Racine, Wisconsin gets cold in November, and November 20, 1933 was no exception. But, it was soon to heat up with the excitement caused by the arrival the Dillinger Gang. John Dillinger, noted bank robber and public enemy, had cased Racine’s American Bank and Trust Company as his next target.

At approximately 2:30 p.m., the robbers entered the bank. Barney Cowan, a customer attempting to make a deposit, was manhandled and had a pistol stuck in his ribs. Harold Graham, the head teller, was counting a stack of bills. He had just put his “next window please” sign in place, when he heard someone yell, “Stick ‘em up!” Graham, his back to the widow, ignored the order, thinking someone was joking. When he heard the command again, he replied with a curt, “Next window, please.” Without a word, gang member Charles Makley shot him. The bullet entered Graham’s right arm and lodged in his hip. Although he was seriously injured, he was able to press the alarm button.

At police headquarters, Officer Chester Boyard heard the alarm, grabbed two men and headed for the bank. Boyard was the first to enter the bank, and was immediately taken prisoner by gang member Russell Clark. Sergeant Wilbur Hansen was next through the door, armed with Colt Thompson serial #3363. But, with the Thompson pointed at the floor, he was taken by surprise. Charles Makley fired and a bullet grazed Sergeant Hansen’s right hand. He dropped the Thompson, which was recovered by Makley. The third officer, who was still outside the bank, ran for help.

The bank alarm and the police presence soon drew a crowd of onlookers, there by blocking the exit from the bank. Dillinger, scooping up the loot ($27,700), realized there was a large crowd out front, and he ordered his men to grab hostages. As the gang and hostages moved through the crowd, two detectives came around a corner twenty yards away. Makley turned and fired a burst from his newly acquired “Tommy Gun,” chasing the detectives into Wylie’s Hat Shop to seek cover.

Three hostages were taken by the gang: bank president Grover Weyland, teller Ursula Patzke and police officer Chester Boyard. At the getaway car, the hostages were forced to stand on the car’s running boards, with Officer Boyard on one side, Weyland and Patzke on the other. Hotrodding through town and running two red lights, Dillinger soon realized he couldn’t get away with people on the running boards. He slowed momentarily and forced Boyard off, while pulling the other two hostages inside the car. Ursula Patzke later recalled that she was forced to sit on a pile of guns and money. When she complained that she was cold, Harry Pierpont, another gang member, gave her his coat.

Dillinger and the gang continued along the back roads of Waukesha County, Wisconsin. Approximately thirty-five miles from Racine, the hostages were tied to a tree with a shoelace and left otherwise unharmed. The gang turned around and headed for Chicago, taking Thompson submachine gun #3363 with them.

The Dillinger gang worked their way south through the fall and early winter of 1933, ultimately spending Christmas in Florida. Early January, 1934 found them back in the midwest in East Chicago, Indiana, where they robbed the First National Bank. As he had done in Racine two months before, Dillinger took hostages and used them as a human shield. Outside the bank awaited a heavily armed force of seven East Chicago police. Officer Hobarts Wilgus was one of the hostages, having been captured early in the robbery while on routine patrol in front of the bank. As Dillinger and the hostages moved down the street, he locked eyes with one of the police detectives at a range of twenty-five feet. Just a few feet away from the getaway car, Dillinger, thinking he had made it, relaxed for just a second, and Detective Patrick O’Malley shouted, “Wilgus!”

Wilgus turned, giving O’Malley a clear shot at Dillinger. O’Malley fired his pistol four times, hitting Dillinger once in his bullet-proof vest. Dillinger, shocked, lost his temper, shoved Officer Wilgus aside and shouted, “I’ll get that son of a bitch.” He raised his Thompson and fired a burst directly into Detective O’Malley. The officer, a father of three, died with eight bulletholes in his chest.

Dillinger, making his escape, again headed south through St. Louis, ending up in Tucson, Arizona. The Dillinger Gang, relaxing and enjoying the western hospitality, was taken by surprise and arrested by the Tucson police. Among the items captured were two Thompsons; one of them, #3363, was the one taken in the Racine robbery. Dillinger, now in the Pima County Jail, and awaiting extradition toIndiana, had some time on his hands, and the Tucson police allowed him to carve his name in the detachable buttstock of his Tommy Gun #3363.

During the time the gun was in the possession of the Dillinger Gang, they committed several robberies; but there is no proof that the gun was used by the robbers. However, the fact that gun #3363 was in the gang’s possession at the time of their arrest in Tucson leads one to assume it was carried, if not fired, in some of these escapades.

Racine Police Chief Grover C. Lutter traveled to Tucson and arrived at the Pima County Jail. He had requested the return of Thompson #3363, a weapon originally belonging to the Racine Police Department. Chief Lutter returned with the gun in 1934, shortly after Dillinger had been extradited to Indiana. #3363 has been in the Racine Police Arms Room since then. While doing historical research on the Dillinger Gun, Sgt. David M. Beranis, of the Racine Police Academy, sent a request to the Pima County Jail in 1971 to confirm information about the return of #3363. A reply from Sgt. Jack Wollard, of the Pima County Sheriff’s Records Department, dated September 27, 1971, confirms the return of #3363 to Chief Lutter. It is interesting to note that Sgt. Wollard had to contact his mother to confirm this information,as she was there in 1934 when Chief Lutter of Racine picked up the gun.

Like most Thompsons bought by police, #3363 spent most of its duty time locked in the police arms room. It was bought as “preventive medicine,” just in case a group of “motorized bandits” of the time should come to town. An invoice dated September 10, 1932, shows the original purchase of a 1928 AC Model Thompson submachine gun with accessories as listed below. Chief Grover C. Lutter of the Racine Police Department was the customer and ordered the following items:

• 1 – 1928 AC Thompson submachine gun $225
• 2 – 20-round magazines $6
• 1 – 18-round shot cartridge magazine $3
• 1 – 50-round drum magazine $21
• 2 – bullet-proof vests $160
• 1 – extra fore grip $2.75

The gun and accessories were bought from Federal Laboratories, Inc. of Pittsburgh, PA., a major police equipment sales company. During the Depression era, $225 was a lot of money. Today, collectors pay as much as $35,000 for an original Coltmade Thompson in good condition. It’s clear that “Tommy Guns” have never been cheap.

Occasionally used for training and demonstration, #3363 was rarely pressed into active service. The May 14, 1972 issue of the Racine Journal Times reported that the venerable Colt Thompson submachine gun #3363 was to be retired from active duty.

An article in the November 8, 1995 issue of the Racine Journal Times reported that a photo opportunity was arranged to raise money for a display about the “Dillinger Thompson” and the 1933 bank robbery. For the sum of $25, you could pose with Thompson #3363 and receive an 8×10 color print. Only four people showed up.

Today, the “Dillinger Thompson” is carefully preserved, cleaned, oiled and cared for by Officer Joseph Villalobos, senior training officer, Racine Police Department.

Our sincere thanks to Racine Police Chief Kurt Wahlen and Officer Joe Villalobos for their kind hospitality and assistance in examining and photographing this historic weapon.

Gun Specifications

Make: Colt Patent Firearms Mfg. Co.
Model: 1928 US Navy
Caliber: .45 ACP
Weight: 9 lbs. 13 ounces
Barrel Length: 12-1/2 inches with compensator
O.A. Length: 33 inches
Sights: Lyman Adjustable
Magazines: 20-round box; 50-round drum
Cyclic rate of fire: 600 rpm
Date of manufacture: Sometime between July 29 and August 27, 1921
Distinguishing marks: Signature carved by John Dillinger on left side of buttstock

By Christopher R. Bartocci

On October 1, 1954, ArmaLite became a division of Fairchild Engine and Airplane of Hollywood, California. Unknown to any of the founders of this company, they would alter the course of America, as well as many other nations, and the concept of what an assault rifle of the future was to be. The new ArmaLite weapons would introduce a new generation of materials and manufacturing techniques to make the most advanced, accurate and light weight battle rifles available.

Eugene Stoner went to work for ArmaLite as a Senior Design Engineer. Stoner and his team (Art Miller, Jim Sullivan, Bob Freemont & others) took the advanced materials used in the aircraft industry (aluminum alloys as well as synthetic materials) to design a light weight modern 7.62x51mm caliber assault rifle, the AR-10. Prior to its introduction, virtually all 7.62mm small arms were made of the traditional steel and wood materials. This led to the continuing use of heavy weapons that were difficult, if not impossible, to control on automatic fire and with using wood stocks, prone to the wood swelling when wet as well as cracking.

Stoner claimed that his primary interest was always the development of 7.62x51mm caliber rifles. As stated in an ArmaLite sales brochure from 1959, the AR-10 was truly “Tomorrow’s Rifle-Today.” The AR-10 made use of modern aircraft grade aluminum alloy receivers dramatically reducing weight compared to conventional steel receivers. The stocks (stock, pistol grip and handguards) were manufactured from advanced synthetic materials adding several benefits to the rifle. These synthetic materials were unaffected by the environment; impervious to rain, humidity, snow or heat. Most importantly to the troop in the field, it was light weight. This enabled the soldier to carry the new AR-10 with 50 rounds of 7.62mm to match the weight of the M1 rifle alone.

Another planned design benefit of the AR-10 was the use of low cost high capacity magazines that held twenty rounds of NATO ammunition that would have allowed the troop to carry preloaded magazines that could be discarded when done. This enabled the soldier to carry substantially more ammunition, therefore providing significantly more firepower on the individual level.

The AR-10 utilized an extremely simple gas system that both decreased weight and increased the accuracy over that of other weapons in its class. Gas was directed by a gas tube/exhaust pipe into the bolt carrier group. This gas delivery method was first seen in use on the Swedish Ljungman Gewher 42 and later would be utilized in the French MAS combat rifles. The design that would make Eugene Stoner one of the most important small arms designers of the last century was his design to make the gas tube run under the hand guards from the front sight base to an opening in the bolt carrier group. The expansion chamber was created inside the bolt carrier group between the rear of the tail of the bolt and the rear of the bolt carrier, eliminating the need for a heavy piston rod, nor any rod attached to the barrel that would decrease accuracy due to interference with barrel harmonics. The gas system consists of a gas tube, which looks like a long exhaust pipe that goes from the front sight assembly/gas block to the bolt carrier group. As the projectile passes the gas port located under the front sight assembly, the gas is directed back to the bolt carrier by it traveling down the gas tube, pressurizing the system, and is lead into an expansion chamber within the bolt carrier group. The expansion chamber is made between the rear of the tail of the bolt and the back of the bolt carrier. That pressure drives the bolt carrier rearward. Just as the bullet leaves the barrel, the cam rotates the multi-lug bolt out of alignment unlocking the bolt from the barrel extension, extracting the fired cartridge case and ejecting it from the rifle. As the carrier moves rearward it does a couple of things. First, the bottom of the carrier pushes the hammer back regardless if it is to a disconnector or auto sear. Then the buffer/ buffer spring is compressed. Once the bolt carrier assembly has traveled to its furthest point rearward, the spring and buffer return the bolt carrier group forward, stripping a cartridge off the magazine, feeding, chambering and locking the bolt into battery ready for the next shot. This is an inline system meaning the tip of the barrel is inline with the center mass of the buffer/ stock, thereby increasing accuracy and reliability while decreasing recoil.

Battling the “Not Made Here” Syndrome

During this development stage of the AR-10 rifle, the United States Army was looking to update its arsenal from the outdated 8-shot M1 Garand. Although once touted as the greatest battle implement ever, time, as well as warfare, changed. A rifle with a high capacity magazine and selective fire capabilities was needed desperately. Especially since it appeared the U.S. was falling behind in the advancements in battle rifle development. The Germans saw this need in World War II and adopted das Sturmgewehr; the world’s first true assault rifle giving the shooter controllable and accurate semi or automatic fire at the discretion of the shooter thereby massively increasing firepower of the unit at the individual level. Around the same time, the Soviet’s began development of their own assault rifle, which was not adopted until 1947 when the AK47 made its world debut and was about to set the bar for effective combat weapons. The U.S. would not take this lack of initiative or vision into account until US troops came onto the receiving end of Mikhail Kalashnikov’s new rifle in the rice paddies of Vietnam. Not until then would the U.S. Ordnance Corps realize how far behind they were in small arms technology.

When the U.S. military was looking for a rifle to replace their obsolete M1 Garand, trials were held with the requirement it would fire the newly adopted 7.62x51mm NATO cartridge. Although the obvious conclusions to the requirement was that they wanted an advanced rifle design that would fill the role of several weapons currently in use including the M1 Garand, M1/ M2 Carbine, BAR, Thompson SMG as well as the M3 SMG. What Springfield Armory came up with was none of the above, especially in the advanced category. They put forth for the trials their T44,which was essentially an M1 Garand with a removable 20 round box magazine and a selector switch that allowed fully automatic bursts that the average soldier could not control. The rifle was just as heavy even though it used the slightly less powerful cartridge. The other entry was the T48, which was a version of the FN FAL rifle. The trials showed much interest in the ArmaLite AR-10, especially in weight, reliability and accuracy. Nevertheless, the winner was declared as the M14 (the T44 rifle). The M14 would go down in history as the shortest serving small arm in U.S. history when it was replaced within 6 years with the AR-15/M16 rifle.

ArmaLite was devastated by this failure. In hind sight you would have to ask yourself if they were upset because their candidate lost or if it was because they knew they had the better weapon, one that was more advanced than anything currently fielded anywhere in the world. They knew it was Ordnance Corp politics that would put an outdated arm in the hands of their troops who were soon to deploy to the jungles of Southeast Asia. It was there that the Ordnance Corps would realize they got the wrong gun and they needed a true assault rifle fast. But that is a different story.

After the trials were over, interest in the .30 caliber cartridge was now getting put on the back burner to the new high-velocity .22 caliber cartridge. ArmaLite would now focus on downsizing their AR-10 tothe AR-15 to fire this new 5.56mm cartridge. The rest is history. The AR-10 went into the Ordnance Corps scrap heap, a victim of poor politics. Small numbers of AR- 10 rifles were produce by Artillerie- Inrichtingen of Zaandam, Holland, but eventually went away. The AR-10 would have to wait until the early 1990s before it would be revisited and appreciated for its advanced design and benefits to U.S. troops, but it would be the U.S. Special Operations Command who would revive it. Gene Stoner would team up with C. Reed Knight, Jr. at Knight’s Armament Company to revive the rifle he could never get out of his head. There, the SR25 would be born: a 7.62x51mm caliber rifle that would have many of the updates from the current M16A2 family of weapons.

The ArmaLite name went into ambiguity and remained a company who made brilliant advancements in small arms development but never had the selling knowhow to make it to the top.

ArmaLite Makes a Comeback

In the late 1980s, several companies would start producing copies of the AR- 15/M16. One of them was Eagle Arms of Coal Valley, Illinois. However, ingenuity and research and development at Eagle Arms were pretty much limited to reverse engineering Colt AR-15 and M16 rifles and producing versions for commercial sales. That was until January of 1994 when anenergetic and true firearms designer bought the company. Former U.S. Army Ordnance Officer and civilian employee of AMCCOM at Rock Island, Mark Westrom restructured the company and began development on new products. On the top of that list is what Westrom named the M- 10: a resurrection of the AR-10 7.62mm rifle. This was somewhat after Knight’s came out with their SR25 rifle. Another landmark event was about to take place for Westrom when he purchased the rights and trade mark of ArmaLite. The new company was called ArmaLite, Inc., with Eagle Arms being a subsidiary of that company.

Westrom had some choices to make with his M-10. The first one was a given – now the rifle could legitimately be called the ArmaLite AR-10. The next series of questions was how he should go about designing it. The first option was to go off the original prints. This had two problems. First was the rifle would look very strange and out of place compared to the current M16-series rifles. Secondly, many advancements had taken place over these intervening years with the evolution of the M16 series and those improvements could not readily be implemented on the original caliber design. The original AR-10 was never a finalized combat ready design. Once it was adopted it would go through a development process to get it ready for issue: all those things that Ordnance Corps neglected to do with the M16 development during the Vietnam War. The next option for Westrom was to redesign it from the ground up. Westrom was up for the challenge but with the development of the SR25, another option needed to be entertained. If Westrom was to base his AR-10 off the Stoner designed SR25, he could tap into a new market. By keeping interchangeability with the SR25 on the major components, he would have a secondary market for the new AR-10 rifles parts. So the third was the option chosen. Westrom kept the upper receiver, bolt and bolt carrier interchangeable with the SR25. But the lower would be different as well as an entirely different design principal from Knight’s.

Knight was, and still is to this day, first and foremost a defense contractor with limited commercial sales. When Stoner developed the SR25, he wanted to keep as much interchangeability/parts commonality with the M16A2 as possible (60%). With military logistics and resupply being what they are, this only made sense. Westrom felt that several of the componentsused on the SR25 were not sufficientlystrong enough for use in the 7.62mm rifle. Westrom felt he would design this as a 7.62mm caliber rifle and parts interchangeability would not be a priority. The first rifle to be introduced by ArmaLite would be their AR-10A2, the infantry rifle.

