The recent introduction of Steyr’s Scout Rifle has created a great deal of interest in the world’s firearms community, mostly among firearms aficionados. The fact is, however, that the rifle has definite capabilities for use by military scout-sniper teams and for law enforcement. In this article, SAR evaluates Steyr’s new rifle and its military/law enforcement potential.

The scout rifle concept dates to the Second World War when the German Wehrmacht introduced the Karabiner 98k mit Zielfernrohr 41 (Model 98k Carbine with Model 41 Telescopic Sight -Kar98k-ZF41). The ZF41 telescopic sight was not intended to be a precision sight, but rather a sight for quick shots in combat. Its magnification was only 1.5 power and the rifle-telescope combination was very popular with the German military; nearly 90,000 were produced and plans called for 370,000 more when wartime exigencies caused telescope orders to be canceled. After World War II, the scout rifle idea lay dormant until it was resurrected by one of the firearms fraternity’s legends, Col. Jeff Cooper. Col. Cooper set the requirements for the modern scout rifle which differ somewhat from the WW II original. Before examining the scout rifle concept, however, we must understand the advantages of an intermediate eye relief low powered telescope mounted on a lightweight rifle.

Shooting a rifle well is a true challenge, especially when using open sights. Traditional “V” or “notch” rear sights are especially challenging because the shooter must concentrate on three points at once – the rear sight, the front sight and the target. The aperture or diopter sight ameliorates this problem somewhat, but the challenge of achieving correct sight alignment and sight picture remains. Sight alignment, particularly, is critical when using open sights of any type. Optical sights eliminate the need for obtaining correct sight alignment and picture, but introduce another set of problems all their own. When using optics of any magnification greater than approximately four power, target acquisition is slowed, with the difficulty of target acquisition in direct proportion to the degree of magnification. Probably the best of both worlds are “collimator” or “red dot” sights, such as Aimpoint, which have no magnification whatsoever. Many of these require batteries for power, however, and thus do not fit within the guidelines for a scout rifle because of the propensity of batteries to fail at the worst possible time as a corollary of Murphy’s Third Law. (Anything that can potentially go wrong, will – at the worst possible time!) Low power optics require no external power source, however, and thus are as reliable as such a device can be. From a shooting standpoint, their effect is to decrease the target acquisition time of the shooter while enhancing his accuracy. The method of using such sights is easy to learn and essentially requires only that the shooter keep both eyes open and on the target as he brings the rifle to his shoulder. As he shoulders the rifle and attains his shooting position, the crosshairs of the optic fall almost directly onto the center of the target, essentially where the shooter’s eyes are focused. This system is far superior to open sights in this respect. The sole disadvantage to the use of an intermediate eye relief, low power telescope is the fact that it is more fragile than open, or “iron” sights. Most quality modern optical sights are fairly rugged, however, and unless dropped directly onto a hard surface they can be expected to weather most exigencies. The scout rifle is envisioned as a general purpose rifle, suitable for any use from sport to combat and thus must be of a caliber suitable for killing any living target up to about 1,000 lb, eliminating current military calibers of 5.56x45mm (.223 Remington). The scout rifle will thus be chambered for a “full-power” 7.62mm (.30 caliber) cartridge, which for military use virtually mandates 7.62x51mm (.308 Winchester). Other points with regard to the ideal scout rifle are as follows:

A -The rifle should be a “repeater.” It should permit successive shots to be taken without reloading. The rifle will probably be a bolt action, as semiautomatic rifles tend to fall above the established weight limitation.

B -The rifle should be handy. That is, it should not be excessively heavy or overly long. Length should be no more than one meter (approximately 39 inches) and weight should be no more than about 3.1kg (seven pounds), the weight that most persons in relatively good physical condition can comfortably carry in one hand for an extended period. Rifles beyond these parameters are considered too cumbersome.

C -The buttstock of the scout rifle should not be too long, which renders the rifle slow and unwieldy. An adjustable stock is not mandated in Col. Cooper’s requirements for the scout rifle, but it is clear that an adjustable buttstock would be ideal.

