For the past 30-plus years, the name Curtis Higgins and S&H Arms of Oklahoma, Inc., have been at the forefront of quality machine gun conversions of Heckler & Koch (HK) semi-auto rifles and carbines. The business started in 1986 manufacturing thousands of registered HK autosears prior to the May 19, 1986, ban on new machine guns and conversions. Since the 5/19/86 Day of Infamy, Curtis and his company have converted innumerable HK 93, 91 and 94 rifles into fully transferrable select fire versions of the models 33, G3 and MP5 (for more info: curtis@sandharms.com). While several other manufacturers also made the autosears, the S&H conversions were coveted due to the flawless cosmetics and functioning of the weapons. S&H was also known for its autosears for the FNC and, to a lesser extent, autosears for the Ruger 10/22. To this day, S&H is known as the premier gunsmithing facility for HK machine guns.

1986 also was the year S&H entered the suppressor market with MP5 muzzle suppressors, HK MP5SD integral suppressors and a variety of integral rimfire suppressors for Ruger .22LR weapons, the Ruger 77/44 and the Marlin .45 Camp Carbine. Curtis licensed his integral Ruger rimfire designs to John’s Guns.
Small Arms Review recently received S&H’s latest suppressed weapon, an integrally suppressed upper receiver chambered for the popular AAC .300 Blackout cartridge, an improved version of the SSK .300 Whisper originally designed by J.D. Jones.

Designed for a 9-inch barrel, the .300BLK’s popularity has risen dramatically due to the simple conversion of the AR-16/M16 weapons simply by changing the barrel with its associated gas block. Even the M249 belt-fed machine gun is set up for this cartridge. For many purposes, the .300BLK cartridge is ideal: .30 caliber bullet, short barrel, subsonic and supersonic loadings with bullet weights ranging from 110 grains to 220 grains. The loadings using bullets 150 grains or less are supersonic while those with the heavier bullets are generally subsonic.

The S&H Model 30 is a complete assembly consisting of an integrally suppressed upper receiver with an overall length of 28.8 inches and a ported 16-inch, 1:5 barrel. The ports bleed excessive propelling gas into a sealed chamber in the rear of the suppressor.  It weighs 89.7 ounces (5.6 pounds). It utilizes the bolt, charging handle and lower receiver of the user’s AR-15 or M16. For our evaluation, we used a Bushmaster select fire AR-15 lower receiver with a standard buffer intended for 5.56 weapons.

The unit is a conventional direct impingement gas system which mounts easily on an AR-15 or M16 lower receiver using the bolt assembly and charging handle from the host weapon. The handguard has a full-length Picatinny rail and has as standard equipment easy-to-use, flip-up sights. The 1.5-inch-diameter suppressor outer tube extends rearward over the barrel over 15 inches back to the gas block and approximately 5.5 inches forward of the muzzle. The baffle stack in this forward section contains five conventional baffles. The exit hole in the front end cap is configured to use a standard 3/8-inch hex wrench for disassembly. The large chamber surrounding the barrel is fed by four ports in the barrel several inches forward of the gas port. This permits proper usage of this chamber rather than relying on reverse gas flow at the muzzle.

The entire suppressor can be disassembled by the user for cleaning and maintenance. The only tools needed are a 5/32-inch hex wrench for the handguard and a 3/8-inch hex wrench for the front end cap. For total disassembly, a special spanner wrench from S&H is needed to loosen the retaining nut that tightens the suppressor outer tube onto the threaded barrel end. Removal of the baffles and spacers from the front section is somewhat tedious. Unlike firearms with moving parts, suppressors generally perform better if they are not cleaned (with the exception of rimfire suppressors). From the writer’s experience examining suppressor designs, it is estimated that performance degradation will not become apparent for many tens of thousands of rounds, and cleaning is not recommended.

Of major interest to users is the sound performance of the system. Sound measurements were made in compliance with MIL-STD-1474D (Section 5). Two Larson-Davis model 800B sound level meters were used, each with its Larson-Davis model 2530 random incidence ¼-inch instrumentation microphones. These are compliant with rise/response times less than 20 microseconds. Measurements were made at the reference location (one meter left of the muzzle 90º to bore axis, 1.6 meters above grass) and at the simulation of the shooter’s left ear (SLE, 8cm rearward of the receiver, 18cm left of bore axis). By using two sound meters, it is possible to obtain both location readings for each shot. Because MIL-STD permits the use of weighting and because weighting is the industry standard, measurements were made utilizing C-weighting.

Five rounds of 125-grain Black Hills supersonic, five rounds of Gemtech 187-grain subsonic, five rounds of TNQ 220-grain subsonic and five rounds of Remington 220-grain subsonic ammunition were used, and the results averaged. In addition, velocity was measured both at the muzzle and at 25 yards using a Labradar radar chronograph. Velocity at greater range was not possible due to constraints of the range used. Sound levels and velocities are shown in Table 1.

While performing sound testing, several malfunctions were noted with the Gemtech 187gr, the TNQ 220gr and the Remington 220gr subsonic ammunition. The 125gr Black Hills supersonic functioned flawlessly.  Because of malfunctions with the subsonic ammunition, high-speed video was taken, concentrating on the ejection port to document actual bolt travel and rearward bolt velocity. Video tests were performed on a 3-shot burst with the camera operating at 10,000 frames/second. The TNQ 220-grain subsonic was not photographed due to having only enough ammunition to perform sound and velocity measurements. The high-speed video of the bolt opening showed normal rearward travel with the supersonic ammunition but only approximately 66%–75% rearward travel with the subsonic ammunition.  Opening bolt velocity was 3750mm/second with supersonic ammunition and less than 2,000mm/second with subsonic. The subsonic bolt travel was enough to permit case ejection at the 4 o’clock position but not enough to feed the next round from the magazine.

Sound levels with all varieties of ammunition tested were below 140dB at the reference location with the subsonic ammunition showing averages around 130dB. Readings at the shooter’s left ear location were in the upper 140dB region, probably due to some ejection port noise and gas leakage in the region of the gas block. Supersonic readings were somewhat higher than subsonic. The reference location is a good indicator of perception by the target in the far field.

Velocity readings were as anticipated for the ammunition used. All subsonic ammunition had a muzzle velocity just under 1,000 feet/second, and all exhibited a drop of approximately 50 feet/second at 50 yards. The Remington 220gr subsonic exhibited the greatest round-to-round variation in velocity with a standard deviation of around 30. The TNQ 220-grain subsonic showed the least variation.

Quantifying flash requires a light meter capable of holding the intensity of the single brightest light peak. Lacking access to such a meter, there are two methods of evaluating flash: long camera exposure (about 1 second) on a dark night or high-speed video. High-speed video offers the option of performing filming in daylight with a black background for contrast. It also offers the option of looking at bullet stability. With a ruler in the field of view, a reasonable estimation of the intensity can be made. Figure 5 is the single frame showing the greatest amount of flash.

Firearms have little value if they are not accurate. A lead-sled was used as a bench rest, and a target was shot at 50 yards. It was decided to utilize the Black Hills 125gr supersonic ammunition because its greater kinetic energy is most likely to be used for neutralizing targets. The supply of this load was limited without enough to zero accessory optical sights. As a result, the flip-up iron sights on the weapon were used. The front post (.058 inch) is approximately 6MOA wide. The group size is under 3MOA (target grid is one inch).

In all, SAR’s testing of the S&H M30 integrally suppressed upper receiver was very positive. While it is a larger suppressor, it is also very successful for 300BLK suppression and accuracy. Curtis should be proud of his continued success in providing a good product for the end users.

This article first appeared in Small Arms Review V22N9 (November 2018)

“You only have to kick in the door and the whole rotten structure will come crashing down…”
-Adolph Hitler

With this prediction, Hitler launched Operation Barbarossa, his invasion of the Soviet Union, on Sunday morning, June 22, 1941.

In four months, his army carved hundreds of miles east from Poland, through Russia, to the city of Tula. Tula straddled the roads and rails 120-miles south of Moscow and blocked the advancing Panzers’ path to victory. On October 29, 1941, Tula was now the door to Moscow.

Late in the 1500s, Tsar Fyodor I first settled gun-makers in Tula near the iron ore deposits by the Upa River. In the years that followed, Tula courted foreign gunsmiths and engineers to the city, and it became the center of Russian iron working and armaments. Peter the Great visited in 1712 and founded the state armory. By 1720, more than 1000 workers were producing 20,000 muskets a year. Tula gained a reputation for high-quality arms, often with ornate decoration, but the meat and potatoes continued to be military guns, like the Berdan rifles produced beginning in 1879. It was a city built by iron.

Arms production for the Russo-Japanese War of 1904–1905 and WWI swelled Tula still more. Most of the guns used in the Red Revolution and the fighting to follow came from Tula. When Hitler attacked, the City of Tula had a population of 272,000.

Hitler had confidently declared Russia would be defeated in three months. He was sure the Red Army would crumble if they lost the western industrial and agricultural heartland. An eastward retreat would be a suicide march into the wilderness. Hitler’s blazing victory would be so swift that no winter clothes for the troops, anti-freeze or low-temperature oils for engines and guns need be considered.

To Hitler the invasion of Russia was inevitable. It was Germany’s destiny and his to lead it. Communism was the mortal enemy of National Socialism and, moreover, the lands to the east were vital to a German future. There was no other choice.

There were strong voices against it at the time. Despite the German victories in Europe, England remained stubbornly unbowed, and opening a new front seemed foolhardy. Many of Hitler’s economic advisors warned the acquisition and administration of so much territory would be more a drain than an asset. And, this assumed they won!

But, the pessimists were lesser men; men without vision … Hitler knew better. Hitler knew the Reds were soft. The brief Winter War of 1939–1940 in which the Soviets failed to subdue Finland convinced him. The German high command, flushed with victory and bedecked with new medals, were aware that Stalin’s purges of Soviet officers had wiped away the Red Army leadership. They agreed. All were arrogantly unaware of the lessons Stalin had learned. In the wake of the Finnish disaster, he was already recalling thousands of fired officers and over-hauling Soviet equipment.

In the snowy forests, the Finnish Suomi KP/-31 submachine gun had taken a heavy toll on the Reds. True, the Soviets had their old-style PPD designed by Vasily Degtyaryov. It was serviceable, but there were never enough. Russia would need millions of guns.

Georgy Shpagin redesigned his friend’s PPD to produce the PPSh-41. The initials stand for “Pistolet-Pulemyot Shpagina,” or, in English, “Pistol, Machine, Shpagin.” The 41 is for the year of adoption—1941. Like the PPD, the PPSh is blow-back operated and fires the Russian 7.62mm pistol round. This was modeled after the German 7.63mm cartridge and could fire the German cartridge as well. The reverse was not true as the more powerful Russian round could damage the German guns. The PPSh wasn’t in production when the Germans stormed the Russian border, but by the time they reached Tula, the gun was being stamped out in Moscow. The PPSh incorporated a copy of the Suomi 71-round ammunition drum. Eventually over six million were made. With its 900rpm fire rate it was hugely popular and easily maintained by even ill-trained soldiers. Even German soldiers were happy to be issued captured PPShs, converted to 9mm.

Degtyaryov and Shpagin worked together as friends and protégés of Vladimir Federov for many years. The clique of Soviet arms designers were all favorites of Stalin, surviving the purges and enjoying many honors. The Degtyaryov plant at Kovrov was named in honor of Degtyaryov.

One of the most successful machine guns developed in the Soviet Union, the gas-powered 12.7mm DShK heavy machine gun, was created there. Degtyaryov originally designed it to feed from a 30-round drum. Shpagin devised a belt feed, and the “Dashka,” as it became called, was a much-loved staple in WWII and is still in broad use today. At Tula, the guns were dug in; their crews huddled behind the shields of their wheeled mounts.