The AR-10A2 “The Infantry Rifle”

It is necessary to look at the time period when the AR-10A2 came out. This was while the main U.S. battle rifle, the M16A2, still utilized iron combat sights. Today, iron sights (fixed) seem to be outdated. With the adoption of the Swan/ NATO Mil-Std-1913 rail and the plethora of hi-tech optics and accessories, the old reliable iron sights are now more so thought of as back-up sights. Even though the M16A2 is still in production for the U.S. military, flat top M16A4 rifles seem to be taking over. The original AR-10 rifle was designed when iron sights were standard and troops were taught how to use them, and use them well.

The AR-10A2 utilizes the fully adjustable rear sight which is adjustable for elevation as well as windage and is adjusted without the need for any tools. The elevation increments were set for the trajectory of the standard 7.62x51mm M80 ball cartridge. If someone is comfortable and accustom to the M16A2, they will be right at home with the AR-10A2. The AR-10A2 is likened to an M16A2 on steroids. The front sight is the standard 4 position square sight.

The upper receiver, like the original AR- 10/AR-15, does not have the forward assist assembly. The weapon system was developed by Stoner to function as is and there was no need for a mechanical device to drive the bolt closed if it fails to lock.He felt (as does the M14 operator’s manual) that you do not force a cartridge into the chamber. You remove it and chamber a new cartridge. Forcing the bolt closed is more likely to cause a more serious malfunction than to prevent it. This is why the original AR-10, the Stoner developed SR-25 and the new AR-10A2 do not have one. Westrom has been asked for it and always explains to his customers why it is a bad idea.

The AR-10A2 has the M16A2 rifle’s fired cartridge case deflector. The fired cartridge case deflector is a pyramid shaped deflector that is part of the forging right behind the ejection port. Using high speed photography, research showed that as cyclic rate increases, the ejection pattern shifts rearward. This is what will cause fired cartridge cases to strike left handed shooters in the face. The original deflector rib used on the early AR-10 and AR-15 was sufficient with lower cyclic rate (caused by powder type) but as more Ball powders began to be used, the deflector rib did not extend out far enough to deflect the fired cartridge case. The new deflector extended out much further than that of the original deflector rib. The fired cartridge case strikes the rib and either bounces forward off the deflector or deflects it so it will not come in contact with the face of a left handed shooter.

The handguards used are the standard M16A2 handguards that ArmaLite offers in both black and the ArmaLite trademark green furniture. The rifle uses the standard A2-style canted slip ring. The front sight tower is another innovation of ArmaLite. Rather than the conventional drilled and staked front sight assembly, Westrom chose one that is held on with set screws. The purpose of using set screws was to allow the rifle’s front sight base to be shifted to zero the front sight for windage, while at the same time leaving the rear sight mechanically zero/centered in the rear sight base. The original rifles, in order to be Assault Weapon Ban compliant, had no bayonet lug. With the sunset of the ban in 2004, Westrom resumed production of standard front sight assemblies with bayonet lugs. Newer models are now staked in place on the AR-10A2 rifle but the other models retain the set screw front sight assemblies.

The 20-inch AR-10A2 barrel is chrome plated with a manganese phosphate finish.The barrel has a 1 turn in 12 inch rifling twist, which will stabilize all military grade 7.62mm NATO ammunition. The barrel has been improved throughout the years. All of Westrom’s weapons are works in progress: they are constantly improved and updated. The earlier rifles used M16-type barrel extensions. In 2004, ArmaLite made a product enhancement to the AR-10 rifles utilizing M4-type extended feed ramps in both the barrel extension and upper receiver. The standard M16 rifle gas tube is one of the components that Westrom felt would not be sufficient for use in the AR- 10. The standard gas tube would only be inserted about half way into the carrier key on the bolt carrier and Westrom felt this could cause unnecessary gas leakage. He extended the length of the gas tube so itwould seat to the rear of the key to ensure a better gas seal.

Also in compliance with the assault weapon ban, ArmaLite provided their AR- 10A2 rifles with muzzle brakes because they could not use the politically incorrect flash supressor/compensator. The first generation muzzle brake had three gas escape vents on the right and left side. It was later replaced with a muzzle brake with two vents. Current post Sept 14, 2004 rifles utilize a proper M16A2-style muzzle brake. Of course there are many aftermarket types that can be used as well. All earlier versions utilized a heavy barrel from end to end. Newer production rifles utilize a lighter barrel from the muzzle to the front of the front sight assembly thereby assisting with making the rifle a little less muzzle heavy.

The bolt carrier group has gone through much evolution since the original. In Stoner’s original design, the gas tube ran along the left side of the barrel from the front sight into the left side of the bolt carrier group. Later, ArmaLite made a design change that placed the gas tube on top of the barrel where it remains to this day in both the 5.56 and 7.62mm weapons. By the time Artillerie-Inrichtingen went into production, these modifications had already been made. The weapon was originally charged from a handle that was inside the carrying handle and the original carrier group was all chrome plated. They utilized a cam pin as well as the standardtype extractor and ejector. The firing pin was free floated and held in place by a machined steel retaining pin. The multi lug bolt had lineage to one designed by Melvin Johnson. The actual mechanics of how the assembly works has not changed for more than 40+ years.

When Stoner went to work on his SR25 rifle, he applied many of the advancements made in the 5.56mm rifles throughout the years while retaining his signature chrome plating of the bolt and carrier. He utilized the standard M16 carrier key. The firing pin retaining pin was one of the most significant enhancements. Stoner redesigned it to be “soldier proof,” making the pin captive so it would not be lost during field cleaning. Westrom kept both the bolt and carrier compatible at the sub level. However, Westrom went with the more durable and proven manganese phosphate finish. Inside, the bolt carrier and key are chrome plated. He also went with a larger cotterstyle firing pin retainer pin. The firing pin is where ArmaLite went off the reservation of tradition. The original AR-10 rifle was designed to work with Mil-Spec M80 7.62mm Ball. Most all automatic weapons prior to the AR-10 had free floating firing pins. The primers were hard enough that inertia of the firing pin, from a closing and locking of the bolt would not cause the weapon to slam fire. However, in commercial and law enforcement applications of the AR-10, the rifles would have to be compatible with commercial .308 Winchester ammunition. Commercial production primers are not made to the same hardness specification of military ones, so when firing many different types of commercial ammunition, the rifle would slam fire. Westrom took the most logical and simplest road to correction by added a firing pin spring to prevent the slam fire condition. The ArmaLite extractor assembly had gone through many updates and continues to do so to this day. In fact, one of the most criticized components of the AR-10/ AR-15/M16 weapon systems is the extractor. Due to the design, there is but a very small compartment for the extractor spring to function. The thickness and diameter of the spring has been taken to the max. This part does wear out quicker than pretty much any part of the weapon. The first major enhancement to the ArmaLite extractor was the addition of the internal plastic buffer. This has been standard on military M16’s since the mid-1970s. This buffer kept the extractor spring straight and offered additional force. The next major change was to come out of USSOCOM at Crane during their M4 reliability enhancement programs. They developed a rubber O-ring that slid over the existing extractor spring/buffer. This 10¢ piece of rubber increased the extractor force by a factor of 4. The O-ring has been in use with SOCOM for several years and only a few years ago was finally authorized by the big Army as a reliability enhancement. The newest enhancement offered by ArmaLite, specifically for their AR-10 carbines, is another embedded extractor that fits inside the original. This is in conjunction with the rubber O-ring. As with the 5.56mm weapons, the shorter carbines/shorter gas tubes increase the cyclic rate of the weapon. The bolt is opening sooner while larger amounts of residual pressure exist in the cartridge case. Thus, the extractor is pulling out a cartridge that is still somewhat stuck to the chamber. This increases the fatigue in the extractor springs.

The lower receiver is what takes a good departure from the original AR-10 and SR- 25 design. Westrom went with an M16- type 7175-T74 aluminum forging. Westrom paid particular attention to give a clean, familiar, M16A2-style look to his rifle. This includes the magazine release button fence as well as the co-witness selector marks on the right side. The bolt catch was another part of the AR-10 that he felt the M16A2 bolt catch was not strong enough to halt the massive 7.62 caliber bolt group. So Westrom re-designed the bolt to have more mass and to be significantly more robust. ArmaLite has just come out with another enhancement to the bolt catch that would go with a newly developed ArmaLite magazine.A standard M16 rifle stock and buffer extension are used. Again, they are offered in black or ArmaLite green.

Of all the unique aspects of the AR- 10A2, or any other of ArmaLite’s AR-10 rifles, the magazine would have to be the most interesting. The chosen magazine system was based on many reasons but the driving reason was due to the assault weapon ban that prevented manufacturers from producing high capacity magazines. The original AR-10 magazines and the Knight magazines worked incredibly well and were definitely the preferred choice. But due to the timing, original magazines were rare if not impossible to find and Knight magazines were extremely rare and, when found, quite pricey. Westrom wanted all his customers to have affordable high capacity magazines. With the limited availability of the standard magazines, he needed an alternative. Due to the decommissioning of the M14 rifles many years ago, there were huge stocks of military 20-round magazines. They were reasonably priced and very well designed. So Westrom set out with his engineers to make the M14 magazines work in his AR-10 series rifles. By modifying the feed lip angles and the magazine well, the winning combination was achieved, though the follower had to be replaced for the magazine to actuate the bolt catch. Due to the fact there was no rib on the rear of the M14 magazine that would guide the follower and provide the surface that would engage the bolt catch, Westrom had to come up with a follower design that would operate the bolt catch. The design was a spring loaded plunger with a guide cut in the back of the magazine that would allow the plunger to extend rearward prior to the last shot being fired. When the last cartridge is fired and the bolt carrier group moves all the way rearward, the plunger lifts up the bolt catch locking the bolt to the rear. This modification was made by sending the magazines into ArmaLite or update kits were provided to gunsmiths. Now with the assault weapon ban lifted, ArmaLite designed their own magazine. This new magazine would of course be compatible with all previous weapons and based off the M14 magazine design. But a rib was manufactured into the rear of the magazine to accommodate the new follower. The new follower works similar to that of the standard AR-10 or SR- 25, where the rear of the magazine raises the bolt catch into engagement. ArmaLite did develop a new bolt catch for this magazine. Studies conducted by ArmaLite showed that more than 90% of the previously made rifle’s bolt catches would engage the new magazine. But even 90% is not good enough for Westrom and he makes the improved bolt catches available for weapons that need it to function with the new magazines.

With today’s combat conditions and new technology, iron sights seem primitive. But to many combat veterans they are still the most viable of all sights. They are impervious to weather, heat, humidity, water submersion and mud. They do not, under normal conditions, get knocked out of alignment. The AR-10A2 keeps the spirit and intent of the original AR-10. The original intent for the rifle was primary iron sights with the ability to mount optics. ArmaLite offers a variety of AR-10 rifles including the modern Mil-Std-1913 flat top upper receiver. However, sometimes going back to the basics leads to the most overall sound weapon system. The AR-10A2 is just that. With recent operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, the long range capability of the 7.62x51mm cartridge could be exploited and this is the perfect rifle to do it. Whether with optics or iron sights, the old design is truly state-of-the-art. This 50 year young rifle, as well as this family of weapons, will serve the U.S. and allies for many years to come. The legacy and the continuing success of the AR-10/AR- 15 series rifles is a tribute to Gene Stoner and his dedicated team of designers who, in the 1950s, were just too far advanced in the small arms world and they did not have the insight to see that Stoner truly did develop “tomorrow’s rifle today.” It is true that Gene Stoner lived to see his initial design used as the downsized AR- 15 /M16/M4 series of weapons utilized by millions of soldiers and police officers around the world. However, it is only tragic that he did not live to see that the initial 7.62mm concept of the AR-10 has gone full circle and equips the most advanced troops in the world, and has achieved much fame and popularity.

By Anders Thygesen

Sabotage – The Fog Signal serves as a brilliant example to illustrate how an organization in dire need was able to devise a useful and practical solution to an immediate problem without reinventing the wheel. As the S.O.E. (Special Operations Executive) took root in the occupied countries during World War II, the need for efficient sabotage equipment increased. An efficient and fairly easy place for the resistance groups to attack was the railway system. In Denmark alone 1,525 rails and trains were destroyed during the years of 1943 – 1945.

Often it was not only the trains that were blown up. The best and most cost efficient method of sabotage to hamper the German war machine was gained by derailing the train and its cargo of war materials, causing ruin or comprehensive delays. To this end, a trigger device was needed for demolishing the rail directly ahead of the oncoming locomotives eliminating the possibility of bringing the train to a halt before derailment was accomplished. The solution was obvious and had been used ever since the late 1800s.

Development

As early as March 1893, an article in a Danish local newspaper reported how a new signal device had been introduced that was able to notify a locomotive engineer when, for example, the Stop-signal was obscured by fog. The Danish Railway Guide Book of 1944 instructs a railway worker to place three Fog Signals in a row on both tracks in such a way that a locomotive crossing them would produce a series of loud “gunshots” notifying the engineer and warning him to reduce speed.

Description

The civilian version produced by Kynoch measures 2.055 inches (5.2cm) in diameter and 0.4 inch (10mm) high. It is made from a concentric metal bowl and soldered on the inside to a pressure plate. The bowl is crimped onto a circular sheet metal plate soldered to three, and in some cases up to seven, anvils on which percussion caps are placed. This plate serves as the base of the Fog Signal. The Fog Signal houses 125 grains (8 grams) of black powder adjacent to the percussion caps. A mount holding a pair of wire legs is soldered to the bottom plate. The legs are flexible allowing them to be squeezed over the track, thus fixing the Fog Signal to the track.

When the locomotive runs over the bowl with the pressure plate, it is squeezed against the percussion caps setting them off and igniting the black powder. Because the black powder is confined in such a small place the rapidly expanding gasses of the explosion cause the sealed bowl to burst generating a loud bang.

The modified S.O.E. version is grey and measures only 1.57 inches (4cm) in diameter and 0.6 inches (1.5cm) high. Mechanically it is built using identical principles as the civilian version. However, the bowl and the wire mount are made from brass. Only the bottom plate is sheet metal. Three percussion caps are to be found inside and there is a 2 inch (5cm) long quick match fuse wrapped around the caps adjacent to the black powder.

The most significant difference from the civilian Fog Signal is the 1.26 inch (3.2cm) spring snout protruding from the side of the bowl. It is identical to the spring snout found on the “Timepencil” Switch No.10 and serves exactly the same purpose of holding a detonator or a Bickford fuse. The snout itself serves as a funnel for leading hot gasses from the inside of the bowl through the snout and into the detonator assuring reliable ignition.

Function

In order to guarantee successful operation it was essential that the Fog Signal be placed correctly on the track. As the illustration from the Enemy Sabotage Equipment, the War Office, May 1945, shows, it is clearly seen that the bowl is not centrally mounted on the wire pegs. This is so that the spring snout will protrude as far as possible from the surface of the track. It was therefore extremely important that the saboteur attached the Fog Signal so that the spring snout holding the detonator was facing towards the outside of the track, otherwise the snout with the detonator would be cut clean off by the flange on the locomotive’s wheels before ignition.

The distance between the Fog Signal (ignition point) to the main charge placed in front of the locomotive is set by the length of Cordtex (detonating cord). The Cordtex is attached to the detonator by tape or a Cordtex Joint wire and connected to one or more charges. The burning rate for the Cordtex is approximately 23,000 fps. (7,000m/s). This means that the ignition device and demolition charge fire simultaneously regardless of the length of Cordtex and number of charges used.

Different Models

Two commonly known variations were available to the resistance. The British S.O.E. version Mk.I A as previously described and one produced by the U.S. O.S.S. (Office of Strategic Services) designated as Firing Device, R. R. Torpedo A3. It was an improved version developed in October 1943. Apparently the Germans, in an effort to avoid the Fog Signals, attached wire brushes to the front of the locomotive thus sweeping the tracks. The R. R. Torpedo A3 was more firmly attached to the tracks due to the lead straps making it more resistant to the wire brushes. It differs somewhat from the British version in appearance as the bottom plate is oval and the wire clams have been replaced with lead straps. The internal construction is exactly the same. The O.S.S. Fog Signal was produced by Western Cartridge Company of East Alton, Illinois.

Special thanks to Norman Bonney and Dave Sampson of the UK and Dr. John Brunner of the USA for assisting in the preparation of this article.

L. James (Jim) Sullivan was born on 27 June, 1933 in Nome, Alaska.  His father was an attorney and Senator in the Alaskan legislature.  He has one brother, Frank Sullivan, who is a doctor in Cranston, Rhode Island.  He is married to his wife Kaye, whom he married while working for ArmaLite in the 1950s.  The list of Sullivan accomplishments and designs in small arms is impressive and stretches from the AR-15 system, to the Stoner 63 system, the Ruger Mini-14, the Ultimax 100, and countless projects in between.  Jim Sullivan is still going strong, and this winner of the prestigious Colonel George Chinn Award from the NDIA Small Arms Symposium, is forging ahead on new projects.

In Part I of this Interview, Jim Sullivan fills in the blanks on the ArmaLite days and the AR-15 project, the Stoner 63 project, digs deep on the Ichord Committee regarding M16 failures in Vietnam, covers the Ruger Mini 14 and M77, as well as his work on the 7.62mm chain gun, the EPAM, Chiclet Guns, and Caseless ammo.
      
