. SAR, 3312 12th Street SE, Saint Cloud, MN 56304. Phone: (320) 258-4448. Fax: (320) 258-4449. They can be found on the web at www.dpmsinc.com.

A New Version of the Famous Sterling Submachine Gun

CPS Company announces, A Gun from Dagenham, American Redux 1958-2008. It is their new line of limited edition Sterling L2A3 submachine guns available beginning this fall. These fully transferable NFA submachine guns are the result of eight years of research and materials acquisition to authentically document and reproduce the original British military version of the well-known Mk4 submachine gun. Between 1956 and 1959, Sterling Armament Company, Dagenham, Essex, England produced approximately 26,000 L2A3 submachine guns for the British Ministry of Defence, before the MoD decided to finish production requirements themselves. As a result of a court settlement, Sterling went on to make the Mk4 version and sell it commercially around the world; while the L2A3 remained exclusively with the British military, never available for sale or permanent export anywhere. Total Government and Sterling L2A3 production reached 190,000. Only a handful remain today in overseas museums as the rest were declared obsolete and destroyed in 1994. These historical recreations are marked GUN, SUB MACHINE, 9mm L2A3 and serial numbered as Sterling production pieces. Each one has additional Government modifications of a reinforced butt stock, checkered magazine release button and finished in smooth black paint, applied over a phosphate treatment. Additionally, four new-in-wrap magazines, original No.5 bayonet and scabbard (both MoD refurbished), sling, military handbook, F1 magazine pouch and a serial numbered Certificate of Authenticity are fitted together inside a custom birch display case. For more information contact CPS Company, Dept. SAR, P.O. Box 261, Monticello, WI 53570-0261. Phone: (608) 274-7946. Fax: (608) 276-7477.

StormWerkz Introduces New Krinkov Scope Mount

StormWerkz has just added two new scope mounts to their line of firearm upgrades for the Bulgarian/Russian and Yugoslavian Krinkov AKs utilizing the military standard Picatinny rail. Both Weaver and Picatinny rings and adapters fit this mount. Previously, the only way to mount an optic on a “Krink” was the use of a side mount, which can be expensive, or by using a rail fastened over the gas tube that can expose the optic to extreme heat. StormWerkz has taken care of the problem and its new mounts fasten to the gun’s top cover right in front of the rear sight. It fastens with 4 socket head cap screws through the top cover for a rock solid attachment. They have designed it to make as much rail as possible in the space available on the top covers. These affordable Krink scope mounts are ideal for many of the new compact optics on the market today. The mount body is completely CNC machined from aerospace aluminum and anodized matte black. Each mount comes with screws, wrench, drill bit and a drilling template. For more information contact StormWerkz, Dept. SAR, 408 15th Ave East, Superior, WI 54880. Phone: (218) 349-6175. Website: www.stormwerkz.com.

While the theme this year at the 137th Annual Meetings & Exhibits of the National Rifle Association was a “Celebration of American Values,” the NRA leadership warned of a major political storm approaching over gun rights.

Held at the Kentucky Exposition Center in Louisville, Kentucky, May 16-18, this well-attended event drew over 66,300 people to the meetings. The exhibit hall, which contained the booths of firearms and accessory makers, gun collectors and hunting trip outfitters, boasted over 400 exhibitors.

During the Annual Meeting of Members, NRA Executive Vice President, Wayne R. LaPierrre, warned of a “perfect storm” (in the political sense) approaching for those who cherish Second Amendment freedoms.

After showing a series of filmed interviews with residents of New Orleans who had their firearms confiscated by police in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, LaPierre said the political storm approaching is the worst he has seen in the thirty years he has been working for the NRA.

“Behind every anti-gun law, or candidate, or editorial, or movie is a ruling class that can’t stand you taking responsibility for your own safety,” LaPierre declared. “The ruling class wants you to believe that they’ll protect you so that you will be dependent on them.”

Citing such self-appointed “ruling classes” as Time, Newsweek, 60 Minutes, Sarah Brady, and the United Nations, LaPierre said they all believe the same “elite conceit” – you shouldn’t protect yourself; the Government should. “But we know there’s a little problem with that – they don’t give a damn about you! They couldn’t care less about your safety. That’s the bald-faced truth… that’s the one constant that runs across all the ruling classes and it’s killing the Second Amendment. They all say you can’t be trusted with responsibility for your own protection.

“Huricane Katrina should’ve taught this nation that the elites who say they’ll protect everyone…won’t protect anyone! Those hurricane victims couldn’t count on police, electricity, or phones; you couldn’t call 9-1-1. But they could count on the looters, and the rapists, and the robbers, who all arrived right on time. And that’s when the ruling class ordered troops door-to-door to confiscate the good guys’ firearms – at gunpoint – when they needed their guns the most” …during “the first forced gun confiscation in American history.”

LaPierre went on to cite examples of how the “elite ruling class” has fought NRA’s efforts at enacting “Castle Doctrine” laws (that allow folks to defend themselves within their homes), protecting workers who keep firearms in their parked vehicles in company parking lots, undoing the repressive firearms regulations of Washington, D.C. and New York City, as well as the global gun ban schemes of the United Nations.

“The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun,” LaPierre asserted, “is a good guy with a gun. Instant responders are always better than first responders. Because instant responders can prevent the kind of tragedy that first responders can only clean up.”

In closing, LaPierre said that despite the billions spent by the “elite conceit” to mold public opinion, Americans are not buying the disinformation. Every public opinion poll comes down on the pro-gun side. “Year-after-year, more Americans say the NRA speaks for them, than does the Democratic or Republican Parties, the U.S. Congress, or The New York Times,” LaPierre concluded.

NRA Achievements

Chris W. Cox executive director of the NRA’s lobbying arm, the Institute for Legislative Action, cited recent political achievements:

• True Right-to-Carry is a reality in 40 states.
• Castle Doctrine laws have been passed in 22 states so far.
• Hunter protection laws are in place in all 50 states.
• Range protection laws and state preemption laws are in effect in 47 states.
• The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act is working to protect the firearms industry from frivolous lawsuits.
• Worker Protection laws, that would stop employees from getting fired for keeping firearms in their vehicles on company property, are being considered by numerous state legislatures.

Cox warned that these achievements could be stifled if either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama are elected President in November. Citing the infamous perfect anti-gun voting records of both candidates, Cox picked up on the remarks of Obama at a private fundraiser for San Francisco millionaires during which Obama mischaracterized average gun owners as being so bitter about their sorry lives that they cling to God and their guns.

“Well Barack, we are bitter and we should be!” Cox retorted. “We should be bitter that these elitist hypocritical snobs try to play us for a bunch of fools. We should be bitter that Hillary and Obama look gun owners in the eye and lie about their support for the Second Amendment. But when Hillary and Obama mouth off like they have and vote like they have and lie like they have and trample Second Amendment freedoms like they have, you bet the members of this proud Association are bitter. For gun owners across America, this is how bitter looks and sounds. And come November…let’s show ‘em how bitter votes!” Cox concluded.

John McCain’s Remarks

Likely Republican Party Presidential nominee Sen. John McCain appeared and spoke to the NRA membership as well. Stressing that since he first ran for Congress in 1982, he has opposed efforts to ban gun shows, ban ammunition, ban magazines and ban so-called “assault weapons,” as well as waiting periods for gun purchases.

McCain was forthright enough to admit, however, that he hasn’t always agreed with the NRA on every issue. He detailed his support for NICS background checks for firearms sales at gun shows which he called “a reasonable requirement.” He noted that he opposes federal regulation of all private sales such as transfers between family members.