D -The rifle should be “friendly.” Essentially this implies good ergonomics, with a line of sight as low as possible over the bore and the position of the shooting hand when ready to fire no more than three inches below the bore axis. A third component is the relationship of the bore axis to the stock. If the bore axis is above the stock, recoil forces are directed down, increasing felt recoil and making follow-up shots more difficult. Thus, the bore and stock should be as close as possible to straight line alignment.

E -The rifle should have a functional sling, preferably a “Ching Sling,” probably the best of its class due to its three-point attachment.

F -The rifle should not be intimidating. This implies that recoil is manageable and muzzle blast not overly loud.

G -The trigger should break like a “glass rod.” That is, there should be no perceived movement in the trigger as the sear is released. This is not to say that there should be no “slack” as is the case with all two-stage triggers. Once the slack is taken up, however, the trigger should release the sear without the shooter feeling any movement whatsoever.

As the military established a requirement to meet a perceived shortcoming, we have explored the perceived shortcoming and what qualities a scout rifle should have to fill it. This begs the question of how well Steyr’s new rifle meets the need and Col. Cooper’s vision. To preclude suspense, and so the reader can avoid slipping to the end of this article, we will go straight to the heart of the matter. This writer can think of only one word to describe the Steyr Scout Rifle – excellent, with one reservation. Now, let’s see what attributes justify such high praise from one who was a true skeptic about the entire scout rifle concept until he actually shot Steyr’s latest product.

First, the Steyr meets or surpasses all of Colonel Cooper’s requirements. It is light at only 3.1kg (7 lb) with telescope. It is handy, with its 748mm (19 in) barrel and overall length of just over one meter (39.57 in). The trigger is two-stage military style and once the slack is taken up there is no “creep” whatsoever and it truly breaks like the proverbial “glass rod” at 1.7kg (3.75 lb) on SAR’s test rifle. An English saddle leather “Ching Sling” accompanies each Scout and the rifle is set up with ambidextrous quick mounting points, so the sling can be quickly mounted and dismounted as desired. And finally, the recoil and blast of the rifle in 7.62x51mm (.308 Winchester) are not at all intimidating, at least not to this writer. This is attributable to the rifle’s design as much as to the cartridge, as we will presently see.

Other attributes of the Steyr that surpass the original concept are the detachable box magazine that has a double detent which allows it to be positioned so that single cartridges can be fed while maintaining a full magazine of either five or optional ten rounds. A spare magazine is carried in a buttstock well for quick reloading. Although the 2.5x Leupold telescope is mounted forward of the receiver ring, there is provision for accommodating a conventional telescopic sight using standard NATO mounting. Backup open sights are folded down out of the way until they are required. The cold hammer forged barrel is fluted for extra stiffness. The non-slip Zytel buttstock features spacers for adjustment of the length of pull to suit shooters of any conceivable size and has an integral fold away bipod, plus an accessory mounting rail beneath the forearm. Fit and finish of all parts is excellent, although it must be noted that this rifle is made for hard use, not to decorate the gun case of an admiring collector.

Recoil is managed in several ingenious ways. The 7.62mm NATO cartridge does not recoil excessively and can be handled by most shooters, but many smaller framed shooters might find the recoil of any full-power cartridge excessive, so the Steyr Scout incorporates a virtually “straight line” design which aligns the barrel and stock in such a way that recoil forces are directed straight back to the shooter’s shoulder. This not only reduces felt recoil, but facilitates quick recovery for successive shots. The trigger guard is “faired” at the rear to ease the forces on the shooter’s middle finger and the butt incorporates a recoil pad. Atop the receiver, controls such as bolt handle and ambidextrous safety are placed so that they will not impact the thumb of the shooter in recoil, regardless of how the rifle is held. The rifle comes ready to shoot upon delivery. It is pre-zeroed at the factory and although this writer was very skeptical, we found the Scout to shoot nearly at point of aim at 100 meters using Black Hills or Remington 168 grain and Cor-Bon 125 grain match ammunition. Bringing cross hairs of the Leupold telescope to the exact center of the target required only one click adjustment in windage and elevation. The shot groups were within minute of angle (MOA) at 100 yards using all three brands of ammunition in the (unfortunately) limited firing time that we had available in preparation of this evaluation.