SAR:  Jim, how long did you live in Nome?  

Jim Sullivan:  Until I was seven, and then the family moved.  It looked like the world was heading back into full scale war (World War II). Actually, it had really already started and it looked like the US would get into it and might head towards Alaska; so we moved down to Seattle.  I went through grade school, then went to a town called Kinewagon, Washington, and then went back to Seattle’s University of Washington for engineering.  I’m not a graduate engineer, but I took engineering courses there.  

SAR:  What was your first experience with firearms?  

Jim Sullivan:  I was 12 years old, and a friend of mine’s father had quite a collection and I used to go over there and just look at all those pistols.  It was a very large collection and he had a firing range set up.  He would fire them for us – he wouldn’t let us shoot, but we could watch.  Most were military auto-loader pistols.  The first time that I used any military firearms myself was when I went in the Army.  I was in during the Korean War, from ’53 to ’55, and the war was already winding down at the time.  They were having the Panmunjom talks, and the war ended by the time I finished basic.  That was fine with me.  

SAR:  What was your MOS?  

Jim Sullivan:  I don’t remember the number.  I had been trained as a telephone installer repairman, but I had also gone to what was called the Sparling School of Deep Sea Diving before I’d gone in the army, so I transferred into diving when I went overseas.  That was in 1954.  There was a lot of repair work to do after the invasion at Inchon.  This was after the war.  As far as firearms, the only ones that I fired at all were just in basic training, and we got everything: M1911A1 pistol, M1 Garand, M1 carbine, and the Browning machine guns.  I didn’t see any odd machine guns in Korea.

SAR:  Were you interested in those modern guns?  

Jim Sullivan:  I was fascinated by machine guns in general and I read everything I could ever find on the Maxim gun, especially the technology and the effects of World War One.  This was long before I ever fired an M1 rifle.  I had WHB Smith’s Small Arms of the World and a wonderful biography of Hiram Maxim.  I read about him, and read quite a bit on John Browning and the German designers.  I’ve noticed that most of the small arms advances were either designed by Americans or Germans.  

SAR:  At what point did you shift over to working with small arms?  

Jim Sullivan:  When I got out of the Army in 1955, I went back to the University of Washington, and I read about this new company called ArmaLite.  I think it was in Time magazine.  They had an article on the AR-10.  I applied for a job as a draftsman there, and that’s how I started with ArmaLite – that was in 1957.  I was never a good student, and I had gone to work for Boeing like half the people in Seattle.  ArmaLite was something that really caught my interest and I was very happy to land that job.  They were in Hollywood, California at the time, so I moved there.  

SAR:  Who did you work with at ArmaLite?  

Jim Sullivan:  I reported directly to Gene Stoner.  Everybody did.  Well, not everybody, because there was a front office staff.  Charles Dorchester had some people up there, but everybody in the machine shop and the designers did.  There were two designers at the time, John Peck and Gene Stoner,  I was just a draftsman.  Bob Fremont started later, and Art Miller was there already, but he was pretty much working at Artillerie Inrichtengen in Holland on the AR-10 program during the three years I was at ArmaLite.  John Peck was one of the designers of the M-1 Carbine; he had worked for Carbine Williams and had actually worked there at ArmaLite before Stoner joined.  He worked for George Sullivan – not a close relation to me and I never did discover how close we were.  George Sullivan was the founder of ArmaLite.  He was the patent attorney for Lockheed and got Fairchild.  I don’t remember why that even though he was still in Lockheed, why he got Fairchild involved.  Fairchild was the one that funded the Fairchild Airplane Engine Company, funding ArmaLite.  

SAR:  What type of projects did you work on at ArmaLite?  

Jim Sullivan:  I did almost nothing on the AR-10.  They wanted to make another try at moving the gas system from the side to the top.  The original AR-10 had it on the side.  Gene asked me to take a whack at it, and I did.  He didn’t like my idea at first because there was a transfer tube in the AR-10, and what we ended up with on the AR-16 and the AR-10 was that transfer tube was pulling off of the gas tube, and he thought it would add to the leak, and of course it does because it’s got an additional gap in there.  Anyway, it worked.  This was about a year into my time there, and I was promoted to Design Engineer.  John Peck had designed an early .556 caliber gun.  Actually, there were two guns made.  There was one they called a Stopette, which was in .222 Remington caliber.  It didn’t have a pistol grip, and it didn’t have a big enough barrel extension.  The extension broke, and the head of the machine shop that was firing it was creased on the top of his head, and required getting patched up.  The Stopette was originally designed by somebody who wasn’t there anymore, I think his name was Doc Wilson.  John Peck was doing a military version, just a scaled down AR-10.  What you might call a first AR-15 in a way, but it certainly wasn’t.  It was smaller in diameter, it still had the same small barrel extension diameter as the one that had blown up.  That project was stopped when the Stopette blew up.  They had fired it all right, but it was the first of that size that we changed the gas system from the side.  This too had the side gas system that I moved to the top.  That was my only work on that project, and my only work on the AR-10.  Since that worked well, I got promoted.  

SAR:  How was the work atmosphere at ArmaLite?  

Jim Sullivan:  It was great.  The people were really sharp people, all of them, and fun to work with.  Most had gun backgrounds.  George Sullivan, the founder, had a big collection of military guns.  John Peck certainly was a gun enthusiast, and Gene Stoner, well, you know his background on the early work on AR-10 before joining ArmaLite.  People at ArmaLite were into guns and into the history and technology, and there was a good work atmosphere.  I only had a Browning Pump while I was there.  After the Stopette, they wanted to do an all new cartridge, a new gun, and that was what became the AR-15.  This is the M16, basically the same gun, it’s just more evolved using two different numbers.  We started from scratch, and there was another guy that joined me by the name of Bob Fremont who wasn’t a gun guy.  Bob was one of these fussy guys that was exactly right most of the right time.  He drove everybody crazy.  He did the most meticulous tolerance studies.  He would do that, and I was doing the gun design on this gun, they hadn’t even given it a name yet, but that was what became the AR-15.  We put a different trigger mechanism in there.  We made changes from the waffle magazine, which, while it looks stronger, it’s actually weakened by doing it that way.  We had a 25-round steel magazine that wasn’t a waffle magazine.  That didn’t last.  With the 25 shot, the taper in the cartridge was a problem, so we went to the aluminum 20-shot to keep the mag straight.  You can only go so far before you run into trouble, if you have a straight magazine.  The AR-15 was designed for a straight magazine.  In retrospect, that was a mistake.  You really needed a curved magazine to make the weapon more effective.  We never should have done it that way with a straight magazine.

SAR:  What material did you use in the first AR-15?  

Jim Sullivan:  George Sullivan, the founder, he was kind of into new materials, and he had a version of 7075 aluminum that he called Sulliloy.  Yes, “Sullivan Alloy.”  [Sullivan laughs]  I think he put some kind of patent on it, pretended it had special properties.  Really, it was just 7075 aluminum with some kind of bat’s blood voodoo in it.  Never made any difference that we could see.  

SAR:  How did the first AR-15 work?  Did you get it built while you were there?   

Jim Sullivan:  Yeah, we got it done.  Prototypes never work right, and we had lots of problems, but we solved them all.  Actually, we had moved out of Hollywood by the time we got started on that one.  We were down in Costa Mesa, which is 30 or 50 miles outside of Hollywood.  The company was growing and growing.  We had a great range that we could go to there in Hollywood.  It was a little ways out of town.  The Hutton range, but we lost that.  The one we had that we were able to use there in Costa Mesa nearby had too many rules.  You would have to make arrangements to go out there and fire, where at Hutton we could just show up and blaze away.  That restricted the test firing, which in a way may have caused some of the problems that later showed up regarding the extraction business.  

SAR:  What were you doing personally?

Jim Sullivan:  I got married almost as soon as we moved down there.  Kaye had agreed to marry me already, so she came down immediately after I started there, and we got married right away.  I worked there three years, through the entire process of the AR-15.  After that, Bob Fremont got laid off, then I got laid off and Gene Stoner left.  ArmaLite wasn’t really making any money, and ArmaLite had originally intended to produce this rifle.  Stoner and some sales group had gone to Asia with an AR-10 and the new AR-15.  Nobody wanted the AR-10, everybody wanted the AR-15.  Strangely, Stoner never thought much of 5.56 caliber.  He’s called the father of the 5.56, but he didn’t like it.  He designed the AR-16, which was a 7.62 rifle using a piston version which went no place, but the scaled down version in 5.56, the AR-18, was the one that was successful.  That was Arthur Miller’s project after I was gone.

SAR:  Did you stay in the firearms business after you left ArmaLite?

Jim Sullivan:  No, I went to National Cash Register: it had nothing to do with guns.  I was a designer there for two years, and then I wanted to get back into guns.  I went to work for Harvey Aluminum, which made Sulliloy, the 7075 forgings.  Here’s one of the first ones. (Sullivan pulls out an AR-15 lower receiver forging.)  That’s the first AR-15 forging.  It was from a group of 40 that we did.  I also got involved with explosive munitions that helped me get some background in this area.  It was for an earth anchor; it wasn’t demolition or weaponry.  You pounded a pipe in the ground, then you dropped this little bomblet down in there, and set it off.  It would spread open, and then you’d drive it down one and a half feet further into this empty space down there, and then they poured concrete in.  This was something they could anchor aluminum.  They were special little pallets that joined together and made an airfield and it was for anchoring an aluminum airfield.  So to sell their aluminum airfield, which the military adopted, to sell that, they had to develop this earth anchor, and that’s what I was involved with.  It was adopted in the early ’60s.

SAR:  You joined Gene Stoner on the Stoner 63 project at the beginning, didn’t you?  Where were they at when you joined them?

Jim Sullivan:  Bob Fremont had joined him too, so it was the three of us, the same three that had worked on the AR-15.  Bob worked on the Stoner 62; I never did that.  It was 7.62 caliber like Gene’s M69W prototype.  M69W reads the same whether it is in a standard machine gun version or with the receiver inverted to become a rifle.  I joined in on the Stoner 63 at Cadillac Gage in Costa Mesa.  All of these projects, the M69W, the Stoner 62 and the Stoner 63 had similar concepts.  If you turned the receiver upside-down, it was a rifle, turn it the other, it was a machine gun.  I worked on everything in the project, but each of us did different things as a focus part of the project.  We were no longer doing special cartridges, so that was a little different.  Bob Fremont concentrated his work on the machine gun parts, the belt feed, and I worked more on the magazine-fed gun.  Of course, they’re the same gun, so whatever one guy was doing had to be compatible with what the other guy was doing.  At this time, Colt was making the AR-15 and M16.  ArmaLite was shut down as a division of Fairchild and was sold off to some guys in Texas.  They had sold the AR-15 gas system patent to Colt.

SAR:  Were you following what was going on with Colt and in Vietnam?  

Jim Sullivan:  I wasn’t getting any special briefing on it or anything, or aware of what was going on.  Where I became aware of it was when everybody else did, the scandal of American soldiers being killed with jammed guns, being overrun.  I didn’t know what the problem was at the time, nobody knew when that first hit.  I mean, the people in Army Material Command apparently knew, they had to have known, but they didn’t volunteer any information.  [laughs]  I mean, those people, still today I think they must worry about what would happen if anybody really found out what they had done.  Nobody can prove that they sabotaged the M16 program, but there was no way that, in the testimony that came out in the Ichord Committee that this was a complete unknown.  I feel very, very strongly on this.  (Senator Ichord headed the committee, which was the 90th Congress, 1967.  The report is titled “Special Subcommittee Report on the M16 Rifle Program, House of Representatives” dated October 19, 1967).  Essentially the problem that happened with the M16 in Vietnam was that they changed ammunition from what we had designed and they went and changed from IMR powder to a ball powder.  I can find the conclusions here  “Increased cyclic rate caused by ball propellant,” it goes into that waver of cyclic rate of seconds test.  The problem was that they changed from the intended powder.  Who did that change?  Army Materiel Command at the time did not have the ammunition.  They had guns under their control, but not ammo, which was stupid, just an organizational problem.  But they were in charge of the guns and the arsenals.  Ah, here’s the findings and recommendation of the Ichord Committee Report.

“Both the Army and Marine Corps personnel have experienced serious and excessive malfunctions of the M16 rifle, most serious being the failure to extract a spent cartridge, that the past experience of the army with the M16 rifle in Vietnam was not properly called to the attention of the Marines when the weapon was issued to them.  That the major contributor to malfunctions experienced in Vietnam was ammunition loaded with ball propellant, that the change from IMR-extruded powder to a ball propellant in 1964 for 5.56 ammunition was not justified or supported by test data.  That a number of modifications of the M16 rifle were made necessary only after ball propellant was adopted for the 5.56 ammunition, that the AR-15/M16 rifle as initially developed was an excellent and reliable weapon.”

It went all to hell just because of that change in propellant.  Certainly there were other problems.  We should’ve chrome plated the chamber, that causes problems, and that was something that was our fault as original designers.  

SAR:  What were the symptoms of the ball propellant change that happened to the AR-15 M16 system?  

Jim Sullivan:  It has much higher gas port pressure.  It’s not in itself a bad powder, it’s just like saying diesel fuel is fine, just don’t put it in a gasoline engine, and that’s what they did.  The gun has to be designed for the powder.  That’s the fuel that the gun as an engine runs on.  The M16 system was functioning just right, but when the powder was changed, the gas port pressure that operates the gas system that operates the bolt had much higher pressure.  It made the bolt move faster than it was designed for, and it began unlocking too early, which put stresses on the locking lugs.  Also, the cartridge metal hadn’t relaxed in the chamber enough, particularly when the weapon got hot, and the cartridge would stick in there, keeping the extractor from extracting the cartridge.  The extractor would start to pull it out and then pop loose occasionally.  In a weapon, you can’t have occasionally.  These weapons would reach a point where a guy couldn’t fire a full 20-shot magazine through ’em.  Initially with the IMR powder that we designed it for, it was 10,000 psi at the gas port.  The ball powder was 12,500 psi, a 25% increase.  That was enough to make the gun not work taking the reliability factor out of the equation.  Ball powder’s also dirtier than IMR, and the M-16 is dirty as well because the gas system goes back into the upper receiver area.  I mean the gas actually operates the gun, way back at the back of the bolt, the bolt gets dirty because of it, and it requires more attention.  With IMR powder, which is a cleaner-burning powder, it was a lot better.  I can’t name numbers on that, but I know, I’ve seen the tests, and it’s a lot easier to clean with IMR.  The US is still using ball powder in the 5.56 cartridge: they should’ve changed it immediately.  Foster Sturdevant from Colt came up with a heavier buffer.  It was more than just heavier, that’s what slowed it down, but it had another kind of unique feature which was neat, and that was the heavy weight that’s within this tubular buffer was divided up into a bunch of sections that were separated, and they were steel cylinders separated by a rubber washer.  And so they had a cascading effect of impact.  When they’d impact at either end, you didn’t get the impact of all of them at one time, it was “bang bang bang bang.”

SAR:  It spread the impulse over…

Jim Sullivan:  Exactly.  It spread the impulse over time.  It worked.  It saved the gun, but it didn’t work perfectly.  As gas-operated guns get older and get more rounds fired through them, the gas port rounds off inside.  When you drill the hole that is the gas port, it ends up with sharp corners where it breaks through into the bore.  Gas doesn’t like to flow around sharp corners.  As you fire more and more ammunition through it, it wears those corners and rounds them off, and now gas flows faster and faster.  The gun as an engine is speeding up.  The older it gets, the faster it goes, and the more powerful the cycle becomes.  A lot of people think that’s good, breaking it in.  Wrong, this is bad.  A gun has to work within a certain zone, the action has to be right, the spring, the weight of the cycling components, the distance you’ve given them to cycle and the spring force.  You get that too far wrong, and the gun doesn’t work anymore.  

SAR:  There’s a positive break-in period on the gas port.  

Jim Sullivan:  Certainly.  It’s drilled in there, and that wear-in is going to happen naturally within 1,000 rounds no matter what you do.  We plan for that.  It’s the abuse that causes the problems.  Some of the special operations groups, they do their training and they fire massive amounts of ammunition, they get their new M4 Carbines, and their doctrine is suppressive fire going in and coming out.  They do mag dump after mag dump after mag dump.

SAR:  Some of those used guns I’ve clocked at 1,300, 1,400 rpm.  Is it just that the gas port is rounded out and the flow is better, or is it that they’ve actually eroded the hole, and they have more going in there?  

Jim Sullivan:  The diameter doesn’t change, it’s the rounding off.  There are two things about this event.  The gas port in the M16, we didn’t know about this.  A lot of the US gas operated guns, the BAR for example, had gas port adjustments on it.  You can let the gas port be the initial throttle, but you can compensate for when it rounds off.  But in a gas operated gun, if you don’t have a gas adjustment on there, you can’t use the gas port diameter as the metering diameter.  You’ve got to go downstream someplace and put something smaller in there that can’t erode that remains the metering diameter.  We didn’t have anything like that in the M16, that part was our fault, we didn’t know it needed to be that way.  I went to Colt about the M4, and took the plug that’s in the end of the gas tube and I moved it over this hole, and I made it the restricting hole diameter.  No matter how big you make the gas port, or how rounded off it becomes, it’s the hole that is in the gas tube that does the metering and determines how much gas gets back here.  More is still going through, but its way better to do it that way.

