Left: M15A2 link. (51.31 lbs; 23.27 kg per 1,000 links) Push through link for the M85 .50 caliber machine gun.

Top center: M2/M9 link. (38.6 lbs; 17.51 kg per 1,000 links) Pull out link for the .50 caliber M2HB, M3 machine guns.

Top Right: M1 link. (10.12 lbs; 4.59 kg per 1,000 links) Pull out link for the .30 caliber Browning machine guns. .308 caliber Israeli links weigh almost the same, very minor difference.

Bottom center: M13 link. (9.57 lbs; 4.34 kg per 1,000 links) Push through link for .30 caliber M60, M240 machine guns.

Bottom right: M27. (4.50 lbs; 2.04 kg per 1,000 links) Push through .223 caliber link for the Minimi, M249, Shrike, CETME Ameli, etc. Stoner 63 links weigh the same.

Q- Dan, in your article on Living History in Serbia, you mentioned the Yugoslav M80 as their version of the RPG. It looks more like a version of our M72 LAW.

A- What I actually said was that the M80 is the Yugoslav version of the Russian RPG-18, which is quite a different animal from the infamous RPG-7 series. The RPG-18 is very similar to the US M72 series “LAW”. Nothing really touches the versatility of the reloadable RPG-7 in most arsenals. The fact that many countries have gone to a lightweight, short, expendable rocket propelled grenade launcher hasn’t diminished the prevalence of the RPG-7. As noted in the article we ran on the Iranian offerings at the Defense Services Asia 2004 show in Malaysia (SAR Vol. 7, No. 12, Page 55), the cut off RPG-7 the Islamic Republic of Iran DIO is offering on the world market can give the M72/RPG-18 style launchers a run for their money in concealability and their RPG-7 “short” is reloadable to boot. Scary prospect considering some of Iran’s international customers.

Regarding the M80, it is longer than the RPG-18 by about 150mm, and has a more extended range as well. The RPG-18 has an effective range of 200 meters; the US M72 about 220 meters and the M80 is beyond 250 meters effectively. All of these can fire much farther of course, but sights and the nature of shoulder fired rockets are the limiting factors for accuracy. The RPG-7 has grenades that can be fired accurately out to 550-600 meters with reasonable accuracy and a skilled operator well trained with the optical sight. Note that in the picture the M80 rocket motor is significantly larger than the RPG-18, and the M80 has six fins instead of the four fins on the RPG-18 or the eight fins on the US M72. It has been my experience in firing these that the M80 is equivalent to the US M72 series in performance. There are variations within the M72 series that have differing penetrations, just like there are differences in the rounds used for the RPG-7.

Penetration in Rolled Homogenous Armor (RHA) varies by projectile, but the one-shot launchers all perform about the same. The Russian RPG-18 claims 375mm of RHA penetration, the M72A5 LAW claims 355mm of RHA penetration, and the Yugoslav M80 claims only 300mm of RHA penetration. From personal observation, I would put the M80 penetration up with the best of the other offerings.

There are numerous examples of these expended tubes in private hands, and the RPG-18 is the hardest one to collapse back into carrying configuration. If you extend the tube, pay attention as you do each step. There have been a number of articles written recently on the RPG-7 system, and there were many inaccuracies in these. SAR will be running some thoroughly vetted out articles on these weapons systems in the near future, but Raffica is not the place to get too deep on this.

Q- I was going through a gun show and found this tool in a pile of parts. The parts were M16 and some other military looking parts. Can you ID this for me? It is about 3-1/2 inches long.

A- Sure, that is the M249 Scraper Tool. I took a better picture of one, and decided to identify the various tools on it. These have been around for a long time, and there is a pivot pin on the base of the gas regulator scraper section that allows the tool to fold up and fit in a flat spot in your gear.

Q- In the last issue of SAR, you went over the M56 parts sets that are for sale right now. I bought one that I am making into a semi-auto, but only have one magazine. I can’t seem to locate any more. Can I use the PPSh41 magazine for this?

A- Hold on a second – no point in ruining a perfectly good PPSh41 magazine even though it is the same caliber and general body shape. They are a bit rarer than the M56 magazine. Take a good look at the accompanying picture. The PPSh41 magazine has brackets welded on the side to stabilize it against the receiver for round presentation. These would have to be removed to allow this magazine to enter the magazine well on the Yugoslav M56, as well as cutting a notch for the magazine catch. Additionally, the PPSh41 has extended ribs at the front and rear that would have to be ground down to fit in the M56 magazine well. While the body size and shape is very similar, the PPSh41 body is about .03 inches shallower and some of the ribs could be left on to compensate if needed. Looking at the feed lips, there is plenty of metal to work with on a PPSh41 magazine to remove and contour for the M56 feeding. However, the followers are of different contour, and this might present issues on feeding. All in all, I think it wiser to wait a bit for more magazines to come in to the US as there should be more coming in as surplus.

Q-I keep hearing about the complexity of suppressor baffles used in sound suppressors. When I took my “XYZ” suppressor apart, the baffles were like washers with a cone pressed into them. What’s the big deal here, what makes the suppressors I see offered from many manufacturers so costly?

A- Like most things, it is never as simple as it looks. A good estimate of the costs of developing a new suppressor design is $250,000 in research and development. What you have been looking at is very old technology; which is fine for some civilian applications. These simple baffle designs take the edge off of the sound pressure waves, enough to satisfy the general shooting public with their already butchered hearing thresholds. All of us have high frequency hearing loss, and many times we can stand around at a range testing a suppressor that is “quiet” to us, while every dog for miles is barking and anyone who hasn’t had twenty years of shooting experience is covering up their ears in agony. The physics of sound as it relates to human hearing is something that requires a larger forum than a Raffica question. Instead, we present some photos of a cutaway suppressor to show the complexity and design needed on one fairly modern suppressor system, and Dr. Philip H. Dater of Gemtech and Antares Technology has agreed to give a brief response as well. Take it away, Phil.

“The suppressor technology of the 1960s and early 1970s was generally that of a mesh to rapidly absorb heat, thereby reducing the sudden pressure release associated with firearm discharge. Examples are the Welrod, High Standard OSS, MAC-Ruger pistol of the Vietnam era and others. These tended to be extremely compact suppressors and were almost always built around a ported barrel (which controlled velocity). They also had an exceptionally limited lifespan, usually less than 500 rounds. In the late 1970s and extending throughout most of the 1980s, the technology shifted to far longer lived and slightly larger suppressors using baffles. As a rule, these baffles were simplistic by today’s standards, many of which were simply flat fender washers spaced in a tube. Some used flat washers that had been formed into a shallow cone with a forming die, while others used machined baffles. Spacing was uniform and generally not optimized other than the thought was that the more baffles present, the greater surface area for heat absorption. What was common among the designs is that the baffles were symmetric and generally all the same, leading to simplified production techniques. These functioned at reducing pressure by having a moderately large surface area to absorb heat and a relatively large volume for expansion.

The structure of the baffles provided primarily for large surface areas for heat absorption as well as some degree of trapping of gases. The most prolific manufacturer of this technology was Jonathan Arthur Ciener, who started the mass marketing of suppressors in the US civilian market. The JAC baffles were shallow cones with integral spacers machined from aluminum on either screw machines or primitive CNC lathes. Automatic Weapons Company followed soon thereafter with stamped baffles in the majority of their suppressors in the early and mid 1980s. Combinations including this technology are still seen today in some of the older designs manufactured by more modern companies.

Starting around 1988-1993 and progressing to the current day were baffle designs that were far more complex. One of the leaders was Doug Olson (RKI 001), working for Qual-a-tec under some generous research grants that lasted several years. While the newer designs of this era still had a lot of surface area for heat absorption, various holes, jets, and asymmetric structures were introduced to generate turbulence in the gas flow, delaying and slowing gas exit from the suppressor. At this point, rotational orientation of the baffles with respect to each other became important in the performance of the suppressor. Because of the higher efficiency of the baffle, it became possible to significantly reduce the size of the suppressor while at the same time increasing its performance. The commonest (and most widely copied) baffle today is the so-called K-baffle, so named because in cross section it resembled the letter “K.”

There have been, of course, significant overlapping of designs. Hiram Maxim, known as the father of firearm silencers (and amateur radio), was a silencer visionary and a design genius before his time. His designs, dating back to the early 1900s, used stamped baffles with significant asymmetry that were relatively compact. Parker-Hale has used a similar design. The WW2 De Lisle silenced carbine and the silenced Sten used a combination of meshes and simplistic stamped baffles. Many of the older designs were predicated by the tooling readily available.

Suppressor design continues to evolve. Availability of CNC machining centers, improved casting techniques, and accurate sound level meters has made refining designs and prototyping new concepts easier, although it remains dreadfully expensive. Design is hampered in this country by restrictive legislation and an exorbitant excise tax limiting the civilian market. Because of governmental restrictions, the market is artificially small, and the selling price has to compensate for the R&D expenses as well as increased unit cost of more limited production runs. If there were no restrictions, far less expensive manufacturing techniques could be employed with lower cost to the end user (as in most of Europe today).” – Dr. Philip H. Dater

Send questions to:
Raffica
sareview@aol.com
Or mail to Small Arms Review Attn Raffica
631 N. Stephanie St #562
Henderson, NV 89014

WHAT IS The National Firearms Act, Trade and Collectors Association (NFATCA) Doing For Me??

We made a command decision to use the Sitrep space this month to allow John Brown, president of the NFATCA, to address the small arms community. – Dan

The NFATCA is active on almost every front of the NFA community, working hard to protect the rights of NFA owners nationwide. You may ask what it is we are doing and where does the money go to fund such a powerful effort.

It is important that everyone knows that every board member of the NFATCA is donating their own personal time, effort, and in many cases funds, to make certain that this organization is not just another “blow by” effort where the benefits are for a few and don’t serve the needs of many. Quite the contrary with this organization. The NFATCA is working at virtually every level within the NFA Branch and ATF to develop a collaborative effort in working with every issue our organization has – all brought to us by members of NFATCA. Each and every week, the NFATCA board meets and discusses critical issues that need our attention in the community. In many cases, board members are making repetitive trips to Washington D.C. just to make certain we build a rock solid relationship with the NFA Branch. So what are we working on?

We have worked diligently on the barrels and receivers issue with a great deal of success. We have worked closely with ATF to bring together the first ever NFA handbook, designed to answer many of the questions and address issues that many of us have had for many years. We have been closely involved in watching the NFA Branch achieve success in migrating to newer technology which could eliminate much of the paper processes that many of us face today. We are, and will be, involved in many other issues which are not ready for publication at this time. My point is simple. Through a series of meetings at ATF we have been welcomed and are working at a level never before seen with ATF. It is a collaborative effort that the NFATCA works on every week in order to strengthen the organization and to have an agenda that will benefit our community.

Why should you join such an effort like this? The answer is short but to the point: united we stand, divided we fall. If all NFA dealers, collectors, and manufacturers join together, we stand to gain the knowledge and experience of many rather than just a few. Today, we stand with a great deal of experience but the journey is far from over. Too much knowledge is still missing from our ranks and the experience levels of many people are still missing in our efforts to strengthen the NFATCA. Everyone hates the recruiting process but this one is more powerful than many of the issues we have faced in this community. Together we can make a difference, but that will require the time, effort and attention of hundreds of us, and hopefully, thousands.

We encourage you to think deeply – not only about the investment you personally have made in the NFA community – but also what you can do for the entire community to strengthen what we have worked so diligently to achieve. Time is of the essence in achieving and preserving our rights in the NFA community. Take the time today to ask any member of this organization why they feel the effort is worthwhile. When you have finished, make the effort to join our cause and make a difference in the preservation and the enjoyment of our NFA privileges. – John Brown, President, NFATCA www.nfatca.org

PROTECTION OF LAWFUL COMMERCE IN ARMS ACT NOW LAW! On October 26th, less than a week after passage by the U.S. House of Representatives, President Bush signed the “Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act” (S.397) into law, effectively ending politically motivated lawsuits designed to bankrupt firearm manufacturers and retailers.

“This is an historic day for freedom. I would like to thank President Bush for signing the most significant piece of pro-gun legislation in twenty years into law. History will show that this law helped save the American firearms industry from collapse under the burden of these ruinous and politically motivated lawsuits,” said Wayne LaPierre, NRA’s executive vice president.