Behind them, weapons were going directly from factory to the front line. The “Sveta” got its nickname from its initials “SVT.” SVT stands for “Tokarev self-loading rifle.” Working at Tula, Fedor V. Tokarev, another Stalin favorite, improved his SVT-38 into the SVT-40. It fired the rimmed 7.62mm from a detachable 10-round magazine. A million and a half SVTs were made including over 50,000 sniper versions. Many SVTs had already faced the Germans in the opening days of Barbarossa, but the ensuing Blitzkrieg saw most of these lost. Production at Tula and Izhmash was only curtailed in favor of the easier to make M91 rifle and the PPSh submachine gun.

Stalin believed Hitler would not attack Russia. Even when the biggest invasion in history tore into his lines on June 22, 1941, Stalin believed the attack was unauthorized, and Hitler would quickly rein in his renegade Generals.

At that moment, Hitler was the only power on earth that could rein in the German invasion. He had no intention of doing so. The German Blitzkrieg roared from success to success.

The German attackers swept the stunned opposition aside and plunged deep into the enemy rear areas. From there they dashed to the sides, cutting off the Russian front lines from hope of resupply and reinforcement. Then they wrapped them up into confused pockets of isolated and demoralized men, convinced, quite rightly, they had been abandoned and written off. In the first week of Barbarossa Germany captured 400,000 Soviet soldiers and the city of Minsk. Then the cities of Leningrad and Kiev came under the gun and in between another 600,000 Soviet soldiers were trapped and captured.

The majority of Soviet soldiers met Hitler’s forces with the Mosin-Nagant Model 91 “three-lined rifle.” The three lines measured the bore; each “line” being .254 of a centimeter, adding up to 7.62mm. The bore diameter would be used in most Soviet small arms, apparently in an effort to make barrel production more efficient. This bolt-action rifle, was another Tula development, an amalgam of Russian Captain Sergei Ivanovich Mosin’s rifle and Belgian Emile Nagant’s magazine. It was first issued in 1892. Almost 40 million were eventually made at Tula and other Russian arsenals. Some were even sub-contracted to Westinghouse and Remington in the U.S. The M91 served in the Russo-Japanese War, the Revolution, the Civil War and throughout WWII. A few even served in American and British hands. Most were long infantry versions, but shorter models were made and several sniper versions were produced.

Supporting the M91s were the Degtyaryov DP light machine guns. These were widely issued by the end of the 1930s. The distinctive 47-round pan magazine provided reliable feed at the cost of being awkward and hard to reload. But, the DP was reliable and easily manufactured even in improvised factories. Unlike its German counter-part, the MG-34, the DP did not have a quick-change barrel and relied on a low 600rpm fire rate to moderate over-heating.

In a series of pincer movements, the Germans elevated their encirclements to a near art form. Even the German commanders were astounded at the huge numbers of captured enemy soldiers and equipment. There was no mechanism to cope with the volume, but the cynical policy of starving the prisoners eased the pressure.

 Still, within a month, German commanders were starting to feel nervous. Their successes meant their resources were being devoured, but the Soviets seemed to have been underestimated and kept conjuring men and equipment out of nowhere. Resistance was stiffening as the Soviets learned of the savage German behavior, the flamethrowers unleashed on civilians, the massacres and the roving death squads. And, underlying everything, was a simple, noble, Russian love for their motherland.

Among the captured weapons were many Tula-made Maxim Model 1910s. Tsarist Russia first fielded the recoil-operated Maxim gun in the Russo-Japanese War and began to make their own in 1905. The Russian Model Maxim 1910 is easily recognized by its ribbed water-cooling jacket. During WWII, a distinctive tractor radiator cap was added to allow insertion of snow when liquid water was not available. The Model 1910 earned the term “heavy machine gun” with its shield and wheeled mount.

The Model 1910 fires the 7.62mm Russian rimmed cartridge from a 250-round belt at 600rpm. Although the gun was later superseded by the SG-43 Goryunov, it remained in production until after the war.

Field Marshall Gunther von Kluge led the Army Group Center in Operation Typhoon, the German operation to take Moscow. Hitler’s predicted three-month deadline for victory passed quietly, and the advance continued. Not until October 1941 did German scouts finally see Moscow through their binoculars. Twelve miles ahead, they saw a city bristling for battle and eerily empty. Stalin had sent government and industry 500-miles to the south-east and across the Volga River to the city of Kuibyshev. While Muscovites panicked and fled, Stalin looked at his private train ready to take him to safety and decided to stay in the besieged capital; a decision that likely saved the nation.

Winter came early in 1941, the cold stabbing the German soldiers through their summer uniforms. It would be the worst winter of the century. The Germans split up and raced to the flanks, hoping to surround Moscow and hit from several directions. Sweeping ahead to the south on October 7, the renowned German Colonel-General Heinz Guderian was approaching Moscow on the road from Orel with his proud 2^nd Panzer Division. Ahead, the city of Tula was already writhing under German artillery shells. Von Kluge and Guderian expected this dot on the map would quickly be a minor memory. Guderian was ordered to take Tula.

 But, the ancient Russian ally, winter, would not be ignored. A layer of snow fell and then melted, turning the road to mud. Tanks and infantry transport sank, and the morass devoured German fuel and straining machinery and exhausted the men. Additionally, numerous partisan groups badgered the German supply lines and rear areas.

Ahead, the glow of Tula’s industry could occasionally be glimpsed. As well as being the manufacturing center of many Soviet arms, Tula was also the birthplace of the Soviet TT-33 semi-automatic pistol. The two “Ts” in “TT” stand for the gun’s designer, Tokarev and the Tula arsenal. Tokarev, a Tula native, improved on John Browning’s design with an improved system of holding the recoil spring. Overall the gun is made to be easier and simpler than a Browning to clean and fix. The 7.62mm ammo is held in an 8-round magazine, and the gun could fire the German 7.62mm if any were captured.

Another Tula product was the Nagant M1895 revolver designed by and named for Emile’s brother Leon Nagant. This remarkable gun was produced at Tula from 1895 through both World Wars. It fired seven shots of a unique 7.62mm rimmed cartridge. The full-length brass cartridge surrounded the bullet. The gun pushed the cylinder forward to seal the gap between cylinder and barrel. This eliminated flash, preserved the power of the burning gases and facilitated use of a silencer if desired. The various secret police services made use of this.

 Stalin appointed General Georgy Zhukov to take over the Western Front, including Moscow’s defense, on October 10. Twelve days later, German elements neared Tula, and V.G. Zhavoronkov, the First Secretary of the city, assumed combat command of Tula and formed the 1500-strong Tula Workers Regiment.

 While the new regiment trained, everyone else fit to work was drafted to build defenses. Trenches, barbed wire, minefields and anti-ditches began to ring the city. Homes and factories were strengthened and stocked with weapons, ammunition and Molotov “cocktails;” bottles of gasoline to be thrown at tanks. Anti-tank weapons were in short supply, but Degtyaryov had also designed two models of light anti-tank rifles. The bolt-action PTRD and the semi-auto PTRS-41 both used the same 14.5mm cartridge. Unfortunately, they only penetrated the German tanks under ideal conditions. The semi-auto PTRS-41 only functioned well when it and its ammunition were well-bathed in oil.

 A layered perimeter was established. When the temperatures dipped, wood from the rubble was burned to soften the frozen ground. Belts of wire were thickened and ditches deepened.

Entire factories had been disassembled, crated and shipped east. Several production lines from the Tula arms factory went with them, but production did not stop. The remaining lines worked night and day.

The Soviet Army bolstered the Tula Workers Regiment. Throughout the fighting, women, children and the elderly would carry supplies to the front, carry messages and help the wounded. While the defenders prepared and scrambled to plug their gaps, they couldn’t know Stalin was already assembling reserves to the east.

On October 24, Guderian’s drive on Tula began. By October 28, he was less than 20 miles from Tula. The lone, muddy road remained a huge problem, and only one battalion of infantry had enough fuel to keep up with the dwindling tanks. The pace had to slow; without the infantry, the Panzers were prey for the often suicidal Soviet anti-tank squads.

On October 29, the German tanks ground over the small towns south of Tula, smashing through the thin resistance. Dusk found the Germans tired, grimy and mud-covered but only two miles from Tula.

“Take it!” Guderian was ordered. He attacked immediately in the hope of surprising the Soviets and breaking into Tula. It didn’t happen. The Soviet defenders lashed out with their M91s, SVTs, PPShs, DPs, anti-tank guns, Maxims and Dashkas. Mortars and artillery piled on to bring the shaken Germans to a standstill. Guderian’s attack was suspended until dawn. The attack had failed, but the idea was right; Tula was strengthened and reinforced under cover of darkness.

The sun rose unseen behind low, dark, clouds. The German artillery barrage lit them up at 5.30 a.m., the shells mingling with rain. When the bombardment stopped, the tanks, confined to the few roads by even more mud, made contact with Tula. The German infantry pressed forward with them. By mid-afternoon, the fighting fell to a stalemate. Then, the Soviet T-34 tanks arrived, their broad tracks able to negotiate the soft ground. Their 76mm guns pounded the 2nd Panzers and drove them back. The infantry could only follow.

A last-gasp German attack late in the afternoon fared no better. Soviet forces in a defended cemetery blunted it, and when the Germans shifted into a factory area they did no better. By nightfall, the unhappy Germans were digging their own defensive positions.

During the overcast night, still more reinforcements joined the now hopeful defenders, bringing their strength to more than two dozen tanks. A fresh rifle division deployed, and more anti-aircraft guns were wheeled into front-line service. The Germans held back Soviet infiltrators all night.

 The night brought a new horror. The Katyusha multiple rocket launchers were a terrifying surprise. These were nick-named “Stalin’s organs” because the grouped launching tubes resembled the pipes in a church organ. As the rockets howled and exploded, the thin morning light revealed ghostly Soviet fighters through the mist, smoke and drizzle.

The Luftwaffe sent planes, but the Soviet 732^nd Anti-aircraft Artillery Regiment shot down several and disrupted the attack. Their 85mm guns were then leveled to engage German ground forces. When the rare Soviet aircraft did appear they strafed the Germans with 7.62mm and 12.7mm aircraft machine guns made at Tula.

The Germans could barely hold, and attack was out of the question. On November 1, the Soviets counter-attacked from Tula again. The counter-attack stalled as the Germans, now trapped in the mud, fought with their backs to the wall, attacking tanks on foot with small arms and grenades.

Again, the front gelled. Seeing his attacks stopped, but realizing the Soviet counter-attack was also stopped, Guderian shifted north to bypass the city, continue the advance to Moscow and cut off Tula from further resupply and reinforcement.

The Panzers met rigid resistance. At the same time, another push toward Tula was stopped by the unshakable 156^th Rifle Regiment of the NKVD. By November 3, the battle lines were again locked in trenches and foxholes.

Over the next two days, the 413^th Rifle Division reinforced Tula. More importantly, a cold front pushed away the drizzled weather. The frigid air froze the mud, and the German vehicles and men could move. It also brought new suffering to the Germans. Emergency supplies of winter clothing were miles behind in the vast muddy traffic jam stretching back to Poland. The cold hit record lows.

On November 15, the Germans struggled again to push around Tula and regain the initiative. Despite several counter-attacks mounted by the Soviets, by November 17, it looked like the attack might succeed. Then the T-34 tanks arrived to catch the German infantry unsupported. Their 37mm anti-tank guns were useless against the T-34s. The German commanders watched dumbfounded as their men ran for their lives. Reinforcements stabilized the situation, but the sense of foreboding was inescapable.