Campaign finance reform is another area of disagreement between McCain and the NRA that the senator touched on. The McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform Act was legislation that McCain helped draft and which NRA has opposed since its inception as it restricts lobbying activity. McCain said the intent of his bill, which is now law, was to change the way campaigns were financed as he said elected officials were formerly being influenced to put the interests of donors ahead of the public interest. “It is neither my purpose nor the purpose of the legislation to prevent gun owners or any other group of citizens from making their voices heard in the legislative process,” McCain said.

McCain went on to emphasize what he said is a clear difference between his candidacy and that of Sens. Obama and Clinton, “If either…is elected President, the rights of law-abiding gun owners will be at risk,” he stressed.

He recalled how Sen. Clinton was quick to affirm her support for the Second Amendment after the uproar over Sen. Obama’s remark that gun owners cling to guns and religion out of bitterness. Clinton’s actions prompted Obama to make another remark that backfired on him: “She’s running around talking about how this is an insult to sportsmen, how she values the Second Amendment. Like she’s in the duck blind every Sunday, packin’ a six shooter!” McCain added the comment, “Someone should tell Senator Obama that ducks are usually hunted with shotguns.”

The NRA had not endorsed a candidate for president during the time of the Annual Meetings.

This year’s banquet speaker was nationally syndicated political commentator Glenn Beck who gave an entertaining presentation on current events as well as a touching and frank discussion of his rise from abject poverty to prominence and affluence in a short period of time. In keeping with tradition, NRA President John C. Sigler, presented Beck with a custom flintlock rifle at the conclusion of his address.

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal was introduced to the membership as a “fast rising political star.” Jindal addressed the membership and spoke of the gun-grabbing atrocities afflicted on the law-abiding by the police and national guardsmen in his state in the aftermath of Hurrican Katrina. At the conclusion of his address, Jindal was presented with The Harlon B. Carter Award by Christopher Cox.

Latest Firearm & Accessory Products

On the convention floor, acres of the latest firearms and related products were shown and available for handling by attendees. While it is not possible to cover everything that was seen, here are some highlights.

Taurus is now offering its popular 1911-style pistol with “Bull’s Head Walnut” grips. These new premium walnut wood grips are checkered with a unique combination of the European stipple and American checkering patterns. The result is a most handsome and distinctive set of grips and are available on both the blued and stainless version of the Taurus 1911 or can be purchased separately.

Long Guns

In the rifle arena was the new M1 Carbine in a paratrooper walnut folding stock model produced by Auto-Ordnance. Specs include an under 36-inch length and a 26-inch length with the stock folded (making for a very compact package), 18-inch barrel, weight of 5 lbs. 6 oz., parkerized finish, blade front and flip style rear sight. It is furnished with one 15-round magazine. Overall fit and finish seems better than on the originals.

Optics

In the optics segment, Trijicon, Inc. has introduced a new addition to its AccuPoint line of riflescopes, the 3-9×40 crosshair – part of a series of battery-free illuminated crosshair riflescopes. The Trijicon AccuPoint series utilizes an advanced combination fiber-optic and tritium self-luminous aiming-point illumination system that results in maximum success for the hunter as there is no need for dependency on failure-prone batteries.

At the center of the crosshairs is the self-luminous aiming point which automatically adjusts to changing light conditions. There is also a manual override to allow users to adjust the brightness to their personal preference in a given shooting situation.

The 137th NRA Annual Meetings & Exhibits are now history but for those who were able to attend it was an enjoyable and memorable experience. Next year’s event will be held in Phoenix, Arizona. It will certainly be worth your while if you are able to attend.

Momentum Gaining for e-Form 4473

Pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act, ATF has been seeking public comment on the efficiency of its Firearms Transaction Record, ATF Form 4473.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) is among the organizations urging ATF to adopt an electronic Form 4473 that would be voluntary for both consumers and dealers. The e-Form 4473 would presumably be in a format that is not connected to a government database that could be used as a backdoor gun registration system.

NSSF said the benefits of the e-form 4473 would include:

• Enhancing the utility and clarity of the information to be collected.
• Minimize the burden of consumers and dealers in completing the form through the use of automated electronic and technological collection techniques, e.g. permitting electronic submission of responses to the questions asked.
• A reduction in mistakes in filling out the form, e.g. dealers could not be found in violation when a consumer enters “Y” to a questions instead of “yes”.
• A reduction in ATF inspection time at licensees premises in reviewing 4473 forms.

The author publishes two of the small arms industry’s most widely read trade newsletters. The International Firearms Trade covers the world firearms scene, and The New Firearms Business covers the domestic market. Visit www.FirearmsGroup.com. He may be reached at: FirearmsB@aol.com.

I Landed in Warsaw, Poland, then drove the seventy or so klicks to Kielce for the annual MSPO Show that is held there. Driving through so much history gave pause for thought, as did the seductive name “Radom” on one of the towns I passed through on the way. Radom as in the Radom pistol, which gave wings to daydreams of walking into small gun shops with piles of Radoms on the back shelf, collecting dust. This did not happen, of course. Poland is a very nice place to visit, and it seems to be in layers today- a modern country on top of a post war failed communist economy, but under all of that the strength and deep military history of a thousand years of commitment and industry. The next MSPO will be the 16th annual event and it is scheduled for 8-11 September, 2008, and I strongly urge those with the means and interest to attend this yearly show. Vendors who have not yet signed up may be out of luck at this point but should definitely plan for 2009. -Dan

Each year, when MSPO is announced, there is a “Lead Nation” chosen. This “Lead Nation” is responsible for setting a tone, putting their best foot forward and showcasing their products and support for the Polish defense industry and MSPO. At the meeting in 2007, it was the United States as lead Nation and in 2008 it will be Sweden.

In 2007, there were 364 companies from 24 countries present and the US contingent represented 31companies.

MSPO has grown into the largest military show in Eastern Europe, and its prominence in the defense industry is growing every year. Along with the trade show and live demonstrations, there are several days of seminars on arms and military subjects.

MSPO is fast becoming a “Must attend” show for those in the international arms trade, and SAR heartily recommends attending.

Bumar Group represents most of the Polish arms manufacturers as the export group and the sponsor of many of the booths at MSPO Bumar Sp. z o. o. www.bumar.com

For information on the MSPO 2008 show:
www.mspo.pl
For information on TargiKielce- the events and convention center:
www.targikielce.pl

Beryl Wz96

Poland’s new Kalashnikov variant is the Beryl wz96. SAR has a feature on this rifle coming soon from Leszek Ehrenfecht. Presented here are three variants- the Beryl, the Mini-Beryl, and the Beryl Commando. Manufacturer is Fabryka Broni “Lucznik” Radom Sp. z. o. o. and their website is www.fabrykabroni.pl

PM-98/98S Submachine Gun 

The PM98 is a modernized version of the 1984 made PM84 closed bolt submachine gun. The PM-06 is the 2006 modernized offering, incorporating a picatinny rail like the PM98s.

ZUR-23-2T

Poland has excellent production facilities for the famous ZSU-23-2, the workhorse Anti-aircraft system from the old ComBloc. It’s been modernized with electric controls and in the KG configuration adds two GROM missiles. The old ZSU (Type) 23 (Caliber 23mm) and -2 (2 guns) carries the ZUR configuration in Poland. The T configuration has no missiles, but an onboard fire control system that allows for air targets and ground targets with automatic integration of ballistics for various ammunitions used.