In late July, the Senate approved the measure 65-31. The House passed the bill 283-144. The “Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act” was NRA’s number one legislative priority and a monumental victory for the Association and its members.

“What we witnessed was the culmination of a seven-year effort that included a comprehensive legislative and election strategy,” stated Chris W. Cox, NRA’s chief lobbyist upon the bill’s passage into law with President Bush’s signature. “We worked hard to change the political landscape to pass this landmark legislation. As always, our members were up for the task. Key electoral victories in 2000, 2002 and 2004 helped pave passage of this law,” Cox said. “The Bush administration was a vital ally during debate on Capitol Hill. I would also like to thank Senators Larry Craig and Max Baucus and Congressmen Rick Boucher and Cliff Stearns for doing a yeoman’s job as lead co-sponsors of this legislation. In addition, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and Senate Majority Whip Mitch McConnell ought to be commended for their steadfast leadership during Senate deliberations,” added Cox.

In recent years, 33 states passed similar legislation outlawing frivolous lawsuits intended to bankrupt the gun industry. However, this new law creates judicial uniformity in all courts across the United States. “This law will help preserve the American firearms industry and also help preserve American manufacturing jobs. American companies will cease to make products if they continue to be sued every time a violent criminal they do not know, have never met and cannot control, misuses a legal non-defective product. This is a significant step toward saving millions of manufacturing jobs,” concluded LaPierre.

During Senate debate earlier this year, the Pentagon stated its concern over the consequences if the American firearms industry was litigated into extinction. The Department of Defense stated it “strongly supports” S. 397 citing, “that passage of S. 397 would help safeguard our national security by limiting unnecessary lawsuits against an industry that plays a critical role in meeting the procurement needs of our men and women in uniform.”

Brady Group’s Reaction

The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence worked up until nearly the last minute to continue to file suits against the industry before the bill was ultimately signed into law. Brady Center lawyers now say they intend to attack the constitutionality of the legislation.

Dennis Henigan, Director of the Brady Center’s Legal Action Project, said: “The Congress can pass it. The President can sign it. But this shameful law will not stand. We will challenge the constitutionality of this special interest extravaganza in every court where the rights of gun violence victims are being threatened. This bill is an unprecedented attack on the due process rights of victims injured by the misconduct of an industry that seeks to escape the legal rules that govern the rest of us. We believe state and federal courts across this nation are prepared to strike it down.”

Brady Center lawyers have nine pending lawsuits against gun sellers and manufacturers, in which they represent individual victims of gun violence, and urban municipalities. The cases are pending in the states of Indiana, New York, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, North Carolina and in the District of Columbia.

The Brady Campaign has also been trying to keep tourists from visiting Florida by disseminating misleading information about Florida’s new law not requiring individuals to retreat (even if possible) from a deadly criminal act. Calling it a “shoot first, ask questions never” law, the Brady Campaign has been misinforming tourists about the law by handing out fliers and running advertisements in newspapers in Europe (where gun ownership is no longer common) and the U.S. with the obvious object of attempting to stem tourism and thus force the state to rescind the law.

The City of New Orleans filed the first municipal lawsuit against the American firearms industry almost exactly seven years ago, and over thirty cities and counties subsequently instituted similar litigation. The law of the land now prohibits filing, and would require dismissal of, lawsuits against manufacturers of non-defective, lawfully sold firearms based upon their subsequent criminal acquisition and misuse. Most of these cases have been dismissed by trial or appellate courts, but only after great expense by both taxpayers and the firearms industry. Motions to dismiss the few remaining cases will be filed shortly, based upon this new law. The same day President Bush signed S.397 into law, a motion to dismiss the New York City case was filed.

“While absolutely vital and a resounding declaration of the bipartisan will of Congress,” said Sturm, Ruger President Stephen L. Sanetti, “this law will not immediately end wasteful litigation. It is certain that motions to dismiss the remaining cases will be opposed and their results appealed. Tests of the law’s validity by disgruntled special interests, who oppose the clear will of the people and their legislators, will doubtless follow. We are confident of ultimate victory, but the battle goes on,” Sanetti said.

President Bush praised Congress for the bill’s passage, saying, “I commend the House for passing the ‘Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.’ Our laws should punish criminals who use guns to commit crimes, not law-abiding manufacturers of lawful products. This legislation will further our efforts to stem frivolous lawsuits, which cause a logjam in America’s courts, harm America’s small businesses, and benefit a handful of lawyers at the expense of victims and consumers.”

While the industry celebrated its victory, a new threat was brewing across America’s northern border. Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin says Americans “have an obligation” to help stop the smuggling of guns into Canada and said he was looking into suing American gun companies which he implied were responsible for the guns being smuggled into Canada. “Americans ask us to do things in terms of the border; I think there’s an obligation on their side to work with us to prevent gun-smuggling into Canada,” Martin told a news conference adding that up to half of all gun crimes in Canada are committed with firearms that have been smuggled into the country.

Guilty Verdict in Street Sweeper Case

In what could be one of the first prosecutions for possession of an unregistered “Street Sweeper” shotgun, United States Attorney Chuck Rosenberg has announced the return of a federal jury’s guilty verdicts.

Pete Joe Villegas, 36, of Kingwood, Texas, was convicted recently of being a felon in possession of a firearm and possession of an unregistered destructive device – a Street Sweeper.

A Street Sweeper is a 12-gauge shotgun with a round magazine holding 12 shotgun shells. It is a copy of a South African military weapon. If the trigger is pulled fast enough, the street sweeper can fire all 12 rounds in approximately 3 seconds. Under federal law, a Street Sweeper is considered a destructive device. Villegas, a convicted felon, is prohibited under federal law from possessing a firearm.

The jury’s verdicts came after a three day trial during which they heard testimony and received evidence that while serving a warrant for the arrest of Villegas at his residence in Kingwood during the early morning hours of April 29, 2003, officers from the Houston Police Dept. and the Texas Dept. of Criminal Justice, Office of Inspector General, found numerous weapons, including the Street Sweeper in a bedroom occupied by Villegas.

Industry News Briefs

FN Herstal unveiled two new military weapons systems at the Association of United States Army (AUSA) Annual Meeting in Washington, D.C. in early October. On display was the new SCAR S.O.F Combat Assault Rifle and the M3M GAU 21 .50 Cal. weapon system.

American Ammunition, Inc. (OTCBB:AAMI) announced that it has received an additional 1,000,000 round order for its line of ECO-AMMO. The order is for 9mm caliber ammunition. AAMI started manufacturing and distributing ECO-AMMO in 2004. It contains a lead free projectile with reduced lead pollutants sometimes referred to as “green” ammo. ECO-AMMO is said to be ideal for indoor ranges since it disintegrates upon impact and therefore does not ricochet.

Lamperd Less Lethal Inc. (OTCBB:LLLI) has cut an exclusive distributor agreement with Laser Shot, Inc. The deal means Lamperd will sell Laser Shot’s products and provide after-purchase support in Canada. Laser Shot’s Dynamic Simulator System is used for law enforcement and military training.

Old Western Scrounger, the firm specializing in the acquisition and sale of obsolete ammunition, has been acquired by Gibbs Rifle Co./Navy Arms Co. The California-based Old Western Scrounger, Inc. was run by “Dangerous Dave”, a distinctive figure who appeared at trade and consumer shows wearing a black top hat with a gold-colored spike affixed to its top (appearing somewhat reminiscent of the 19th century German pickelhaube helmet). Though there was no announcement of the acquisition on the Gibbs Rifle Co. web site, Old Western Scrounger’s site contained mention of the move. Some inventory is still being offered on the site (www.ows-ammunition.com)

First Samco Merges with TDI Arms

First Samco Inc. & TDI Arms USA Inc., both arms accessory marketers, have merged into a new company, to be known as Command Arms Accessories. Products include Picatinny rail systems, advanced light and laser devices, hand grips, stocks, bipods, and adaptors. Most products are available in black, tan, and OD green and come with a lifetime warranty. This change does not affect the Fobus line of holsters and accessories.

Hodgdon Introduces US869 Powder

Hodgdon Powder Company has announced a .50 Browning machine gun propellant designed to offer significant advantages in many magnum rifle applications. Called US869, it is said to be a true magnum spherical rifle powder that is superb with heavy bullets in big, overbore rifle cartridges. US869 is a dense propellant that allows the shooter to use enough powder to create maximum velocities in cartridges such as the 7mm Remington Magnum, .300 Remington Ultra Magnum, .30-378 Weatherby Magnum and others. US869 is superior in the .50 Caliber BMG as it yields high velocity and great accuracy with 750 to 800-grain projectiles and is said to be a fine 1000 yard match propellant. In addition, US869 is affected minimally by varying temperatures, a key feature for top competition and hunting accuracy. Testing has found that a .50 caliber 750-grain bullet is driven at 2,719 fps at 70 degrees Fahrenheit, at 2,709 fps at 125 degrees F., and 2,722 fps at -40 degrees F. Hodgdon’s new US869 will be at retailers by the spring. Complete loading data is presented in the 2006 Hodgdon Annual Manual.

S&W Gains U.S. Army Order

Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (Amex: SWB), parent company of Smith & Wesson Corp., has announced that it has secured an order from the U.S. Army Tank Automotive Armament Command (“TACOM”) to provide 12,000 pistols for shipment to the Afghanistan Border Patrol. The order is valued at approximately $3.4 million.

This order is the second shipment of Smith & Wesson pistols to be provided to the U.S. Army for ultimate delivery to Afghanistan security forces. The first shipment, completed in May 2005, was shipped through the U.S. Army Security Command to supply the Afghanistan National Army.

For both orders, the U.S. Army selected the Model SW9VE, a double-action-only pistol constructed with a durable polymer frame and a through-hardened stainless steel slide and barrel. Unique features of the 9mm pistol include simple operation procedures, tool-less disassembly and state-of-the-art ergonomic design.

The author publishes two of the small arms industry’s most widely read trade newsletters, The International Firearms Trade which covers the world firearms scene, and The New Firearms Business which covers the domestic market. He also offers FFL-mailing lists to firms interested in direct marketing efforts to the industry. He may be reached at: FirearmsB@aol.com.

New Tactical Handguards for HK Series Rifles from JLD Enterprises

JLD Enterprises, Inc., makers of the PTR-91 series of rifles, is now introducing a new line of tactical handguards to fit various HK and similar series rifles. The new handguards are made from aluminum and are available in black and OD green. The handguards feature threaded “hardpoints” at the 3, 6 and 9 o’clock positions that accept Picatinny rails in different lengths. The rails are also available from JLD and come in 1-3/4, 3 and 6 inch lengths. At this time, 2 models will be available: one to fit the HK 93, 33 and PTR-91K, and a longer model to fit the full size G3, 91, Cetme and PRT-91 rifles. The new handguards require no gunsmithing and provide a rock-solid mounting platform for optics, lights, lasers and forward vertical grips. For more information of these new tactical handguards, please contact JLD Enterprises, Inc., Dept SAR, P.O. Box 562, Unionville, CT 06085. Phone: (860) 676-1776. Fax: (860) 676-1880. They can also be contacted via the internet at www.jldenter.com.

Pelican Introduces Desert Tan Color Cases

Pelican Products, a leading manufacturer of high-impact watertight cases, has worked with the US Military to develop desert tan colored versions of their world-renowned Protector cases. All Pelican cases, including the desert tan, have been MIL-SPEC tested in conjunction with the U.S. military, which approved and helped match the color to exact standards. Pelican Protector Cases offer a fully stackable design, boasting nearly 14,000 cubic inches of possible storage space in the largest cases. To ensure easy and immediate access, the cases also feature double-throw latches that have been tested to 400 pounds, but open with a light pull. For added security, stainless steel reinforced padlock protector holes are included on most models. Like all Pelican Protector Cases, the cell-core construction helps protect sensitive equipment in some of the most extreme conditions on Earth. Additional standard features include a lid equipped with a polymer o-ring for a dust and waterproof seal, and a moisture-fighting, pressure-balancing, automatic Gore-Tex purge valve. Proprietary customizable Pick N’ Pluck foam is also standard in most Pelican Protector Cases. Of course, Pelican Cases can also be spotted by the distinctive, trademarked “Dual Band” design. Optional features include TSA-approved security padlocks, multi-pocketed lid organizers as well as single and dual-level padded divider sets. As with all Pelican products, the cases are backed by a Legendary Lifetime Guarantee of Excellence: “You Break It, We Replace It…Forever.” For more information please contact Pelican Products Inc., Dept. SAR, 23215 Early Ave., Torrance, CA 90505. Phone: (310) 326-4700. Fax: (310) 326-3311. They can be found on the web at www.pelican.com.