Remember, going back to the Ichord Committee in the 90th Congress, they identified the problem with our soldier’s weapons.  The 110th Congress doesn’t even care.  They don’t care that the M4 has got exactly the same problems that this thing had in ’67.  Back then, people raised all kinds of hell over it.  The 110th Congress doesn’t do a damn thing, and those soldiers over there in Iraq right now have exactly the same problems with their M4 in spite of the improved buffer.  They’ve got exactly the same problems that this thing had in 1967 when the Congress actually did something about it.  These people won’t.  The United States militarily is in bad shape because they’ve let these small arms deteriorate to a point now where the US is a superpower only when it fights a naval battle or an air battle.  It’s not a superpower when it fights a rifle battle.  

SAR:  You worked on the Stoner 63.  How long were you with Cadillac Gauge?  

Jim Sullivan:  Three years there, too.  The 62 was a prototype for the Stoner 63 but the 62 had a machined receiver while the 63 was a sheet metal concept.  The trigger mechanisms were very different.  What made the gun unique and valuable was the fact that you could assemble it as a rifle, or using 90% of the same parts you could assemble it as a full-performance machine gun.  That concept had been worked out on the 62 by the time I had gotten there.  I worked on scaling it down into the 5.56 caliber.  We had lessons learned from the AR-15/M16 project that we could draw on.  We needed a longer cam and we put a longer dwell in the unlocking cam.  No matter how fast the 63 may speed up, it isn’t going to seize up.  I don’t think we ever had an extraction failure in the Stoner 63.  It isn’t the angle of the cam path, it’s the straight section.  If you make the straight section longer, the bolt carrier has to move further before it begins to rotate the bolt, and the overall total length when it’s all done and starts yanking on the cartridge is determined by the overall length of the cam.  The longer that is, the more the gun likes it, and that’s true of any auto loading gun.  

Of those three years I was there, two years were spent designing the Stoner 63.  Bob Fremont left in that time period and went to work for Colt.  Bob was a great guy, but he bullied the front office and he insulted the executives.  [Sullivan chuckles]  It was kind of fun to watch the fight going on between Fremont and the execs.  Fremont was a hell of a good man, but he was hard to take.  I liked him, but a lot of people hated him.  The execs sure hated him.  We were still in California, and the president of the company came out and he was really steaming mad.  I don’t remember what Fremont had done that day.  Anyway, he flew out to California to fire him.  Fremont knew he was coming, and when the guy was there, he walked in our office and asked for Stoner to come outside, and Fremont says, “Wait a minute.  While we’re all together, there’s something I’ve got to talk about.  I’ve been here for two years now, and I haven’t gotten a raise yet.”  [laughs]  The guy was so shocked he gave him a raise and left. [laughs]  

SAR:  A preemptive strike?  

Jim Sullivan:  Yeah, Stoner and I just roared.  Stoner had told us the guy was coming out to fire Bob.  

SAR:  You were two years into the Stoner 63 program.  How many guns had you made?

Jim Sullivan:  We had everything worked out.  We made about 80 or 85 guns at that point, and then I went back to Quantico and spent that year there.  It was all testing with the Marines at Quantico, and Camp Lejeune, and then on up to Fort Greeley, Alaska for cold weather testing.  The Marines liked the Stoner 63.  In 1965, they did a live combat test in Vietnam.  Colonel Joe Gibbs was the man who ran the tests in ‘Nam.  Recently, he wanted to do a book on the Stoner 63.  But the Marines made few changes to the gun and you know the old saying, if it works, don’t fix it.  The Marines tested the Stoner 63 for a year and then ordered 300,000 of them, and the Army talked to Congress or the Senate funding committee and said, “The Marines should use what we use,” and that ended that.  The Marines loved the gun, they didn’t want any changes to it.  In the testing, certain problems came out.  At Fort Greeley in Alaska, the machine gun wouldn’t work at all and we had to make a little fix.  Remember, you turn it upside-down if it’s going to be a rifle, from where it is a machine gun.  There’s a turret at the back of the bolt carrier.  When you turn it upside-down you have to rotate that so that it remains in the same up and down position, even though you’ve turned the bolt carrier over.  In order to be able to turn that turret, it was just bound in there tight by the buffer, which was part of the bolt carrier assembly.  It was just held in position by friction, and then when you put it in the gun it was held in position by the track.  In severe cold weather, you’ve got problems with lubricants.  A gun needs to be fairly well-lubed.  Up in the Arctic you have terrible friction problems because the lubes don’t work in extreme cold weather.  They rub off, and you’ve got chist in the air – ground up powdery stone from shifting ice floes.  This gets in the action.  Anyway, this turret, which was positioned by friction, would under normal circumstances move forward and move back, because it was operating the belt feed.  The feed was camming to one side, causing it to rotate to the other side.  It would seize up and stay there, and the gun couldn’t cycle, in an almost cold weld.  It became obvious what the problem was, and I did a little latch that prevented it from locking up.  It was a positive latch, and then Stoner came up with a simpler way.  I talked to him on the phone about it.  It was to take advantage of this stack up of buffer forces.  It had to cam itself forward to compress these Belleville washers a little further, and then would snap in.  It was a detent using parts that were already there.  We never did get it fully tested.  This is typical of the type of problems that would show up in field tests, that don’t show up in your normal tests.  

SAR:  Did you travel outside the US for that period?  

Jim Sullivan:  No, most of the travel I did in that group was testing in US military type places.  Cadillac Gage moved to Warren, Michigan and I was there for a year and a half.  I was in contact with all kinds of people in the firearms industry as by that time I had gotten to know a lot of people.  Stoner and I had gone to an army briefing on small arms, and Bill Ruger was there, so the three of us went out to lunch.  Afterwards he offered me a job, and I wouldn’t have taken it. I would’ve stayed at Cadillac Gauge, but the Army turned against the Stoner 63 order for the Marines.  Not much point in sticking around.  The Stoner 63 project was pretty much relegated to minor production.  Maybe 3,500 guns total.  They made changes to it, and by the time that test was done, it was as near perfect as you could ever make a gun.  The users didn’t want any more changes to it at that point, and Cadillac Gauge just couldn’t keep their hands off of it.  

SAR:  So you moved over to Ruger.  How long were you there?  

Jim Sullivan:  1965-1968.  Three years at Ruger too.  

SAR:  Three years.  Jim, I’m detecting a pattern here.  

Jim Sullivan:  I know. [laughs]  

SAR:  Where were you at with Ruger?  

Jim Sullivan:  That was in South Port, Connecticut.  I was an engineer and a designer.  I designed two guns: the model 77 bolt action and the Mini 14.  That Mini 14 was the third 5.56 that I had worked.  I worked with Bill Ruger. Everybody worked with Bill Ruger.  There were two guys on the Mini 14 project.  The chief engineer and another guy named Larry Larsen, who was at the time doing the single-shot rifle; that beautiful falling block rifle, the Ruger Number One.  What a beautiful gun.  Actually, that’s what Larry worked on the full three years.  It sounds funny that a gun like that takes more design time than a bolt action repeater or a Mini 14, but it does.  Everything’s got to be perfect, and it was.  

SAR:  You worked on the Mini 14.  What did you start with when you were looking at the project?  Did Bill Ruger have a concept?  

Jim Sullivan:  The Mini 14 was just a scaled down M14.  That was it.  Ruger said, “Let’s take an M14 down to 5.56.”  The M16 had been adopted, and what Ruger wanted was something he could sell to both the military and civilian world.  I tried to tell him the military wasn’t going to buy a 5.56 that looks like a hunting rifle; it’s got to be an assault rifle.  The full auto gun, the AC-556, was done after I left.  I did it in semi-auto.

SAR:  How was it working there?  

Jim Sullivan:  Oh, just great.  Bill Ruger, you remember what kind of guy he was, he was a curmudgeon.  So a lot of people were afraid of him, I guess, but he and I got along good.  I worked for him again here in Arizona.  I spent about an equal one and a half years on each rifle I did at Ruger.  On the M77, when you looked to the market, there’s the Winchester Model 70 and the Remington 700 as main contenders.  Bill wanted something as good as the old Model 70.  He didn’t want something cheap like the newer guns on the market.  He wanted something that would compete.  Bill wanted something that’d outsell them both, and it did.  He wanted a better gun, and he had bought that casting company in New Hampshire, Pine Tree Castings, and so he wanted the bolt and receiver cast, and he wanted top quality.  He wanted a Mauser-type extractor, so it’d be a full controlled-round feed.  In the end, it really wasn’t, we cheated.  It looks like a Mauser extractor.  It snaps over, though, it doesn’t slide up in.  Then he wanted his own proprietary scope system, so I had to come up with the tilt-out scope,   

SAR:  How was the Mini 14 project?  Was that challenging?  

Jim Sullivan:  Yeah.  I thought that was more interesting.  The only thing you get to do as a designer that’s kind of novel and fun is like the trigger mechanism on the Model 77.  I came up with a different way to do it, as well as the bolt stop.  We got a patent on it because it works just like a Mauser bolt stop, but the Mauser bolt stop has to have a bump out of the receiver, which makes it real hard and expensive to polish that side of the receiver.  I came up with a bumpless stop.  [laughs]  So that was fun.  The rest of it had all been done before.  Anyway, I loved Ruger, I loved the company, it was great, but Kaye and I didn’t like Connecticut.  We had two young kids going to school.  We really wanted to get back to California, and I got an offer from Hughes.  I went to work there and stayed for 10 years.  That broke the three year curse.  (Laughs)

SAR:  Hughes Advanced Armament Division of Hughes Tool?

Jim Sullivan:  Yes.  I was one of the designers of the first chain gun in 7.62mm.  I didn’t work on the upsized M242 25mm guns.  They use ’em on helicopters and the Bradley Fighting Vehicle.  The 7.62mm, it’s on the main battle tanks in England.  There was a 30mm chain gun project as well, but the Army was saying, “We want proof of concept” so I was brought in to make a 7.62mm chain gun.  Hughes had been working on a twin barreled Heligun with a revolving cylinder in between the barrels, but that wasn’t my project.

SAR:  Was the chain gun your concept?

Jim Sullivan:  I didn’t invent the chain gun, a guy named Lenny Price was the inventor: it was his concept.  Originally they didn’t have me come out there to do the chain gun.  What they wanted was a tank machine gun because there was the old Browning .30 caliber gun that was too long, and a new very short receiver .30 caliber tank gun, called the M73.  What a piece of garbage, along with its big brother; the M85 in .50 caliber.  What they wanted to do was replace the M-73.  There was a big broad agency announcement of a requirement for a tank machine gun that would go in all mechanized vehicles.  Hughes worked on several projects to address that.  One of them was the chain gun 7.62; the other one I worked on was the EPAM, the Externally Powered Armor Machinegun.

It had a hand crank on it.  That was just one of the requirements, kind of silly, I thought, but they said if power failed, you’d still want to be able to use it.  Kind of dumb in my opinion, but hey, it’s a requirement.  All the EPAM ever was, was a prototype.  Lenny Price came up with the chain gun at the same time.  In the Hughes Times, they wrote up that he got the idea from a Harley Davidson motorcycle.  He was a Harley rider, so of course he knew chain operation, but that wasn’t what set him off.  He was another neat guy.  A lot of the guys that I’ve known that were gun designers, were exceptional, interesting people.  They did all kinds of things.  This was in Culver City, California, and Lenny lived on a boat, and he went to work on his motorcycle.  I’ve ridden on the back of that many times, went out to lunch with him a lot of times.  Neat old guy.  He’s dead now, like so many of them are.  He started off with a bigger gun for a different requirement, and the chain just fell into place as a natural way to shorten the mechanism.  While he was in the middle of this, the Army had a requirement for a helicopter, and the Hughes Helicopter Division wanted something in 7.62mm.  If they could do the gun and the helicopter, that would give them the contract.  They started in on that while I was working on the EPAM, and Lenny was working on the 30-millimeter.  The army’s “proof of concept” speech was given, and they wanted to see the thing.  Hughes asked me to drop the EPAM and do a 7.62mm chain gun.  I started off on that all by myself, but there was a guy who is now kind of my partner in some of the stuff I’m doing: Bob Waterfield.  Bob worked at the range as a range technician.  He’s really sharp, and I got him involved.  The two of us ended up co-designing the 7.62mm chain gun.  We did start with scaling down Lenny’s chain drive, but we had to do the rest from scratch.  Americans didn’t do anything with it, but the British did.  They liked it because we did a forward eject on it and it had that short receiver footprint.  We got that done before they got the 30-millimeter done.

SAR:  What’s the concept on the chain drive?

Jim Sullivan:  When you look down into the receiver, you will see a chain that goes around four sprockets in kind of a rectangle.  You have all the dwell while the connector to the bolt is going side-to-side, and then the motion of the bolt is when it’s going front and back.  When it’s going across at the rear, that’s when you do your feeding.  When it’s going across at the front, that’s when you do your firing because it gives you time for the pressure to drop in the chamber.  This system has been done at higher rates of fire, but is really only effective at a lower rate like about 450 RPM.  Remember, this was the period where they were working on the new tanks and some of the new vehicles, and they didn’t want to have the long receiver Browning 1919 series or the long receiver .50 caliber.  They couldn’t get the commander in there near the gun, because it was too long into his face.  They had to make guns with shorter receivers, and the two that they had, the M-73 and the M-85 were just disasters as guns.  On the chain gun, we laterally transferred a lot of the activity in the firing cycle, so our design was very short, and very effective.

SAR:  That only covers about half of your time at Hughes.

Jim Sullivan:  There was a lot of other work that we did.  For a while the army was just fascinated with caseless ammunition.  They couldn’t face the problems in caseless ammo, and they just believed that if they threw enough money at it, somehow it’d get solved.  They’re still fighting with caseless ammo concepts.  I worked on that and the Chiclet stuff as well as the Advanced Combat Rifle (ACR) concept and later the Advanced Infantry Weapon System (AIWS) at McDonnell-Douglas.  The whole group of Hughes people went over to MDHC, in fact, after I came back from wherever, I went and did another Chiclet gun with them.  It was recoil operated to soften it.  It was like .410 caliber, only it was a Chiclet, that size, fairly big.  It used five flechettes in a sabot, which in turn was in the Chiclet.  The magazine went in the side and was semi-auto.  

All in all, I spent about five years on caseless ammunition, Chiclets, all this hopeless crap.  When you first get involved in it, you think well, the advantages are so great that it’s worth the effort.  But when you get into what the problems really are, eventually you see it’s hopeless, and then you try to tell everybody that, and they get mad because they don’t want to give up their work or contract.  With the technology that was available, and we’re in the same position right now, caseless became evident to me and the other guys that it wasn’t going to be able to be feasible.  Really, you have to redesign what the goal is.  If you say you want lightweight ammo, well, now you can work with that goal.  If you say right off that the lightweight ammo has to be caseless, then you’re screwed.  The guns were kind of fun, but man, they all ended up the same way.  The breech seal would fail and blow up the whole magazine. We had some real wreckage down there!  

SAR:  So from 1968 to 1978 you did the EPAM, the 7.62mm chain gun, caseless projects, chiclet/flechette projects, and then left for…?  

Jim Sullivan:  There were plenty of other projects, but I finished up on the chain gun just before I went over to Singapore.  I had kept in touch with the people at ArmaLite, which had been bought by a group of Texas oil men.  I actually had an office at ArmaLite.  Bob Waterfield joined me there on weekends, and we’d work there three nights a week and Saturdays.  We formed a company called Timberline Hawk.  We did just real simple things that we could try to do business with.  John Wayne invested in this one program – this one here.  It was a .22 LR rifle.  We formed a corporation called Wayne Repeating Arms, and the plan was we’d start with a .22.  Here’s one of them.  (Hands over the rifle.)

SAR:  Very lightweight.  

Jim Sullivan:  It had some nice features along with that.  It locked open.  At the time, California had the law about you can’t have ten-shot detachable magazines.  So you could load the magazine.  It’s a double-column magazine, you just load it through the port, you lock this open with the safety, then you release the safety in the chamber.  It still operates as a safety.  We incorporated, but we never got it in production because Wayne’s son-in-law was his business manager, and got caught in an “indiscretion” and Wayne fired him.  The new business manager had to take over all the Wayne businesses, and since this wasn’t progressing in far enough, they just canceled it.  So, too bad.  I interacted with Wayne: we went out and he shot ’em twice.  One of the ways we originally connected was we had started out as Timberline Hawk. We had made a little money, and we bought a bunch of parts from a company that had gone out of business.  It was a little Derringer.  Using their Derringer, I came up with a little .22 rifle.  It’s pretty crude, but John Wayne ended up with one of the prototypes and took it out on his boat.  He knew the people at ArmaLite because his boat was always being repaired by the boat yard next door, and he used to come in there since he liked guns.  We had met long before, when way back when I had worked for ArmaLite.  He used to go out and plink cans out in the water with it, and it turned into a business deal.  