WKM-B NSV type

The side-shuttle styled “NSV” 12.7mm machine gun is here adapted to the ground mount “Infantry” configuration. There are knee supports for the shooter to add to tripod platform, and a shoulder support similar to the Vinghog M2HB softmounts seen in SAR recently. Zaklady Mechaniczne Tarnow S.A. www.zmt.tarnow.pl

UKM 2000 D

By far one of the most interesting finds at the show was the UKM 2000D variant of the PKM. With its side folding buttstock making it more paratrooper friendly, and the fact that it is in 7.62x51mm NATO caliber were outstanding. This author tried to get a better look into the mechanism, but the staff there would not permit it. They insisted that this model utilizes not only the NATO 30 cal, it uses the standard M13 disintegrating metallic link, the same as the M60 and the M240 series use. This is a radical change from the offerings that most companies are trying in this caliber, usually requiring the end user to switch to PKM pull out non-disintegrating metallic belts. Expect a deeper report on this item. UKM2000P is the standard infantry version, UKM 2000D is the folding stock version, and UKM 2000C is the tank version. P and D versions have Picatinny style rails.

Zaklady Mechaniczne Tarnow S.A.
www.zmt.tarnow.pl

As depression era unrest captivated the country, law enforcement of the 1930s struggled to cope with gangsters, strikes, and unruly mobs. Circumstances of the times drove innovations in support equipment for police to more effectively deal with the problems. Charles Manville, who operated a machine shop in Indianapolis, Indiana, had witnessed rampaging Midwest crime during the 1920s, and subsequently contributed to several self defense and law enforcement innovations. What began as tinkering for Manville developed into a niche business where he achieved success marketing his invention of progressively more efficient tear gas delivery equipment. His efforts expanded and sustained the small company he founded, known as the Manville Manufacturing Company, until wartime contracts for other products eclipsed his interest in the gas gun business.

Manville began by developing personal defense equipment, leveraging the public apprehension of the time. He manufactured and marketed gas pen guns, which were concealable devices that a potential victim could use to project a small tear gas cloud on an attacker. They sold well enough to sustain the business, and he graduated the line to include pen guns ranging up to 12 gauge. Manville also began manufacturing cartridges known as “Manville Tear Gas Shells.” The Manville ammunition featured brass cartridge casings, and utilized non-corrosive primers and a DuPont powder charge to expel and vaporize a white crystalline chloracetophenone (CN) tear gas substance. CN was a short duration tear gas that produced intense tearing, eye pain, and skin irritation. According to Manville advertising, their tear gas formula was developed through 12 years of research by Captain Frank B. Gorin, formerly of the U.S. Army Chemical Warfare Service.

Manville began with the pen guns, but was disappointed with their overall effectiveness, so next he developed a 5-shot, 12 gauge tear gas revolver, designated the Manville Gas Revolver Model R12. The revolvers were marketed to law enforcement, who sought better means to deliver chemical riot control agents. While the 12 gauge gas solution still lacked the desired effectiveness, the ability presented by the Manville revolver for an officer, or team of officers to each fire 5 shots in quick succession improved their non-lethal deterrent firepower. Three examples of Manville revolvers were examined and photographed for this article, as well as another version marketed by a subsequent company. Various minor revisions occurred to the revolver design in the late 1930s, which can be seen in the examples.

Manville’s quest to provide law enforcement with the means to deliver larger volumes of tear gas led to his invention of a 24-shot, 12 gauge, semiautomatic tear gas projector. The bulky weapon had a shiny, futuristic look, and also somewhat resembled the Model of 1921 Thompson submachine gun, with the Manville’s large revolving cylinder mimicking the looks of a Thompson “C” drum. The design was intended for hip firing and featured a forward grip, a shotgun bead front sight, and no buttstock. The Manville was crafted mostly of machined aluminum castings, with a steel barrel and frame support, and plastic grips. It was known as the Manville Machine Gas Projector Model M12. The Model M12 also had the ability to fire regular 12 gauge shotshells, which gave the gun a devastating potential at close range. There are no known instances of the weapon’s use with shotshell ammunition by law enforcement in a tactical situation.

Manville Gas Projectors were produced in 3 design generations. The first generation, 12 gauge model exhibited a spring-wound, revolving cylinder milled out of a solid piece of aluminum, fluted to reduce weight. Manville named the aluminum alloy used in his revolvers and projectors “Manvilloy.” In order to reload the 12 gauge projector, the front and rear sections had to be separated by loosening two knurled knobs on top of the weapon, which clamped down on a steel receiver support rail, just forward of the revolving cylinder. This was an awkward and tactically inefficient operation. The violence of the action also tended to work the knobs loose, producing wear at the joining surfaces, and causing the halves to slightly separate. As a result, ill gas effects for the shooter could occur, since tear gas cartridges of the time activated immediately upon firing. The preferred firing position was most definitely upwind from the desired target.

Several of the Manville revolvers and projectors were reportedly used to help subdue a labor riot in Terre Haute, Indiana in 1935.

When Manville designed the larger 25mm guns, the weight of a solid 25mm aluminum cylinder would have proven unacceptable, so a shorter aluminum base cylinder was machined to accept 18 steel sleeves, which protruded dramatically, adding to its shiny, futuristic look. Some other improvements were made to the action, while the weapon retained the two knurled knobs on top, keeping it necessary to separate the two halves to reload. These were the second generation of Manville Gas Projectors.

The third generation of Manvilles featured improvements to facilitate easier reloading. A pivot tube with an internal bolt action was added above the receiver, connecting the front and back halves of the gun. The tube acted as a pivot point, so that the cartridge cylinder could be swung out and reloaded, without separating the two halves. The bolt action served to lock the halves together after loading, which solved the separation and tear gas exposure problem existent in the first two generations.

Several misperceptions exist regarding the Manville Guns. The first misperception is that the weapons were fully automatic. This probably originates from the Manville Model M12 designation as a “Machine Gas Projector,” and also from the Manville chapter in Thomas Swearengen’s 1978 book, The World’s Fighting Shotguns, in which a picture caption refers to the 12 gauge, 24-shot model as the “Manville 24-Shot, 12 Gauge Machine Gun,” although the text specifically documents the action as semiautomatic. The 12 gauge specimen examined for this article was not designed for, nor capable of, fully automatic fire. Manville and Swearengen probably perceived the gun as a gas projecting machine, thence a machine gas projector, or gas delivery machine gun. The second misperception involves the existence of an 18-shot, 27mm model, and a 26.5mm model. Information and pictures of supposed 27mm Manville Gas Guns exist on the internet, but the models referred to are actually 18-shot, 25mm Manvilles. The root of this lies in the fact that Manville referred to the guns as 25mm, but measurements of a second generation, 18-shot, 25mm Manville demonstrated the muzzle and chambers measure between 26.6 and 26.75mm. The gas projector models were also not marked with caliber designations until the 3rd generation.

Improvements to tear gas ammunition occurred during the late 1930s, particularly with the larger cartridges. Fuses were incorporated to allow aerial or point of contact gas ignition. This was certainly good news to law enforcement who deployed the gas. Manville became involved in these improvements, and in his quest for continuous improvement, he developed a 12-shot, 37mm version of his gun, featuring a removable, revolving magazine. Realizing that the size and quantity of 37mm gas would be too heavy for a hand held unit, Manville designed it with a ground mount, similar to a Maxim machine gun. This essentially made the gun into a crew served weapon, at least in terms of portability. The 37mm model did not sell well, and no examples were available for review.