Magtech Introduces 3 New Calibers for First Defense Series

Magtech Ammunition, Inc., a manufacturer and distributor of ammunition products, introduces three new handgun calibers for Magtech First Defense personal protection ammunition. In 2004, Magtech introduced the first three calibers of the Magtech First Defense ammunition series for law enforcement and personal defense: 9mm Luger, .40 S&W, and .45 Auto. For 2005, Magtech adds three more options to their ultimate personal protection ammunition: .357 Magnum, .38 Special, and .380 Auto. Magtech First Defense rounds are designed with a 100% copper bullet, unlike other traditional hollow-point ammunition containing a lead core covered by a copper jacket. With this solid copper construction, First Defense bullets have no jacket to split or tear away, ensuring controlled expansion and penetration. For the past 75 years, Magtech Ammunition has been using the highest quality materials, cutting-edge manufacturing technology and state-of-the-art equipment to provide the shooting industry with exceptional standards for ammunition manufacturing and distribution. Each round is designed and constructed to meet SAAMI and CIP technical specifications for reliability, consistency and safety. For more information on Magtech First Defense ammunition and other products offered by Magtech, contact: Magtech Ammunition, Inc., Dept. SAR, 6845 20th Avenue South, Suite 120, Centerville, MN 55038. Phone: (800) 466-7191. Their website is www.magtechammunition.com.

Remington Introduces the New 870P MAX Shotgun

Remington now swings the pendulum even further on its 870P Police shotgun line offerings. The new 870P MAX carries maximum features for tactical shotgun applications. The buildup starts with the standard 870 Police parkerized 18-inch barrel shotgun. They’ve included the Davis Speedfeed IV-s 13-inch LOP full pistol grip buttstock for ease of handling and comfort while wearing a vest. (The stock is 1 inch shorter than a standard full length stock). Next is the Wilson Combat/Scattergun Ghost Ring sight system that includes the XS interchangeable front sight. This system also allows the user to remove the rear sights and put on a low profile front bead for instant bead sight acquisition. Last but not least is the Surefire Tactical fore-end flashlight with momentary & toggle switch ON/OFF application. Other features include Remington’s new R3 recoil pad to lessen the felt recoil of full load buckshot and slugs as well as provide a quicker second shot recovery. This new 12 gauge shotgun also features a dark black parkerized finish. For more information, please contact Remington Law Enforcement & Government Sales Division, Dept. SAR, 870 Remington Drive, P.O. Box 700, Madison, NC 27025-0700. Phone: (336) 548-8899. Fax: (336) 548-8798. Their web address is www.remingtonle.com.

Du-Lite’s New Kwikseal Firearm Lubricant

Since 1955, Du-Lite has been manufacturing and providing Kwikseal to many of the world’s most prestigious firearm manufacturers. Winchester, Sturm Ruger, Kimber, Thompson Center Arms, Henry’s Repeating Rifles, U.S. Firearms, Dakota Arms, Charter Arms, Barrett Firearms and Colt all rely on Kwikseal to protect their firearms while at the factory in storage and during shipment to their dealers. Due to recent consumer interest, Kwikseal is now available in 3.5 and 14 oz. non-aerosol pump cans. This new packaging makes Kwikseal both a safer and more economical alternative to pressurized cans currently in use by their competitors. Kwikseal provides superior protection against the corrosive conditions of salt water because of its waxing agents. Waterfowl, small and big game hunters all have found Kwikseal to provide the best protection available. It displaces moisture and seals metal parts. In storage, Kwikseal won’t evaporate or migrate down vertically stored firearms. Waxing agents in the oil adhere to the metal providing a barrier to protect against rust and corrosion. Repeated applications will not build up or laminate as other products do. Newly applied Kwikseal contains a solvent which dissolves the existing layer and creates a new barrier of protection lasting up to 18 months. For more information on this revolutionary product, please contact Du-Lite Corporation, Dept. SAR, 171 River Road, Middletown, CT 06457. Phone: (860) 347-2505. Fax: (860) 347-9404. Their website is www.dulite.com.

Nearly twenty years have passed since former President Ronald Reagan signed the infamous McClure-Volkmer Act into law. Although this piece of legislation had a few pro-gun clauses, a last minute amendment was added that banned all future manufacture of machine guns for private ownership. The law took effect on May 19, 1986.

This piece of legislation forever fixed the number of transferable machine guns in the system. Since that day prices have steadily increased as the supply of transferable guns has steadily decreased. Today the cost of a transferable machine gun can exceed the cost of a new well-equipped automobile.

Many Class 2 manufactures were well aware of the impending restrictions a few weeks prior to the enactment of the ban. Most of the manufacturers worked night and day to make and register as many machine gun receivers as possible. It was not necessary to assemble complete working guns, but the receivers had to meet a minimum stage of construction as set forth by the BATF. At midnight May 18th it was all over.

The firearm-collecting world is always full of unexpected surprises; often parts or part sets that are unavailable for years suddenly show up in the warehouses of surplus dealers. One example is the parts and part sets for military issue Thompson submachine guns. These parts that were once in a seemingly inexhaustible abundance were gone and the prices of the few remaining parts were increasing daily. Then, recently, hundreds of mint to like new M1, M1A1 and M1928 Thompson part sets were found. Who would have ever thought this would ever occur – sixty year old Thompsons in new condition!

Every now and then a small quantity of new, unused registered receiver tubes would emerge. Most of the remaining tubes were originally produced to be assembled into Sten submachine guns, but then just a few years ago most of the Sten part sets disappeared, shelving the plans to assemble the tubes into working guns.

More recently, Class 2 manufactures got creative and have submitted plans to the BATF Technology Branch to use the remaining registered receiver tubes for assembly into guns other then the Sten. Although many of the new applications for the receiver tubes were approved, there were restrictions placed on modifications allowed to the receiver tube itself. To date, the BATF has approved the Sten tubes to be made into Sterling’s, Lanchesters and most recently clones of the Smith & Wesson Model 76. Yes, the Model 76.

The original 9mm Smith & Wesson Model 76 submachine gun was first manufactured in 1968 with production ending in 1974. 6,000 production guns were built during that period. There were other earlier clones of the S&W 76 made. One was the MK Arms Company model called the MK 760 and another was the Global Arms/Southern Tool’s M76A1. Production of these weapons were just starting up as the machine gun ban was being enacted, limiting production of these submachine guns.

Lack of magazines was always a problem with the Model 76, with originals being scarce and proportionately expensive. Then, seemingly out of nowhere, the easily adaptable Suomi M31 magazines appeared at bargain basement prices. Not only were the magazines cheap, most of them were in brand new condition. The magazines could be altered in seconds with a Dremel Tool to fit in the Smith Model 76 by simply removing a few thousands of metal from the front guide plate. Accordingly, with the magazine problem solved, the asking prices for the Model 76 began to increase.

The newest submachine gun on the market is the product of Ohio Class 2 manufacturer, and no stranger to the Class 3 world, Jim Burgess. Jim was a once a retail dealer for John Stemple’s original line of submachine guns, and also manufactured suppressors for them.

Jim’s new creation has been designated as the SW 76 (without the “&”). The SW 76 guns are manufactured from virgin tubes that were originally registered by John Stemple in 1986. Jim has enough parts and receiver tubes to assemble 100 guns. Jim said that he personally test fires each gun that he builds to insure proper functioning before shipping it off to the customer. All of the parts of the SW 76 will interchange with an original Smith & Wesson M76 except for the bolt. The bolt is not interchangeable due to the reorientation of the extractor and the Stemple receiver tubes have an inside diameter that is slightly larger than that of an original S&W M76, requiring two sleeves that act as bearing surfaces to be placed on the bolt to take up the extra space inside the receiver.

A big question is; where in the world would you find the part sets from the Smith & Wesson Model 76? Original spare parts for the gun just don’t exist. The answer; from semiautomatic copies of the Model ’76.

During 2001 the Tactical Weapons Company of Arizona was engaged to manufacture the parts and receivers for a weapon that would be marketed as the Omega 760 carbine, a semiautomatic-only copy of the Smith & Wesson Model 76. Initial sales of the Omega 760 were brisk but quickly dropped off. The disappointing sales of the Omega ultimately drove the decision to cease production and the decision left a number of parts that were never assembled into guns. Jim was able to purchase 100 of the surplus Omega 760 kits and convinced Special Weapons to produce the full auto bolts and the other parts he needed. The company agreed, and the 9mm SW M76 was born. Special Weapons still have a limited number of new Omega 760 semiautomatic carbines as well as part sets available for purchase.

One of the weakest areas of the original Smith & Wesson Model 76 design was its extractor, which will often fail after several thousand rounds. One substantial improvement that was implemented into the design of the SW 76 is the relocation of the extractor from the original 12 o’clock position to a 2 o’clock position on the bolt. Relocating the extractor substantially reduces lateral stress on the extractor effectively extending its service life. The extractor was also beefed-up for additional durability. The trigger, magazine catch and sear are easily serviced on SW 76, pivoting on removable pins that are secured with E-clips. While the sear on the original M76 is easily removable, the trigger and magazine catch are semi-permanently riveted in place.

The SW 76 uses the same magazines as the original Model 76 and, like the original, the plentiful Suomi magazine will fit and function in the gun with some minor fitting. The new SW 76 comes with instructions on altering the Suomi magazines.

Jim also has designed a suppressor specifically for his new SW 76. The powder coated suppressor uses standard 9mm ammunition and is designed to reduce its velocity to subsonic speeds. The suppressor will also fit and function on the Smith & Wesson M76, the MK Arms MK760 and the Southern Tool M76A1 guns.

I was able to get a first hand look and an opportunity to test fire the SW 76 at a recent shoot in Ohio. The SW 76 is indeed a dead ringer for the original M76. Jim brought along several of his SW 76 submachine guns to the shoot and all worked perfectly. He also brought along his new suppressor. It, too, was quite impressive and quiet even when firing standard super-sonic 9mm ammunition.

As mentioned earlier, the availability of these guns is limited to 100 pieces, and this is probably one of the last opportunities for buyers to purchase a brand new design and newly manufactured machine gun. Jim has a CD available that has close-up views of the SW 76 submachine gun, plus live-fire demonstrations both with and without Jim’s new suppressor. The CD even includes complete assembly and disassembly procedures. The cost of the CD is $10.00 and is free to dealers that send in a copy of their SOT. Dealer prices for the SW 76 and suppressors are available upon request.

For more information, visit Jim’s website at; wwww.jmbdistribution.com. Email; jburges@insight.rr.com

JMB Distribution
4291 Valley Quail S.
Westerville, Ohio 43081

By Frank Iannamico

The U.S. .30 carbine has quite a history dating back to its initial introduction by Winchester in 1941. The M1 and M2 carbines served three generations of U.S. troops; during World War II, Korea and even as late as the Vietnam War.

Although the carbine’s handiness and light weight made it popular with soldiers and Marines alike, it was often criticized for its lack of stopping power. While probably true for long range engagements, the ballistics of the .30 carbine round will do the job at close ranges, especially when multiple hits are made from a select-fire M2 version. World War II combat hero and Medal of Honor winner, the late Audie Murphy, often stated that the M1 carbine was one of his favorite weapons. That is quite an endorsement from “one who was there.” Close range engagements were what the carbine was originally intended for, replacing the handgun and basically allowing rear echelon personnel to better defend themselves from attacks.

Winchester had also developed a new cartridge to be used in their new “light rifle.” The cartridge was designated as, Cartridge, Carbine, Caliber .30 M1. The early characteristics of the original cartridge were:

• Bullet weight: 110 grains.
• Charge weight: 14.5 grains of IMR 4227
• Primer: Winchester No. 116
• Pressure: 31,000 PSI
• Muzzle velocity: 1,860 feet per second.

The .30 Carbine cartridge was approved as Standard on 30 September 1941. The Ordnance Department awarded contracts to the Western Cartridge Company, Winchester Repeating Arms, Remington Arms Company, Lake City Ordnance Plant and the Kings Mills Ordnance Plant. While corrosive primers were used in World War II for .30 caliber M2 and .45ACP caliber U.S. service cartridges, the .30 caliber carbine rounds all utilized non-corrosive primers. The wise decision to use non-corrosive primers greatly extended the service life of the carbine’s barrel.