SAR:  So that was the night job, three days a week?  

Jim Sullivan:  Yeah.  It was an attempt to start up something more serious.  We ended up with a shotgun that ArmaLite had made.  John McGurty was their machine shop manager, and he was my partner on that gun that John Wayne ended up with.  John McGurty, was a partner on the project.  We also did a holsterable submachine gun.  Here it is.

SAR:  A holsterable submachine gun?  

Jim Sullivan:  Yup.  Some parts were somebody else’s, but in our design, the bolt traveled a long distance and was very smooth.  We made it so you could push from both ends, and now they put this all in a holster.  It’s a telescoping wraparound bolt around the front, and a rear piece that comes together, closes up and becomes the size of a regular handgun.  Pretty slick.  We didn’t cheat and fire full auto, we didn’t have a license for that, we just fired semi-auto.  It started its life as a Linda or Terry Pistol.

In Parts Two and Three of the Interview with L. James Sullivan, we cover Singapore and the design and adoption of the Ultimax 100, the Beretta Assault Rifle, the Beta C-Mag, Gordon Ingram, Somalia, Uzi Gal, the Ruger SMG, Kalashnikovs, the British SA80, “sacred cows” and his current design work,  Jim takes a no-holds-barred look at the current US M4 issues.  Don’t miss it!

L. James Sullivan’s favorite quote on wishful thinking in an Arms Race: The Spanish admiral talking about the Armada with his men, and how he was going to face the British and said that he knew that although the British had more range in their guns, God was on the side of the Spaniards, so the British would be befuddled and not able to fire until they were within equal range of the Spanish guns.  


L. James Sullivan’s favorite quotes on preparedness: 1906 – Mark Twain, in reference to the Ordnance tests of the Maxim Machine Gun that had been ongoing since 1896: “The eye that never sleeps might just as well, since it takes ten years to see what any other eye can see in five minutes.”

By Chris A. Choat

In 1977, Steyr released what then looked like the most space-age firearm ever built: the Steyr AUG (Army Universal Gewehr). In Austria, this gun carried the model designation of F-88. It was a bullpup design, had built-in optics with not only a plastic stock but many internal fire control parts that were also made of plastic. Although it was very accurate and reliable, shooters tended to shy away from it mainly because of the futuristic look. Three decades later, the shooting public has embraced bullpup designs and the extensive use of high-tech plastics is no longer an issue. There are four or five bullpup designs that are now in production with several more in prototype stages.

One of the newest bullpups on the market is the new STG 556 from Microtech Small Arms Research (MSAR). This company is headed by President Tony Marfione and is a sister company of Microtech, well known for producing extremely high quality knives for a number of decades. Now with the new sister company, he is back on the firearms’ trail with his new American made STG 556 version of the Steyr AUG.

The MSAR STG 556 is much more than just a copy of the Steyr AUG. The STG 556 incorporates all of the improvements that the AUG should have had. Small Arms Review recently had a chance to spend several days at Microtech Small Arms Research in their Pennsylvania factory to see how this new gun is being built from the ground up.

The first thing noticed when looking at the new gun are the improvements in the receiver and the rifle’s stock. The receiver is made from 7075 T6 investment cast aircraft aluminum. It is then machined on state-of-the-art CNC centers to a tolerance less than .0010 of an inch. The finish on the receiver is Mil-Spec hard coat anodizing which is then moly coated. It has hardened threaded stainless steel accessory points on both the right hand side as well as the top. These hardpoints incorporate .250×20 TPI threaded helicoils. By using helicoils instead of just threading the aluminum, a hardpoint can be replaced if someone gets wrench-happy tightening an accessory rail and strips it out. The hardpoint on the top of the receiver is probably one of the biggest improvements to the AUG style weapon. It allows different optics to be used instead of just the one that the early Steyr’s were saddled with. With the STG 556, the shooter can remove the 1.5X Steyr-type scope and replace it with the MSAR 1.5X Close Quarter Battle scope or add a flattop rail and use a crosshair target scope, red dot scope, night vision device or any combination. Any optic that can be used on flat-top receivers or rails can be used on the STG 556. STG 556s will be shipped with the standard 1.5X scope but MSAR will be offering a 3X scope with the Close Quarter Battle reticle as an option. MSAR can also renew the nitrogen in an original Steyr AUG scope as well as change the reticle to the new CQB style. A rail can also be attached to the right side of the receiver for lasers, lights etc. MSAR is offering three sizes (small, medium and large) of both top and side rails. The large top rail is just right for a combination of NV and regular optics. They will also have a lower rail that can replace the folding forward vertical grip. The rails that they offer are U.S. Mil-Spec 1913 Picatinny.

The stock of the STG 556 looks pretty much the same as a Steyr AUG from the right hand side but the left side reveals a couple of new features. The first is a forward assist button much like the one found on the AR-15/M16 rifle. With the original Steyr design you had a small button on the charging handle that had to be held in to assist the bolt closing. With the STG 556 you merely push forward on a round spring loaded button to engage the bolt and help close it. With modern firearms and better propellants, the need to “help” the bolt close because of fouling is almost non-existent but this feature makes it nice to close the bolt silently. On the right hand side of the gun, just behind the magwell, is the new last round bolt hold open release lever. The STG 556 locks open after the last shot but now instead of having to “rack” the charging handle to drop the bolt you just press on the bolt release lever and the gun goes back into battery. Several other new features are incorporated into the stock including a much better ejection port door cover. The STG 556 can be set up to fire right or left handed by changing the bolt head and switching the ejection port door cover to the opposite side. Nothing new here as the original AUG could also be converted from right hand to left hand operation. However, as owners of original Steyrs know, if you changed the port door cover on an AUG a few times, the retention piece that holds it on would give up its retaining qualities. That’s why many Steyr AUG’s that have been converted have duct tape holding on the cover. The new cover is also made from a much better polymer. The whole stock of the STG 556 is made from a very high grade polymer that is almost indestructible. The stock is injection molded in two halves and then the two pieces are vibratory welded together in house. There is virtually no seam line on the MSAR stocks as compared to the Steyr stocks that often looked as though they were glued together. The stock on the STG 556 also features drains holes so that if a gun is taken underwater, the compartments inside the stock will drain as soon as it is taken out of the water. The Steyr AUG in essence had to be disassembled and shaken repeatedly to get water out of its stock. Additionally, the new STG 556 furthermore features bolt recoil rods with drain holes in them. On AUGs, the rods could fill with water and make the gun inoperable because the water inside the rods would “hydraulic” and not allow the bolt to cycle. The buttpad on the new gun is another item that is made from a superior material called Versollan. The buttpad has a ribbed surface instead of a smooth one for better gripagainst the shooter’s shoulder.

Another new feature is the folding charging handle. While the A2 AUG did have a folding charging handle, it would sometimes lock under the front scope riser. This “event” would lock up the gun causing it to have to be disassembled to get it functioning again. The STG 556’s folding charging handle has been redesigned so that it still folds but will not jam under the riser.

The STG 556 features the same quick detach barrel system as the AUG, but the STG barrels are fluted for lighter weight, enhanced rigidity and more surface area for faster cooling. The new barrels are made from 4150 ordnance steel, are chrome lined and are chambered in 5.56mm. All barrels are phosphated and then moly coated. They will be available in 14-inch 1 in 7 twist, 16-inch 1 in 8 twist and 20-inch 1 in 9 twist with possibly a 24-inch light machine gun style barrel to follow later. Barrels have 13×1 left hand metric threads. The new STG 556 barrels will fit the Steyr AUG rifles as well as vice versa. Even the flash hider has been redesigned. It now features a wire cutterclosed-end design as well as styling enhancements. The new flash hider will also accept the M-16 blank firing attachment.

MSAR will also offer a suppressed barrel assembly. It has long been said that an AUG could not be suppressed. This is no longer true. MSAR’s new barrel assembly will feature a non-removable suppressor that is welded together. The suppressor is made from state-of-the-art materials including Inconel and high heat stainless steel parts and features a patented sealed gas system. On the original Steyr barrels, the gas system was designed so that if a suppressor was installed, excess gases were released around the adjustable gas piston regulator and the resulting gas cloud could be seen to the side of the gun. Along with the gas cloud there was also considerable noise. With the new MSAR suppressor system, the escaping gases are captured and put back into an outer tube of the suppressor. The gases are then slowed down, cooled and vented out of small holes located around the front of the suppressor. By controlling the gases this way, there is no increase in bolt carrier velocity or cyclic rate; thereby reducing stress on both bolt and receiver. There is also very little noise. The new suppressor is reported to reduce the weapon’s report by an impressive36 decibels and virtually eliminates all muzzle flash. This new design also eliminates build-up of crud inside the suppressor.

Internally, there are also several improvements. A common problem with AUG’s that were used a lot was that the extractor pin would break, the extractor would come out of the bolt, and the gun would either lock up or would fail to extract. The STG’s extractor pin is much larger and beefier than the original AUG’s pin. The extractor is also cut slightly deeper for added grip on empty cartridge cases. Additionally, the bolt lugs are slightly beveled around the inside edge for added reliability. This allows the STG to feed virtually every kind of ammo. The ejector also has been improved. It now has two springs instead of one. Positioned one inside the other, each one is wound a different direction so that they will not “nest” and cease to function. Furthermore, all pins and springs in the new rifle are now made from stainless steel. This offers corrosion resistance as well as longer life. The bolt from the STG 556 will also interchange with the AUG.

Microtech is also making their own magazines for their new rifle. The magazines will come in 10, 20, 30 and 42-round capacities and feature innovative improvements over the Steyr design. Steyr magazines can be broken fairly easily. The new magazines from Microtech are exceptionally durable. They can be dropped, stomped on and even run over with a Humvee and they will not break. Steyr AUG magazines are sensitive to some gun cleaning chemicals that can cloud the surface or even soften the magazine body material enough that it can be scraped off with fingernail pressure. Not so with the new Microtech mags. Made from a material called Raydel 5000, not only is it chemical and impact resistant but it will also withstand temperatures to over 500 degrees. You absolutely cannot break these magazines and are so tough that they are warranted forever. The new magazines have a textured surface with cartridgecount numbers molded in. The magazine bodies are a slightly amber color instead of the green or black smoke color of the original Steyr magazines. The reason for this is that Raydel 5000 only comes in amber or black colors, so in order to have transparent magazines, amber must be used. The follower, base plate and base locking piece is made from a material called RTP, which is a fiber reinforced polymer. This material is also chemical, impact and heat resistant. MSAR’s new magazines will fit Steyr AUG’s but AUG magazines will not readily fit the STG 556.

The gun received for testing was equipped with a 16-inch barrel and the standard 1.5 power sight with CQB reticle. Initial testing was done from a bench rest at 100 yards on a perfectly still day. A variety of ammunition was used to get a feel for which type and bullet weight the gun liked. It included several Black Hills varieties, Remington 50-grain Hollow Point, Wolf Gold 75-grain BTHP, XM855 green tip and some UltraMax 55-grain Soft Point. Three shooters took turns with the gun – all firing each of the different types of ammo. It should be noted that the CQB reticle is just that: a Close Quarter Battle sight. It is not designed for target shooting at 100 yards. Even so, the rifle performed very well. Five shot groups hovered around 3 inches with just about any ammunition we used, with a couple of groups measuring just under 2.25 inches. Commendable performance for a 16-inch barreled gun with that type of sight. The rifle didn’t seem to have a “favorite” type of ammunition as it shot them all very well. Bullet type or weight didn’t seem to matter much. What shot into the tightest group for one shooter might not be the best for the next shooter.

A second session of shooting was done with the factory sight removed and the flattop rail installed. On top of this was mounted a Night Force 2.5-10×24 NXS Compact Scope. This excellent optic offers unrivaled clarity along with an illuminated, variable intensity reticle. This particular scope was equipped with the FC-2 Close Range Tactical reticle. It features a dot in circle reticle much the same as the original Steyr AUG optic except that the center dot is much smaller. Even though it is called a close range scope, with it cranked up to 10-power it gives you a very precise aiming point at even at 200 yards. Shooting again at 100 yards with the Night Force scope, groups shrank to under one inch. If the shooter does his part this rifle is more than capable.

Reliability of the STG 556 was perfect. There was not one failure in well over 500 rounds of all types of ammunition. The rifle was not cleaned or lubricated during the test and the gas plug was left at the standard “S” position. The rifle also has a setting marked “H” that allows more gas pressure to be bled off to cycle the gun when it becomes fouled. There is also a grenade launching setting marked “GR”that shuts off the gas port for launching various rifle grenades.

The Microtech STG 556 is able to be ordered as a basic rifle or in a Limited Edition kit. The basic rifle is just that: the black rifle and one magazine. No options and no frills. The Limited Edition kits will feature the STG 556 in either tan, OD green or black. It will come in a color matched Pelican 1700 rifle case with wheels, one top optics rail, one side accessory rail, one of each of the four sizes of magazines and a Microtech Currahee knife with color matched handles and color matched sheath. The knife also has a serial number matched to the rifle. Last but not least, a Giles Wilderness sling with quick-detach Uncle Mikes sling swivels. These Limited Edition rifles are definitely a must have for serious collectors.

The first STG 556s will all be in .223 caliber. Other calibers are planned. By the time this article is in print, guns will also be available in 6.8 SPC. Conversion kits can be ordered for shooters that already have guns in .223. The kits will consist of a barrel, bolt and magazine. With one of these kits, owners of Steyr AUGs can also convert their guns to this hard hitting caliber. As Microtech is the manufacturer, parts will be plentiful and will be budget friendly. AUG owners will now be able to get parts for their guns as well as upgrade them to STG 556 specifications. Select fire guns will also be available as post samples to NFA dealers, law enforcement and government agencies.

The initials “STG” are an abbreviation for Sturmgewehr, or Storm Rifle, and this new rifle will definitely take the shooting public by storm. It is very accurate, totally reliable and exceptionally well built with a long list of new design features.

Sources:

Microtech Small Arms Research, Inc.
Dept: SAR
300 Chestnut Street Ext.
Bradford, PA 16701
Phone: (814) 363-9260
Fax: (814) 363-9284
Website: www.msarinc.com

LightForce USA, Inc.
Dept: SAR
NightForce Optics
1040 Hazen Lane
Orofino, ID 83544
Phone: (208) 476-9814
Fax: (208) 476-9817
Website: www.nightforcescopes.com

America has long been considered a country occupied by an untold number of expert riflemen. Volunteer militiamen and uniformed members of America’s military services have skillfully employed countless types of rifles and handguns in the defense of this country, both here and abroad, for a very long time. It is often said that a man is only as good as his equipment. While that may be true, it is the proficient use of sound equipment that makes the difference “down range.” Firearms proficiency is a direct result of ones understanding and ability to master “the integrated act of firing one round,” or the fundamentals of marksmanship, as it is more commonly known. There is simply no substitute for marksmanship regardless of the technology offered in the firearm. Laser sighted weapons with full solution fire control systems firing air bursting munitions still must be accurately aimed and fired by skillful operators to bring steel on target. Like the Laws of Physics, the fundamentals of marksmanship cannot be changed and must be applied if positive results are expected with each pull of the trigger. When applied correctly, the proficient application of the fundamentals of marks-manship can make a man armed with even a simple WWII-era bolt action rifle a very dangerous man on the battlefield. Developing, scrutinizing, pushing the envelope and applying and teaching the art of advanced marksmanship has been the specialty of the US Army Marksmanship Unit (USAMU) (www.usamu.com) since it was formed in 1956 by President Eisenhower.

50-Year AMU Reunion

More than 630 individuals attended the 50-year anniversary of the USAMU during a grand 3-day reunion at its home base at Fort Benning, Georgia, the “Home of the Infantry.” Sponsored and organized by the Military Marksmanship Association (www.militarymarksmanship.org), formerly the Army Marksmanship Unit Association, and the USAMU, this event “brought home” many well known distinguished rifle, pistol and shotgun shooters and their spouses to honor the many achievements of the unit and its past and present members.

Mission First

To better understand the varied mission of the AMU, one must first understand the organization itself. The AMU is presently commanded by LTC Charles Connett. A highly decorated combat veteran of the US Army Special Forces, LTC Connett directs the daily activates of the 125 member organization, which includes both military and civilian personnel. Armed with a surprisingly modest annual operating budget, the AMU is able to field, train and support winning teams and winning weapons systems, and maintain the necessary training facilities, in support of the many activities and programs described below.

The USAMU is composed of eight sections that include a Support Staff, a Custom Firearms Shop and six competitive shooting sections, or “teams” as they are often called. These sections include Service Rifle, Service Pistol, Action/Combat Shooting, International Rifle (which includes Air Rifle, Small Bore Rifle, 300- Meter Rifle (calibers up to 8mm)), International Shotgun (which includes Trap, Double Trap and Skeet), and International Pistol (which includes Air Pistol, Free Pistol, Rapid Fire Pistol, and Sport Pistol). AMU shooters compete with calibers ranging from .177 caliber to .45 ACP, 12 gauge and .300 Winchester Magnum.