On November 18, Guderian’s attack lurched north toward Moscow. German tanks detached to attack Tula from the north. Tula was nearly cut off as German forces seized the road from Moscow.

 Too little, too late—The German forces were simply exhausted of everything. By December 5, Guderian was looking for an exit.

The next day, the prepared Soviet counter-attacks by fresh Siberian troops with hundreds of new PPShs and dozens of new T-34 tanks bled out the last of German energy and material. The temperature dropped to -36F. Oil froze in German engines and guns, grease froze on artillery ammunition, optical sights frosted and fogged, and metal parts, reportedly including rifle bolt handles, became brittle and broke. The Siberians had seen worse and shrugged it off.

Soon, there were plans to withdraw and consolidate and counter-attack. These came too little in the cold and confusion. Moscow did not fall. On December 20, Guderian flew to Hitler’s headquarters to plan a withdrawal. On Christmas day Hitler fired him.

There were many battles ahead, but Moscow was safe, and the German adventure in Russia was turned. The defenders of Tula were largely responsible; Hitler was stopped at the Iron City’s door.

This article first appeared in Small Arms Review V22N9 (November 2018)

During World War II, the U.S. Ordnance Department began a research and development program for a new lightweight infantry rifle. After the war ended, progress was slowed due to reduced post-war funding for the project.

Early weapons developed during the program were based on the M1 Garand rifle, which slowly evolved into the T44 series of rifles, ending with the T44E4. One of the more serious competitors facing Springfield Armory’s T44E4 was the Belgian-designed Fusil Automatique Leger or FN FAL rifle.

During 1954, the U.S. placed an order with Fabrique Nationale of Herstal, Belgium, for 3,303 FN FAL rifles in 7.62mm caliber. The weapons were distributed to the using services for testing and evaluation. Although the Belgian-made rifles were marked T48 they were a combination of 2,270 FAL Canadian pattern, 833 semi-automatic light-barrel T48s and 200 heavy-barrel T48E1 models with bipods.

The Inch-Pattern FN FAL

A meeting was held at the Office of the Chief of Ordnance on May 10, 1954, to brief representatives of the Springfield Armory on the policy for the T48 rifle program. On May 26, 1954, Armory officials attended a conference held at the head office of Canadian Arsenals Limited. The group distributed translated drawings and manufacturing data to prospective contractors who were invited to submit bids for production studies. It was established that engineering information would be exchanged between the United States, Great Britain and Canada with Canadian Arsenals Ltd acting as the clearing house. Spare parts requirements for a normal one-year maintenance program were compiled for 500 T48 rifles to be manufactured in the United States.

High Standard T48 Rifles

The U.S. Ordnance Department charged the Springfield Armory with the job of converting the FAL rifle from the metric to the Imperial system of inches. After a brief study, it was determined that converting the Belgian drawings to inches would not be an easy task. Other concerns were U.S. Ordnance specifications for materials, heat-treating procedures, manufacturing tolerances and other manufacturing operations. The Springfield Armory was busy with the T44E4 rifles and numerous other projects, so it decided to turn the task over to a commercial entity. Bids were taken for the project, and the contract was eventually awarded to the High Standard Corporation. As part of the agreement, High Standard was to manufacture at least 12 functional FAL T48 rifles from their final drawings to verify the results of their conversion efforts. Canada adopted the inch-pattern FN FAL and assisted High Standard with their drawing conversions from metric into inches. The rifles were to be delivered by September 1954. The High Standard T48s had a uniquely shaped “square” trigger guard, a U.S. specified flash suppressor and a receiver mounted guide for loading the rifle without removing the magazine.

Initial testing found the T48 rifle proving superior to the U.S. T44, and consideration was given to dropping the T44 from the competition. However, outperforming the FN rifles in the arctic testing phase gave the T44 a new lease on life.

T48 rifles made by High Standard along with Springfield Armory’s T44 rifles were tested under arctic conditions during the winters of 1953, 1954 and 1955. The rifles were also concurrently undergoing testing at Fort Benning, Georgia. Results from both locations reported that the T44 rifle was proving superior. Fort Benning reported that the T48 rifles were experiencing functioning problems under dusty conditions. Similar problems were encountered with the FAL rifles during desert testing by Great Britain. To address the problem, a small delegation of Americans who represented the U.S. contractors, visited the Royal Small Arms Factory in England and the Fabrique Nationale factory in Liege, Belgium. The problem was traced to the FAL’s close tolerances between the bolt carrier and the receiver. The Belgium engineers suggested the incorporation of “sand cuts,” or longitudinal grooves, machined into the bolt carriers, which solved the problem.

The Harrington and Richardson Arms Company (H&R) and International Harvester both submitted bids to manufacture 500 inch-pattern T48 rifles. Harrington and Richardson was chosen to produce the T48 rifles while the Springfield Armory would manufacture the T44E4 design, as well as the heavy-barrel T44E5 rifles for the trials. The cost to manufacture the inch-pattern T48 rifles was $2,392.00 (1955 dollars) each. The T48s made by H&R differed slightly from those made by High Standard. The High Standard T48s were a straight inch-scale transfer from the FN caliber .30 lightweight drawings. While the H&R-made T48s were patterned after the Canadian prototype C1 models which were essentially inch-corrected Canadian EX1 rifles. The 500 H&R rifles were primarily for production and cost studies. The inch-pattern U.S. version of the FN FAL, designated as the T48 rifle, used the Canadian magazine design that included a reinforced magazine lip. This modification applied to all inch-pattern FAL rifle magazines made the magazines non-interchangeable with metric FN FAL rifles.

The Hand Arms and Equipment Unit of the Armory was ordered to prepare Ordnance drawings, provide manufacturing information and technical data to the Boston Ordnance District for use in administering the contract number DA-19-020-ORD-3436 for the caliber .30 T48 rifle to H&R.

A representative from the Springfield Armory attended a four-day conference held from May 16 through May 20, 1955, at the Royal Small Arms Factory in Enfield, England. The conference initiated by the British government was the first in a series to promote cooperation and eventual tripartite NATO standardization of the Belgian FN rifle.

After the first 100 U.S.-made Harrington and Richardson T48-FAL rifles were ready in September 1955, 10 were randomly selected for testing at the Aberdeen Proving Center. The Harrington and Richardson T48 rifles were initially experiencing a few problems with small parts failing and stoppages. After these problems were addressed and solved, testing resumed. Subsequent trials found that the updated T44E4 rifle had fewer malfunctions than the T48 rifles even after the modification of adding sand cuts to the bolt carriers of the T48. The Harrington and Richardson T48 rifles were unable to qualify in the accuracy test. This problem was traced back to excessive machining tolerances on the barrels, partially because of a drawing error.

Despite there being no formal contract between Fabrique Nationale and the United States, the company granted the U.S. the complete rights to produce the FN T48 rifle domestically at no cost. There was a catch to the agreement. A royalty would have to be paid on any FN weapons given or sold to another country under a military aid agreement.

After most of the early problems in both rifles had been solved, a final head-to-head, full-scale test between the U.S.-designed T44E4 and the Belgium-designed, U.S.-built T48 rifles was scheduled for the summer of 1956. The stakes were high; it was expected that one of the rifles would be chosen as the new U.S. infantry weapon, replacing the M1 rifle. Tests were administered at both Fort Benning and at the U.S. Marine Corps Base, Quantico, Virginia. There was a great deal of skepticism on behalf of those involved in the testing about the United States Army adopting a foreign-designed infantry weapon for its forces. Many felt that the U.S. was simply going through the motions of testing the FAL rifle to appease Canada, Great Britain and other NATO members, who were pressuring the U.S. to adopt the Belgian FAL rifle. On the other hand, there was great political pressure from the U.S. and the Springfield Armory to adopt the U.S.-designed T44E4.

After the trials had been completed, Fort Benning reported that both rifles were suitable for army use, failing to decisively choose one design over the other. The Marine testing at Quantico slightly favored Springfield Armory’s T44E4. It seemed that no one was prepared to select one rifle over the other, as it was becoming a very sensitive political issue. Others were outspoken about the adoption of either rifle, stating that neither one represented any real improvements over the old M1 rifle and emphasizing that the search for a truly modern, lightweight infantry rifle simply had not been realized.

Nearly a year after the final trials, the U.S. Government finally concluded that the T44E4 was a full pound lighter than the T48, contained fewer parts and had a single-port gas system that didn’t require adjustments. The similarities between the T44E4 and the M1 Garand rifle would ease both training and manufacturing requirements. Despite pressure from the other NATO countries for the U.S. to adopt the Belgian-designed T48 rifle, on May 1, 1957, Secretary of the Army Wilbur H. Bruckner announced that the T44E4 and T44E5 were being adopted as the Standard U.S. service rifles as the M14 and M15 respectively. An Ordnance Committee meeting held on November 14, 1957, finalized the adoption of the M14 and the heavy-barrel M15 rifles as Standard. At the same meeting the M1 rifle, the Browning automatic rifle, the M1 carbine and the M3A1 submachine gun were classified as Limited Standard items.

With some reluctance from the European allies, the U.S.-developed 7.62x51mm T65E3 cartridge was officially adopted as the standard small arms round of the NATO alliance in 1954. Before long, many other allied countries began to seriously consider the FN FAL rifle. Being that most of the NATO countries had reluctantly adopted the U.S. cartridge, they expected the U.S. to also adopt the FN FAL rifle so that not only would NATO have a common cartridge but a common service rifle as well. However, there was no NATO requirement established for a standard infantry rifle; each country was free to adopt whatever rifle it wished.

The Belgian FAL rifle, in slightly varying configurations, was adopted as the standard service rifle by over 90 countries. The FN FAL would become the most prolific rifle among the NATO alliance. The U.S. M14 rifle would have one of the most short-lived tenures of any previous U.S. service rifle. Within a few years, after the last M14 rifle was made, the weapon began being phased out of U.S. service to be replaced by the small caliber 5.56mm M16 rifle. Many of the NATO alliance countries were somewhat bewildered by the United States’ decision to adopt the diminutive 5.56mm cartridge. Great Britain was stunned in light of the U.S. handily rejecting their .280 caliber cartridge back in 1954 on the grounds that it did not have sufficient power for a U.S. infantry weapon.

Where Are They Now?

The T48 rifles now repose in several U.S. military storage depots, many never fired. Most are the T48 rifles that were made by Harrington and Richardson. There are, however, more High Standard T48s made than have been reported in the past. There are seven standard barrel T48s and six heavy-barrel T48E1 rifles in storage at the Springfield Armory National Historic Site in Massachusetts. Although most of the T48 rifles were produced in a semiautomatic configuration, they do have a full-automatic capability and as such are considered machine guns. There are at least two documented original NFA-registered T48 rifles in private collections.

This article first appeared in Small Arms Review V22N9 (November 2018)

George Fosbery is best remembered for his Webley-Fosbery “Automatic” (self-cocking) revolver and his “Paradox” shotgun rifling system. He arguably also deserves credit for one of the most significant firearms design elements in history; the multi-lugged rotating bolt with integral claw extractor and plunger ejector. This is usually credited to Eugene Stoner as part of his revolutionary design for the ArmaLite AR-10 (1956), which of course evolved into the ubiquitous and important AR-15 pattern, but in actuality, Stoner borrowed from Melvin Johnson’s 1941 rifle bolt. This bolt and barrel extension solution allows for a consistent and accurate lock-up and a lightweight receiver, since the extension and bolt bear the pressure of firing and no additional locking surfaces or over-building are required. The vast majority of modern self-loading rifles utilize either this system or the AK twin-lugged bolt and trunnion approach.