The original configuration of the .30 caliber carbine cartridge was changed early in 1942. The original .30 caliber 110-grain projectile had a cup style base, which tests had shown was unstable during firing, and would often leave a ring of gilding metal in the forward end of the chamber. A new flat base 110-grain projectile was designed to eliminate the problem. The type of powder used was also changed. The original DuPont powder proved to be too bulky for the small case. To achieve a higher projectile velocity, a new DuPont powder was introduced. The new powder increased the carbine’s muzzle velocity to 1,970 feet per second and raised the chamber pressure to 40,000 PSI.

The new (1942) specifications for the improved carbine cartridge were;

• Bullet weight; 110 grains
• Charge: DuPont 4809 or Hercules 3950.8B (alternate)
• Primer: commercial non-corrosive
• Pressure: 40,000 PSI
• Muzzle velocity: 1,970 feet per second

In September of 1944, the nomenclature of the .30 carbine round was changed to Cartridge, Ball, Carbine, Caliber .30 M1. The change, adding the word “ball,” was to avoid confusion with the newly adopted tracer and grenade launching cartridges developed for the carbine. While most World War II carbine ammunition had brass cases there were large amounts of steel cased carbine ammo made during the constant brass shortages experienced during the war. (Brass was considered a critical material, mainly for use in artillery shells.)

While the combat effectiveness discussions of the M1 carbine will go on forever, the point is moot, as the carbine hasn’t seen combat (other than possibly in a few third world countries) for a long time. The main purpose of the U.S. carbine today is to provide entertainment to collectors and shooters.

One of the problems modern shooters have faced with the carbine has always been a steady supply of ammunition. The availability of surplus U.S. and foreign cartridges has always been inconsistent. Although most of the major U.S. ammunition companies manufacture .30 carbine ammunition, it has always been quite expensive, a definite deterrent for selectfire M2 carbine owners. Genuine U.S. GI surplus is sometimes available from the Civilian Marksmanship Program (CMP). While excellent ammo, it too is somewhat expensive.

Surplus foreign ammunition requires special attention. Carbine ammunition for military use has not been produced by any major nation for years. Surplus lots have often been stored under less than ideal conditions. A few years ago pristine appearing condition carbine ammunition showed up on the surplus market bearing LC headstamps. While manufacture by U.S. government contractor Lake City comes to mind, it wasn’t. An investigation revealed that the cases were Berdan primed and the ammunition was actually manufactured in China. Worst of all, it proved to be quite corrosive. Due to design of its gas system, the U.S. carbine is one weapon that you don’t want to fire corrosive ammunition in.

During the periods of carbine ammunition shortages, many were forced into reloading their own .30 carbine rounds. While it could be done fairly inexpensively, the tapered design of the case made reloading a labor intensive affair. While carbide dies are available, the cases still require a coating of reloading lubricant, but worse, the cases needed constant trimming. The carbine headspaces on the mouth of the case, making overall case length critical. One other problem with reloading is picking up the spent cases after firing. One usually paid more attention to where the cases were going than the projectiles and, of course, you had to find every spent case.

Wolf ammunition is well known to high-volume shooters. The company’s switch from painted lacquer cases to the polymer coating a few years ago was a huge improvement. When I first learned of Wolf’s new .30 carbine ammunition, I did the most logical thing I could think of and got on the Internet and visited several carbine-oriented websites. All of the reviews I read there were positive. However, most of those enthusiasts were shooting semiautomatic M1 carbines and not finicky select-fire M2 models. I also visited the Wolf Ammunition websiteand found the following information;

“Wolf unveils the next generation ammunition with POLYFORMANCE™ an advanced technology polymer coating. All Wolf ammunition is backed by a 100% PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE.”

This advanced technology polymer coating offers:

• Superior Reliability: The application of the polymer creates a precision uniform coating around the casing. It produces a bullet with persistent, uncompromising, stable dimensions thus leading to smooth reliable extractions.
• Better Functioning: The superior lubricity improvement eases wear in gun chambers and alleviates excessive operational and maintenance issues associated with rapid firing. The development of this polymer represents a break-through in the field of tribology, and incorporates the most recent chemistry in terms of lubricity improving molecules.

WOLF Performance Ammunition is the only ammunition company that provides a 100% Performance Guarantee. If you are not fully satisfied WOLF will refund your money on the unused portion of the ammunition, including any freight charges.”

Pretty much convinced, I then decided to find out first hand. The Wolf .30 carbine ammo looked good, was fairly inexpensive and I would not be tempted to police up the non-reloadable spent cases. The steel cases are also environmentally friendly: after a short period they rust and eventually disappear. Sold on the concept, I placed my order.

Upon delivery of two one-thousand round cases to my door, the first order of business was to disassemble a few cartridges for a closer examination. The overall length was within U.S. GI specifications at 1.655-inches. The propellant was a ball-type powder. The charge weighed 12.5-grains and was pretty consistent between the ten rounds I pulled apart. The full metal-jacketed projectile was lead with a gilded metal jacket. Average projectile weight was 109.6 grains. The case was made of polymer coated mild steel with an overall length of 1.288-inches. A silver Berdan-type primer provided ignition.

I decided to take along several carbines for the test to insure that the ammunition was (or was not) suitable for different weapons. The semiautomatic M1 carbines were all U.S. GI of varying manufacturers and a select-fire Winchester M2.

I used a PACT Mark IV chronograph to measure the velocity of the projectiles. To keep the muzzle blast from affecting the readings, the skyscreens were placed ten feet in front of the muzzle. The day of the test was quite humid and the ambient temperature was in the mid 80 degree Fahrenheit range.

I loaded up a few magazines and fired three strings of five rounds each. The highest reading was 1,823.1 feet per second with a low of 1,752.8 feet per second. The average of the fifteen rounds fired, according to the chronograph, was 1,789.1 feet per second.

The next step was to use the cyclic rate feature of the PACT Mark IV chronograph to measure the cyclic rate of the M2. U.S. GI thirty round magazines were used for this part of the test. A total of one hundred and twenty rounds were fired. The cyclic rate was fairly consistent with an average rate of 720 rounds per minute. Each of the four magazines was fired in one continuous thirty round burst. There were no stoppages.

Firing at paper targets from a sandbag rest produced average groups of 3.50-inches at a distance of 100 yards. I considered this quite reasonable when considering the age (both mine and the carbines) and the untold number rounds that had been previously fired through the test weapons.

Several magazines were test fired through each of five different carbines with no malfunctions. The original intent was to fire an entire 1,000 round case of the ammunition for the test. After the successful performance of 450 rounds we decided to end the test, due to the heat, humidity and boredom. Boredom? Yes, while firing the M2 full-auto was fun, firing at paper targets with the semiautomatic M1s got old pretty quickly.

The conclusion I reached with Wolf .30 carbine ammo was thumbs-up. The ammo is reasonably priced, it functioned flawlessly in several of my M1 carbines and most importantly in my M2. Best of all as a former ammunition reloader, I don’t have to, nor am I tempted to, pick up the spent casings.

The legacy of the old U.S. carbine is that today, over sixty-years after the M1 carbine was first introduced, companies are still manufacturing ammunition for them. Keep in mind that there have only been a handful of other firearms chambered to fire the unique .30 carbine round. I would bet that most of the ammunition sold today is traveling down range via the barrels of old M1 carbines.

(Editor’s Note: Robert Bruce’s extensive profile of Marine Scout Snipers (SAR May 2005, Vol. 8 No. 8) sparked requests for a similar look at precision shooters of the Army and other services. Unlike the Corps, which is publicly proud of its snipers, the Army is a bit squeamish about the subject. However, the Army’s apparent PC prejudice on the subject was pretty much limited to the Pentagon. The closer SAR’s inquiries got to the front lines the more enthusiastic the responses were, enabling a more complete picture of the essential and escalating contributions of snipers, sharpshooters and other precision marksmen in Central Command’s area of operations. What follows is mostly about the Army’s unsung heroes plus an update on what some Marines have been up to. – Robert G. Segel)

“Snipers are the most sophisticated and reliable source of human intelligence in my AO (area of operations) that I have at my disposal as an infantry commander. Their ability to depict complex situations accurately and to articulate them sensibly in a timely manner makes it a whole lot easier for me to finish off the bad guys and enable the good guys. Having competent sniper teams is an incredible overall combat force multiplier. Especially when you throw in a thousand meter surgical shot. That creates nightmares for our current enemy threat.” US Army Captain Keith J. Haviland, Commander, A Co. (Killer Company) 1st Bn., 184th Inf. Regt., 4th BCT, 3rd ID. May 2005, Iraq

Nightmares, indeed, and plenty of them as the US military and its allies operating against the insurgency in Iraq and Afghanistan urgently field more and more snipers, sharpshooters and other precision markspersons.

The nature of the conflict in these and other countries in Central Command’s AO has evolved into a struggle to eliminate the small percentage of extremist elements while minimizing casualties among the general population where they hide. Despite the increasing precision of various “smart” weapons including bombs, artillery and mortar munitions, collateral damage is still too often unacceptably high.

This challenge has been met in many instances by sharply increasing the number and frequency of heavily armed patrols as well as targeted house-to-house searches and raids. They are guided by intelligence supplied in part by sympathetic locals and tactical assets like the little Dragon Eye and Raven surveillance UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles).

But, as Captain Haviland so clearly stated, many infantry company and battalion commanders have come to rely most heavily on the real-time observations and deadly accuracy of their own specially trained hunter-shooter teams.

Hide, Observe, Report, Shoot

In addition to fieldcraft and high precision riflery, a significant amount of time is devoted to surveillance and intelligence reporting skills in the formal sniper schools run by the Army and Marine Corps. This training emphasizes the importance of careful observation of enemy activity and frequent radio transmission of clear and concise facts back to the chain-of-command.

Thus, the sniper team – shooter, spotter and often a team leader as well – becomes the commander’s eyes and ears well forward of his unit. In urban warfare this usually means the team moves out covertly into the upper part of a building then remains hidden while scanning a specific sector for an extended period of time. Mission taskings may include reporting of suspicious activity such as placement of IEDs (improvised explosive devices), movement and gatherings of likely insurgents, and spotting mortar positions.

While strict rules of engagement will vary according to the situation and location, most often the team must request and receive higher level permission before taking a shot. Also, when appropriate, the team may be called upon to call for and adjust artillery or air strikes.

Not to be overlooked is the force-multiplier and morale contribution of sniper teams providing security overwatch for friendly patrols as well as static guard posts. Many a GI has been spared as overly eager terrorist insurgents get dispatched with surgical precision when they raise a rifle or RPG (rocket propelled grenade) to fire from a window or alley.

Not All Are Snipers

While all precision shooters are valuable to the tactical situation, not all are genuine “snipers.” This distinguished name is best reserved for those who have successfully completed formal schooling by their respective services, resulting in award of the sniper MOS (military occupational specialty) 8541 to Marines or ASI (additional identifier) B4 in the Army.

For the most part these men are assigned in the role of sniper and armed with top-of-the-line bolt action Remington 7.62mm rifles like the Army’s M24 and Marine Corps’ M40, or semiauto .50 caliber Barretts.

Army Honors Barrett M107

The Vice Chief of Staff of the Army has recognized the Barrett M107 Cal. .50 Long Range Sniper Rifle as one of the Top Ten Greatest Inventions of 2004.

“Operation Enduring Freedom/Operation Iraqi Freedom after action reports have identified the M107 as a top performer and one of the most useful pieces of equipment for the urban fight – particularly for our light fighters. Soldiers and their leaders had nothing but praise for the accuracy, target effect and tactical advantage provided by this weapon.”

Ronnie Barrett’s remarkable .50 caliber sniper rifles have rapidly made their way from Special Operations Command into widespread issue throughout the US Armed Forces and those of many allied nations.

The Army recently gave the M107 “full materiel release” status, signifying that rigorous testing and evaluation has determined that it is completely safe, operationally suitable and logistically supportable.

The M107, developed and made by Barrett Firearms Manufacturing, Inc. of Murfreesboro, Tennessee as the M82, was procured as a Soldier Enhancement Program to meet urgent operational needs in the Global War on Terror.

It is also known to the Marine Corps as the M82 series Special Application Scoped Rifle (SASR).