Each team has its own coach and is staffed by active duty Army competitors who are also advanced instructors in their chosen shooting discipline. The Service Rifle and Service Pistol teams employ stock and/or highly modified variants of standard-issue US Army weapons such as the M16A2 rifle and M9 pistol. Past service weapons like the US M14 and M1911A1 can and are still seen on the service category ranges in competition, and at the annual National Matches at Camp Perry, Ohio, the zenith of small arms competition in America. Even M1 Garands and 1903 Springfields are not uncommon sights on service rifle ranges around the country.

The International teams use a variety of non-standard and custom made firearms from highly respected makers like Anschutz, Walther and Hammerli that must comply with the strict standards of the sport. International team members compete in international events to include Military World Games known as “CISM” as well as various World Cups, the World Championships, the Pan-American Games, and for those who qualify, the summer Olympic Games. In fact since 1956, AMU shooters have won literally hundreds of team and individual titles including more than 454 individual and team World Championship medals and 21 Olympic medals. This is one reason why the AMU is called the Home of Champions. As of late 2006, USAMU shooters have earned seven Olympic quota slots for the 2008 Olympic Games to be held in Beijing. These slots include two male and one female shotgun slots, two men’s pistol slots and two men’s rifle slots.

Real World Contribution to the War Fighter

One should not be mislead by the highly publicized quest for gold of units like the AMU. Each military service has its own version of a shooting team and they all meet and compete throughout the year against Reserve, National Guard, law enforcement and civilian teams. Often and inappropriately maligned as “just a shooting team,” the skills and contributions of the men and women who wear the coveted AMU black cap should not be overlooked.

Since its creation in 1956, the charter of the AMU has been to raise and maintain the overall marksmanship proficiency within the Army. Unlike some other services that have career fields assigned for their shooting team personnel, active duty personnel assigned to the AMU retain their Military Occupational Skill (MOS) when assigned to the unit. New Army enlistees can enlist directly into the AMU but this has been a relatively rare occurrence. For this to occur, the prospective AMU member must have a written recommendation from an AMU coach and approved by the AMU commander. Once assigned to the unit, it is now possible to remain there for an entire career. Of course this is greatly dependent upon maintaining ones skill level at a constant national or world class level; not an easy task by any measure. Interservice transfers into the AMU from other services are also possible and recently quite common. Six or more members of the US Marine Corps Marksmanship Unit, to include two gunsmiths, have made the transfer in the past 10 years to the Army Marksmanship Unit. Candidates must first leave the service and then enlist anew into the Army.

AMU shooter/instructors train novice and expert marksmen to compete in Division/ Corps/Post, Interservice, National and International shooting competition. Not all competitors who shoot for the AMU are assigned to the unit. Many promising candidates are picked up on temporary orders from Army units of all types to travel with the team on the shooting circuit throughout the spring and summer shooting season. This provides the participants with the priceless chance to learn highly advanced marksmanship skills from the distinguished AMU shooters and the opportunity to apply and practice these skills under the stress of individual and team competition. At the close of the summer tour, most attached team members return to their units and in turn pass on these newly acquired or recently honed skills to other members of their units and other units on their posts. In many ways one can say that the AMU acts as an incubator for the Army’s overall marksmanship proficiency. Promising summer pick-up shooters may even be offered the chance for a permanent change of station assignment to the AMU.

AMU members develop new weapons, ammunition, marksmanship concepts and applications. They teach in Army schools such as the Army Sniper School, and/or run AMU-created courses such as the Squad Designation Marksman Course (SDMC) and Close Quarters Marksman (CQM) programs of instruction, as well as the DoD mandated National Small Arms Firing School conducted each year during the National Matches at Camp Perry . They provide input, write and update instructional manuals that all Army personnel refer to when conducting unit marksmanship training. They support collegiate (ROTC), regional, high school and sometimes club small bore rifle programs. AMU instructors have conducted countless small arms firing, safety and marksmanship instruction clinics to an untold number of US and friendly foreign military service members, law enforcement and civilian students. AMU “Black Hats” are often seen at public events and expositions helping to recruit civilians for the challenges and associated benefits derived from an Army career. They are goodwill ambassadors “packing heat” one might say. The Service Rifle section estimates that only 20-25% of their time is spent on competitive practice. The balance of their day is spent preparing for, teaching classes and training the trainers.

Ignore It and It Will Go Away

Marksmanship is a highly perishable skill demanding intense focused concentration, fine muscle movement, learned muscle memory from repetition and a host of capabilities not often found in most military activities. The Army’s attention to marksmanship proficiency has, shall we say, “varied” over the last few decades and started into a fast decline in the early 1980s when leadership disbanded the three regional AMU detachments located at Fort Riley, Kansas, Fort Ord, California and Fort Meade, Maryland, as well as the many hard working post AMTU’s (Advanced Marksmanship Training Units). This reduced the number of AMU experts available to regional commands and thus the access to their instruction and skills to many units sorely in need of proper and sound marksmanship training. For a time, unit marksmanship training was conducted mostly from Army field manuals by admittedly well intentioned NCOs and officers who unfortunately had no real hands on marksmanship training beyond what was learned during their basic and unit training. At the same time many Army posts canceled post unit marksmanship competitions and the crop of promising new shooters selected by the regional AMU detachments for the summer tour to Camp Perry all but dried up. The realization brought on by combat operations in “Gulf I” and elsewhere, helped refocus Army training to include sound and critically important marksmanship training, especially in the area of intermediate (less than 300 meters) and long range rifle shooting (600 meters or greater). The Army learned once again the hard way the value of the well trained rifleman as they employed Designated Marksman and Snipers to counter enemy sniper threats. The hard earned talents of the men and women of the AMU, and other like units within the other services were once again realized as an extremely valuable asset within the ranks of the Army that needed to be tapped.

Black Magic?

Competitive shooting at the level of an AMU shooter is a true form of physical human art and can best be compared in some ways to golf or free throw shooting in basketball. While is can be physically demanding at times, especially the action sports, most national and world class distinguished marksman “earn their money” in a fixed position intensely focused on the sights, or target downrange depending on the shooting discipline, with often no perceivable movement visible. Those unfamiliar with this display of high level marksmanship skill often describe a rifle or pistol match as boring. It is anything but boring for the competitor and requires great skill, dedication and an almost fanatical attention to doing the exact same thing time after time after time. That is accuracy defined from the human form. The correct action, the “integrated act of firing one round,” done over and over again to near perfection. Any golfer will know how easy that seems, but how very hard it is to accomplish consistently and under varying conditions.

The accomplishments of competitive shooters like those from the AMU are astounding, often unimaginable. For instance, take International Free Pistol. In this event competitors fire a .22 caliber single shot pistol at stationary targets at 50 meters from a standing unsupported position using only one hand to hold the pistol. The X ring, or highest scoring zone in the center of the bulls eye target, is less than 2 inches (50mm) in diameter. A perfect score in a 60 round match, fired over the course of 2 hours, is 600 points. A world class competitor will score somewhere around 565 points. That means that the majority of those rounds fired must impact within that 2 inch circle at more than half the distance of a football field. It is akin to trying to shoot a bullet down the length of a 2 inch diameter pipe without it touching the sides over the distance of 50 meters. Not impressed? Okay. Take a nationally ranked Service Rifle shooter who wins a Long Range Rifle Match firing an AMU-modified M16A2 rifle at a 10-inch X ring at a distance of 1,000 yards. That’s an M16A2 rifle with IRON SIGHTS! Still not moved? Try the AMU International Section-developed 1,000 yard Palma rifle with optical sight. Chambered for a 6.5mm wildcat cartridge called the “6.5/284” and specially loaded at the AMU, the round launches a 142-grain projectile with far less felt recoil than .300 Win. Mags often used in this match. In this match armed with these rifles the four man AMU Palma team set a new national record in 2006 (799 points out of a possible 800) by placing 79 out of 80 shots into the 10-ring at 1,000 yards. The 10-ring is only 20 inches in diameter. 53 of the 80 shots fell within the 12 inch diameter X-ring. The vast majority of the shots fell within a 6 inch group, at 1,000 yards.

Not Your High School Metal Shop

One of the little known but critically important elements of the AMU is their inhouse ability to modify, and in fact create from raw materials, intensely accurate firearms and ammunition in all categories. This is the job of the skilled gunsmiths and technicians of the AMU Custom Firearms Shop. Staffed by 15 members, which includes 5 machinists, both civilian and Army personnel, “The Shop” produces top-quality, match-grade rifles, pistols, shotguns, scope mounts, rails, buttstocks, whatever is needed by the competitors to win on the range, on modern CNC machines, such as the Fadel 22-tool, four access, CAD-programmed milling center.

The successes of the AMU shop in the specialized fields of R&D and rapid prototyping are not well known outside of competitive shooting circles. AMU has initiated and/or performed on many special programs to develop and field much needed firearms and weapon enhancements of service “rack” grade weapons in support of the US war fighter. National Match M14 rifles and M21 sniper rifles developed and in many cases built by AMU gunsmiths, have and still serve with US Army combat units today in the Global War on Terror (GWOT). AMU has been a one-stop rapid prototype shop for many special requirements for US special operations units. The concept of the 6.8x43mm Special Purpose Cartridge was jointly developed by AMU personnel working in close concert with US Army Special Forces personnel to address recorded combat failures of 5.56mm M855 weapons in Afghanistan and Iraq. The first prototypes of the highly accurate and optionally sound suppressed M16-based Special Purpose Receiver (SPR), officially type classified in USSOCOM as the MK12, was first developed at the AMU and has since served with great distinction in US special operations units operating in “the sand pile,” and other unmentionable places. AMU pistol smiths have developed highly specialized M1911 pistols for sound suppressed use by SOF personnel, a feat once thought impossible due to the locking system employed in the pistol. AMU rifle smiths have developed sound suppressed .308 Winchester and .300 Winchester Magnum caliber sniper rifles on special order for “special customers” that are highly regarded works of “functional gun art” from this very well respected organization.

Some of the unit armorers in today’s US SOF units and DoD and special law enforcement tactical units have trained, worked, consulted with or have even been assigned to the AMU Customs Firearms Shop at one time or another. Like the competitive shooting sections of AMU, The Shop is also an incubator in its own right for precision firearms and ammunition developments. The AMU Ammunition Loading Section loads thousands of match rounds each day in support of the unit’s mission, each round measured to within 1/10th of a grain of propellant. They are also working on the fringes of advanced ammunition technology to meet the unique needs of their customer base, whether they are punching holes inpaper or people.

SDMR – Bad News for the Bad Guys

It was the AMU where the Army Squad Designated Marksman Rifle (SDMR) was first envisioned and built to meet an urgent combat need from the 3rd Infantry Division for use during combat operations in OEF/ OIF. 240 SDMRs were built by the AMU for the 3rd ID in an effort to provide the infantry squad with a much needed counter sniper and precision engagement capability that before SDMR did not exist, and was being exploited by the enemy. Many other conventional Army units have since also received SDMRs and SDMR instruction as provided by the AMU. The SDMR is a highly modified M16A2 rifle assembled by the experts at the AMU and is fitted with a 1-inch diameter AMU-fluted match grade barrel with 1/8 inch twist for use with the 77-grain MK262 match-grade ammunition, free-floating Daniel Defense 4-quad rail system, Trijicon ACOG 4×32 reflex sight with A.R.M.S. QD mount, Harris bipod and Knight’s Manufacturing Company 2-stage match trigger with the automatic sear removed. While the excellent Charlie Milazzo 2-stage trigger is preferred, they are no longer readily available.

After modification by the AMU gunsmiths, the SDMR is capable of firing a rapid fire 10-shot group of under 8 inches at 600 yards. 10-shot groups are a far better indicator of true accuracy over 5-shots groups fired by many shooters and commercial rifle makers as they can be up to 50% larger in diameter and more realistic as to what one would experience in combat or on the range. The SDMR is intentionally left to look like a standard M16A2 rifle so the Squad Designated Marksman does not appear to an enemy combatant or sniper as any greater threat than the basic riflemen. That is likely his last mistake.

As part of the AMU SDMR effort to support combat units, the AMU Service Rifle section teamed with civilian and retired military members of the Civilian Marksmanship Program (CMP), best known to most readers as the place to acquire a USGI M1 Garand “cheap” from US arsenal stocks. These combined government/civilian mobile training teams, comprised of expert riflemen from around the country, created and conduct SDMR courses for Army Squad Designated Marksmen to insure they can get the most out of the SDMRs assigned to their units. The CMP procured 40 SDMRs from a highly respected US rifle vendor for use in joint USAMU and CMP Train-the- Trainer courses that are conducted over 35 times a year to soldiers being deployed in support of the GWOT.

Likely You Won’t Find These in Your Arms Room

The service grade AMU M16A2 and M9 pistols, used by AMU shooters in national competition, are highly modified variants of the standard issue firearms. You won’t see these on the shelves at FN or Beretta. Various enhancements created at the AMU are incorporated into the weapons to improve their “shootability” in the hands of the competitors. For instance, in the M16A2 the weight of the rifle is actually increased. Most Service Rifle section shooters prefer a heaver rifle when firing in the off-hand or standing position during the Slow Fire stage of the rifle matches. This additional weight, consisting of specially contoured lead weights added under the hand guards and within the butt stock, help to stabilize and “settle in” the rifle during the critical final aiming process. M16A2 “Service Rifles” are also fitted with 1/4-minute rear sight drums fabricated on AMU machines. This allows smaller adjustments to be made to the rifle’s zero during competition to account for the smaller targets engaged and for wind and ammunition variances experienced at long ranges compared to the 1- minute adjustments of the issue rack-grade M16A2’s that are designed and sufficient for hitting man-sized targets. 2-stage match triggers and match-grade barrels are also fitted to the AMU M16A2 creation.

Even the 9mm M9 Beretta pistol gets a thorough facelift to become an AMU certified Match Grade Service Pistol. Stock M9s are fitted with a new, reinforced Brigadier slide assembly, KKM Precision barrel, steel frame inserts, and high profile Bo-Mar click adjustable sights. The AMU pistolsmiths machine a flat on the barrel at the 6 o’clock position and add a set screw to insure positive and consistent shot to shot accuracy. An over-travel set screw is added to the trigger and the sear and disconnector are polished to provide a crisp and clean 4-pound trigger pull. In the end, the pistol is expected to fire a 10-shot group from a Ransom rest at 50 yards of less than 2 inches using match-grade 115-grain ammunition from Atlantic Arms.

There is a great deal of very clever professional “tinkering” that goes on daily by AMU technical staff in the never ending search for accuracy. In fact, it is hard to find a truly “stock” weapon within the walls of the AMU. They are there though. AMU shooters use accurized weapons for the Presidents Hundred rifle and pistol matches, but use standard issue weapons for matches such as the All-Army Small Arms Championships.

AMU Hall of Fame Inductees – Keeping “The Best” For Last

As is usually the case with all reunions, the 50th reunion of the Army Marksmanship Unit, held during October 2006, brought together many old faces and their spouses to relive old times and great accomplishments. The organizers of the three-day event planned informal roundrobin shooting events for the attendees on the AMU rifle, shotgun and pistol ranges as well as a tour of the US Army National Infantry Museum located adjacent to the AMU headquarters building on Fort Benning. The obligatory social events included Section dinners, a fantastic BBQ, a look at the draft of the 50th Anniversary AMU Book available through the Military Marksmanship Association web site, section photographs and the dedication of the new AMU Action Pistol Range, named for Army MSG William Krilling who was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross for gallantry during the Korean War. The last night reception at the glorious Columbus “Iron Works” was attended by many dignitaries to include the only current active duty Congressional Medal of Honor recipient, LTC Gordon R. Roberts, Columbus Mayor Robert Poydachef, LTG Robert L. Van Antwerp, U.S. Army Accessions Command Commanding General, Mr. Gary Anderson, Director of the Civilian Marksmanship Program and ten time individual World Champion and two time Olympic medal winner in 300 meter 3- position rifle, and ISSF President Olegario Vazquez Rana. Even Mr. Dieter Anschutz of the Anschutz company, long time supporter of international rifle and pistol shooting, was in attendance to celebrate his company’s 150th anniversary, as was Lones Wigger, twelve time individual World Champion and 3 time Olympic medal winner!

During the reunion, past champions were recognized for their achievements. 23 AMU members were inducted into the Section Halls of Fame. This included 1LT Joe A. Deckert, LTC John R. Foster, SFC John P. Kingeter, LTC Harry A. Lucker, and MAJ Willis L. Powell, Running Target Hall of Fame; LTC Sallie L. E. Carroll, SGM Emil W. Heugatter, 1SGT Class Barbara Hile, and MSG Ralph O. Thompson, Service Pistol Hall of Fame; and MSG Burl Branham, Shotgun Hall of Fame. Six former AMU shooters were inducted into the AMU Hall of Fame. Those persons were MSG Erich Buljung, SSG Matthew A. Dryke, SGM Emil W. Heugatter, CPT Daniel Puckel, COL Thomas J. Sharpe, and SFC Earl Waterman.