Clearly in 1891, when Fosbery first patented this design, he was not anticipating today’s trends in rifle design, but it is intriguing that he arrived at the same solution to the problem of locking mechanisms as Johnson (1939) and Stoner (1956). Even more interestingly, whereas Johnson machined an ejector groove in his bolt (for a receiver-mounted ejector), Fosbery’s bolt has the later Stoner-type plunger ejector built into it. The designs are so similar that it is tempting to imagine the involvement of a DeLorean somewhere in the design process!

As an important caveat, it is quite possible that Stoner or Johnson never saw Fosbery’s patent or his gun. The two designs are not in fact identical, the Fosbery having six radial lugs, Johnson and Stoner opting for (effectively) seven. Fosbery also placed the extractor within a lug, rather than omitting that lug as modern Stoner bolts tend to. The lugs themselves also differ in profile, although there is a reason for this and another interesting historical ‘echo’ to note. In recent years, Knight’s Armament Corporation developed a radiused bolt lug profile similar to that seen in the original Fosbery bolt. This was done to meet a specific user requirement, whereas in the Fosbery it was likely done due to the inherent weakness of square lugs, given the metallurgy of the day. Fractured lugs are still a failure point today, albeit in extremis.

The gun itself is not well documented, and the present author has not been able to locate the relevant patent, which published references state was ‘No. 11,339’. Nor is it known when this example was constructed. Ian McCollum’s working theory is that it was built as a rifle and modified several times to serve as a testbed for different ideas. The trigger guard/magazine housing has been altered, and notably, the barrel has been replaced by a 1909-dated Winchester 16 bore shotgun barrel. What profile the original barrel might have had is not known, but the bolt and barrel extension are certainly scaled for a large cartridge. Clearly a magazine of some sort was originally fitted, but it is not clear how this would have functioned. The trigger mechanism intrudes into the space that would surely be required for a cartridge to feed.

In any case, the design came to nothing commercially and only two examples survive today. Pump-action shotguns did not catch on in the UK, and Fosbery’s bolt was never married to any of the several early self-loading designs then in existence. Indeed, this may not even have been practical at the time even if it had been thought of. Nor is there any evidence of military trials, which is not surprising if Fosbery thought of his bolt as a feature best applied to shotguns. The present-day reality is that such low pressure ammunition does not require such a stout and sophisticated mechanism. A simple tilting bolt acting in a locking shoulder is sufficient for most pump-operated designs.

Technical Specifications

Calibre: 16 bore
Overall length: 1273 mm (50.1”)
Barrel length: 773 mm (30.4″)
Weight (with empty magazine): 3.41 kg (7.5 lbs)
Feed device: Unknown

This article first appeared in Small Arms Review V22N9 (November 2018)

If machine guns interest you, consider attending the Big Sandy full-auto shoot! I had heard about this event in rural Arizona over the past few years but hadn’t been able to attend until this past March.

Held twice a year, in March and in October, it is now billed as the largest full-auto event in the USA. It takes place in northwestern Arizona, approximately 10 miles northeast of the small town of Wikieup.

The firing line is roughly a quarter mile long and overlooks a good-sized ravine or gully. The various targets are placed at the valley bottom and along the far side. This means that the bullet impacts are well-contained by a natural berm several hundred feet high. The targets consist of many 55-gallon steel drums painted white, a few old cars and LOTS of binary explosive targets! At times, a model aircraft enthusiast would fly a Styrofoam RC plane up and down the firing line to the great amusement of the spectators; and perhaps to the frustration of the shooters, as it is surprisingly difficult to hit, even with full-auto fire.

For those with their own machine guns, they rent a 10-foot-by-10-foot section of the firing line for the three-day event. For those without their own guns, a spectator pass is available. This allows access to the event and the chance to rent guns from several vendors that rent guns to the public.

The event starts at noon on Friday, runs all day on Saturday and has a short final shoot on Sunday morning. Of special interest are the night shoots on Friday and Saturday evenings. I cannot begin to estimate how many thousands of rounds of tracer ammo went across the valley, but it was a lot! The RC planes had glow sticks taped on for the night shoot. And still more binary exploding targets, plus colourful fireworks, had everyone grinning.

Among the belt-fed guns observed were several Browning 1919A4s and M2HBs, at least one water-cooled M1917 and M60s, including both pistol grip and spade grip versions. The classic WW I German MG-08 Maxim on a sled mount, as well as WW II-era MG-34 and MG-42 were also seen. And my favourite, the wonderful old British Vickers was there in both smooth and corrugated water-jacket versions.

Magazine-fed guns included M16/M4 types, AK-47s, Uzis, a Thompson M1928, at least one Bren gun and a Browning M1918 BAR.

Several artillery pieces also took part. We were treated to firing displays of a replica Civil War-style cannon mounted on wheeled wooden carriages and early WW II-era, anti-tank guns. The French Hotchkiss-designed Mle 1937 Puteaux 25mm anti-tank gun fired a few rounds, as did the Swedish M/36 Bofors 37mm guns. There were three Bofors guns there, with at least one being a Finnish license-made version known in Finland as 37 PstK/36. Two replica Gatling guns were seen, but I did not see either one fire. There was even a homemade bowling ball mortar, made from a high-pressure gas welding oxygen cylinder. As the name suggests, it lobs bowling balls across the valley. Great fun!

As the website says, “If you’re up to it, please come visit this uniquely American event.”

The next three shoots are scheduled for:

Fall: 19–21 October 2018

Spring: 22–24 March 2019

Fall: 18–20 October 2019

Prices are:

Line Shooters, 3 days $275 (advance) or $300 at the gate, per person, discounts for groups (see mgshooters.com/index.php). General Admission Spectator, 3 days $30

This article first appeared in Small Arms Review V22N9 (November 2018)

This experimental British light machine gun or automatic rifle was developed from 1945–1947 under the auspices of the British Armament Design Establishment (ADE), based at the former Royal Small Arms Factory Enfield in North London. It was therefore the first true Enfield bullpup firearm but is poorly understood today. This is not helped by the baffling duplication of “EM,” or “Experimental Model,” designations by ADE (see “A Note on Nomenclature,” below). This leads to confusion with the later E.M.1 assault rifle. The original E.M.1 was designed by Roman Korsak (frequently rendered “Korsac”) alongside a 7.92 x 33mm assault rifle designed by Jeziora?ski (often misspelled as “Jesieranski” or “Jeziorenski,” including in official documents of the period)—the first British weapon to be designated E.M.2 and not to be confused with the more famous Janson E.M.2.

Korsak was a Polish refugee—one of a number of Belgian, Czech and Polish weapons designers, including Jeziora?ski and Janson; the latter’s birth name being Januszewski—who had come to Britain to escape the Nazi regime. There had been a lack of small arms and light weapon expertise in the country prior to the war, and these immigrants helped to fill that gap. Korsak was one of those who chose to stay on in the UK after the end of the war and became head (CEAD or Chief Engineer & Superintendent of Armaments Design) of a design team based at Cheshunt in Hertfordshire. Janson would later succeed him in this role, and Janson’s rifle would come to the forefront of British small arms design.

As we might expect from a support weapon theoretically intended to replace the Bren gun, the Korsac features a relatively heavy barrel and a bipod, but unusually is in ‘bullpup’ configuration. Conceptually and mechanically the weapon is based upon the German FG-42 automatic rifle, an advanced development of the American Lewis gun designed for paratroopers and credited to Louis Stange of Rheinmetall-Borsig. The Fallschirmjägergewehr 42 was already quasi-bullpup in arrangement, albeit with a side-mounted magazine well. The FG-42 also provided the E.M.1 with its ‘piston extension’ (operating rod) and rotating bolt carrier group with two-lugged bolt at its head. As a result, it shares the FG-42’s closed bolt/open bolt operation modes for semi and automatic fire respectively. This includes the curious behaviour of the striker, which is cocked by the first ¾ inch or so of cocking handle travel before the bolt itself is unlocked and withdrawn by the remainder of travel. Inside, the striker slides rearward within the bolt, which stays in the closed and locked position. The protrusion on the bottom of the striker slides in a ventral slot on the bolt carrier, but in this mode, not far enough back to cam the bolt open and then pull it to the rear.

The sear is acting on the rearmost of two bents on a unique component known as the ‘slide’. This functions essentially as a forward extension of the bolt carrier. In the FG-42, the semiautomatic and automatic bents are machined into the underside of the bolt carrier group. In the Korsak E.M.1, the trigger mechanism sits further forward, and the slide compensates for that extra distance by acting as a forward extension to the bolt carrier group. This unique solution to the perennial problem of poor triggers in bullpup firearms obviates the need for a long trigger linkage bar or rod as in traditional bullpups, and is much simpler than the trigger mechanism of the Thorpe E.M.1. In the accompanying photos, the slide has been left inside the body, but its front portion is visible, protruding from under the gas block. This slide features two bents, which interface with twin parallel sears in the trigger mechanism housing (see below). These are manipulated by rotating the selector switch, which raises and lowers them in and out of engagement with the slide.

On Automatic, the right-hand sear is pushed up by the selector to engage with the front edge of the slide, holding the slide, bolt carrier, and striker to the rear (that is, fully behind the slide) to effect automatic fire. Set to ‘Rounds’ (or ‘Repetition’), the right-hand sear is dropped down out of engagement, and the left-hand sear is able to run within the machined track in the underside of the slide. It can now catch the front bent on the slide, holding only the slide and striker to the rear ready for semi-automatic fire.

When the rifle is assembled, the front edge of the slide acts as the automatic bent, placing the slide and attached bolt carrier almost fully to the rear (there is some over-travel to allow easy cocking) in open bolt condition. This assembly is then ready to be released by the right hand sear in the trigger mechanism (see below), after which it is pushed forward by the compressed recoil spring, closes, locks, and releases the striker for the first shot of automatic fire. In semi-automatic mode, the machined bent at the rear of the slide hangs up on the left hand sear. The bolt itself is fully in battery and locked, but the slide and striker are free to travel the short distance required to fire the first semi-automatic shot. This Weaponsman.com post on the FG-42 shows how this works in the context of the simpler direct engagement of the sear with the bents on the bolt carrier. The other significant point of divergence from the FG-42 is in the use of a tappet style short-stroke gas piston to set the working parts in motion. This is surprising given the other similarities with FG-42, and there is no surviving indication of the thought process here. Clearly, the Soviet lineage of self-loading rifles was thought to be superior in this regard.

The adjustable gas regulator features two settings for normal and adverse operation, and can be switched to the latter setting by depressing the detent with the nose of a cartridge and rotating clockwise (from the shooter’s point of view). Returning to the many gifts bestowed by the FG-42, we find a set of folding iron sights with a rotating cylinder for elevation adjustment of the rear aperture. Finally, in common with the FG-42 but also other British designs of the period, Korsak’s weapon was chambered for the full-power German 7.92 x 57 mm cartridge. The magazine associated with the gun appears to be a modified, rather than scratch-built, example from the Czech ZB-26, the British Bren magazine – itself derived from the ZB-26 – being too steeply curved for the cartridge. The lug/rocker catch system of the ZB/Bren family, also common to the FG-42, was also used. Finally, the (not quickly) detachable barrel with its simple cone-shaped flash suppressor is also derived from the ZB/Bren. The change lever (selector) operates as per FG-42 with its pull-to-engage, pivot to operate lever, but separates fire selection from safety catch. The former is marked ‘A’ and ‘R’ for ‘Automatic’ and ‘Repetition’* (see note at end – Ed.), the latter ‘F’ and ‘S’ for ‘Fire’ and ‘Safe’.