Corporal Torres and the Barrett .50 cal. 1,200 Meter Shot

3rd Brigade Reconnaissance Troop plays major role in Fallujah Offensive. 1st Infantry Division News, Fallujah, Iraq, December 2004.

Once in position and looking west down into the city, the scouts used their Long Range Advanced Scout Surveillance System (LRAS3) – a device that uses thermal imaging to register heat signatures – to call for fire on targets deep into the city in preparation for the main push.

Later in the day (8 Nov.) the troops began receiving sniper fire. As Spc. James Taylor scanned the city through the LRASS, he spotted another sniper in a window about 1,200 meters out.

Corporal Omar Torres, an infantryman and sniper from the 2nd Battalion, 2nd Infantry Scout Platoon, joined the men on the road, bringing with him his .50 caliber M107 sniper rifle. With Taylor acting as his spotter, he sent several rounds into the building.

“Oh man, you nailed him,” shouted Taylor who was still watching through the LRASS. “That was so cool, he just exploded!”

Sharpshooters and Designated Marksmen

Because the demand far outstrips the supply of these “real” snipers, worthy shooters with somewhat lesser degrees of schooling and proficiency are also deserving of membership in the precision riflery fraternity. Depending on variables including the marksman’s branch of service, duty assignment and specific weapon, there is much latitude in what they are called. Hair splitters are invited to weigh in but SAR finds it convenient to use two broad categories.

We’ll call the first category of semi-snipers “Sharpshooters/Designated Marksmen,” who are expert shooters given some advanced instruction and then assigned the role as an additional duty. They are usually identified by the distinctive scoped 7.62mm rifle with its protruding box magazine they proudly carry.

The M14 Rides Again

GI’s armed with accurized M14 rifles are taking a greater role in combat action in Iraq and Afghanistan. There are a number of reasons for dusting off these 1950’s era semiautomatic battle rifles but it’s fair to say this is mostly because they’re available and they do the job.

Replaced in the mid-1960s by the little M16, plenty of these 7.62mm NATO caliber warhorses remain in storage at Anniston Army Depot and, with a bit of tweaking, “Fourteens” way out range and out punch any version of the 5.56mm M16 family.

The Marine Corps has long embraced this rework – carefully done at its famous facility on Quantico – as the Designated Marksman Rifle. Specially trained shooters in FAST (Fleet Anti Terrorism Security) companies get most of these and praise their effectiveness against multiple and moving targets out to 600 meters and sometimes more.

Although modified Fourteens served with distinction in the Vietnam War as the M21 Sniper Rifle, the Army has only recently rediscovered it for this role. In the last couple of years hundreds have been pulled out of cosmoline, tuned up, and rushed out to the field in an admirable but apparently less than fully official manner. Despite Department of Defense news photos and stories featuring the Fourteen in Southwest Asia, the Army is strangely quiet about its very cost-effective recycling of a proven battle rifle. What’s up with this?

On the M14

SAR believes somebody ought to get a medal for responding to urgent requests from the field to overcome the Sixteen’s sniping deficiencies by quickly fielding surplus Fourteens. Inexplicably, we can’t find evidence of any such recognition.

Our requests for information on issue of modified M14 rifles started at the Pentagon and got routed in all manner of directions with no luck. Continued polite pressing through supplementary channels finally yielded a response from a knowledgeable source in the Infantry Center at Fort Benning. Some relevant excerpts:

SAR: Is the proper nomenclature Designated Marksman Rifle?

Army: There is no nomenclature for a modified M14 as this is not a formal Army program, but rather a unit-specific effort.

SAR: What is the basis of issue; how many per unit and who gets them?

Army: Zero. Some units have received depot surplus M14s to augment their authorized weapons but there is no formalized or standardized basis of issue, nor are all units authorized to have M14s – it is a capability provided for a limited time on a case-by-case basis.

SAR: What is the rationale for fielding these vs. the M24?

Army: All units authorized the M24 have their allocated quantity. Those units in receipt of M14s have not received them in lieu of M24 sniper rifles.

SAR: Where are the Designated Marksmen being trained and to what standards?

Army: Designated Marksmen are trained as part of marksmanship sustainment training at the individual unit level, according to standards established in Chapter 7 of FM3-22.9, Rifle Marksmanship.

Squad Designated Marksman

Not to be confused with those in the previous category, Squad Designated Marksmen are members of Army and Marine rifle squads who carry specially modified 5.56mm M16A4 rifles or M4A1 carbines. Telescopic sights and bipods are the most obvious indicators of this special status but the luckiest ones carry weapons with match grade trigger groups and heavy barrels.

They usually get extra training to go along with this high-speed gun gear and are expected to put this to good use in two very important ways. First, the day scopes – usually 4 power ACOGs – enable better identification of threats among friendlies. Then, when the need arises to apply 5.56mm persuasion, the accuracy package plus well honed shooting skills equals higher likelihood of finishing the job without collateral damage.

The Marine Corps has two versions of what they call the SAM-R (Squad Advanced Marksman Rifle), one made at Quantico’s Precision Weapons Section to match standards and the other less formally assembled by deploying Expeditionary Units. The essentials are the same for both, M16A4 with 4 power scope and bipod, and are said to easily do the job out to 400 meters and more.

USAMU Supports Squad Designated Marksmen

“It’s the same rifle, just fitted and better adjusted. Almost like NASCAR, all the improvements are under the hood.” Lieutenant Colonel David Ludwig, USAMU Commander

An excellent feature on the United States Army Marksmanship Unit in the Spring 2005 issue of Infantry Bugler magazine (National Infantry Assn.) detailed some extraordinary assistance at the request of the 3rd Infantry Division as it prepared for deployment to Iraq.

AMU’s expert in-house armorers, with skills honed in support of the Army’s finest competition shooters, took 240 of the division’s M16A4 rifles and fine tuned them for high performance shooting. Sporting a free-floated barrel, competition trigger group, bipod and optical sight, the resulting weapons were capable of putting 20 rounds of special M262 ammo in rapid fire inside the 10 ring at 600 yards.

3rd ID Squad Designated Marksmen also got an AMU tune up, learning from some of the world’s best shooters how to get the most out of their new rifles. The program of instruction for SDMs may be found in FM 3-22.9.

Stryker Brigade Snipers in Iraq

Troubled by the lack of recognition in news releases and other elements on the Army’s official website www.army.mil, SAR sent a request through Pentagon channels to the 25th Infantry Division, deployed in Northern Iraq. The response was immediate and enthusiastic. Some excerpts:

• Major Mark Bieger is the Battalion Operations Officer for 1st Battalion, 24th Infantry Regiment deployed in the 1st Brigade (Stryker Brigade Combat Team), 25th Infantry Division in Northern Iraq. “Snipers have been critical to successful operations in fighting the insurgency in Mosul, Iraq. The sniper provides two critical advantages: precision, long-range direct fires and covert surveillance. In an urban environment, the sniper’s unique capabilities cannot be matched with other, lesser-trained soldiers, technology or alternate tactic, technique or procedure. The snipers of this battalion are absolutely necessary and an invaluable piece of the organization.”
• Captain Chris Bachl is a Stryker Infantry Company Commander of A Company, 1st Battalion, 5th Infantry Regiment deployed in Northern Iraq.
  
  On Sniper Effectiveness in Iraq: “The seven man sniper squad (2 x three man sniper teams + 1 Squad leader) are used in a full array of operations in support of company and battalion targeting operations. Common operational uses include covert stay behind ambushes, cache/terrain of interest observation, counter IED, Iraqi Army patrol overwatch, and counter mortar/counter rocket and COP/Hard site security. They truly operate over a full spectrum of operations to include both lethal and non-lethal roles. One critical role they play involves the gathering of information and intel as they conduct observation and surveillance. My company snipers were very adept at pinpointing enemy actions at a distance using their advanced optics. Their spot reports translated into critical real time information (sensor to shooter link) that platoon’s were able to act on instantly using their digital capabilities.”

• One example: “While providing observation and counter reconnaissance in support of a platoon maneuvering forward from a COP the sniper team spotted ‘suspicious activity.’ After developing the situation and further observation, they observed military aged males gathering at a house at a distance of 600 meters from the combat outpost. The sniper team was able to then vector the maneuver platoon to the house while the spotter and sniper continued to maintain eyes on the situation. Once the platoon was in sight, the gathering began to disperse, some picked up RPGs and AK 47’s and started firing at the approaching platoon. The sniper team was able to isolate them with precision fires allowing the platoon to maneuver closer to the building.”
  
• Captain Kevin Saatkamp is an Infantry Stryker company commander in the 3rd Battalion, 21st Infantry Regiment deployed to Northern Iraq.
  
  “Snipers fulfill a critical role in the urban insurgency. The benefits of the organic company sniper, unique to the Stryker Brigade, add a tremendous precision fire asset to those who need it most: the infantryman on the ground. Consisting of a 3-man element; the sniper team provides not only the ability to “reach out and touch someone,” but also the ability to observe targets covertly without a large signature. The largest challenge to the sniper in Mosul is the difficult and varied terrain. One mission the team may be placed in a 3-story building, the next in an open field. Leaving behind a sniper team in an area that just received contact has proved especially effective to US forces. Although not always employed, the sniper can provide an insight into the neighborhood that a normal dismounted patrol can’t. In short, the company sniper team is a tremendous combat multiplier to the Stryker company and battalions.”

Marine Sniper Receives Silver Star By Lance Corporal Ray Lewis

“Under fire for twelve hours at a time with rounds landing inches from his head, sniper Sergeant John E. Place volleyed with such lethal response that insurgents wouldn’t poke their head out their windows.”

His exploits in Operation Iraqi Freedom II as a sniper team leader with Company E, 2nd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment, earned Place a Silver Star, awarded at Camp Pendleton, California, on June 23rd 2005. He is currently assigned to 1st Marine Division’s Marksmanship Training Unit.

Sniping for Allah

While it is authoritatively said that most “sniper fire” reported by US and allied forces comes from conventional small arms in the hands of marksmen of average skill, it would be naïve to think that there aren’t real snipers among the diverse ranks of the insurgencies in Afghanistan and Iraq.

An undisguised propaganda piece filed by Baghdad correspondent Hala Jabar appeared in the 20 February 2005 issue of Britain’s Sunday Times, fawningly profiling an insurgent sniper who we are led to believe must be an Islamic version of legendary Marine sniper Carlos Hathcock. “Abu Othman” – not his real name – is said to be a star among the embittered Sunni Muslims who were the biggest losers when their benefactor Saddam Hussein was deposed.

Supposedly self-taught from internet research, computer shooting games, Hollywood sniper movies, and hours of Dragunov rifle shooting out in the desert, Abu is credited with killing over forty Americans – including some GI snipers – along with numerous Iraqi “collaborators.”

Under the heading of “Know Your Enemy,” here’s one from SAR that provides a sobering look into the bizarre internet world of insurgents and their many sympathizers plus a link directly to the Sunday Times’ story: http://abutamam.blogspot.com/2005/02/snipers-and-there-are-many-on-both.html

Future Sniping

Army snipers – and maybe their Marine brothers – can look forward to receiving a fast shooting new 7.62mm sniper rifle in the next year or so. Program Manager Soldier Weapons is expected to soon announce the results of an extensive competition for the XM110 Semi Automatic Sniper System, essentially a beefed-up and tuned up M16 along the lines of the Navy SEAL’s MK11 Mod 0 (Knight’s SR-25).

Also, Ronnie Barrett hasn’t rested on his M107 .50 caliber laurels. Joint Services Small Arms Program is well along with developmental work and safety testing of his 25mm high velocity version called the XM 109 Anti-Materiel Payload Rifle. Insiders report this awesome weapon has already seen “operational evaluation” overseas.

Adopt a Sniper

Despite the best efforts of many on Uncle Sam’s team to get the latest and best guns and gear to his warfighters, bureaucrats who control purse strings and supply lines too often consider golf courses and day care centers to be more important.

This unconscionable situation – made worse by the rapid increase in the numbers of precision marksmen of all types – means that too many shooters must do without and others having to operate with obsolete, damaged or worn out equipment.