The Manville Manufacturing Company went public, changed their name to the Manville Manufacturing Corporation, and moved from Indianapolis to Pontiac, Michigan in 1935. During WWII, they produced parts for 20mm aircraft guns, and were awarded the Army-Navy Production “E” Award for excellence. The award was a coveted and patriotic achievement for companies of the time. After the war, Manville produced dishwashers, and later ceased business. It is important to note that little documentation remains regarding the Manville company, as Charles Manville reportedly destroyed all records, prototypes, tools, parts, and complete guns on hand in 1943. Swearengen’s shotgun book included a chapter of information he gained from interviewing former Manville employees, and we have him to thank for providing much of what we now know about the development and history of the Manville gas guns.

Following WWII, Lake Erie Chemical Company (LECCO) acquired patent rights from Manville, and manufactured their own version of the 12 gauge, 5-shot tear gas revolver, and called it the Model 512. The LECCO model was marked accordingly, and added a hand stop at the top of the revolver grip to aid in control during repeated firing. The hand stop enables easy identification of a LECCO model at a glance.

Manville influences on current firearms can be found in some available revolving models of 37mm tear gas guns, as well as the 40mm MM-1 grenade launcher developed for the U.S. Military during the 1970s. Probably the most widely known Manville influence occurred when Hollywood cast a third generation Manville Gas Projector in the 1981 movie, The Dogs of War. The flashy weapon was featured prominently in advertisements for the movie, and its abilities as portrayed were quite exaggerated. Although Charles Manville inexplicably abandoned and obliterated record of his gas gun projects, the design features he incorporated into each model he produced still have relevance to law enforcement and military products today.

(The author wishes to acknowledge and thank the late Thomas Swearengen, author of “The World’s Fighting Shotguns” and Ironside International Publishers, Inc. for certain information referenced in this article, as well as William J. Helmer for several of the example gas guns and advertisements.)

(Editor’s note: Special Tactical Services, McClellan and Renz’ highly respected tactical training and resources firm, is an important partner of US Ordnance, current manufacturer of the substantially improved M60 series machine guns and spare parts. Both companies have long been fighting a determined retrograde action in support of US military personnel and other users of thousands of these battle proven guns that are still deployed worldwide in the Global War on Terror. This interview was originally conducted to provide background information for Robert Bruce’s report on US Ordnance’s MK43 series machine guns, featured in the April 2008 issue of SAR. Because of its remarkably candid and necessarily controversial elements, SAR believes it deserves to run on its own, providing much information that is both relevant for today and important for the historical record.)

Special Tactical Services, LLC, established in 2000 by former Navy SEAL Dale McClellan, offers highly effective tactical training in a variety of weapons and antiterror/security disciplines that increase the war fighting capabilities of today’s operators in the Global War on Terror and on the front lines of Homeland Security. STS is an officially listed US Government General Services Administration vendor and works for the US Navy and its Center for Security Forces. STS instructors have provided uniquely effective training for numerous federal, local, & state law enforcement agencies as well as elite units in every one of the US Armed Forces.

STS is also the exclusive weapons and armorer training partner to US Ordnance, current manufacturer of improved M60 series machine guns. Additionally, STS designs and manufacturers a number of innovative products including advanced Shipboard Ballistic Weapons Stands and Modular Armored Security Shields for Entry Control Points.

Dale McClellan, President and CEO, has over 16 years of military and private sector experience and is responsible for shaping the future growth and diversification of STS. He graduated from Basic Underwater Demolition SEAL Training in 1990. While serving at SEAL Team Eight he was deployed to Mogadishu, Somalia in 1993. Trained as a Machine Gunner, Point Man, Sniper and Scout Sniper Instructor, McClellan finished his military career training Seal Team members for combat operations as an Assault Cell instructor.

Steve Renz, Senior Vice President, with nearly 20 years of instructional experience in the military, law enforcement and the private sector, is among those responsible for the direction of all activities that Special Tactical Services offers. A six year veteran of the United States Marine Corps, he served as an anti-tank assault man assigned to a Combined Anti-Armor Team, a Scout Sniper and Scout Sniper Instructor, as well as a Close Quarters Battle Instructor. While assigned as a sniper to the Surveillance and Target Acquisition platoon with First Battalion, Eighth Marines, he conducted several deployments to the Mediterranean area and to the Middle East. He later served as a Scout Sniper Instructor at Camp Lejeune, N.C. and went on to assist in the development and implementation of the Marine Corps’ Designated Marksman program. As a CQB Instructor, he was responsible for the training of Marines and other military personnel in all facets of handgun, submachine gun, shotgun and rifle/carbine combat marksmanship as well as all facets of covert and dynamic entries for vital asset recovery.

Special Tactical Services, LLC, Virginia Beach, Virginia

SAR: This interview is intended to gather background information for an in-depth look at the MK43 Mod 1, latest member of the M60 family that the Navy calls a ‘legacy weapon.’ Although officially on their way out, if you go on Navy News website and start pulling down photographs of Inshore Boat Units and others deployed to GWOT, there are a heck of a lot of M60s out there in various configurations.

Dale McClellan: The irony in this (MK43) feature for Small Arms Review is I wish it was done five years ago. Because when we started trying to keep the 60 alive, started performing CPR on it, nobody would listen.

Everyone wants our Soldiers, Airmen, Sailors and Marines to have the best weapons. FN builds the machine guns with the exception of the M2HB. Following the lead of the Marine Corps and the Army, the Navy set the system up where the M240 was to replace the MK43, or the M60 series in its system. Now with the protracted war effort, the armed forces is having a difficult time keeping up with sustainment, and total replacement of the M60 is being pushed out even further.

The issue we had is what you just said, detailed in a letter that we wrote and circulated back then, (see “The Battle Proven M60,” linked on the STS website). We wrote this and sent it out to everybody because there are anywhere between five thousand to ten thousand M60s in the Navy’s inventory, still being deployed on Navy ships and with reserve units throughout the world. But the Navy says it’s an ‘unsupported weapon system’ and they sent out emails to the effect that it’s to be replaced by the M240.

Unfortunately, that meant support for the M60, M60E3 and Mk43s was going to be through cannibalization of M60’s currently in inventory. There is a potential problem though with cannibalizing M60s for spare parts. What most people don’t realize is that the feed cam assembly, cartridge guides, and feed pawl assembly on the Mk43 are not interchangeable with older models.

Replacement was not going to be finished for several years to come. And it wouldn’t matter if it was six days or six years, if someone has to employ an M60 weapon system there’s a high probability that it would not operate properly because the systems are 20+ years old and have been maintained with spare parts that were supplied by the lowest bidder; or worse through cannibalization of incompatible used parts.

We did a firing demonstration for Congressman Mark Kirk and he was impressed with the weapon (Mk 43 Mod 1) and our arguments. This led to a news article in the Washington Times, ‘Rummy Asked to Save Rambo’s Favorite Gun.’ (Linked on the STS website). It was taken all the way to Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld. And we tried to get it saved because it was already out there, it was more cost effective, it’s a good American made weapon system. But we lost that battle ultimately and the gun became ‘unsupported.’ The government had made up its mind; the money had already changed hands.

In Crane’s (NAVSEA Crane, the Navy’s central small arms support facility) defense they said these things are decided and planned three to six years out. And there was no turning around the decision on the M60. So the 60 will continue to get phased out and be replaced by the 240, or the MK48 in some capacities. Which makes more sense. And hopefully the Marine Corps and everybody will start to get some type of shorter 240 so they can have a manportable/dismountable configuration.