There is a hold-open device (HOD) behind the magazine catch, which is designed to hold the action open on an empty magazine, and then to automatically close the bolt when the empty magazine is detached. This is in contrast to later British designs, where the bolt remains held open until the magazine catch itself is operated to release the bolt. Interestingly, this does not function when manually operated, as the bolt carrier is not able to travel far enough to the rear to be retained. It is likely that this feature only worked when the weapon was actually fired, giving the bolt carrier sufficient velocity to compress the rubber buffer inside the butt-plate far enough for the bolt to engage the HOD. In addition, the magazine currently fitted to the gun in the National Firearms Centre collection, whilst it has been professionally modified to fit the gun, does not operate the HOD. Specifically, the standard ZB26 magazine follower features a groove that allows the nose of the HOD to slip into it and prevent the HOD from sticking up far enough to catch the front of the bolt. This suggests that, as Ian notes in the video above, the magazine may not be truly original to the gun as it was first constructed. In theory, the bolt could be manually held open by pressing upward on the tail of the hold open device, but this is fiddly to achieve in practice.

The Korsak pictured is one of only two surviving examples and the only one fully finished. As such it is not possible to test fire it, but fortunately some period information was recorded and other tentative conclusions can be drawn from the weapon itself. The cyclic rate was unsurprisingly quite slow at 450 – 500 rounds per minute, affording some chance of controlling the weapon if used in the assault rather than off the bipod. The recorded muzzle velocity is 2450 fps, which might seem low but is typical for 7.92 x 57 mm out of a barrel of the Korsac’s length (24”, similar to the Kar98K rifle). Effective range was given as 900 yards (823 m), which seems reasonable given the intended role.

The finished weapon is heavy for a rifle at 5.11 kg (11.51 lbs), but reasonable for an LMG of the period. The compact design was forward-thinking and, despite present-day objections to bullpup designs, the official test report (see Dugelby, p.19-21) praises its ‘ease of balance and manipulation’. However, it was noted that the design ‘…was for right-handed shooters only’, a departure from the Bren; unlike their rifle-armed colleagues, left-handed Bren gunners were permitted to operate the weapon naturally. By contrast with the Janson E.M.2, the cocking handle is on the left side where the majority of shooters can best operate it with the support hand. There is little hint of wartime austerity in the manufacturing methods used, with receivers of machined steel and the handguard and pistol grip of carved wood. The example illustrated is finished to a high standard.

The bullpup arrangement shaved another few inches off the overall length of the FG-42, but in the process the helpful buffered stock of that design was lost, replaced by a thick hard rubber buffer block at the rear of the return spring (located in the buttplate assembly). As well as this red rubber block in line with the operating rod, there is a second buffer block located in the butt-plate directly behind the tail of the bolt carrier. This seems likely to have negatively impacted felt recoil and controllability. There are other ergonomic negatives to consider. The pistol grip is chunky and excessively vertical in grip angle. The bipod legs are fiddly to deploy, with rather weak sprung catches that need to be manually depressed to lock the legs into the deployed position. The outer sleeve over the rear sight cylinder makes it far harder to grasp and rotate than the FG-42 original. None of these points appear in the short official assessment, but a couple of mechanical flaws were identified. The report notes that ‘…the striking energy on single shot is insufficient due to friction of the slide in the body’. Indeed, the weakness of the striker spring is evident in the NFC example. The short-stroke piston was also found to deform in operation, and it was recommended that it be enlarged and fashioned from ‘high yield point’, rather than case-hardened, steel. Both of these would seem to have been easy fixes if development had continued.

Work on the Korsac E.M.1 ceased in May 1947, but much of the design carried forward into a new bullpup assault rifle designed to fire a new ‘ideal’ calibre cartridge. This emerged later that same year, and would become known as the Janson E.M.2. Confusingly, the Thorpe E.M.1 bullpup rifle was not designed until the following year. This was proposed not as an LMG but as an alternative to the E.M.2, and consequently was a very different weapon despite superficial similarities. In fact, the Korsak E.M.1 and Janson E.M.2 have much more in common, the latter being essentially a rifle derivative of the former.

A Note on Nomenclature

This weapon’s designation is commonly rendered ‘EM-1’, and this is what will be found in the vast majority of the secondary literature. ‘EM1’ is also occasionally encountered. However, the manuals use ‘E. M. I’ and ‘E. M. 2’ for this series of weapons. We have standardised on ‘E.M.1’, with an Arabic numeral and the spaces removed.

*In the Second World War period it appears that ‘R’ officially stood for ‘Rounds’. This potentially confusing term was replaced by the more specific ‘Repetition’ some time during the development of the Enfield Weapon System.

Technical Specifications

Calibre: 7.92 x 57 mm
Overall length: 110.4 mm (43.5”)
Barrel length: 52 mm (20.5”)
Weight (unloaded): 5.58 kg (12 lbs 5 oz)
Feed device: 18-round detachable box magazine

Special thanks to the National Firearms Centre at the Royal Armouries, who graciously allowed ARES access to their world-class collection for research and photography.

This is Part 1 in a series of posts examining the developmental history of the United Kingdom’s E.M.1 and E.M.2 designated firearms. In the next issue of SAR…

See www.armamentresearch.com for further original content.

No magazine will likely ever be the star addition to your gun collection. The magazine will never get an honorable mention in a war documentary. It’s just a small rectangular device we often take for granted as a necessary peripheral item that facilitates our shooting hobby. The detachable ammunition-feeding device should be more. It should be held in high regard—as something of great historical interest and significance. The development of the detachable magazine parallels the history and development of the small arm—as the modern repeating arm could not exist without its magazine.

History

In the interest of brevity, the internal box magazine common to bolt-action rifles, as well as the stripper clip, used to top off a fixed magazine and the aging single-stack magazine will only be discussed here in comparative reference. This is about the high capacity magazine: Man’s best attempts to provide the soldier and hobbyist with the most firepower he can hold in his two hands. To not wax political, there will be little mention here of any magazine that holds fewer than 11 rounds. As a general consideration, a high capacity magazine is one that is only limited in its size and capacity by the intent and functionality prescribed by that weapon’s designer, as any weapon must remain practical and convenient for the user of said weapon. Surely, the advent of the magazine as it is accepted today must be attributed to the military’s need for superior firepower. As warring forces sought to outdo one another, the infantry arm has always been at the forefront of the (literal) arms race. More power, more distance, higher fire rate and more ammo all equate to success and dominance over an opposing force. This endeavor continues with the military as well as modern law enforcement today. As it applies to the hobby shooter, we accept and uphold that it is our right as Americans to own and utilize our small arms for any and all lawful purposes. The practicality and utility of a high-capacity feeding device are not in question, nor can the importance and significance of the high cap mag be refuted.

The repeating arm became a viable weapon shortly after the invention of the self-contained cartridge in the late 1800s. Through the 1890s, firearm inventors began designing small arms around the detachable box magazine as we know it today—and as soon as it became established, it would quickly find broad success in pistol and submachine gun (SMG) designs of the day. Despite the obvious advantages of the detachable box, militaries around the world seemed to distrust or otherwise ignored the new technology as it applied to the full-powered infantry rifle. The stripper-fed internal box would remain the standard for the infantry rifle until the 1940s.

It has been well-demonstrated that a weapon’s magazine can make or break that particular weapon’s story of success on the battlefield. The famously miserable French Chauchat machine gun featured a magazine with large openings on the sides to provide the user with a visual indication of his remaining ammo supply. The short-sighted design also provided mud, dirt and vegetation an easy path into the gun’s mechanism. On the other hand, the British Sterling submachine gun has enjoyed a half century of distinguished service—renowned as one of the best small arms ever made. Some experts suggest it’s got much to do with the peerless design and craftsmanship of the magazine. The Sterling’s 34-round magazine is made of four welded strips of very thick high carbon steel. There’s a generous feed ramp built into the mag body where the cartridges exit. The follower consists of roller bearings that act as guides below the cartridges. And the follower is very tall—effectively what we might call “anti-tilt” today. Its inventor, George Patchett, saw the magazine less as a disposable sheet metal tube and more as a necessary and integral part of a complex mechanism—no less important than the stock, bolt or barrel.

From WWI though the 1950s we saw many variations and configurations of how the magazine interfaced with its host weapon. In the past, some would protrude vertically from the top of a gun while others extend out to the side. Today most magazines hang succinctly below the weapon. But the magazine’s orientation on the weapons of war was neither random nor arbitrary. These engineering decisions came from lessons learned in battle. WWI taught that when firing from cover, specifically from within a trench or behind a low barricade, a ventrally oriented 30+-round (long) magazine could interfere with the soldier’s ability to maintain safe cover and also confound the reloading of his weapon. In the vast mud puddle that was World-War-I France, it became evident that any opening on the belly of a weapon was a point of potential infiltration for debris. So the belief became widely adopted that a magazine needed to be located anywhere but the bottom of the action. Submachine guns like the Bergmann, Lanchester, Sten and Sterling had horizontally oriented magazines. The high-powered Johnson light machine gun (LMG) and the Fallshirmjagergewehr 42 would also feature horizontally arranged magazines protruding to the left of the action. In the case of the FG-42, it has been suggested that the magazine’s orientation would allow German paratroopers to more easily engage ground troops below while hanging from their parachute. Light machine guns like the BREN, Madsen, Japanese Type 96 and German MG15 had magazines that stood vertically from the surface of the receiver. The German MG15, as well as its near clone, the Japanese Type 98, were more commonly used with a double drum instead of the vertical box. The double drum, by placing the ammo directly to the sides of the gun, gave the user an unimpeded vision of the zone of fire. The Lewis gun and Russian Degtyaryov light machine guns were also fed from the top of the receiver but utilized flat drums with the ammo arranged around the drum like the pistons of a radial aircraft engine. This configuration provided better visibility than the vertically oriented magazine but introduced its own degree of complexity and a resultant potential for failure. These machine guns—with horizontal drums— were commonly mounted in early aircraft presumably due to the improved visibility and increased ammunition capacity afforded by this magazine type.

Belt-Fed

Where the high capacity box mag often fell short was its constant need to be replaced. Even the higher capacity drums—50, 75 or even 100 rounds—posed some logistical difficulties. As magazine capacity increased, so did the mechanism’s complexity and potential for failure. As battle tactics have changed over the past 100 years so has the role of the machine gun. A heavy machine gun may be asked to hold a position and perform area denial against advancing forces. This is the place and time for a belt-fed gun. The light machine gunner may be asked to advance, displace or relocate depending on the flow of the battle. The light machine gunner needs a more mobile and adaptable weapon. The ultimate result of the multi-role demand of the light machine gun was the Squad Automatic Weapon—a light machine gun that accepts belted ammo as well as detachable box or drum mags. Our M249, or generically the SAW, is that weapon. Other nations have resorted to hanging a hollow metal box on their belt-fed light machine gun. This belt box holds and protects a belt of linked ammo and allows for the LMG to be maneuvered and handled like a battle rifle. Belt boxes usually hold between 75 and 200 rounds of linked ammo. The RPD has been a very a successful LMG and notable example of this later configuration.

Feed Types

Essentially there are two ways to stack and store ammo in a magazine—single stack and staggered or nested. Single stack is just that. A single row of cartridges with mag body on either side, a follower below and feed lips above. The staggered magazine keeps two rows of ammo housed within the mag body—usually the cartridges will nest perfectly against one another. That is, each round is in contact with four neighboring rounds. A magazine that allows for proper nesting of ammo makes the best use of capacity given a certain size. This type of magazine generally features what is known as a dual presentation at the feed section. The ammunition remains in its own vertical column as it rises into location where the bolt may strip and feed in into the chamber. Cartridges are loaded alternately from the left, then right, then left side again. The magazines of the UZI and AR-15 clearly demonstrate this type of feeding. 