Brian Sain and a bunch of other law enforcement precision shooting professionals have organized a direct support effort for their GI counterparts in the Global War on Terror. For more information on how you can help with this noble and necessary work, visit them on the web at www.americansnipers.org

Websites

The internet has most everything Abu Othman and the rest of us need to know about precision shooting in GWOT. SAR recommends “The number one starting place for tactical marksmen” that starts right off with six full pages of direct links in three columns each. Visit this site at: www.sniperworld.com

M24 Technical Specifications

Caliber: 7.62x51mm NATO (ammo is special M118 Long Range)
Overall Length: 43 inches
Barrel: 24 inches, twist is 1 turn in 11.2 inches
Weight: 12.1 pounds
Operation: Manual, bolt action
Feed: Internal 5-round magazine
Sights: Standard day optic is 10 power Leupold M3A Ultra

The Army’s Unofficial Designated Marksman Rifle (M14)

Caliber: 7.62x51mm NATO
Overall Length: 44.14 inches
Barrel: 22 inches
Weight: 10.8 pounds combat ready
System of operation: Gas, semiautomatic
Feed: Detachable 20-round box magazine
Sights: Usually Leupold variable power day optics

M16A4 SAM-R Technical Specifications

Caliber: 5.56×45 mm (NATO SS109 and US M262)
Overall Length: 39.6 inches
Barrel: 20 inches, twist is 1 turn in 7 inches
Weight: 7.5 pounds
Operation: Direct gas, semiautomatic
Feed: Detachable 20- and 30- round box magazines
Sights: Trijicon ACOG 4x and Leupold TS-30A2 3 to 9x

For more than 40 years now, M16 series firearms have been the American military’s weapon of choice. It is fair to say that few small arms have created such a history of controversy, which still persists to this day. What actually happened early in the Vietnam War forms the basis of ongoing misinformation and misconceptions about the M16 & M16A1 rifles. These weapons unfairly “earned” a reputation for malfunctioning when they were “dirty” and for being a lightweight piece of junk to many. The truth, however, is much more complex than the standard line that the gun did not work due to fouling. The M16’s initial reliability issues should not have fallen on the Black Rifle itself, but on the U.S. Army Ordnance Corps which was ultimately responsible for developing and fielding weapons used by U.S. soldiers.

The new lightweight rifle was adopted in 1964 based on its “superior performance” over the heavier M14 with its 7.62x51mm NATO cartridge designed for longer range engagements. The M16 was seen by many, including Special Forces advisors, as a good infantry weapon “nearly perfect” for combat conditions in Vietnam. With a larger “basic load of ammunition,” these small caliber, lightweight, low recoil weapons proved ideal for rapid multiple target engagements and close quarter fighting often encountered in Southeast Asia. Without digging into the early history of the U.S Air Force AR-15’s & M16’s, we will look at what went wrong “in the jungles of Vietnam.”

Soon after the new black rifles were deployed into ground combat with front line Army and Marine units, reports of significant malfunctions began to circulate across Vietnam and back to the States. Many of these problems stemmed from U.S. Ordnance Corps’ defiance, prejudices and outright negligence, which proved serious enough by 1967 to warrant a Special Subcommittee on the M16 Rifle Program in the U.S. House of Representatives. These proceedings within the Armed Services Committee are now known as the Ichord Hearings, after the chairman, Rep. Richard Ichord. The details of the entire M16 program brought out during these hearings showed incredible mismanagement and gross negligence which directly caused weapons to malfunction in the jungles of Southeast Asia. After the real problems were brought to the surface, corrective action was finally taken to develop a weapon system that would function properly with its ammunition and could be deployed reliably in extended combat operations for decades to follow. We will now take a hard look at the errors, oversights, and solutions which lead to the combat proven M16A1.

Fateful Selection of Ball Powder

Most problems encountered with the rifle would be based on the Ordnance Corps’ decision to load 5.56mm ammunition with Ball powder instead of the IMR powder it was designed for. The decision was made carelessly and without testing to see if the Ball powder would have any adverse effects on the rifle. This was a grave error, one that the government would be warned about both by Gene Stoner and by Colt’s.

So what difference does the powder make? All the difference in the world. Auto loading firearms are by far one of the most complex of all machines. The tolerances and manufacturing processes are very unforgiving. A military rifle is a weapon system. That system is made up of a weapon, cartridge, propellant, primer and bullet. Any time one is changed, it must be tested and qualified before a change is implemented to insure the integrity of the weapon is not compromised. It was not.

Ball powder caused a series of malfunctions due to its different burning properties from the IMR powder the rifle was designed around. Keep in mind that the gun and ammunition were designed together. Ball powder has a much sharper pressure curve (burns faster) and increased the port pressure of the rifle. This increases the cyclic rate of the firearm by more than 200 rounds per minute. What this means is the timing of cycling of the firearm was dramatically sped up. The rifle was designed to fire at a rate of 700 to 800 rounds per minute, with ball powder it was increased to nearly 1,000 rounds per minute. This alteration of operation caused numerous problems including exceeding the cyclic rate maximum. It was so bad that Colt (by instruction of the Army) performed acceptance testing with older lots of cartridges loaded with IMR powder so that they would meet the lower cyclic rate as specified in the contract with the Army so the rifles could be delivered to the Army. Ball powder has been used going back to World War II. Large stocks remained from that time period that could be converted into rifle powder. This significantly decreased the cost in comparison to IMR powder. The main problem with IMR propellant was the inability for DuPont to manufacture the quantities needed to the specifications required. The actual decision to use ball propellant for this rifle system was not a bad decision, the problem came into how they implemented it. The rifle/ammunition were not tested and qualified before ammunition with Ball propellant made its way to the jungles of Southeast Asia.

Failure to Chrome Plate the Chamber

The principal and most serious cause of the malfunctions of the AR-15/M16 rifle in Vietnam was the failure to chrome plate the chamber. From experience gained in the Pacific Theater during World War II, it was found that chrome plating a chamber of a firearm would prevent many serious failures to extract. This military requirement was set forth by Ordnance Technical committee since 1957. Corrosion causes pitting in the chamber. When the cartridge is fired, it expands to the walls of the chamber. The cartridge would stick in these pits causing the extractor to tear the rim off the cartridge cases and the only way to remove it was to hammer it out with a cleaning rod. If the chamber was corroded and pitted, no cleaning would make it function properly. The question is, if we learned this lesson in World War II and made it a military specification on all U.S. small arms, why did the AR-15/M16 rifle not have it? The blame here goes not to Ordnance Corp but to the “Wiz Kids” on Secretary of Defence McNamara’s staff who made all the decisions. This micromanagement of money in resources and decisions was made by people who had not the slightest clue about small arms. As stated by William Davis, Jr. about the decision to not chrome plate the chamber, “If the rifle needed a chrome chamber Stoner would have designed it that way. So it did not have one therefore it did not need one.” Despite that fact, the rifle that Stoner and Colt showed the government was not a finalized weapon. It would need development to get ready for the troops to use at large.

This problem was simply corrected. First to appear were barrels with chrome plated chambers only. The barrels were marked “CMPC”(Colt magnetic particle inspected and proof tested). Barrels were also sent to Rock Island to have the chambers modified and chrome plated. This prevented the serious failures to extract and made the chamber easier to clean. Later in the war, the barrels were chrome plated in both the bore and chamber. These barrels were marked “CMPB” or “ CMP Chrome Bore.” With this modification the failures to extract became a thing of the past in the rifle.

Additionally the original gas tube was made from AISI 4130 steel. Due to corrosion issues that came up in the jungles of Vietnam the gas tube material was changed to stainless steel. This was implemented in the 1966 to 1967 time frame. This change eliminated the corrosion issues.

Failure to Extract

Failure to extract problems were due to the bolt unlocking sooner due to the change-over from IMR to Ball powder. There was still high residual pressure in the chamber and the cartridge cases did not have sufficient time to contract to be easily removed from the chamber. Thus, the extractor would slip off the rim or shear part of the rim off leaving the fired cartridge case in the chamber. To clear this malfunction, often the bolt would be closed again and the cartridge would come out of the chamber. If you compounded this malfunction with a corroded and pitted chamber, the cartridge case would become lodged in the chamber and have to be pounded out with a cleaning rod. This was by far the most serious of any malfunctions of the M16 in Vietnam. Chrome plating the chamber cured the extraction ill. The next major improvement to extraction took place in the 1970s with the addition of the rubber extractor spring buffer, which greatly increased extractor force. This particularly helped carbines that had a much higher cyclic rate.

Fouling

Fouling has been played up by many as the main cause of the failures in Vietnam. Many claimed that the gun would malfunction and the only way to get it working again was to tear it down and clean it on the battlefield. This was not the case. The main malfunctions were caused by corroded chambers causing failures to extract. No matter how clean the rifle was, it would not function reliably with a corroded chamber. Cleaning will not increase bolt and fire control group strength to prevent parts breakage due to the significant increase in cyclic rate. However, Ball powder did cause more fouling in the firearm, particularly in the chamber and inside the bolt carrier in between the back of the bolt carrier and the rear of the bolt. Simple maintenance took care of this, but maintenance became a problem of its own. It should be noted that to this very day the military M855 Ball cartridge uses Ball powder and the M16A2 and later generation rifles work very well.

Correcting Slam Fire Issue

One of the earliest problems to surface was slam fire. Slam fire occurs when the bolt is released and the firing pin strikes the primer and that inertia is enough to set the cartridge off. The principal culprit was the inconsistency in the manufacturing of the primers. When soft batches of primers were loaded this was more evident. To cope with this problem, the weight of the firing pin was decreased thus correcting the problem. There was a complete retrofit of all the old firing pins with the new ones service wide. Based on my research, the old firing pins were destroyed to keep them from surfacing at a later date and causing slam fire problems.

The “Light Strike” Problem and Newly Designed Buffer to Cope

The “light strike” was consequence of the higher cyclic rate. This malfunction was only found on fully automatic fire. When the cartridge is fired, the bolt carrier moves to the rear and the hammer is held by the automatic sear. The bolt carrier moves forward by action of the buffer spring, strips a cartridge off the magazine, chambers it, and as the bolt moves into the locked position, the sear trip area on the back of the bolt carrier tips the auto sear releasing the hammer to fire. But when the bolt carrier slammed into the barrel extension, it would momentarily bounce off the barrel extension and when the hammer would strike the bolt carrier, it would not be completely closed. The hammer would ride the firing pin/bolt carrier group forward and by the time it would lock there would be insufficient energy left to fire the cartridge. Thus, there would be a light dent on the primer but the round would not fire.

This problem would be corrected by the redesign of the buffer/spring guide. The original buffer, which utilized the “Edgewater ring springs,” was basically a spring guide that worked well with IMR propellant. For use with ball powder, five sliding steel weights were inserted inside the buffer and in- between them are small rubber disks. The weights would be able to move freely inside the buffer. This accomplished a couple things. First, it slightly decreased the cyclic rate on the closing stroke. Secondly, it prevented the bolt carrier bounce. As the buffer moved rearward when fired, inertia kept all the weights to the rear and when the bolt carrier would move into the locked position the weights would move forward absorbing the energy preventing the bolt carrier bounce.

Excessive Parts Wear and Breakages

The bolt itself would crack and break from the higher velocity and impact caused by the higher cyclic rate. The rear of the disconnector would break as well. These components worked properly at their design parameters but the increase in cyclic rate caused them to be overworked and eventually fail. The bolt catch was found to break with extended use due to the higher cyclic rate. It certainly was not that the rifle would not work with ball powder, it would have to be modified to do so. That was the job of the Ordnance Corps as per directions given by Secretary of Defense McNamara: they failed to do that.

Refining some manufacturing processes and redesigning some components solved these problems. The bolt was shot peened to increase its strength to deal with the higher cyclic rate. The disconnector was redesigned and made stronger to deal with the harder impact. The bolt catch was strengthened to halt the bolt carrier group of the higher velocity caused by the use of Ball propellant.

Other Modifications and improvements

As the war progressed, the rifle was further modified and improved. After first fielding, it was clear that these rifles were corroding. This is called “Intergrandular Exfoliation.” This is a chemical reaction in the aluminum caused by a combination of humidity, body perspiration and other chemicals that caused the receivers to flake off in layers and had a white corrosive substance appearance. This was primarily due to the receivers being made of the lower quality 6061 T6 aluminum forgings. Eugene Stoner himself had pled with Ordnance Corps to use 7075 T6 aluminum and was shot down until 1968 when production changed to the desirable 7075 T6 aluminum, which is used to this very day.

The lower receivers went through three generations as well. The original utilized a removable front pivot pin. The second introduced the captive front pivot pin, which visibly showed a raised area/rib that went straight back behind the front pivot pin and ended near the rear of the ejection port. The third was the addition of the magazine release button fence, which prevented accidental release of the magazine by dropping or dragging.