“Unsupported”

SAR: There must be plenty of M60 replacement parts in the inventory.

McClellan: Unfortunately, some of the people at Crane don’t know what they’re sending out. When several Navy Units received their M60s they had Basic parts on a Mk43 with an E3 forearm. I mean it was terrible. Obviously, somebody doesn’t know what they’re putting together. They think a M60 part is a M60 part is a M60 part. A Navy briefing about problems shows how much money was allocated in 2002 and how they were going to overhaul 595 guns. All were SEAL Team guns; the only ones they were still supporting.

The Navy has said, ‘Well, we have all these guns in inventory. As they break we would replace the parts but there’s nobody manufacturing parts.’

Well there is. US Ordnance manufactures top quality, MILSPEC parts under a US government contract. The problem is in the bins of parts the Navy currently has. They’re mismatched, old parts from some of the first models up to the E3s. What most don’t realize is that those top covers and a lot of other parts are not interchangeable. They mess up what we call ‘the timing’ of the weapon system and cause it to malfunction. So now you have individuals who may or may not be educated on those exact parts and they’re taking these components, interchanging them, and consequently it decreases the reliability of the weapon system.

Steve Renz: One of the biggest things that really forced us to educate ourselves on the 60 was that no two of the Navy’s guns had the exact same parts and pieces. There were different bolt plugs, different buttstocks, barrel configurations, all kinds of different parts and pieces on the ‘same weapon.’ So it forced us to do a lot of research. And what we found was when we started to do some inspections on some of the different ships and different units is the Gunners Mates and Armorers had no idea about the Product Improvement Program from back in the 1960s. There were receivers that had obviously never even gone through PIP (Product Improvement Program upgrade). There appeared to be little to no subject matter expertise on the weapons system and we wanted to help fix that.

We needed to know what some potential problems are if you have a basic M60 that’s running components from different models including the MK43. So as a private company we were able to take a lot of these different parts and pieces, mismatch them, throw ‘em into a gun, run it and see what the problems were. And we found there were some significant problems. This resulted in simple malfunctions and stoppages to complete weapon failure in some cases.

STS Arrives on Station

SAR: How did STS get involved with the Navy’s M60 situation?

Renz: I think a lot of that happened around the 2000 – 2001 time frame when we started doing training for the Mk43 with the Submarine Squadron Support Unit (SSSU) command which is now called NSSU

McClellan: SSSU was the first unit that came to us. This is after they went to the SEAL Teams at Little Creek Amphibious Base, Virginia, and said, ‘Hey, we have all these MK43s like yours but our guys don’t know how to use them.’

The SEAL Teams basically said, ‘We know these guys at Special Tactical Services, call them.’ So they came to us to learn all about the MK43. Building on my SEAL Team background (Team Eight from 1990 to 1998), STS put together a program built from the same principle mechanics that I had implemented back then as an Assault Cell instructor focusing on weapons manipulation and tailored it to what we thought would work for the fleet Sailors who operate the weapon alone in a watch duty station or for any machine gunner for that matter.

We started training the Navy with the MK43 guns and ammunition they had – shooting a thousand rounds per Sailor. But when you start putting that kind of volume through a machine gun it’ll break. Doesn’t matter if it’s a 60, a 240 or a .50, eventually it’ll break.

This is when we started finding about the support that could or could not be provided to the Sailors. They weren’t getting the parts, and the guns were broken.

At the same time we started thinking, these are their wartime guns with so many rounds through ‘em! This is ridiculous. They ought to have training guns that they can beat up and break. We got a line to Saco Defense but they referred us to the new owners at General Dynamics (GD). GD wouldn’t touch us unless we were buying hundreds if not thousands of parts. ‘You want twenty firing pins? Yeah. Call us when you want twenty thousand firing pins.’ So they wouldn’t have anything to do with us either.

Alliance with US Ordnance

McClellan: GD had been extremely reluctant to tell us but I complained enough to them that eventually they told us about US Ordnance, which had bought the M60’s manufacturing rights, technical data package and all the tooling. Once we found out about US Ordnance it was ‘Game On!’ Now we had a source for current parts manufactured to MIL-SPEC (military specification) in the United States of America. This enabled us to fix the Sailors’ guns with the correct components.

Later, we told US Ordnance that we would like the opportunity to come out there and show them the training program we had been putting together. We want you to tell us from a manufacturer’s perspective if there’s anything wrong with the course. So Steve Renz and I flew out to Reno, Nevada, met with Norm Justice and some of the other guys, and taught them our Navy machine gun course. They had a few things for us that were constructive criticism but overall their opinion was, ‘The course is incredible,’ and they sponsored us as their exclusive trainers.

As we went down the path with this they started supporting us with everything we needed. They were fantastic to us and the troops. Also, they were probably one of the most receptive companies I’ve ever seen to constructive criticism. We would call them up and say, ‘Hey, these roller cams keep breaking.’ They’d say, ‘Send us every roller cam that breaks.’ So we would do a round count and we would send it to them. And what was amazing about US Ordnance is they took that data, they looked at their metallurgies and data provided, and they listened to everything we told them and they built a better machine gun.

SAR: So MIL-SPEC wasn’t enough? US Ordnance went beyond that?

McClellan: Well, not exactly, and they could explain it more accurately; but as the Viet Nam war wound down and the M60 support and sustainment transitioned to peacetime, various spare parts contracts were bid out to the lowest bidder. Quality suffered and substandard parts flooded the system. The M60 was not alone in this and as a result several revisions were made in the federal purchasing code to protect small arms manufacturing companies with respect to bolts, barrels, and receivers. But the damage had already been done. The system was flooded with substandard and outdated M60 spare parts.

Once US Ordnance got the M60 under their roof they were able to control both ends of the spectrum using only newly manufactured parts on their weapon system. If there was a problem with a part they could find out where the failures were. If the rollers on the actuator cam assemblies were breaking, they stopped outsourcing with that supplier or they held them to a tighter tolerance or material specification so that it matched the print and it worked with the other internal components as the system was designed.

By The Book

SAR: We understand that STS prepared a highly detailed chart that specifies the right parts for each variation of the M60. Is that institutionalized back through Navy channels?

McClellan: Yes, we gave it to them. But because everyone assumed the 240 would replace the 60 by now it was never implemented.

Renz: That’s one of the big things with this current CSWI (Crew Served Weapon Instructor) Program that STS assisted in developing for the Navy. Those guys are going to be instructors so they’re educated on it. We want them to be able to go back and work on the four guns they’re going to come across in the Navy system; the original M60, the M60E3, or MK43, and some Deltas (aircraft guns with spade grips) out there in the Air Wings.

MK43 Conversion Kits

SAR: What came next?

McClellan: We went forward with US Ordnance to NAVSEA Crane and tried to get them to support doing a remanufacturing process. To at least take the new US Ordnance parts and send out the A and B type kits to have the guns rebuilt so they were functional in a combat capacity similar to what was done for the SEAL Teams. That seemed to fall on deaf ears and frustrated the hell out of us.

Renz: A lot of the guys who come through our course, or see the videos, want the conversion kit for the MK43. This is really about a five minute project that costs just around forty five hundred dollars: a lot cheaper than a twelve thousand dollar FN MK48. That’s been our argument. You’ve got so many of these M60 receivers that are still in the system. For $4,500 per weapon system you can turn it into the MK43.

850 Round Bursts

SAR: Tell us about that amazing video on YouTube of the MK43 firing a continuous 850 round burst.

McClellan: I think everyone except US Ordnance and STS laid claim to that video, but yes, we did the first run of those 850 plus round endurance test.