Some mags provide a single presentation at the feed section. That is, the two columns of ammo are forced to merge into a single row before being presented into the bolt’s path for stripping and loading into the chamber. The weapon loads ammo from the same central location every time. These mags typically use a staggered but not a perfectly nested storage configuration. The internal width of these mags is slightly less than that of a properly nested dual presentation magazine. As such, they do not make as efficient use of size vs. capacity. The magazines of the Sten SMG and Glock pistol clearly demonstrate this type of feed configuration.

Very High Capacity Drums and Boxes

There have been some exceptional mutations to the basic box or stick magazine. The Finish Suomi KP/31 was a highly developed submachine gun of WWII. It could utilize any of several different magazine types—sticks, drums and something called a “Coffin mag.” The Coffin mag (aka “quad stack”) is essentially two conjoined double-stacked mags. Toward the top, each half tapers and feeds into a single row just before those two single-stacked rows merge into another double row. Then that double-stack tapers and merges again into a single stack up to a single presentation feed section. It’s complex, to be sure. It’s sensitive to the physical condition of the ammunition. It’s sensitive to dirt or sand. And sensitive to any minor damage or deformation to the magazine body. But the Suomi Coffin mag holds 50 rounds, while its length remains equal to the Suomi’s standard 36-round stick mag. This type of magazine has been refined and adapted to the AR-15 platform by Surefire, in a 60- and 100-round option. The AK-47 platform has teased at the existence of a “quad-stacked” mag for some time now, and recently we have seen the commercial availability of such an item.

The proper drum mag may be getting on in years. They have existed for over a century and have been or are currently available for most weapon platforms. There are three types to be encountered. Those with a single row of cartridges tracing the interior of the drum body. This type is common to modern weapons chambered in 12 gauge, 22 long rifle and 9mm Luger. Other drums store ammunition in a spiral—beginning with the single outer row then transitioning into an ever-decreasing circular path. The AK-47, Thompson and PPSH drums are of this type. These always include a cog fan-shaped rotor that carries small clusters of cartridges though the spiral path and keeps them aligned and oriented. The last configuration is merely a double-stack magazine that curves abruptly to the left or right into a circular pattern. Today’s common commercial offerings for the AR-15 and Mini-14 platforms are generally this sort. One exceptional variation to this design is the double drum. The double drum is not new. The German MG15 was fielded almost exclusively with this unique magazine. It presents as a pair of small drums—one to either side of the action. One great advantage of this design is its compact nature. It adds little to no height to the weapon when affixed. It doesn’t impede shooter’s line of sight over the weapon in the case of a top-fed gun, nor does it prevent the shooter from firing from a low prone position in the case of a bottom fed weapon. The double drum was first adapted to the M16 / AR-15 pattern in the late 1980s by the Beta Company. This device became known simply as the “Beta mag.” Unlike the early German incarnation, the Beta mag was designed to be serviceable and adaptable—the feed section could be interchanged to fit other weapon platforms or replaced as required to maintain reliable function. Each half of the mag is indeed a bent double-stack mag, and each merges into a single stack before being introduced to its neighboring single-stack row of ammo to form a new double stack of ammo in a dual presentation feed section. The mags feature a device called a “feed chain” (a common device in many drums mags) that presents as several cartridge analogs joined by chain links. This part of the invention provides constant pressure and feeding while the main follower remains inside the drum body.

Materials and Construction

The first detachable box magazines were made from sheet metal; some were two pieces that were formed and soldered, welded or brazed together. The Sterling SMG magazine was crafted from four strips of steel that were formed then spot-welded together. Later development saw the use of single metal sheets being formed then welded, brazed or soldered along a single seam. The most recent advancements in metal fabrication have provided seamless metal tubing that may be formed into a box magazine. Many early battle rifles featured what we consider today as detachable box magazines; however, these magazines were intended to be kept as part of the firearm and thus often loaded while in the weapon with a stripper clip. These magazines were heavy, robust and expertly crafted from thick steel. The Enfield, Gewehr 43 and FN 49 are examples of battle rifles that were issued with high quality detachable magazines, but each rifle was issued with just a few magazines. The user would replace the mag if and only if required to keep the weapon functioning. The soldiers wielding these rifles were trained and equipped to “top off” an empty box magazine via stripper while the bolt was locked rearward.

The infamous assault rifle of WWII Germany, the STG-44, was among the first high-power assault rifles built without a stripper clip guide. The user would carry a supply of full magazines—as each mag became exhausted it would be discarded and replaced with another full mag. As the magazine became a disposable device, its construction needed to become faster and cheaper. Metal fabrication techniques would have to adapt to fulfil this demand—the disposable magazine would have to be perfect—while retaining the reliability of the hand-crafted reusable magazines of decades past.

Through the 1950s, 60s and even 70s, the magazine was often culpable as a weak point in the battle-rifle equation. Mass-produced magazines were fragile; they were dimensionally inconsistent, and the sheet metal magazine would face compromise, sometimes made from ductile aluminum or made from steel just thicker than foil. Some of these compromises were enacted to satisfy cost restrictions. Some were to satisfy weight restrictions. We can see the struggle of the engineers when faced with government intervention—their attempts to make the best of the mag given certain limitations in cost or weight. One successful way to make the magazine body more rigid was to incorporate grooves and ribs in the magazine body. This technique is still employed by modern manufacturers of metal rifle magazines. Some early sheet metal mags featured bolsters and extra layers of thick plate or even steel castings or machined components mated to the thin sheet metal bodies. The feed lips were a common point of failure, as they are responsible for cartridge presentation and easily damaged by even mild impacts or abuse. The original AK magazine makes a relevant example. The thin sheet metal body would serve only as bulk storage of ammunition while the part of the mag that interfaced with the weapon—the feed lips and locking surfaces—were crafted from heavy castings or even machined from solid steel or aluminum.

The most recent positive change in the development and perfection of the magazine would inarguably be found in polymer science. Synthetic magazines were around as early as the 1960s but not as we know them today. Early magazine endeavors to craft the magazine body from lighter and more resilient materials produced what today we would call composite construction. Back to the AK platform for another relevant example; Russian designers were experimenting with phenolic resins and other synthetic bonding agents melded with organic fibers, or vice versa, synthetic fiber bound in a matrix of organic bonding agents. These early polymer mags were lighter than steel, tougher than aluminum and highly resistant to the failures associated with environmental exposure common to the field of battle. Although at its infancy, the synthetic magazine of the 1960s and 70s would cost more to produce than its comparable sheet metal version. As with all new technologies, time and science would solve this problem.

Today, without much need for a supportive example, it is safe to posit that polymer has been established as king of the hill. Most major arms manufacturers today have succumbed to crafting at least a few magazines from polymer. Even the mighty Heckler and Koch, arguably the best sheet metal crafter in the world, now makes polymer rifle and pistol magazines. With that assumption, many pistol magazines are still made from steel. And even Glock, famed for the plastic gun they brought into popular favor, still furnishes a steel magazine, which has been clad in a layer of polymer. Only by very recent advancements in exotic plastics such as flouropolymers have manufacturers been able to produce consistent and reliable pistol-caliber magazines that can compete with the longevity and performance of the best metal bodies.

Failures

Since WWI, the Japanese produced one exquisitely deficient machine gun—mostly faulted for how its ammunition was fed. It was called the Type 11 and had a hopper mechanism that fed 5-round strippers full of ammo into the gun—the same strippers used by the infantry to feed their bolt rifles. Seems like a sound idea, until one learns that the hopper only held six stripper clips (30 rounds—enough for almost 4 seconds of fire). Keeping the Type 11 full of ammo was a full-time job for one man while another man would aim and fire the gun. 

The Italians managed to impress and fail simultaneously. One of the most beautiful WWII weapons is the Breda 30. Today it is regarded as a treasure of the old world and appreciated as a tragic work of art. When one considers its battlefield prowess, the Breda makes the list for not having any. The magazine was hinged to the gun—not detachable at all. The box would pivot forward to facilitate loading with a 20-round charger before the magazine would be rotated back into position. Every time the charger was inserted into the magazine, dirt and debris was also introduced. Particulate and foreign material would build up in the mag to the point of malfunction. The magazine featured an opening to provide a visual indication of remaining ammo supply and another way for dirt to get into the gun. This arcane beauty can barely be considered a machine gun at all. But the mechanism and magazine are unique enough to deserve an honorable mention.

Notable Variations and Exceptions

The basic pattern of the high capacity magazine has been rubber-stamped across the industry: sheet metal or polymer body; coil spring; and plastic anti-tilt follower. Just apply a few dimensional specifics to this basic recipe, and one can provide a magazine for almost every weapon on the planet. Some designs have deviated from this basic approach. Sometimes a bit of extra complexity can solve a real-world problem. The following are a few examples of some magazine designs that have stepped out of line a bit in order to enhance the form and function of the weapons they feed.

Helical Magazines

These are rare but not totally unique to any one weapon platform. A helical magazine arranges and stores ammunition in a spiral around a cylindrical magazine body. Its advantages are easy to qualify; it makes more efficient use of space than a box mag, and it need not protrude from the weapon like a box mag. Instead, it can lay alongside or under the gun. Ammunition capacity is higher in a helical magazine compared to a similarly sized box mag; ammo can occupy the entire length of the mag as there is no spring and follower under the column of ammo. Instead, a torsion spring resides in the space inside the helix of cartridges. The most notable weapon platforms using this type of high capacity magazine are the US-made Calico and the cold-war era Soviet Bison SMG. Several large aircraft cannon in military service utilize a similar ammunition handling mechanism.

FN P90

The magazine of this PDW (personal defensive weapon) lays atop the gun lengthwise. The 50-round box extends from within an inch of the muzzle back to the shooter’s cheek weld where ammunition is fed into this semi-bullpup “gun” (the P90 is neither rifle, nor pistol, nor carbine). The odd factor here is that the ammunition settles horizontally into the magazine and perpendicular to the barrel. As the ammo descends from the mag into the bolt’s path for loading, each cartridge must rotate 90 degrees clockwise as it drops through the feed “turret” of the magazine. Ahead of the follower there are two free-floating rods—the same diameter as the 5.7×29 cartridge but just too large to exit the feed turret. These rods can perform the trick of rounding the corner and forcing all cartridges from the magazine; a trick the follower alone cannot perform. And the ammunition manages to make this trip at such a rate that this gun can maintain a full-auto rate of 900 rounds per minute. This mechanism is constructed entirely of low-friction polymer materials. 

Boberg Arms XR9 (Currently Bond Arms Bullpup)

This small firm created a compact semi-auto pistol with a very special magazine and feeding process. The unique engineering allows the XR9 (Bullpup) to count itself as the smallest semi-auto pistol in the world per given barrel length. The key piece to this puzzle is how the magazine dispenses ammunition—to the rear. That is, ammunition is extracted from the magazine as the slide travels rearward. As the slide is under recoil, the mag presents a cartridge into a position where a pair of arms can grasp the case rim and pull it from the mag. As the slide starts forward, the round is elevated above and over the magazine and into alignment with the barrel. The advantages of this system are clear: the barrel can be longer than other pistols of similar overall size (chamber is above the mag, not ahead of it). Also, the extraction cycle is performed by direct energy generated by the fired round rather than stored energy from a compressed recoil spring. However labored the operating cycle endured by this little pistol, its magazine will surely remain among the most unique. And to make it sound even more unlikely, the magazine has no follower.

The “Beta” 100-Round Double Drum 

Shown here in the original patent description is the Beta 100-round double drum designed by L. James Sullivan of AR-15 and Ultimax 100 fame; how it places the ammunition supply in a tight efficient location at the sides of the rifle.