The bolt and bolt carrier had gone through some changes as well. The original AR-15 had a chrome plated bolt and bolt carrier. The XM16E1 used the same with the addition of the forward assist notches. This was a proprietary “hard” chrome plating process that was quite expensive. It was found that the chrome did wear off and chip and eventually corroded. It had also prematurely worn the internal dry film lube inside the upper receiver. The original purpose of chrome plating was to make it easier to clean. This it did, but there was a better way to go about this.

There are no remaining records that state the exact time when the chrome plating process ceased, but it is safe to say in the 1967 time period the chrome plating was dropped in favor a more durable and cheaper manganese phosphate which was black in color. The inside of the bolt carrier and carrier key remain chrome plated. Both the smooth side as well as the forward assist notched versions of the bolt carrier was produced in chrome plating and eventually both changed to the new finish. In 1966 Colt stopped manufacturing the smooth sided carriers due to lack of interchangeability with the XM16E1/M16A1 rifles.

Additionally, a new firing pin retaining pin was introduced. The original part was a machined retaining pin that came in chrome plated and manganese phosphate finish. A much cheaper cotter-type pin replaced this. The original was a much better component but there was another more inexpensive way to do the same job.

The Self-Cleaning Gun

With the purchase and distribution of more than 85,000 AR-15 rifles in Vietnam, there was not a single .22 caliber cleaning kit, operator’s manual or chamber or bore cleaning brush available. As recalled by Gene Stoner, the Army had no intention of buying the rifle so the government did not want to waste money on cleaning kits and manuals. The AR-15 was supposed to be an “interim” solution until they could get the SPIW (Special Purpose Individual Weapon) finalized and fielded. Therefore, the gun was touted as being self-cleaning. Troops were instructed that it was not necessary to perform any cleaning or maintenance on their weapons prior to going out on patrol or on a mission. Due to lack of reasonable maintenance guns would be fouled, firing thousands of rounds without cleaning. By not cleaning, the humidity and other environmental factors, the gun was even more prone to corrosion in the barrel and chamber. With the lack of availability of cleaning supplies, operator manuals and maintenance training, rifles were found to be in unserviceable condition in the hands of infantry soldiers. Many soldiers in the early part of the Vietnam War received training on the M14 rifle in basic training and when they arrived in Vietnam they were issued an M16. They received no instruction on operation and maintenance. With the introduction of Ball propellant, the fouling became more of a problem without maintenance

It was not until late 1966 that the Army began distribution (small) of the newly designed chamber brush which cleaned fouling out of the chamber as well as the locking recesses in the barrel extension. It was not until 1967 that large scale distribution of manuals, cleaning rods, bore and chamber brushes and lubricant were issued to the troops in the field.

Many have seen pictures, video coverage or heard stories of the flimsy M16 that was so fragile to dirt that condoms were placed over the muzzle to prevent dust from entering the barrel. Once again, a half-truth. The reason for covering the muzzle was to prevent water from entering the barrel. Due to the smaller bore, water enters by capillary action and is retained by surface tension. The gravity overcomes the surface tension in a larger .30 caliber bore and it will run out more easily. This was to protect more so from walking thorough streams and rivers and large amounts of water entering the barrel rather than a few drops of rain. This is a characteristic of a .22 caliber high power rifle. The best way to improve the barrel strength is to massively overbuild it to take severe pressures but the weight would become unacceptable. It should be noted that M1 rifles during World War II also had condoms placed over the muzzle during landings on beaches to keep water out of the muzzle.

The Forward Bolt Assist

Many believe to this day that the forward assist was an improvement to the rifle. The designers contested that it was in fact not an improvement but rather a detriment. Testing performed at Rock Island Arsenal proved this. They were able to demonstrate the detriment of forcing a cartridge into a chamber, and in particular a dirty chamber that can cause serious failures to extract and to open the bolt under adverse conditions. The forward assist was added by the request of the Army so the soldier would have some external link to the bolt carrier to manually close it. Odd, since even the M14 manuals say that you never force a round into the chamber. If it will not chamber, eject it out and load another. As Stoner designed the AR-10 as well as the AR-15, this external link was found not necessary. The forward assist was added to fill a psychological need, not a mechanical one. Eventually, it was added to all production rifles and is still in use today. It is an expensive addition to the rifle that has no practical purpose. Under extreme conditions such as being heavily corroded (not seen since they became chrome plated), or with heavily fowled chambers, the forward bolt assist will aid in chambering the round but will not affect the inevitable failure to extract. In firing hundreds of thousands of rounds out of M16-type weapons, this author has never had a malfunction that the forward assist would have cleared.

The Final M16A1

On February 13, 1967 the XM16E1 rifle was type-classified the M16A1 rifle. The final version would carry this weapon system for the next 18 years until the adoption of the M16A2. The final “A1” would have the enhancements including the magazine fence for preventing the magazine from being accidentally released, the forward assist, the 7075 T6 aluminum receivers, chrome plated bore and chamber as well as the new butt stock with the trap door to hold cleaning equipment. With the development of this rifle in full swing after the hearings, troops who entered into service in late 1968 encountered little trouble and the weapon went on to become one of the most successful small arms the world has even known.

The Carbine

With the introduction of the short barreled XM177 and XM177E2 carbines, a new realm of problems were found. The U.S. Government never officially adopted any 5.56mm carbine until the Colt M4. So, all the carbines used were small runs of guns not fully developed and no final Technical Data Package, and therefore; no true mil-spec like the standard rifle. Due to the shorter distance from the gas port to the bolt carrier, significantly more pressure is created in the carbine increasing the cyclic rate even more than the standard rifle. Multiply this with the use of ball powder. Major problems were more frequent failures to extract and bolt carrier bounce. With refinements such as the new M4 “H” buffer, the bolt carrier bounce problem has been solved and with enhancements to the extractor (stiffer spring and stronger buffer) and the use of the new “O” ring have brought the failures to extract problem to a halt.

Conclusions

Reputation is a funny thing. It is developed by many factors, rarely are they based on fact. It is subjective based on the individual’s perception of the weapon and subjected by prejudices. The AR-15 as introduced by ArmaLite/Colt was an excellent firearm but needed to be put through a proper development program before it was issued to the troops. Through this process, issues such as chrome plated chambers, cleaning equipment and modifications to use the alternate Ball powder would have been addressed. The political infighting between the Ordnance Corps, the U.S. military and congress caused many U.S. servicemen their lives by putting a weapon in their hands that was not properly developed, which Ordnance Corps was responsible for. Development of a weapon should never be conducted in the field. This agenda was for one purpose only, to protect their inferior M14 because it was home grown. Regardless that the M16 was ideal for the combat conditions in Vietnam, it was clear that the increased hit probability due to lightweight and low recoil, controllability on full automatic and ability to carry significantly more ammunition over the M14 were a clear advantage. High volume of fire was required in the dense jungles where clearly defined targets were rare. History has a funny way of repeating itself – One has to wonder what the M4 will compete against.

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank to Ken Elmore, President of Specialized Armament Warehouse for his contributions of both intelligence and materials for photography. An avid Colt AR-15/M16 enthusiast and collector, Mr. Elmore is also an instructor for Colt Defence LLC Law Enforcement Training Division. Specialized Armament Warehouse is one of the largest Colt parts dealers in the World located in Chandler, Arizona.

When WWII ended, Auto-Ordnance Corporation stopped producing arms of any kind and was literally packed up into crates and put on the shelf. George Numrich bought the name and the assets of Auto-Ordnance in 1950 and moved Auto-Ordnance to his facilities in West Hurley, New York. At first, Thompsons were produced by assembling them from remaining spare parts inventories or re-importing World War II produced arms and accessories. The same was true with spare parts and L drums. However, by the early 1970’s the supply of surplus items was getting difficult to obtain and he decided to start production of “new” Thompsons.

The last item to be made new was the L drums. The first maker of “new” L drums since WWII was the MGC Corporation of Japan. They produced a dummy Thompson submachine gun made from “pot metal” and supplied them with a blued steel dummy drum.

Numrich Type XL Drum

Numrich purchased these dummy drums and inserted a stamped rotor on the inside that held 39 cartridges. The outside was stamped with “Auto-Ordnance Corporation, West Hurley, New York, U.S.A.”, along with the bullet logo, on the front face at the six o’clock position. No other markings on the face plates were added. This drum was referred to as a type “XL” or 40-round drum magazine. The quality of the drum was poor and reliability suffered.

.22 Caliber Drums

During this time Numrich also offered .22 caliber semiautomatic and later full automatic Thompsons, based on the Model of 1928 appearance. Shown here are only two versions of this caliber drum magazine.

One version used the MGC dummy drum body with an H&R ten round box magazine welded into place to feed the Thompson. The backside of the body had the normal drum rails removed from the face plate and a vertical steel bar welded into place. This allowed the drum to be loaded into the Thompson like a box magazine.

Another version was originally made for the Mitchel Arms PPS-50, a .22 caliber copy of the Russian PPSH-41. Numrich used the drum with a section of a Thompson box magazine welded to the back of the drum allowing the drum to be inserted like a box magazine and added the Thompson bullet logo to the back surface of the drum.

Numrich Type L Drum

Finally, in the 1980’s, Numrich created its own Type L fifty-round drum magazine. Quality of these drums is similar to most of the WWII era drums. However, great care must be taken by novice collectors so as not to confuse this drum with Colt era drums. The rear face plate also uses a New York address but with a little observation, the differences are apparent.

Numrich Type C Drum

In the 1990’s Numrich took the step to produce a hundred round drum magazine. Other than the Type C drums produced by Johns Works Co., in the early 1920’s no other company had produced this version. These drums were made by Elmsford Tool & Die. Worchester Co., New York. Numrich had each drum serialized with a matching number on the cover. Numrich, unfortunately, rushed these drums into production and got what they put into it. The drums produced were a disaster, with poor quality and even worse reliability. These drums became really good boat anchors or paperweights. However, these drums can now be rebuilt to function reliably today. This will be discussed in a later section.

Numrich/Kahr Type X Drum

With the passage in 1998 of the large capacity magazine ban, magazines were limited to a maximum of ten rounds. This led to the creation of the Type X ten-round drum. These were built for collectors who wanted the look of a drum magazine, but one which complied with the new federal laws.

The drum was created by taking a Type L drum and removing the spiral feed rails for all but ten rounds of ammunition. At first, these drums used the full spring rotors from the Type L. Later drums had the springs reduced to only turn enough for the ten rounds of ammo.

Numrich Type L “Export” Drum

With the magazine ban in place, Numrich continued on a very limited basis to produce the 50-round Type L drum magazine. However, sales of these drums (at that time) were limited to only law enforcement or for export. These drums were the standard Numrich L drum, but had the added markings of “FOR EXPORT ONLY” stamped on the back face at the six o’clock position.

These drums were manufactured by Elmsford Tool and Die, Westchester Co., New York and assembled by Iona Co., New Windsor, New York.

With the sunset of the Brady Law/magazine ban, these drums can now be owned by all collectors.

In January 1999, Numrich sold the Auto-Ordnance Corporation name and assets to Saileo Group (Kahr Arms Co.), which continued the production of drum magazines and semiautomatic Thompson carbines.

Kahr Type L “Export” Drum

When Kahr bought Auto-Ordnance in 1999, they took over the production of the Type X and Type L drum magazine production. However, Kahr export drums were marked differently. On the back side of the drum is stamped “EXPORT AND LAW ENFORCEMENT ONLY” at the six o’clock position. With the sunset of the magazine ban, these drums can now be owned by all collectors.

Kahr Type L Drum

With the sunset of the magazine ban, Kahr retooled and went back into production of the Type L drum. Their first attempts exhibited poor workmanship and reliability suffered greatly. These drums were not built with the Class III world in mind, and were intended for the semiautomatic carbine owners only.

Kahr took suggestions from the public and tried to refine the manufacturing of their Type L and introduced what is referred to as an “improved” model. These drums were only marginally better and again reliability is an issue. These drums have a noticeable difference in marking. Notice how the number 9 in the winding instructions appears to have been replaced from the first Kahr L drum.

Modern Reproduction Drums

It can be fun to collect some of the more recent drums on the market. The first is the all rubber drums that have been accredited to the movie industry. These all-rubber drums have been patterned after several different versions of the West Hurley era drums. These drum are only for display and will not function.