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank Ms. Paula Randall, USAMU Public Affairs Officer; LTC Charles “Ty” Connett, USAMU Unit Commander; Robert Aylward, USAMU Deputy Commander; SGM Ybarra, USAMU Sergeant Major; Mr. Bruce Meredith, 2005-2006 President of the MMU; Mr. Gene Clark, 20-year member of the USAMU Custom Firearms Shop; Mr. Glenn Sulser, USAMU Gunsmith, and finally SGT Robert Parks, Service Pistol shooter, for their assistance in preparing this article, and to the many volunteers who made the USAMU 50th reunion such a resounding success. SIGARMS, Ruger and various other commercial vendors deserve special recognition for their support of the reunion with the presentation of various firearms and related items.

The author would also like to dedicate this piece to fellow AMU Service Pistol shooter Dave Woodcock, a rising star destined for greatness, who tragically passed away unexpectedly in the 1980s. Had he stayed a little while longer, it is certain he would have been National Pistol Champion.

About the Author

Jim Schatz was a member of the Army Marksmanship Unit, detached to MTU # 1 at Fort Meade, Maryland, from 1981 through 1984. A Service Pistol and new Service Rifle shooter and Counter Sniper Instructor for AMU, the author was first introduced to formal competitive shooting by his father and advanced pistol marksmanship instruction under the watchful eye of Army coach MSG Oscar Gomez as part of the Advanced Marksmanship Training Unit (AMTU), a post level MTU at Fort Bragg.

Army Wounded Warrior Program

The AMU participates with great enthusiasm in the Army Wound Warrior program. Since 2004, the AMU and Walter Reed Army Medical Center have been collaborating on a program to allow select personnel a chance to train, compete and instruct at the AMU. While at the 50th reunion, I was honored to meet AMU team member SSG Josh Olson of Spokane, Washington. In his first year as a prone International Rifle shooter, SSG Olson qualified for the Paralympic Games. SSG Olson had never even shot competitively before signing on with the AMU. His goal is to shoot in the 2012 Olympic Games. He lost is right leg as a result of a RPG impact during combat operations in Telafar, Iraq in October 2003 as a member of the 1/ 187 RCT 101st Airborne (Air Assault) Division. Today he moves around smartly on an Army provided micro-processing prosthetic C Leg. The Army Golden Knights Parachute Demonstration Team, according to SSG Olson, also has two Army Wounded Warriors on their team, each with below-theknee amputations. Visit the Army’s Wounded Warrior Program website at www.aw2.army.mil for more information.

Just as repeating rifles had been brought into service in the armies of the foremost countries, semiautomatic rifles quickly appeared.

During 1883, Hiram Maxim transformed a Winchester carbine into a semiautomatic weapon. In France, the Clair brothers had produced a pistol functioning by the use of gases since 1888 and they applied the same mechanisms to shoulder weapons such as shotguns, .44-40 carbines and 7×57 military rifles (tested by the French Army in 1898). Additionally in France, a score of prototypes were developed since 1894 by several military factories. Other countries also produced semiautomatic rifles:

• Austria (Mannlicher),
• Belgium (Braüning-F.N.),
• Denmark (Madsen-Rasmussen, Bang),
• United States (Browning, Springfield),
• Great Britain (Farquar-Hill, Griffith & Woodgate),
• Italy (CEI-Rigotti, Revelli),
• Japan (Nambu),
• Norway (Quist),
• Sweden (Bang, Kjellman-Frieberg),
• Switzerland (Mondragon)

In 1898 in Germany, Mauser produced a rifle functioning by short recoil, followed by sixteen other prototypes until 1908. In about 1900, DWM developed a semiautomatic rifle having a mobile knuckle breech similar to that of the Lüger pistol. However, just before the First World War, no country seemed ready to decide to adopt a semiautomatic weapon for their troops except perhaps France, which considered the startup of the Meunier 7×59 rifle. But the imminence of the coming conflict made the project fall through.

At the beginning of WWI, some rifles were used by the crews of aircraft and balloons. France was interested in Winchester 1907, 1910 and Remington Model 9 rifles and a purchasing commission went to the United States to acquire such carbines. Germany used the Mexican Mondragon rifle and brought into service some Mauser 1916 rifles.

Very quickly, machine guns replaced rifles to arm aircraft. In 1916 the French manufactured one thousand Meunier rifles for ground use and sent them to the battle. It wasn’t until 1917 that another semiautomatic rifle was developed by MAS andemployed in substantial quantities with 85,333 specimens being made.

After the war, most countries embarked on programs to develop new automatic weapons. Germany, for a time, was prevented from this and at the time of the rearmament of the Wehrmacht, a repeatingcarbine was retained to equip the troops: the famous K 98k.

In 1935, Mauser developed the G 35 that functioned by short recoil. It was followed by another model in 1937 that functioned with the use of gases with a piston below the barrel. At the same time, Walther developed the A 115 whose piston is presented as a sleeve which moves around the barrel.

But it wasn’t until 1940 that a true program is defined by the authorities. Heereswaffenamt (HWaA), which controlled all of German weapons production, drew up the schedule of conditions of a new semiautomatic rifle that included:

• length of barrel similar to that of K 98k,
• use 7.92mm Mauser ammunition,
• barrel should not comprise vent of uptake,
• no external part located on the top of the weapon must be moving at the time of the cycle of operation,
• if the driving system has suddenly weakened, the weapon must be able to be used like a manual repeating rifle.

The companies of Mauser, Walther, Krieghoff and Rheinmetall all were interested in producing a prototype, but only Mauser and Walther succeeded in actually progressing to the prototype stage.

It is quite obvious that with such a schedule of conditions, the choices were limited. The systems functioning by short recoil or long recoil of the gun were not retained because of their weight and their complexity. HWaA wanted a system that was invented in Sweden by Bang. What resulted were two weapons that were very closely related and known as the G 41 (M) for the Mauser rifle and the G 41 (W) for the Walther rifle.

G 41(M)

Gewehr 41 Mauser (G 41(M)) is a development from prototype S/42 (D) constructed before the war. It uses a straight line bolt with a rotating breech block. Difficulties of development delayed its mass production, which started only at the end of May 1941. In spite of a plan to produce 70,000 rifles in April 1943, it was not certain that Mauser could carry out the 15,000 rifles which had been ordered.

Description

The G 41(M) has a one piece stock similar to that of K 98k. It functions by relaxation with the mouth, with a cone to capture gases. The actuating rod is located under the barrel, which is partially covered by a handguard fixed to the stock with two bands. The frame is capped by a cover, receiving the bolt carrier and the bolt that holds two lugs in front. The lever action is on the rear and is similar to that of a manual repeating rifle. The recoil spring is located inside the bolt. The lever does not move in action, but in the event of failure of the driving system, it allows the use of the weapon like a manual repeating rifle. Ammunition is located in a ten shot magazine that is located in front of the trigger guard. It is fed by two clips of five cartridges or with cartridges in bulk. The safety is a rocking lever on top of the cover. Pushed to the right (S), it locks the trigger mechanism and the bolt in open or closed position and prohibits firing. Pushed to the left (F), it allows firing. A hold open device used for disassembly is placed on the cover at right, or on the right side of the stock. The rear sight is graduated in hectometers from 100 to 1,200 meters, while the front sight is a blade protected by a hood. A portion of cleaning rod is under the gun and the weapon can receive the standard German bayonet. A sniper variation does exist using the ZF 40 scope.

Disassembly/Reassembly

Open the bolt and clear the weapon. Place the safety on the shooting position. Push the two latches on the cover front and open. Push down the hold open device and extract the bolt carrier and bolt. Remove the actuating lever. Push the mouth cone retainer and dismount it. Remove the sleeve and actuating ring. Retract the stops that maintain the bands. Take off the handguard. To remove the rod, it is necessary to unscrew the trigger guard/magazine and dismount the group frame and barrel from the stock. Reassembly is carried out in the reverse order taking care to properly position the bolt carrier lug in the corresponding hole of the actuating lever.

G 41(W)

Walther also produced a semiautomatic rifle that functioned by capturing gas at the muzzle but used the Swedish Friberg andKjellman system for locking the breech. This rifle appears more accurate than G 41(M) and was manufactured in much greater numbers. The first deliveries took place at the end of 1941 and SS units seem to have been the first to be equipped with it. This weapon was manufactured by two firms: Carl Walther, Zella Mehlis (code ac), with 20,996 rifles being built and Berliner- Lübecker Maschinenfabriken, Lübeck (code duv), with 96,477 rifles being produced.

Description

The G 41(W) has a one-piece stock made in beech or laminated wood. A wooden or plastic handguard covers the barrel and is secured by two bands. The barrel ends with a cone gas take, with a flat rod over the barrel. It pushes a bolt carrier with an actuating lever located on the top at the right side. A bolt open device is located near the actuating lever. The actuating rod has its own recoil spring located under the barrel in the forearm. The rod pushes a piston located under the bar-rel and actuates the bolt carrier. The bolt has two lugs at the head on both sides. Two recoil springs are located inside the bolt cover. Ammunition is located in a ten shot magazine that is located in front of the trigger guard. The safety is at rear of the bolt cover. Pushed on the right (S), it locks the trigger guard and the bolt in the open or closed position. Pushed on the left (F) it allows shooting. The rear sight is graduated in hectometers from 100 to 1,200 meters and the front sight is a blade protected by a hood. A portion of cleaning rod is under the gun and the weapon can receive the standard German bayonet. A sniper variation does exist using the ZF 40 scope.

Disassemby/Reassembly

Open the bolt and clear the weapon. Open the bolt and lock it in the rear position. Push the safety on the right. Push the lug of the recoil plate springs to the front and remove the bolt unit. Unlock the bolt open device and retain the bolt carrier pushed by the springs. Dismount the bolt carrier, bolt and springs. Take off the locking lugs, firing pin carrier, firing pin and its push rod. Push the mouth cone retainer and dismount it. Remove the sleeve and actuating ring. Retract the stops that maintain the bands. Take off the handguard. To remove the rod, it is necessary to unscrew the trigger guard magazine and dismount the group frame and barrel from the stock. Reassembly is carried out in the reverse order, but it remains delicate. There exists a preferential position for each locking lug but a locating pin makes it possible to find this one easily. One will also take care to properly place the push rod of the striker with the thinned part backwards.

EPILOG: G 43

The gas action from the mouth imposed on the G 41 rifle program showed that it was complex, too heavy, prone to fouling, difficult to remove and lacked reliability. However, the G 41(W) did reveal some excellent qualities. At this point in time, Waffenamt realized that it was possible to improve the system.

It is undoubtedly a result of contact with Russian semiautomatic rifles Tokarev SVT 38 and SVT 40, that the Germans report themselves that the gas action from the mouth was not the best. Walther altered its G 41 by preserving the locking device but applying the gas port with actuating rod as used on the Tokarev. The new weapon, designated the G 43, was built by three factories with labor provided by the concentration camps of Neuengamme and Buchenwald.. They were: Carl Walther, Zella Mehlis (codes ac or qve), Berliner-Lübecker Maschinenfabriken, Lübeck (code duv), Gustloff Werke, Sühl (code bcd). A great number of subcontractors furnished several parts. At the end of the war the G 43 was re-designed K 43.

Characteristics: G 41(M)

Caliber: 7.92mm
Ammunition: 7.92mm Mauser (8x57JS)
Overall length: 1.175 m (46.26 inches)
Barrel length: 0.552 m (21.73 inches)
Weight: 5.100 kg (11.25 lbs)
Capacity: 10 rounds

Characteristics: G 41(W)

Caliber: 7.92mm
Ammunition: 7.92mm Mauser (8x57JS)
Overall length: 1.123 m (44.21 inches)
Barrel length: 0.545 m (21.45 inches)
Weight: 5.050 kg (11.14 lbs)
Capacity: 10 rounds

Three and a half years ago we announced the formation of the National Firearms Trade and Collectors Association. Our objective was to provide a unified voice with ATF and Congress for the entire NFA community and firearms owners nationwide. In the early stages of our formation many people accused us of “sleeping with the enemy” and turning traitor to the firearms industry. Nothing can be further from the truth. Yet there are still people standing in our ranks posting on many of the websites that still accuse us of being turncoats and, it is safe to say, that these same people have never attended an event where any number of high ranking ATF officials are present alongside the NFATCA. These meetings represent a new sort of teamwork between government and industry that is not only welcome but truly a breath of fresh air for all us. Looking back to where we started and where we are today, the firearms community, and particularly the NFA community, has benefited greatly by our involvement.

The NFATCA has been invited to sit on many panels and has attended multiple meetings simply to represent industry needs and concerns. In 2007, we were invited to nearly twenty meetings with ATF to “get our take” and participate with them on a multitude of issues. It is hard to imagine other government agencies inviting civilians to express their needs. As Lew Raden, BATFE Assistant Deputy Director, once told the NFA Branch, “This kind of relationship is an industry first.” Those people who still call us asking, “What is the NFATCA doing for me?” seem to have a difficulty in grasping the importance of our effect on the bigger picture and the proper question is, “What is the NFATCA doing for us?” The answer to that is evident in the many successes we have achieved in our short history.

There are many among us today that once long ago finally got up the nerve to get their firearms license that didn’t spend an inordinate amount of time worrying about the countless stories we’ve heard where ATF would kick down your door in the middle of night for whatever reason. We can’t relax and drop our guard but that fear should substantially subside with all of the work we are doing together. Fear is either based on experience or, more often, the unknown. With the deployment of the NFA Handbook and now the development of the FTB procedures manual, both the NFATCA and ATF have one goal in mind; to get everyone reading off the same page and have industry and government working together as a team, not as adversaries. Many of you have taken the opportunity to get to know NFA and FTB personnel and found that good communication works. However, we must remain vigilant as ATF is an enforcement agency and their job is to enforce the law.

This is all about working together to make certain that when ATF has to enforce the law, it is based on someone breaking that law and knowing full well that’s exactly what they were doing. To avoid that is to make certain everyone in the industry knows and understands the law. We published the NFA handbook and will publish the FTB procedures manual for everyone in the industry. The information is there for everyone and there is no excuse for anyone in this industry to be ignorant of the laws that affect them so directly.

The NFATCA still has as its primary objective to strengthening communication between ATF and the NFA community and break down as many fear barriers that wecan whenever the opportunity presents itself. There is still a lot of work to do to get this wall torn down but we knew when we started this process that it wouldn’t happen overnight and it would not be easy. The joint relationship that we have developed with ATF is growing by the day based on trust and good, open communications. In being honest with each other there is truly a lot of experience and ideas that we can share together. The problem for both of us is opening that door and beginning to trust one another with all of the information that we both have in our experience locker. That is in fact what is happening. The NFATCA and the ATF are working together to make a better business for both of us. Our logo clearly says it all: “Power through Experience.” That experience, government and industry, will make all of our lives easier and functioning in the NFA community a much more robust and satisfying venture for all concerned.

Come join us today at www.NFATCA.org.

Phase II:
How Hot Does it Run and How Many Continuous Rounds Can We Fire?

It has been almost a year and a half since the original tests, and a review of the data we collected from those outings created a few additional questions that needed to be answered. We noticed that the running temperatures of the P-416 were consistently lower than those taken during the same circumstances with a direct gas impingement system. It makes perfect sense that the absence of the gas tube redirecting hot gasses into the action would relate to lower operating temperatures but we wanted to find out exactly how much of a difference it would actually make, especially during abnormally heavy usage. This allowed us to set up and began phase II.

Phase II would be another type of endurance test where large amounts of ammo would be fired, in very long, continuous and uninterrupted bursts, possibly bringing the test rifles to the point of catastrophic failure. Upon reaching the predetermined number of rounds, the temperature of the rifle would be measured in several areas, and the testing would immediately continue, allowing for the residual operating temperatures to continue to increase. No cooling time would be allowed.

Since BETA C-Mags are readily available and have worked well for us in past testing of this type, we decided to use them as the baseline and go with 100- round continuous mag dumps. We determined that the complete test would consist of 1,000 rounds, barring any type of system failure. After continuously firing each 100-round burst, the surface temperature would be measured on the following parts: the bolt face, the chamber area, the gas block and the muzzle brake. The surface temperature of the barrel would be measured occasionally but was not considered a vital measurement for purposes of these tests. The temperatures would be measured in the Fahrenheit scale with a Geneva Scientific Model TLL950LS Infrared thermometer. This thermometer has a working temperature range from -32° up to +950° and no contact is necessary to slow down the testing or require cumbersome embedded sensors.

Since we determined that it was going to be possible to reach a catastrophic failure point, for safety purposes, each test rifle was fitted with a KNS precision tripod adapter allowing it to be fired from a standard MG42 anti-aircraft tripod, and both series of tests also employed a set of KNS Precision Spade grips. This combination would allow the shooter to place his body well behind the action of the firearm and not require a cheek weld on the stock only inches from the chamber.

We decided to use Wolf 62-grain, FMJ .223 for several reasons. First, there was an abundance on hand, and if both test rifles reached their maximum number of rounds allotted for the testing, we would need at least 2,000 rounds. Secondly, and most importantly, this was to be one hell of an endurance test and it is almost universally agreed that steel-cased ammunition has the potential to be tougher on chambers than traditional, brass-cased ammo. Contrary to sometimes popular internet and urban legend, we have run tens of thousands of rounds of this ammo during testing firearms of all calibers, types and styles over the years with no adverse effects whatsoever.