As we went through the parts on the gun and US Ordnance fixed what was broken, they started making operational changes based on some of our recommendations and some of theirs. About then I found this article that talked about Army testing at Aberdeen Proving Ground in the 1990s. Test results for MRBF (mean rounds between failures) were quoted as very good on the FN MAG 58 – the Army M240 – and very bad on Saco’s M60E3. They said the mean rounds between stoppages (MRBS) for sustained rate burst fire and normal operation on the MAG was 2,962 and MRBF was 6,442. On the M60 the MRBS was a mere 846 and the MRBF was 1,699.

The point was that we had to prove that these old MRBS and MRBF figures didn’t apply to US Ord’s new MK43s or for that matter any correctly assembled version. The Army said the MRBS was 846 rounds so we decided to test that theory and demonstrate a continuous burst of 850 rounds.

We called up Curtis Debord, and asked, ‘If I linked 850 rounds and pulled the trigger one time would the light and short Commando barrel take it?’ They gave it some thought and said no. Based on the temperature rise of about one and a half degree per bullet, they estimated failure would occur at something like 700-800 rounds as the barrel material becomes compromised at temperatures above 1,000 degrees

I told Curtis that to ‘myth bust’ the stated MRBS we need a barrel that can do more than 850 rounds. Think about it – most special operations guys don’t carry a spare barrel. A SEAL Team operators average load out is 600 plus rounds and the old ‘Predator Packs’ could hold 800 to a thousand rounds. Also, most ‘H-Gear/LBE’ guys (infantry grunts) carry around 300 rounds plus a few hundred more carried by those in the squad.

So we wanted to shoot 850 rounds through one barrel in one continuous burst. But how do you do that? The answer was to take a heavy barrel and chop it down and flute it. That way it had the original hard sight on it, it’s shorter, it’s a little bit lighter and it has more surface area for the cooling. So US Ord built one … and as soon as we got it we pushed it to see what it would do, and it worked at least two times for 850+ rounds. Then we did some 600 rounders for Special Forces groups and others. Several on the same barrel until eventually the barrel bulged a little bit. ‘Hey that doesn’t look right,’ so we sent it back to US Ordnance.

The outside contour on the ‘Shorty’ barrel has an enlarged profile where the Stellite liner ends and the hard chromed barrel begins. This strengthens the intersection of the Stellite liner with the barrel and this is where the barrel first bulged after repeated continuous bursts. So US Ordnance adjusted their barrel contours.

Then, assisting US Ordnance at the 2003 Armed Forces Journal (AFJ) Shootout in North Carolina, we were ready to go public with the 850 round burst. This was a production US Ordnance Mk43 that AFJ evaluators had been shooting all day. When AFJ evaluators came up we’d hand over 100 round belts and let them shoot the hell out of that gun. And at the end of the day, we didn’t clean it or anything. All we did was add a whole bunch more CLP on it in preparation for the 850 round endurance test that would be recorded on video.

FN set up on the Known Distance (KD) Range that day because they were demonstrating several other products that were not suitable for the carbine range. We have not tried it but I am not sure that a M240 chrome lined barrel could sustain 850 rounds continuous.

But it still goes back to the MRBS. What we were saying is ‘let’s call a spade a spade’. Put the weapon on the line and let’s do it.’ So I fed 850 rounds of ammunition to ensure there were no binding issues with the stacked 850 rounds and we asked one of the evaluators, Jerry Hurd, to shoot it; a guy who’d been through our training. We wanted somebody we knew would not let off the trigger and could hold the gun on target safely. So Jerry got down and he pulled the trigger and held it down for 850 rounds. And the demonstration went flawless.

SAR: Even after long lines of people had fired a hundred rounds each.

Renz: It was probably close to four thousand rounds through it earlier that day.

A funny thing happened during the 850 round burst. A friend of ours was over on the KD range. When the gun kicked off everyone there just stopped and listened as it chugged and chugged away for what seemed like forever. He said that when it ended everybody was like, ‘Damn!’ The whole idea was to beat that 846 rounds and everyone knew that it worked. It was a pretty bold statement and it was caught on video.

(Editor’s Note: The video recording of this remarkable demonstration has achieved something of a cult status with tens of thousands of viewings on YouTube and other sites. See the resource listing at the end of this feature.)

MK43 Mod 1 Team

SAR: You’ve got a MK43 Mod 1 right here in the conference room. How about walking us through the significant changes that STS and US Ordnance have collaborated on in these weapons.

McClellan: It was clear to us that if they’re this receptive we need to give them some other thoughts and ideas. David Delp, a design engineer at US Ordnance, had several ideas that paralleled some of ours so I would be careful on taking too much credit.

Renz: One of the big things we saw was the military’s obviously going to different types of optics, lasers, pistol grips, everything else, and needed a place to attach ‘em. We went in and I think they were already working on this top cover with the integral rail. We asked, ‘Why don’t you put rails on the front end of the gun?’

So Delp designed the new forend with the rails up front, but we found out it wouldn’t fit some of the Navy’s mounts, like the MK82 with two attachment points. We took a Dremel tool and cut it out, and we would take pictures and send it to ‘em and say, ‘Hey, you need to open this up or it won’t fit on the old gunner shield and some of the other mounting systems’ and they did.

McClellan: These takedown pins right here were designed by Mark Pierson, who now works for STS. We asked US Ord to do a knurled version for the top cover. They were knurled on both sides so you could pull ‘em apart easier.

We asked them to implement the circular aperture (rear sight) on all the guns and were surprised to find out it was already standard on all new production guns.

Another of our other recommendations they’re playing around with is a larger charging handle. One that’s thicker so you can get a better grasp on it.

We talked about the screw on the cocking handle. Pierson started using an aircraft screw because the cocking handle retainer screw kept coming off under vibration. Based on this feedback and feedback from their international customers, US Ordnance redesigned their cocking handle retaining screw with a Teflon insert to keep it from backing out. So US Ord was not only fixing the things that break, they were listening to the operator’s perspective, based on thousands and thousands of rounds with these Sailors and their customers around the world.

We did the new carrying handle that’s on the barrel, going through three or four different versions so it didn’t block the sight. We actually built up JB Weld on the front end of these and mailed ‘em off to US Ord and they adjusted them.

Now US Ordnance came up with the nice hard plate that mounts to the receiver to hold the ammunition (assault bandoleer) to the side. Which is still one of the biggest problems with the 240 – you can’t mount a hundred rounds of ammunition physically to the side of a 240.

SAR: But that assault pack hanger dates back to Vietnam.

McClellan: Actually, it was attached to the feed tray. Problem was, in order to clear malfunctions, you had to lift up to 6.5 pounds of ammo with it. US Ordnance attached it to where the ammo mounts to the receiver and you can easily lift up the feed tray now.

One of the things was this link port, a lot of times the links will sit up on top or this will hit ‘em and knock ‘em down in the receiver. We were looking to get rid of this piece so you could lay the ammo on quicker and not have other problems. So we took a hacksaw and cut the top part off, but that reduced the rigidity. So US Ordnance is looking at building this piece into the top cover.

People always ask about the bolt locking lugs and why shavings would come off them. That’s normal for a Sixty but most people don’t like to see that. US Ordnance is changing the metallurgies between the barrel extension and the bolt locking lugs and have corrected that issue.

Man Portable Medium MGs

SAR: What interaction has there been between STS and other military services related to machine gun training?