Additionally, there are also available drums made for the airsoft Thompsons. These all plastic drums actually feed a plastic 8mm ball to the spring powered Thompson replicas.

Having reached the final design, the Birmingham Small Arms Company (BSA), in all probability and under great secrecy, was commissioned to mass produce the Welrod pistol. The only distinguishing markings on the pistols were that of a little five-pointed star and square along with a serial number. All markings were stamped underneath on the tube right behind the pistol grip.

The serial numbers, numeric only, are either 4 or 5 ciphered and in addition to the above mentioned position also stamped into the breech and etched into the magazine with an electrical pen. Not all magazines bear serial numbers though. The very first bore no markings at all and the moulded ebonite grip was slightly differently shaped than on most of those we find today. Also, the magazine was of a different model which can best be distinguished on the magazine jaws.

The square and the five-pointed star appear without exception on all of the inspected weapons. Yet it has not been possible to establish their true significance.

BSA claims none of the pistols bore serial numbers or other markings that could reveal the manufacturer. They do however confirm having produced parts for the Welrod as well as entire pistols but adds that several other British companies were involved in the production. Following is an excerpt from their correspondence: “Regarding the information that you are requiring on the Welrod pistol, although we have in the past manufactured specific parts for these particular pistols, we have no information regarding production development or variations of these pistols. All we know is that they were produced by a number of companies in Britain including BSA and these were developed specifically for covert operations in occupied Europe. They, therefore, bore no serial numbers or indication as to where they were manufactured.”

But if BSA did not mark the weapons then who did? Some assert that the star and the square are American markings, but I believe this theory can be excluded on the basis of correspondence from The Naval Historical Centre who states: “The Navy purchased an unknown number of Welrods for use. It is my understanding that they were given US Navy markings, with a final acceptance marking that was either “USN” or a stamped anchor…The US Naval Gun Factory and other manufactures have small proof markings for some items, but none use the star. Part markings for NGF – made items may include blueprint drawing numbers, such as “NGF – 12345.”

I regret not being able to account for the significance of the markings in a more precise manner other than what is mentioned above. I will leave it up to each individual to draw their own conclusions. It is a fact however, that entirely unmarked Welrods do exist. It is plausible that the pistols could have left BSA unmarked only to be stamped at the point from which they were later distributed.

The production of the Mk II was not officially up and running until late 1943, but several documents reveals that it was indeed available at the beginning of 1943. According to the serial numbers, at least 14,000 were supposedly produced. Only at the end of 1944 was the production of the Mk I under way, and the amount produced is unknown. The beginning of the production of the Mk I is so late in the war that it is undoubtedly the reason it was never dropped to the resistance.

At long last, documentation proving that the USA apparently, too, produced a number of Welrods has been found. However, there is no information as to when and how many. I rest convinced though that the Welrods used by the Americans during World War II were all manufactured and delivered by the British. This assumption is further supported by a written report from a meeting between some British liaison officers and American OSS agents at the Maryland Research Laboratory, August 16, 1943 concerning silenced weapons. The Welrod was highly praised by all the participants and the report concludes: “It was felt that for that special type of mission, it was the best available design and the U.S. should proceed with purchase of production model Welrods rather than trying for a home-built version.”

Still the Americans at some point began manufacturing their own. At the MOD Pattern Room (now S.A.T.I.C.) in England they retain a specimen with a full inscription on the silencer tube. (Dan’s Note: The late H.J. Woodend told me that he found this U.S. Navy example in Hong Kong and personally brought it back to the MOD Pattern Room. Herbie delighted in showing everyone how we Americans liked to conspicuously mark our so-called clandestine weapons.)

Right after the serial number is stamped the anchor of the U.S Navy with a “U” on its left side and an “S” on its right. In addition is engraved #422072—1 on top of the silencer tube, #422074—2 on the muzzle cap and #422072—6 on the back of the breech. These engravings can very well be serial numbers for the individual parts as described in the letter from The Naval Historical Centre. As there are no stampings of the star or of the square on this model, the engravings agree well with the statement from The Naval Historical Centre. Even if at first glance it appears to be a British Welrod, there are discernable differences. The difference are clearly seen on the individual parts that bears resemblance of a different manufacturing process; just as the gun itself differs markedly by having something best described as an angle bar welded onto the side of the breech, presumably to facilitate operation of the weapon when wearing gloves.

During the 1960’s, a modified version of the Welrod Mk IIA was produced by Military Armament Corporation headed by Mitchell WerBell. The main differences from the original design consisted of replacing the ebonite on the grip with plastic and replacing the original insides of the tube with the more up-to-date silencer technology of Sionics. It has not been disclosed how many were made but most likely it was no more than a handful.

“Execution” Campaign

Newly released (2002) documents from the National Archives UK, reveals the planning of “Operation Execution Month” in June 1943. The operation called for the occupied countries to simultaneously assassinate as many Gestapo and SS officials as possible within a given month. For this purpose alone, a message went out to increase the production of Welrods in order to meet the demands of the pending campaign.

The operation was never carried out, probably due to fear of retaliation from the occupational forces. The Allies must have begun to realize the incalculable consequences of the previously carried out “Operation Anthropoid” at this point. This resulted in the terrible massacre in the Czech town of Lidice near Prague, where the entire male population was executed, all the women were deported, and the town itself was literally razed to the ground with bulldozers in retaliation for the assassination of SS Obergruppenführer Reinhard Heydrich on May 27, 1942 by two Czech S.O.E agents.

Mk.I

I have studied the manuals for both the “Type A” and “Type B”, but to the best of my efforts there are no visible differences between the two. The difference is most likely in the internal suppressor tube construction.

In the manuals, under Function, General Description and Notes on Use, the texts are identical and read as follows. Function: The 9mm Welrod is a silent single shot pistol, intended for use by specially trained operators for specific tasks. General Description: The Weapon is a specially constructed single shot pistol with a detachable silencer. It is silent, reliable in action and easy to conceal. It is accurate up to 30 yards in daylight or 20 yards on a fairly light night, but is most effective when fired in contact with the target. Notes on Use: The gun has three distinct and separate uses. A) For aimed and deliberate shots in daylight or darkness. The effective range of the gun with normal handling is 15/30 yards. For deliberate shots, extreme accuracy is required and can only be obtained by correct trigger squeeze, i.e. a gradual squeeze by the whole hand. With training and practice it is possible to obtain very accurate groups at the distances mentioned. The gun should be held with the thumb and forefinger of the left hand as close up to the muzzle as possible, the pistol grip being held by the right hand. For standing shots, the left elbow should be as close to the body as possible and the rear of the gun approximately 6”/7”from the operator’s eye. B) Without its silencer and used as a single-shot weapon. C) By use of the weapon at the closest quarters, i.e. with the muzzle against the target. For this purpose no special training is required.

The construction itself is practically identical to that of the Mk IIA with the exception of a few details. The grip safety is slightly different in appearance but functions in the exact same manner. Placed underneath the tube right behind the grip safety, a secondary manually operated safety catch has been added. The trigger and trigger-function remains the same, but is now protected by a trigger guard. The magazine release has, due to the previously mentioned problems on the Mk II and Mk IIA, been moved in front of the grip and inside the trigger guard. The magazine is most likely from a .38 Colt Automatic, and the manual directs that although the total capacity allows for 6 bullets, that only 5 be loaded. The true difference lies with the suppressor tube that is two-piece. The rear piece, as with Mk II and Mk IIA, contains the breech, barrel and expansion chamber, whereas the front piece contains the baffles and washers section. The front piece, detachable just in front of the front sight, has a length of 4.9 inches bringing the pistol to a total length of 14.2 inches. The tube diameter is 1.4 inches, and the weight of the pistol is 48.2 ounce.

The advantage to a detachable front piece is obvious as this makes the weapon considerably easier to conceal. The pistol will function despite the front piece being removed; however the noise reduction will be minimal.

The few examples I have had the opportunity to examine have all been marked with a 5 digit serial number as well as the familiar “star and square” stamp under the receiver.

The barrel is perforated with 16 holes, allowing the powder gases to escape into the expansion chamber surrounding the barrel. In this case the holes serve the purpose of preventing the bullets from going supersonic as is the standard of 9mm Parabellum ammunition. The suppressor piece differentiates markedly from Mk II and Mk IIA. It consists of 2 washers and a couple of baffles separated by a metal spacer best described as looking like a spool from a sewing machine and perforated by 24 holes. The spacer creates yet another expansion chamber for the gases to cool off in before passing through the last washer. The muzzle velocity is approx. 1,000 fps. (305m/s).

Apart from the manually operated safety and the magazine release, the Mk I is operated and functions as the Mk II and Mk IIA. The iron sights are coated with a fluorescent material that, according the manual, renders the weapon efficient at 20 yards on a bright summer eve. The effective range in daylight is reported to be 30 yards. The recommended maximum shooting range is 24 yards.

Misinformation & Myth

It is necessary to mention the fact that in literature, the Welrod .32ACP is consistently referred to as Mk I just as the Welrod 9mm Parabellum is referred to as Mk II. In the case where the referral is to British Welrods, this is an error. It is safe to assume that the mix up occurred when the American .32ACP’s were designated Mk I, just to further confuse the issue. The Welrod Mk II was, from the beginning, constructed around caliber .32ACP. It was only later when some field operators, due to bad experiences, questioned the efficiency of the caliber .32ACP, that it was decided to further develop the Mk II. The result was the British Welrod Mk I, 9mm Parabellum.

To further add to the confusion, you will find that the American weapons literature in several places refer to the Welrod as “Hand Firing Device Mk I”. But on the Welrod that is kept in the Ministry of Defence/Pattern Room, the marking on the suppressor tube says: “.32 Hand Firing Mechanism Mk I.”

Additionally, in several places in literature, it can be found that the Welrod was developed by a British officer codenamed “Major Dolphin,” and that his real name was never revealed to the public. It is a fact that the Commander of the Frythe was Major John Robert Vernon Dolphin (later Lt. Col.). That he should have chosen a codename identical with his real name seems rather unlikely. This allegation is simply not true. Newly released documents from the National Archives UK, features a document that was produced towards the end of the war to ensure that the right persons would be properly credited for their inventions. The document reveals that the inventor of both the Welrod and the Sleevegun was Major H.Q.A. Reeves.

Major Hugh Quentin Alleyne Reeves was born in Seaford, Sussex late in 1909. Major Reeves was one of the most productive and creative engineers attached to Station IX. He was, among others, behind the Sten gun silencer, fluorescent night sights, the Sleeping Beauty and the Welgun but to mention a few. After the war he became involved in a project concerning noise reduction in jet engines. Unfortunately he was killed in an accident on October 25, 1955 at Bitteswell Airfield. Mr Reeves was investigating the problem of reducing noise from jet engines running on the ground. He was carrying out tests on a Hunter Mark V fitted with a Sapphire engine. While making an examination he was suddenly drawn into the intake of the silencer and received fatal injuries.

There are persistent rumors stating that the Welrod was also manufactured in calibers .380ACP and .45ACP. So far, this can not be confirmed, as I have been unable to find firm and trustworthy information on the subject.

Twice during my research I have come across information, stating that the Welrod was part of the equipment carried by 2nd Lt. Francis Gary Powers on board his American U2 spy plane when he was shot down over the USSR. This is not correct. Lt. Powers was armed with a silenced Hi-Standard model USA-HD caliber .22LR, serial number 120046. The serial number is not listed in High Standards annals, as the gun was delivered to the CIA, but that is another story entirely.

Status

Welrod Mk I and Mk IIA stayed in service for many years after the end of the war. Several, now retired, SAS (Special Air Service) operator’s report that the Welrod was in use during the Falklands, in Northern Ireland, and even as late as in the 1991 Gulf war. It is equally well documented that the American SOG (Studies and Observations Group) were using the Welrod in Vietnam.

Acknowledgment

I would like to take the opportunity to express my gratitude to the following in no particular order: Mr. J.M. Ramos for allowing the use of his drawing in my article. Dr. J. David Truby, Dr. John W. Brunner and Mr. Ralph Hagan for contributing with their help and knowledge. Museum Inspector Esben Kjeldbaek and Storage Manager Soren Rasmussen, both of The Museum of Danish Resistance 1940-1945, Copenhagen. Police Inspector Ole Rasmussen and Weapons Technician Palle Larsen, both of the Federal Danish Police department of weapons technology.