Load Up

All available BETA C-Mags were loaded and the remainder of the ammo was loaded onto steel stripper clips for use with a speed loader. We didn’t know really what to expect, but having heard stories about “fire till failure” drills with other rifles, we dressed properly including correct sight and hearing protection. The 16-inch barreled P-416 was mounted on the MG42 anti-aircraft tripod and the baseline temperatures were taken. (It should also be noted that the rifle had been test fired and several magazines were fired in measuring the rate of fire before this round of testing began. Given the high endurance of the original test model we decided not to bother cleaning the rifle before starting this round of testing. Since it was obviously dirty, a quick burst of Rem-Oil was applied through the dust cover prior to beginning this test.) The air temperature was a seasonal 41° above zero with no measurable wind and all parts to be checked were very close to our established “room temperature” this day. (A complete set of charts with all round counts and recorded temperatures are included with this article). After establishing that everything was at a base temperature, it was time for the testing to start.

Drum number 1 was loaded and emptied in a single, sub 10-second burst. This was the kind of shooting that we were always warned against because it was potentially destructive and usually pointless in situations where “placing multiple hits on approaching targets was necessary.” It is also precisely the kind of shooting that many serious class III recreational shooters (who have no current approaching enemy targets at the time) really enjoy. The rifle was quickly cleared and temperature measurements were taken in the chamber area, the bolt face, the gas block and the muzzle brake. All were recorded and the next drum was loaded in approximately 90 seconds time.

The bolt was closed on drum number 2 and it was emptied as flawlessly as the first. Measurements were repeated, the next drum was loaded. As the P-416 effortlessly continued to chug along through drums 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8, we wondered if it would indeed make the 1,000-round count we set without a major stoppage.

Drum 9 ran as smooth as the first and it wasn’t until approximately 1/3 into the 10th and final drum that the rhythmic sounds we were getting quite used to screeched to a halt. A quick survey of the situation showed nothing more than a severely cracked magazine feed tower had allowed it to spread and log jam several rounds up inside the action. The loose rounds were quickly cleared and an 11th full magazine was immediately inserted, giving way to another 100-round stream of steel casings, that never ended until the magazine was empty. The final readings were taken and the Phase II portion of the P-416 test was officially over. We didn’t have any reason to believe it would not make it through the whole 1,000 rounds in this harsh manor, but we were still relieved and impressed that it did. A count of the rounds fired through the malfunctioning magazine gave us a total of 1,036 rounds fired throughout the test.

Phase II, Part II

All the data gathered during the P-416 portion was quickly filed, and a second rifle was brought out to duplicate the testing with, and to take direct comparative measurements from, while in exactly the same conditions. This second rifle was a standard direct gas impingement system with an M4 contoured 16-inch barrel, and utilized the same lower receiver and mount setup for continuity.

After taking baseline temperatures the shooting began in the same manor as the first rifle. The first BETA C-Mag was inserted and the first 100-round magazine dump was completed as easily as with the first rifle. It was getting a little darker at this point and the glowing gas tube was highly visible under the rail system. We quickly swooped in with the instrumentation, gathered the necessary numbers and we were onto the second burst.

Drum number 2 was inserted, the bolt was dropped and the range filled again with the same rhythmic beat that had been played since we were set up and started the testing. The gas tube started glowing almost simultaneously with the beginning of the firing, evidenced by the residualheat in it, the barrel and the gas block. The cyclic rate remained smooth and even, and all 100 rounds found their mark in the impact area. The numbers were gathered and drum number 3 was inserted.

As soon as the impact area was in the sights the trigger was engaged and drum 3 was on its way to being rapidly emptied. The gas tube again glowed immediately, and this time the cyclic rate was almost instantly erratic. About 30 rounds into the third drum the cyclic rate started slowing and eventually sputtered to a stop. Pulling the charging handle rearward, anempty chamber was discovered. There had been a gas tube failure and there was not enough pressure to bring the bolt carrier back far enough to pick up a new round and chamber it. Another round was cycled by hand and fired only to have the same result. The magazine was pulled, the gun cleared, and the measurements recorded. Test over. Total rounds fired in rifle number 2 was 264.

Heat Transfer

As discovered through the measurements we recorded, heat was indeed transferred into the action of the firearm through the gas tube at a much faster rate than with the piston gun. The numbers that seemed to indicate the most significant difference were the temperatures of the bolt itself. The bolt face temperature was measured after every magazine was emptied and it reached a higher temperature after firing only 200 rounds with the direct gas impingement gun than it did even after firing over 1,000 rounds through the piston gun. Another factor that plays into the equation is friction, which is greatly reduced in the P-416 by the removal of the gas rings and the silicone nickel coating, which creates an extremely smooth surface. The maximum temperature the bolt face reached in the P-416 was 122° and that was recorded immediately after firing 1036 rounds. The maximum temperature the bolt face reached in the direct gas impingement rifle was 133° but that was only after 264 rounds, the failure point for this system.

Chamber temperatures recorded with the direct gas impingement rifle reached a maximum of 115° and was recorded after 264 rounds, the maximum number of rounds fired. The P-416 reached a similar temperature of 119° after firing 600 rounds. The maximum chamber tempera ture measured in the P-416 was 131° immediately after concluding the testing at 1036 rounds. All temperatures were measured in the rear of the chamber through the barrel extension.

The gas block of the P-416 retained much more heat after firing than the gas block of the direct gas impingement rifle. While the maximum temperature recorded with the direct gas impingement rifle was after only 200 rounds, it only reached a temperature of 339°. After firing 200 rounds in the P-416, the gas block reached a temperature of 498° and spiked at 697° after firing 800 rounds. Gas block temperatures fluctuated greatly throughout the testing but seemed to dissipate much faster in the direct gas impingement rifle. The mass of the gas block is much greater in the P-416 and the free flowing transfer of heat ends there in that particular system as opposed to allowing the flow rearward through means of the gas tube.

Much of the barrel temperature increase is due to the friction of the projectile being forced down the bore. Since the focus of our testing was to check for changes directly related to the differences between the direct gas impingement system and the gas piston systems we did not bother collecting significant data in this area.

Conclusion

We did not really know what to expect when we started this test. The number of rounds fired in the short time allowed was way beyond the normal use of any standard black rifle. The rifle system itself was simply not designed to fire that many rounds without failure. We have all seen enough melted gas tubes and have a good enough understanding of how the system works to know this kind of abuse is well past its intended use. The point of the test was to fire as many rounds as the rifle would withstand, and record the data to that point. Since the P-416 was still functioning at the end of the testing, we still do not know what that end point really is. Maybe a “fire till failure” test is something we should explore in the future. All this writer knows for certain is that the POF-USA P-416 rifle system was designed without the limitations of a standard black rifle and continues to perform in ways quite unrealistic to the original design. There seems to be plenty of active debate about the piston operating system versus the direct gas impingement design and there may never be a “perfect” system for everyone. Just like there are desired barrel lengths, calibers and mounting platforms that some see as mission critical and others see as simple options, the operating system may just be another choice for the end user to determine and remain the topic of another endless debate in the gun world. While there may be valid reasons to stick with a time proven direct gas impingement system in some instances, it is clearly becoming obvious to some that the newly designed piston systems on the market today also have definite advantages. It was not very long ago that the implication of a rifle that could double as a PDW and a SAW would be considered unrealistic at best. Today, thanks to POF-USA, that might not seem quite so far fetched.

Use Your Ears

If you shoot a lot of fully automatic firearms, especially to extremes such as this, your ear can become an important tool. A smooth and even cyclic rate is usually a sign of things working well. When the cyclic rate varies up and down (when shooting the same ammo) or is erratic in any way, it is often a sign of something wrong. A gas leak is an easy one to diagnose as the cyclic rate often slows drastically from start to finish during a long burst. It can be anything from a failing gas tube to a loose gas key but is usually a sign of a gas pressure problem.

During the testing of a new rifle a few years ago, it was decided to do a full BETA C-Mag dump during a lull in the shooting at a well attended private shoot. Since it was a very short barrel (11.5 inches) and had a brake that was quite loud, after 35 or 40 continuous rounds it caught the attention of several participants. The cyclic rate started out in the area of 950 rounds per minute and was slowing at an even pace. By the time the rifle finished the magazine, it was running no faster than 450 rpm. Several people came right over and commented that it sounded like the gun was “running out of gas” and sounded like an outboard boat engine as the tank ran dry. After clearing and cooling, the gun was examined and an improperly staked (and very loose) gas key was found to be the culprit. As usual, your senses, in this case your hearing, can give you more information than you know how to process if you only listen to it.

Sources

P-416 Rifle System
POF-USA
Dept. SAR
23623 N. 67th Ave.
Glendale, AZ 85310
Phone: (623) 561-9572
Fax: (623) 321-1680
E-mail: sales@pof-usa.com
www.pof-usa.com

BETA C-Mags
The BETA Company
Dept: SAR
2137B Flintstone Drive
Tucker, GA 30084
Phone: (770) 270-0773
Fax: (770) 270-0599
E-mail: cmag@betaco.com
www.betaco.com

Spade Grips & Tripod Adapter
KNS Precision, Inc.
Dept: SAR
112 Marschall Creek Road
Fredricksburg, TX 78624
Phone: (830) 997-0000
Fax: (830) 997-1443
E-mail: sales@knsprecisioninc.com
www.knsprecisioninc.com

Wolf Performance Ammunition
Sporting Supplies
Dept: SAR
1125 North Lance Lane
Anaheim, CA 92086
Phone: (888) 757-WOLF
Fax: (714) 632-9232
www.wolfammo.com

New Timney AR-10 Trigger

On the heels of the 2007 release of the highly anticipated and wildly successful AR-15 replacement trigger, Timney Triggers now offers another true drop-in trigger for the AR rifle platform. The new AR-10 trigger by Timney is a design created in conjunction with Frank Desomma of POF-USA, manufacturers of the popular P-415 & P-416 Gas Piston AR rifles. The Timney AR-10 trigger is a self-contained, 100% drop-in unit ready to install in an AR-10 rifle for an exceptionally smooth, crisp, single-stage trigger pull. No gunsmithing, fitting, or adjusting is required. Pull weight is factory set at 4 pounds. The lightweight 6061 T6 alloy housing is anodized for superior durability. Hammer is EDM machined from S7 tool steel that combines hardness to resist wear with superior impact resistance to withstand heavy use without chipping or breaking. Finally, a Teflon Nickel coating is applied to the hammer to deliver a super smooth trigger pull with superior lubricity. Other components are EDM cut from A2 tool steel, then heat treated to Rc 56-60 for longer service life. The trigger module installs using your rifle’s original hammer/trigger pins and the proprietary design eliminates pin rotation and walkout. Timney Triggers offer the rifle shooter a convenient way to shop online. Customers can now order the model they want, with the options they want, and request it factory tuned to the pull weight desired. For more information contact them at Timney Manufacturing, Inc., Dept. SAR, 3940 West Clarendon Avenue, Phoenix, AZ 85019. Phone: (602) 274-2999. Fax: (602) 241-0361. They can be found on the web at www.timneytriggers.com.

Fobus Introduces Two New Holsters for Popular Handguns

Fobus Holsters, the leader in polymer holsters with the most fits available, is pleased to announce the new Evolution Series holster for the Beretta Vertec (BRV) as well as a holster for the FN Five-seveN. The new Evolution Holster utilizes their proven Fobus passive retention system that secures the pistol while allowing instant presentation, without the need to disengage mechanical securing devices. Evolution Series upgrades such as an adjustable retention screw, one-piece holster body construction, steel-reinforced rivet attachment system and a protective sight channel have been incorporated. The Vertec Evolution Holster is available in right hand paddle (BRV), belt (BRVBH), roto paddle (BRVRP), roto belt 1-3/4 inch (BRVRB), and roto duty belt 2-1/4 inch (BRVRDB). The BRV also fits the Taurus full size 92/ 99 with rails. The FNH Evolution Holster is available in right hand paddle (FNH), belt (FNHBH), roto paddle (FNHRP), roto belt 1-3/4 inch (FNHRB), and roto duty belt 2-1/4 inch (FNHDB). For more information on these as well as their extensive line of holsters and firearms accessories, please contact Fobus Holsters/Command Arms Accessories, Dept. SAR, 76 Vincent Circle, Ivyland, PA 18974. Phone: (267) 803-1517. Fax: (267) 803-1002. Their website is www.fobusholster.com.

DoubleStar Introduces New Gas Blocks for AR-15/M16 Rifles

DoubleStar now has three new gas blocks for the AR-15/M16 series of rifles. They say that the new gas blocks are lighter and studier than anything on the market today. The trio includes a two-piece two rail, a one-piece four-rail and a low-profile block. Each is especially suited to the needs of individual shooters, and all are more rugged and durable than what have previously been available. The two-piece and four-piece blocks are made of standard 6061 T6 aircraft-grade aluminum with a hard coat anodized finish for a lighter weight. Each has 1913 Picatinny rail systems to accept accessory attachments. The four-rail system is securely held in place with three sets of screws, rather than the typical two. The screw sets – two on the bottom and one on top – ensure a perfect gas seal. The four-piece system is made to fit .750 inch diameter barrels and retails for $64.95. The two piece gas block is easily and securely installed with four socket head machine screws. It is available for a .750 inch diameter barrel or a .625 inch diameter A1 barrel, and retails for $64.95. DoubleStar’s low-profile gas block is made from 1018 steel and mil-spec parkerized, yet maintains a light weight. Designed for shooters who always use a scope, the low-profile gas block replaces the front sight and retails for $38.95. To find out more, contact them at DoubleStar, J&T Distributing, Dept. SAR, P.O. Box 430, Winchester, KY 40391. Phone: (859) 745-1757. Fax: (859) 745-4638. Website: http://www.jtdistributing.com.

Advanced Technology Introduces New Shotgun Stock

Advanced Technology, Inc. has developed an ambidextrous, top folding stock with pistol grip for pump shotguns. Made of matte black, glass-filled nylon, the stock comes with all the necessary hardware and a sling swivel stud. It is easy to install, lightweight, compact and requires no gunsmithing. A quick-release button allows the stock to fold and unfold quickly and also allows the gun to function in both the open and closed positions. It fits the 12 and 20 gauge Mossberg 500/590, Remington 870, Winchester 1200/1300 and the Maverick Model 88. The retail price of the new stock is just $69.99. To compliment the stock, Advanced Technology offer the Deluxe Heatshield with ghost ring sights, and the ghost ring sight adapter that allows combined use of the top folding stock with the heatshield. The stock comes predrilled to accept their shot shell holder for easy access to an extra five 12 gauge rounds. They also offer the stock as the Marine Top Folding Stock with stainless steel hardware for wet weather use. For more information or ordering options, please contact them at Advanced Technology, Inc., Dept. SAR, 102 Fairview Drive, Versailles, KY 40383. Phone: (859) 873- 9877. Fax: (859) 873-6229. Their website is www.atigunstocks.com.

New M-230 Kit for the 1919A4 from TNW Firearms

Have you ever wondered what the ever reliable Browning 1919 machine gun would have looked like if it had continued in development and evolved past the A6 variant? The skunkworks design team of TNW Firearms, Inc. – Mark Eschenbacher, Dennis Gann and Tim Bero – have projected the form and function into a readily adaptable kit that converts any semi or full auto 1919 into a modern mobile squad weapon. The system consists of a lightened .308 barrel with flash hider, innovative front shroud assembly with threaded mounting holes, custom rails, bipod and folding carry handle. Other features include an improved front sight, FN style buttstock assembly and FN style pistol grip assembly with safety. The weapon retains the ability to be fired from a tripod or pedestal. The upgrade takes about twenty minutes to install and requires no permanent modifications to your 1919. The front shroud assembly has a top cover that swings up for quick and easy barrel changes. The barrel of the new system is lightened and shortened to 16 inches. By doing this there is no longer a need for a barrel booster. The custom Picatinny rails on the top, bottom and sides of the front shroud give the user the ability to add optics, front vertical grips, lights, lasers or other accessories. The kit makes the standard 1919A4 look much like an M- 240 GPMG. For more information on this as well as their semi-auto M2 .50 caliber, semi-auto 1919A4 and A6, semi-auto MG 34 and a full line of accessories and gun mounts, please contact them at TNW Firearms, Inc., Dept. SAR, P.O. Box 311, Vernonia, OR 97064. Phone: (503) 429-5001. Fax: (503) 429-3505. Website: www.tnwfirearms.com.

Gunslick Introduces New AR-15 Cleaning Kits

The AR-15 Cleaning Kit offers shooters a specialized high performance cleaning kit. Headlining the components in this kit is Ultra-Klenz, a high-tech copper dissolver and carbon remover and Ultra-Lube, an advanced gun oil protectant. This kit also includes a full line of cleaning accessories, steel cleaning rods and the special AR-15 bronze and steel brush that cleans the chamber. For more information on this as well as the entire Gunslick line-up, contact them at Gunslick Gun Care, Dept. SAR, N5549 County Trunk Z, Onalaska, WI 54650. Phone: (800) 635-7656. Fax: (763) 323-3899. Their web site is www.gunslick.com.