This magazine can be fitted to a rifle without interfering with any handling or operation required of the user. The only disadvantage to a 100-round magazine of this sort would be its weight when fully loaded.

The ammo supply is distributed equally to each drum and fed to the rifle via the central feed tower.

The Beta mag full of ammunition. Note that at the bottom section the staggered column of ammunition is merged into a single row, thereafter that single column is rejoined with its neighboring column in the feed tower to form a double-stacked, dual-presentation ammunition supply. 

The Beta mag when empty. Note the feed chains in the feed tower. This collection of linked dummy cartridges allows the followers, which are housed only within the drum bodies, to feed ammunition completely through the feed tower. There are two separate feed chains—one connected to each follower, in each drum.

This article first appeared in Small Arms Review V22N9 (November 2018)

ALIEN GEAR

ShapeShift Hook & Loop Holster

The ShapeShift Hook & Loop Holster is a non-permanent solution for carriers who want their firearm off the body, but within reach—in their vehicle, at their bedside, under their desk or on almost any flat, smooth surface. The hook-and-loop fastener is sewn onto a low-profile holster base, which attaches to a separate industrial-grade adhesive mounting pad.

Without any tools, the pad can be mounted to plastic, metal, plywood and more. The highly adhesive mounting pads have been rigorously tested in heat up to 230 degrees Fahrenheit, and the high life-cycle VELCRO© stays like-new through thousands of holster removals. This holster is also available in Alien Gear’s Cloak Series, which is compatible with nearly 600 firearms.

aliengearholsters.com

TANGODOWN

Vickers Tactical Carry Trigger for Glocks

TangoDown Inc. has added the Vickers Tactical Carry Trigger (VTCT). There are two different models which accommodate the large variety of Glock models on the market. The VTCT is a flat-faced polymer trigger. The flat-faced trigger has become quite popular among shooters and offers the perception of a lighter trigger press. When developing the VTCT, the mechanical take-up was not modified. However, over-travel was shortened to offer a quicker reset, which allows for a quicker follow up shot. The VTCT is made from the same material as the OEM trigger, so there isn’t the risk of wear/damage to the frame. The trigger is an insulator, not a heat conductor and will not get hot while spending the day on the range. The VTCT is easily installed in minutes by a Certified Glock Armorer.

tangodown.com

BIG HORN ARMORY

AR500

The AR500 in 500 Auto Maxis designed for hunters and law enforcement. Based on a DPMS style AR308, the AR500 features a lightweight aluminum receiver with grooves cut into the front of the mag well and the trigger. The precision-machined stainless steel barrels are surface-hardened to Rc82 with BHA’s nitride process for consistent downrange performance and in-the-field dependability. The 18-inch barrel is threaded at a ¾-inch x 28 TPI, standard for most 50-caliber muzzle devices and ships with a standard flash suppressor.

Big Horn Armory’s 500 Auto Max is a rimless version of the 500 S&W with the same ballistics. It is capable of feeding and firing any .500 diameter bullet between 200 and 700 grains. The AR500 has an adjustable gas block to allow the user to run subsonic loads using a suppressor.

The Big Horn Armory AR500 rifle is capable of taking any big game animal. For law enforcement or military use, the AR500 is the ultimate checkpoint duty rifle replacing the .50 Beowulf or CQC rifle in a short barrel configuration, or as a powerful breaching weapon capable of clearing any obstruction, including bullet proof glass.

bighornarmory.com

CCP M2

Walther Arms, Inc., announced further expansion of its extremely popular concealed carry product line with its new CCP M2. Retaining all the great features that made the original CCP a great carry option, the CCP M2 incorporates a new visible cocking indicator and an innovative tool-less takedown. With these new features, as well as the soft-coil recoil reduction system and incredible Walther signature ergonomics already found in the CCP, the new CCP M2 is the ultimate concealed carry pistol.

The original CCP was introduced to the market in 2014 and brought with it an innovative design that set a new standard in single-stack 9mm pistols. The soft-coil piston system offered substantial recoil reduction, while also making the slide easier to manipulate. Walther designed the ergonomics to fit a wide range of shooters, offering an extremely comfortable grip, low profile manual safety and reversible magazine release.

waltherarms.com

TRIJICON

REAP-IR Thermal Riflescope Line

The new REAP-IR models offer two additional magnification options to the 35mm effective focal length variants (2.5x base optical magnification). A 60mm EFL (4.5x base optical magnification) and 20mm EFL (1.5x base optical magnification) configuration will now be available along with the original REAP-IR models.

A simplified “Easy Zero Method” makes sighting in the optic easier and more intuitive. Getting rounds on target is now a simple matter of aligning an on-screen digital icon with bullet impacts using provided MOA readouts. Trijicon also updated the main housing to include an integrated Picatinny rail interface for mounting optional accessories and redesigned the battery compartment to a ruggedized, top-loading compartment with an easy-to-use thumbscrew for simpler night-time operation.

Trijicon’s new and improved REAP-IR thermal riflescopes retain leading image quality, ease of use and durability while adding new user friendly features.

trijicon.com

GALCO GUNLEATHER

Scout IWB Holster

The open-top Scout is constructed with the rough side of the leather out. This construction method provides additional stability in the waistband, as well as a smooth leather holster pocket for a faster, smoother feel on the draw. The reinforced mouth allows for easy return to the holster.

The ambidextrous Scout is supplied with two types of interchangeable tuckable clips. The first is the UniClip, designed to go over the belt, but which also works well without a belt. The second is the Ultimate Stealth clip with hook, which fits on the trouser waistband, under or behind a belt with just the clip showing, for the ultimate in stealthy concealment. Both belt clips are adjustable for cant, making the Scout suitable for strongside-, crossdraw- or appendix-carry positions. Scout is available in natural finish with black mouth band.

galcogunleather.com

CMMG

Mk57 GUARD

CMMG has announced the release of a new line of AR pistols and short-barreled rifles (SBR’s) chambered in FN 5.7x28mm. Available in 5-inch barreled BANSHEE and 8-inch barreled PSB configurations, each model in the new Mk57 GUARD line is fed from FN 5.7 pistol magazines and uses CMMG’s patent-pending Radial Delayed Blowback operating system. The Radial Delayed Blowback operating system is designed to minimize felt recoil. It features a rotating bolt that requires the recoil impulse of a round being fired in order to unlock. As each round is fired, a portion of the rearward force is exhausted in unlocking this bolt prior to driving the carrier rearward and cycling the action. With less rearward force to compensate for, CMMG is able to use a lighter carrier and buffer than a standard blowback design would allow, thus reducing the overall reciprocating mass.

cmmg.com

NIKON SPORT OPTICS

NEW TREX Modular Optic Carrying System

Nikon’s new TREX modular optic carry system is headed for dealers’ shelves and now available for the serious outdoors enthusiast. The TREX harness comfortably distributes an optic’s weight during long miles in the field and is available in three system variants—FreeStyle, EXO and 360—designed to address the degree of optics protection sought for your environment. All components in the system are fully interchangeable, allowing users to modify the TREX into any of the above variants by adding or removing the optic accessory bags. Each model also has a ventilated yoke built into the harness that integrates a stowaway hydration net to allow you to accommodate your own hydration bladder.

At the system’s core is the TREX FreeStyle fully adjustable harness with quick-release attachment cords. This feature-packed harness securely holds your optic close to the chest while running or crawling, yet allows fast access for glassing. The TREX EXO carry system integrates a lightweight exoskeleton shell that provides incredibly fast access. In conjunction with the harness’s quick-release attachment cords that hold the optic securely in place, EXO offers protection of the eyepiece lenses even when the over-flap is not secured. Rear cellphone pocket has built-in microfiber cleaning cloth for keeping lenses smudge-free. Nikon’s TREX 360 adds a water-resistant, padded optic compartment to shield and secure your glass while also keeping it at-the-ready. The patent-pending closure system keeps the case closed tight to shield against water, snow and dirt. Interior cellphone pocket has a built-in microfiber cleaning cloth.

nikonsportoptics.com

APEX TACTICAL SPECIALTIES

Apex Action Enhancement Kit for the Ruger Mk IV

The Apex Action Enhancement Kit for the Ruger Mk IV (only) replaces the factory trigger and hammer and is designed to reduce the trigger pull weight by approximately 40% to around 3.5 pounds. The kit delivers a crisp trigger break while reducing the trigger’s over-travel by 50% and overall trigger travel 15%. Also included in the kit is a safety plate to maintain factory safety values, even when drop-tested from 6 feet. The red anodized magazine safety delete, which when installed, allows the pistol to fire without the magazine inserted. This is recommended for competition use only.

apextactical.com

POF-USA

Two-Stage Triggers

Based on overwhelming demand, POF-USA has delivered to the market a full lineup of two-stage triggers matching the style and final weight of the current single stage offerings. Long hailed in competition shooting realms as the preferred method of trigger operation for many people, two-stage triggers have a brief amount of slack that can be taken up before hitting a defined “wall” at which point the shot can be withheld until the perfect moment with an incredibly clean break. Available in 4.5-pound curved, 3-pound straight and 3.5-pound EFP (Enhanced Finger Placement) final weight models.

pof-usa.com

RISE ARMAMENT

Legacy Rifle

The Legacy Rifle features a 416R stainless steel barrel with proprietary fluting for an unparalleled combination of accuracy and weight reduction. The aluminum handguard has 32 MLOK connection points and a Picatinny upper rail system for countless customization options and is ergonomically designed for enhanced comfort. The rifle’s special-edi-tion Patriot Trigger enables enhanced precision shooting and faster follow-up shots. The Legacy Rifle also boasts the incredibly effective RA-901 Compensator, a high-performance bolt carrier group and a Mag-pul CTR carbine stock.
risearmament.com

BLUE FORCE GEAR

The Tourniquet Now! Pouch

The Tourniquet Now! Pouch was designed around the CAT tourniquet but can fit the SOF, RATS, TK4, SWAT-T or other similar sized tourniquets and serves as a great all-around rapid deploy pouch. The tourniquet fits inside an elastic keeper attached to the lid that is then folded up and secured on the top with a hook and loop field. Lastly a BLIP—or Ball Loaded Index Point makes for the perfect ‘pull’ with gloved, wet or bloody hands. The ball doesn’t rely on friction; the bones in your fingers positively engage it. BLIP’s form is both easy to pull and impossible to miss. As with all Blue Force Gear equipment, it is made with excellence in the USA and carries a limited lifetime warranty.

The Tourniquet Now! Pouch starts with the Helium Whisper MOLLE attachment system made of ULTRAcomp—a battle proven, high performance laminate. This creates a small and light yet secure MOLLE attachment for the pouch on any MOLLE war belt, plate carrier, pack or any other platform.