McClellan: We’ve taught USMC units all over the country, some Coast Guard and the US Army Special Operations Command came to us and we ran a course for Special Forces guys at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. They know all the foreign weapons, they know all the guns. So we did an in-field armorers and weapons analysis course for them. This afforded the opportunity to evaluate the MK43 and they wanted to talk about the M60 and some of the improvements that were being made because the Army was saying, ‘Maybe we should look at this weapon again for dismounted applications.’

SAR: Well how about what recently happened with the 101st Airborne? They were using (US Ord M60E4/MK43s) in Iraq and apparently loved it. US Ordnance sent SAR some enthusiastic emails and a couple of pictures of the gun in combat use in Iraq that were forwarded to them from an officer in the division’s 3rd Special Troops Battalion.

McClellan: It’s unlikely that the Army will do anything like that for other infantry units – maybe for the Rangers or Special Forces. But we’ve resigned ourselves to the fact that a lightened and chopped 240 will be the next big thing here. But right now this (MK43 Mod 1) exists, it’s lighter, it’s less expensive, and it works.

Everyone’s realizing the 240 is too big for dismounted missions. There’s no ‘A gunner’ (assistant) anymore to operate under the ‘crew-served’ application. Soliders and Marines operating the weapon system themselves today and the M240 is too big for these types of dismounted applications. Just ask any forward deployed service member using these weapons.

The proof of that is FN, responding to a USSOCOM requirement, built the MK48. This is FN’s 7.62mm version of the MK46, which was basically an upsized M249 SAW; in our opinion a 5.56 frame beefed up for 7.62. From SEAL Team evaluations in the beginning, and depending on the person you talk with now, they’re having problems with the gun.

There’s been talk of a 240 ‘shorty,’ where they’re scaling down a 240 (M240E6/KSP58). This seems to be a more logical approach and same thing they did with the M60 when they built the E3 and the Mk43.

Our argument the whole time has been the Mk43 already exists, it’s already in the system. You put the modification kit out through the remanufacturing process, and you have your shorter, lighter machine gun.

War in Cyberspace

McClellan: I was making the M60 argument online in tactical forums with a bunch of SEAL Team guys and others, going back and forth about the 60s and other weapons. So I said, ‘Alright, enough of this cyber chat, let’s go to the range.’ At the range, I showed them the weapon system, we put the conversion kit on one of their weapons, shot it and ran another 850-round burst. Needless to say we established new ground and a mutual respect for the weapon system.

Another item was the published weights for the M240 machine gun. We put a 240 on a scale and it wasn’t even close to what the military manuals stated. So we were trying to figure out how did they get the weight? Well, it appears the M240 receiver weighs that much – not the M240 with the barrel, top cover, etc. In the end, the published weights that we have seen are a bit confusing.

So we weighed a M60 receiver then the receiver with each different type of barrel, every different configuration we could come up with, rounding everything off to the nearest half pound. That way when people would say, ‘Well yeah, but it’s heavier than a 240,’ we ask, ‘What configuration is your 240 in?’ The bottom line is a modern Mk43 is lighter than a M240 and comparable to a Mk48

We went around and ‘round and it kept fueling our fire, it was a good time and a great learning experience. We have a high level of professional respect for anyone involved in providing quality products to the troops.

Conclusion

SAR: In the meantime, there are a whole lot of M60s out there and they need to work right.

McClellan: I’ve talked to units within the last couple of weeks that are getting guns given to them today to go to war and they are M60s!

The sad part is that an old combat proven American made work horse is on her way out. Like the M2HB, she’s been around for a long time, seen a lot of wars and killed a lot of bad guys. But the deal had already been done; the US military was determined to replace the 60. By 2003 she was on her way out, there was no changing the Government’s mind. I was the last person you’d have heard say that eight years ago, but the writing’s on the wall.

Evolution of the M60
    By Robert Bruce

The light and handy 7.62mm NATO caliber M60 General Purpose Machine Gun was developed by the US Army in the aftermath of WWII and fielded in 1957. A departure from traditionally machined heavy steel, it could be made cheap and fast on a stamped sheet metal receiver.

Determined to replace all its Browning-designed M1919 series guns, the Army began a series of modifications to the basic M60. The M60D came first, a helicopter door gun characterized by spade grips and prominent ring sight. The solenoid-fired M60E2 was developed about the same time, a coaxial gun for tanks and external mounting on helicopter gunships.

“PIP” (Product Improvement Program) parts upgrades were applied along the way to address certain design and performance deficiencies.

The M60E3 followed, dropping five pounds in a major overhaul demanded by the Marine Corps. The weight loss unfortunately came with poor durability and reduced performance.

Navy SEALs liked their custom chopped regular M60s but the troubled E3 wasn’t up to the job. Long time M60 manufacturer Saco Defense began delivering a retrofit parts package – the M60E4 – in 1994, receiving the Navy designation MK43 Mod 0.

Still reasonably light and somewhat more reliable and durable than the despised E3, SEAL Team MK43s can be recognized by a distinctive “duckbill” flash suppressor and a positive lock gas cylinder extension that is stubbier and thicker.

After US Ordnance acquired exclusive manufacturing rights to all M60 series guns in 2000, their reliability and durability increased tremendously. However, by this time the US Army – eventually to be followed by the rest of the Armed Forces – had made an irreversible decision to phase out Sixties in favor of the Belgian designed M240 series. The US Navy is the M60’s last major user but all of these are being replaced as quickly as M240s are delivered by FN Manufacturing.

The MK43 Mod 1 is US Ordnance’s latest version of the SEAL Team classic Sixty, readily identified by an integral accessory mounting rail on the feed cover and three more on a redesigned forearm. A retrofit parts kit is available from US Ordnance that will make any serviceable M60 receiver into this light, short, versatile, and powerful one-man machine gun.

Find Out More

US Ordnance, Inc.: www.usord.com
Special Tactical Services, LLC: www.spectacserv.com

• STS website has a link to the letter “The Battle Proven M60”
• STS website has a link to the Washington Times news story “Rummy asked to rescue Rambo’s favorite gun.”
• STS website has a link to the 850 round demonstration video (also seen on www.youtube.com – search “M60 850 rounds” )

There are many semiautomatic variants of newly manufactured NFA firearms available to the military firearms enthusiast. Most people can live with the fact that they are operationally different due to the 1986 ban on the manufacture of machine guns for civilian ownership. Other changes, much more noticeable, also take place to meet the other Title I requirements including barrel length and overall length.

While the semiautomatic mechanism is currently “written in stone” at the present time, there is no prohibition on the civilian manufacture of any other NFA category, including silencers, destructive devices (DD), Any Other Weapons (AOW), Short Barreled Shotguns (SBS), and the focus of this article, Short Barreled Rifles (SBR). While you can’t alter the function, you can certainly get it back to that look you would like, simply by registering it as a Title II firearm prior to making any modifications.

Some popular rifles that get “altered back” to their more original look by using the same barrel length as their fully automatic brethren include the AR-15 and all its variants, and the Uzi carbine. Both are quite simple by mechanical standards and only require a swap in parts with minimal tooling, if any, being necessary. The FN PS90, which seems to be growing in popularity by enormous proportions, looks great with a shorter barrel as well; just like the original P90. The physical swap, while not beyond the abilities of many serious enthusiasts, is much more entailed than those previously mentioned and is thus the subject of this article.

The Legal Stuff Must be Taken Care of First

Before altering any firearm from a Title I to a Title II firearm, it is most important that prior approval from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives be obtained. It is even necessary to obtain their approval before purchasing the parts to complete the conversion and own them in conjunction with your host firearm.

The form an individual will be using to register and “manufacture” the SBR will be an ATF Form 1 (5320.1) Application to Make and Register a Firearm. It is extremely similar in appearance to the familiar Form 4 used to transfer a machine gun to an individual. The basic information is the same, except you determine the information to be filled in regarding the firearm. If you are starting with an existing firearm, as is the case of our PS90 example, the original manufacturer and serial number is used. Any changes you propose to make will be listed in the new description, including barrel length, caliber, overall length, etc.

You will need to affix a recent passport photograph to the completed form and obtain a Law Enforcement Certification, again, just like the Form 4. It must be submitted in duplicate and accompanied by a pair of BATFE NFA Fingerprint cards (available from most local Class III Dealers or can be obtained directly from BATFE) as well as the Certification of Compliance with 18U.S.C. 922(g)(5)(B) (BATFE Form 5330.20). This form is often referred to as the Citizenship Certification. With the exception of the Fingerprint cards, all these forms can be obtained from the BATFE Website www.atf.gov or from the extremely beneficial website www.TitleII.com, formerly known as Danbrew’s PDF Document Center.

Include a check in the amount of $200 for the manufacturing fee payable to “The Department of Justice” with your package, and you can start your planning. Your approved form can show up anytime from 6 weeks to 12 weeks from mailing, and at that point you can start procuring the parts needed to undertake your project and start assembling the new configuration.

Getting to know the PS90

The FN PS90 is a compact Bullpup design with a very short overall length. This makes it even more attractive to bring through the Registered SBR process. With the short barrel, it is extremely compact and packs a big punch compared to similar sized firearms, usually available in pistol calibers. Its slim aesthetics are only exemplified by the unique, horizontal magazine, which lies flat, snapped over the top of the action with absolutely no protrusion in any direction. Basic disassembly for normal maintenance is very simple and requires no tools.

The PS90 is divided into 4 major components; the barreled receiver, the bolt group, the stock and the hammer pack. To field strip the PS90 the first thing you do is remove the magazine, inspect and clear the action and make sure no ammo is present. The next step is to pull the cocking handle rearward to cock the hammer, and than let the handle return to its forward position. Depress the barrel support lock located forward of the chamber area and slide the barrel and receiver assembly completely out the front. Next, tip the receiver down towards the front and slide the bolt group out the same opening as the receiver. Then, slide the butt plate at the rear of the firearm up, and off. The last thing to remove is the hammer pack located under the butt plate you just removed. The hammer group release lever is lifted up and the entire self-contained hammer pack is removed by sliding rearward from the stock. At this point the FN PS90 is field stripped enough for general maintenance and is quickly and easily reassembled.

SBR’ing the FN PS90

The PS90 is a very different creature from most other systems on the market. With many firearms, when factory short barrels are not an option, most people just cut the original barrel to the desired length, re-crown and thread if desired. In the case of the PS90, this isn’t the only option. The barrel on this gun is actually hidden under a much larger barrel shroud, and is blind pinned behind the flash hider. This shroud, from the barrel locking nut area, all the way to the tip of the flash hider is a one-piece unit and must be completely removed before proceeding. The original barrel is only usable again for your project if you cut it to the right length, re-crown and re-thread it for the proper barrel nut. Your other option is to procure a correct length barrel and correct barrel nut to finish your project and save the other parts for future projects or trading materials. Either way, you will need a new barrel nut as the old shroud is no longer useful in any capacity. Everything necessary to complete this project came directly from CMMG (www.cmmginc.com) including excellent directions with all questions asked. A new barrel was installed and a special barrel nut was supplied and utilized, converting the threads to the popular 1/2×28 to allow use of common muzzle accessories. The original barrel nut with the original P90 Flash Hider is also available to complete that “factory look” if that is what you are going for.

If you do wish to try and salvage your original barrel for future use or other projects you can drill out the blind pin located directly behind the flash hider. After removing this pin, the sleeve, also acting as the barrel retaining nut, can be removed and the barrel is allowed to be slid out through the rear of the receiver. If you don’t care about salvaging the barrel and sleeve for future replacement as is, you can simply cut through the barrel and sleeve behind the flash hider, remove the barrel sleeve to the front and remove the barrel through the rear of the receiver. The barrel will still be usable for a short barrel project in the future.

Special Tools & Flying Springs

No one likes flying springs, especially when we don’t know where they came from in the first place, what they looked like, or how to replace them even if we did find them. The special tools refer to some minor modifications necessary to some common wrenches to allow them to fit in the confined spaces of the barrel and the barrel nut.

We will discuss the necessary modified tools first. The two wrenches that needed to be modified for this project include a metric 15mm and a 19mm. Since the spaces they need to fit are very thin, some material must be removed from the width of most standard wrenches. This can be accomplished with a bench mounted belt sander in short order. For a point of reference, the space the 15mm wrench needed to fit in measured only .235 inches wide while the unmodified wrench dialed in at .290 inches wide.

For the flying springs, it is important to know that the barrel, when in place, acts as a host for 3 captive springs. If the old barrel were to be quickly withdrawn from the rear of the receiver there would be nothing to hold the springs in their necessary position and have the potential to create a major problem. To address the spring placement concern, a range rod of a similar diameter can be used pushing the old barrel out (from front to back) with it, while capturing all the springs in their normal position. When the new barrel is inserted from the rear of the receiver, it slowly pushes the range rod out (to the front), recapturing the springs in their intended location again. With the new, short barrel in place the barrel nut was added at the front of the receiver and the barrel was tightened from the rear of the receiver while the front nut was held captive in the receiver and assisted with the 19mm wrench. With a tightening of the barrel nut, and reassembling the PS90, your SBR project is complete.

Do It Yourself or Hire a Pro?

Even though it is completely legal to manufacture your own SBR, some people choose to have a licensed Title II Manufacturer do the work for them. There are a few key reasons it may be advantageous to subcontract this work out. First, once you are approved by BATFE to complete your SBR, you must engrave your name on the receiver as the new manufacturer. Some people don’t want their own name engraved on a firearm as the manufacturer for reasons of liability or for concern about possible future sale. Others choose to have someone else do the work for them just because of time or mechanical constraints.

The process of hiring a licensed Title II Manufacturer to do this work for you is almost as easy as building it yourself on the Form 1 earlier described. In this case, the gun is sent to the manufacturer with a request to remanufacture it to an SBR, and a BAFTE Form 4 is completed to transfer the gun back to you once completed. It is the same federal tax ($200) and approximately the same time frame. The form is almost identical and the Title II Manufacturer is the one who engraves their business name on your firearm. Some manufacturers who do this work are CMMG, Inc. and TROSUSA, both well known in the FN arena.

Online Support

As the author was researching sources of information for this project, several businesses and helpful online communities were discovered. If you have any questions about the FN PS90, or are simply a new fan, you can visit either of the following websites that contain a lot of information: www.fnforum.com and www.fivesevenforum.com. Both were very helpful. For BATFE forms to complete the legal registration before engaging in the project, you will find everything you need at www.titleii.com. For general questions about NFA, the folks at “Tom Bowers Board” www.subguns.com are always happy to help out. For parts, accessories and heavy technical support we highly recommend CMMG at www.cmmginc.com.

PS90 Parts & Accessories
CMMG, Inc
Ph: (660) 248-2293
Fax: (660) 248-2290
www.cmmginc.com

SBR Conversions & Accessories
Mark McWillis
P.O. Box 680
Clackamas, OR 97015
Ph: (503) 358-3708
www.trosusa.com