The Belt Mounted Tourniquet Now! Pouch allows you to carry a tourniquet on your belt—easily the most effective life saving device. Whether a trip to the mall, the office or through the woods—a tourniquet should always be with you. The pouch fits on any pants belt or duty belts up to 2 inches wide.
blueforcegear.com

This article first appeared in Small Arms Review V22N8 (November 2018)

DRD TACTICAL

PARATUS Weapon System

PARATUS weapon system uses patented quick-change barrel system and internal recoil system which allows for the weapon to be fired with the stock folded. Available in 7.62  Nato and 6.5  Creedmoor. drdtactical@usa.com

SPECIFICATIONS

• Product Name: PARATUS
• Weight: 9.2lbs
• Length: 38in
• Calibers: 7.62 Nato or 6.5 Creedmoor
• Barrel Lengths by Caliber: Both calibers 16in, 18in or 20in
• Action: Semiautomatic
• Rate of Fire: N/A
• Muzzle Velocity: 2750 fps
• Effective Firing Range: 800m to 1000m depending on barrel length
• Feed System: Magazine fed
• Sights: Does not come with any sights

Cadex Defence

CDX-MC KRAKEN

The CDX-MC KRAKEN, is a multi-caliber rifle using an innovative (patent pending) barrel change system. This multi-caliber system features the lowest shift of point of impact between takedown and reassembly of the same barrel on the market. Cadex CDX-MC uses a traditional barrel to action threading system while incorporating a special tool designed to unscrew and torque its barrel from the breech side. cadexinc.com

SPECIFICATIONS

• Product Name: CDX-MC Kraken
• Weight: 15.2lbs / 6877g (without muzzle brake, based on 26in barrel)
• Length: 46.1in / 117.1cm (Folded: 37.2in / 94.49cm)
• Calibers:
  6 Creedmoor, .260 Rem, 6.5 Creedmoor, 6.5×47 Lapua, .308 Win, .300 Win Mag, .300 Norma Mag, .338 Lapua Mag, .338 Norma Mag
• Barrel Length by Caliber:
  • 6 Creedmoor: 24in–26in
  • .260 Rem: 24in–26in
  • 6.5 Creedmoor: 24in–26in
  • 6.5×47 Lapua: 24in–26in
  • .308 Win: 20in–24in (26in on request)
  • .300 Win Mag: 24in–26in
  • .300 Norma Mag: 24in–26in
  • .338 Lapua Mag: 27in
  • .338 Norma Mag: 27in
• Action: 3 lug bolt with 60° bolt throw
• Bolt Action Repeater
• Rate of Fire: N/A
• Muzzle Velocity: ± 2800 fps
• Effective Firing Range: ± 2000 m
• Feed System: Magazine feed
• Sights: Does not come with any sights

Windham Weaponry

RMCS-4 Rifle Kit

Windham Weaponry’s RMCS-4 rifle kit offers four calibers in one AR platform by changing out barrels, magazine wells and, if necessary, the bolt/bolt carrier and magazine. Barrels are chrome-lined for long life (9mm barrel has a Melonite finish). All WW barrels are clearly stamped with appropriate caliber markings. windhamweaponry.com

SPECIFICATIONS

• Product Name: Windham Weaponry Multi-Caliber Rifle System
• Weight: Varies depending on the caliber, average weight is 7.13lbs
• Length: 32.38in with stock closed, 36.13in with stock
• Calibers: 5.56/.223, .300 Blackout, 7.62×39, 9mm
• Barrel Lengths by Caliber: All barrels are 16in
• Action: Gas Impingement System
• Semi or Fully Automatic: Semi
• Rate of Fire: Varies depending on the caliber
• Muzzle Velocity: Varies depending on the caliber
• Effective Firing Range: Varies depending on the caliber
• Feed System: Detachable magazine fed
• Sights: Does not come with any sights

This article first appeared in Small Arms Review V22N9 (November 2018)

What is a “Frankengun”?

A “Frankengun” is just what it sounds like—a cross between Frankenstein’s Monster and a gun, in this case a machine gun. The phrase goes back to the early Internet days when legal machine gun owners would cross-pollinate weapon designs using parts, and sometimes movie voodoo type add-ons, to create something that fit their idea of a fun gun. Frankengun contests are held occasionally, and we at Small Arms Review like to encourage our readers to participate, making sure it’s legal as they do so. Much like our fabled “MacWaffle” contest (Small Arms Review Vol. 2, No. 4), where readers had to make a working waffle iron out of MAC flats, this is about having some fun.

We received several entries but chose the top 2 presented here. The winner of the Frankengun Challenge will be judged by the readers and receive a 3-year subscription to both Small Arms Review and Small Arms Defense Journal. An RKI Certificate will be provided for those who put in an entry, which will be suitable for framing.

The S&W76/MK760

Magazine Problems Forced Owner to do Some Surgery

Richard Hoffman

This project started when one of my friends purchased an MK760 that was jamming. The gun would run just fine if you held the magazine forward and did not let it move when you shot it. The magazine well on his MK760 was too large and would let the magazine flop all over the place. The rounds would never be presented the same way consistently, causing feed jams. Looking at it and the history of the Smith & Wesson 76 / MK760, it should have always been designed like the Swedish “K” and been able to accept Suomi sticks, drums and coffin magazines. So I went to work.

Not knowing beyond a shadow of a doubt that I could get the drum magazines to work without having to cut too much out of the receiver and weakening it, I decided the best course of action would be to make a post sample 760 receiver to convert and work out all the bugs. I started by first carefully cutting off the magazine well so I could use it later. I then milled enough of the receiver away from the magazine cutout to allow the Suomi drum magazine to sit high enough to feed. The front magazine block was the next part to design, machine and weld into place. The next parts needed were a rear filler block to hold the rear rib of the magazine and a new magazine catch. At this point it was running perfectly with the double-feed magazines, but the bolt was too wide at the bottom and would hit the back of the single-feed magazines. The next job was to machine a new bolt that was narrower on the bottom so it would feed from the single-feed magazines and the double-feed stick magazines like the Swedish “K.” After all this, it worked and worked really well. I hope by the time this article is published I will have everything designed, machined and ready to start accepting guns in for the magazine conversion.

Last fall I had the opportunity to pick up an S&W76 for a good price and jumped on it since I have started to make replacement parts for the S&W76 /MK760 SMGs and wanted good parts to copy. I was excited and decided to shoot it in one of our monthly Florida subgun matches. The whole time I shot the match I was fighting to keep the stock from folding up on me. I tried using one of the existing AR-15 stock adapters on it and had problems with not being able to get everything to stay tight so the stock would twist in the adapter. I was not happy with that at all, so I designed a solid AR-15 stock adapter that I was happy with.

Now that I wasn’t using the factory stock, why not make a grip adapter to use on one of the many AR-15 grips that are available on the market? The grip adapter was fairly easy to design, but with all the angled sides that had to be machined, this proved to be more of a challenge than I was anticipating. After updating my version of BobCad, my cadcam program, and figuring out a fixture for my fourth axis on my CNC machining center, I was able to turn them out in a reasonable amount of time. The hardest part of the grip adapter was figuring the best way to make the captive mounting screw.

With the stock and grip taken care of I now had the problem of sights/optics. The AR-15 stock makes you look over the top of the factory sights, and I wanted to use a red dot sight on it anyway. I tried a clamp-on optic rail my friend had, but it would twist side to side and slide forward and back. At this point I decided to weld a short section of rail to the receiver which worked really well, but I figured a lot of people would not want to weld a rail to the top of their transferable. I decided since I had so much AR-15 furniture on it already, I might as well go all the way and make a barrel nut that would let me mount an AR-15 forend on it. I installed a Midwest Industries 8-inch Slim M-Lok forend. I then mounted a FastFire 2 red dot sight with the FastFire AR mount on the forend.

I usually don’t like bolting on all the AR-15 furniture on a non-AR-15, but it has made this 760 shoot really well. It has now become my favorite competition subgun. There is very little rise while shooting long bursts while neutralizing a plate rack or a Polish plate rack. It is extremely easy to keep on target and is extremely accurate. More than that, it makes the 76/760 a very enjoyable subgun to shoot.

Along the way I made machined and heat-treated A2 tool steel extractors, solid stainless steel recoil spring guides and a 3/32-thick heavy duty neoprene buffer to ease any hammering of the takedown pin from the bolt. In the near future I will be adding a little bit of weight to the bolt to slow it down—about 100 RPM. I am also planning on designing a good folding stock as well as a fixed stock that will allow you to use the factory sights. I think a 22LR kit for the 76/760 would be a whole lot of fun. This is an ongoing project until I get the S&W76/MK760 to be the best subgun match gun out there. I also want to get all the S&W76/MK760s out of the back of people’s safes and to the range doing what they should be doing.

The Monolith: Living the Dream with my Favorite Thing

Walt Kuleck

Waiting a year (less a day) for the tax stamp on my Colt M4 (LE6520) to come back from the ATF gave me a lot of time to consider what to do with the lower when it became a legal SBR. When I submitted the Form 1 I had planned to create a true M4 with a 14.5-inch Colt upper; however, that seemed to be a bit mundane. So, I began to cast about for alternatives, with the desire to remain in the Colt universe.

I had done some familiarization training with our city’s SWAT team, introducing them to their 11.5-inch Colt Commandos. Thus, the thought of creating a Commando with a Colt law enforcement upper came to mind. While searching various suppliers to nail down one of those 11.5-inch uppers, I came across a 10.5-inch Colt Monolithic upper, LE6945CK. That struck me as the perfect complement to the now-SBR M4 lower.

In the process of writing a number of books on the AR platform, I had formed some ideas as to the appropriate configuration for my 6945 SBR. I chose a Geissele trigger and a flat-wire buffer spring and heavy buffer for the lower’s internals. Externally, I installed a Nikon reflex sight and INFORCE weapon light. I particularly like the INFORCE light because it can be operated conveniently without the trouble of wires and remote switches.

Up front I screwed on an Elite Iron can. To protect tender flesh, clothing and equipment from a hot suppressor, I covered the can with a Manta suppressor sleeve. Manta’s polymer allows safely grasping the suppressor even after multiple mag dumps. Manta supplies rail covers to the USMC for their M27 automatic rifle; I have come to appreciate the Manta rail covers, so they were a natural choice for the project. A Vickers sling from Blue Force Gear shoulders the load.

Finally, I have become quite fond of X Products’ drum mags, so an X-15 was the natural choice for a high-capacity feeding device. The skeletonized version may not be the most practical in a dusty or muddy environment; it saves a little weight and, well, looks cool.

So, there you have it; a year-long dream, culminating in the opportunity to bring together some of my favorite things from Geissele, INFORCE, Manta, X Products and others. “The Monolith,” as I call it, is a fun piece and one of my all-time favorites.

Frankengun Captions

BWE-76-1: Pictured is an MK760 with a BWE Swedish “K” magazine conversion that allows you to use unmodified Suomi stick, drum and coffin magazines. It is also outfitted with BWE’s AR-15 stock, grip and forend adapters and a red dot sight.

BWE-76-3: BWE’s AR-15 stock and grip adapters allow you to use your favorite AR-15 stock and grip on your Smith & Wesson 76 or MK760.

WJKuleck SBR Left Side 2

Monolith from the left side. From front to rear, Elite Iron 7.62 suppressor with Manta suppressor cover, INFORCE weapon light. X Products skeletonized X-15 drum mag, Nikon P-Tactical reflex sight, Magpul MOE pistol grip, Radian Raptor charging handle and Rogers Superstock butt stock. The M4 6520 lower receiver came from Colt with the MOE grip and Rogers stock. The upper is Colt’s 10.5in-barreled 6945 Monolith, with Colt-supplied Magpul MBUS rear sight. The Sling is a Vickers Tactical from Blue Force Gear.

WJKuleck SBR Right Side Monolith

This right front ¾ view highlights the Manta very comfortable rail covers, as adopted by the USMC for the M27 IAR. The front sight is integral to the Monolith upper receiver.

WJKuleck Left Side Manta

This left-side close-up highlights the Manta suppressor cover on the Elite Iron suppressor and the INFORCE weapon light. The Manta cover remains cool enough to handle even after three 30-round mag dumps on full-auto, to which I can attest from personal experience. The integral switch of the INFORCE light makes it easy to activate without the trouble of external wires and switch pads.

WJKuleck SBR Left Side INFORCE

This upper front left ¾ view highlights the folded integral front sight and the Manta rail covers. At the rear the Nikon P-Tactical reflex sight is on a UTG riser for center co-witness. The knob on the top of the INFORCE weapon sight is the tensioning screw for the sight’s integral rail mount.

This article first appeared in Small Arms Review V22N9 (November 2018)