Our sole complaint about the Steyr Scout is that our test rifle initially produced several misfires with each brand of ammunition we fired in it. We queried Steyr’s US. representative regarding these unexpected malfunctions and found that it was the fault of the factory striker spring setting. The striker tension was lightened because some members of the American firearms press complained about excessive resistance when lifting the bolt handle of pre-production models of the rifle. Rectifying the problem was very simple and involved no more than removing the striker assembly, which is covered in the operator’s manual, and then adjusting the striker spring tension. After tightening the striker spring, we found no discernable difference in effort required to lift the rifle’s bolt handle and the misfire problem disappeared. Those who encounter misfire problems should contact their Steyr representative to obtain exact procedures for making the adjustment. This was our sole complaint about the rifle’s performance while we had it for evaluation. It would also be welcome for a left-hand version to be made to accommodate the approximately 20 per cent of the population who are forced to operate an otherwise superb rifle essentially backwards.

What is the military or law enforcement usefulness of the bolt-action Steyr Scout in this day of fully automatic military firearms? Colonel Cooper claims that one of the primary roles of this rifle is its use by a military scout, although the traditional lone military scout has been replaced by reconnaissance teams, long range patrols, or scout-sniper teams, however it should be noted that some snipers occasionally operated alone during the Vietnam Conflict. Lone snipers would not, however, arm themselves with a scout rifle, but with a purpose-built sniper rifle. The long range patrol or reconnaissance team will have a variety of fully automatic weapons available should it encounter enemy forces of any size and be forced to fight. For such missions, the Scout Rifle is clearly not suitable. It is for the spotter member of a scout-sniper team that Steyr’s Scout Rifle is suited. It is the same caliber as most standard military sniping rifles and has the requisite accuracy to serve as a scout-sniper team’s “backup” rifle. Two man scout-sniper teams move by stealth and avoid firefights at all costs. Even if they were armed with fully automatic weapons, a two man scout-sniper team caught in enemy territory would be quickly overwhelmed. Indeed, current military thinking is for the spotter member of the scout-sniper team to be armed with a semiautomatic 7.62x51mm rifle, sometimes termed a “Designated Marksman Rifle” (DMR) while the sniper is armed with a heavy precision built bolt-action rifle. The role of the spotter is to back up the sniper and provide covering fire if necessary using a rifle of somewhat less accuracy and range than the sniper’s high – precision rifle, but capable of delivering a higher rate of fire. The Steyr Scout with optional 10 round magazine could fill that role and would be as reliable as any semiautomatic rifle of equivalent accuracy. Indeed, some military forces have already purchased the Steyr Scout rifle, although they have not disclosed the purposes for which the rifles were purchased.

For law enforcement, the Steyr Scout is a very viable option as a patrol carbine, although we would recommend either frangible or limited penetration ammunition if it is used in this role due to the possibility of overpenetration and ricochets in an urban environment. Typical police encounters are at under 150 meters and at this range 120 grain frangible bullets would be more than adequate for use against any perpetrators, even those wearing body armor. At the same time, frangible ammunition such as that manufactured by Longbow does not overpenetrate or ricochet. Limited penetration ammunition is also an option for urban use in a 7.62mm NATO rifle such as Steyr’s Scout. Limited penetration 168 grain match grade 7.62mm NATO ammunition such as that manufactured by Black Hills will typically penetrate body armor and then break up in the target without exiting. In fact, such ammunition will not overpenetrate a target without body armor. In addition, the attributes of the Scout Rifle’s optical sighting system that simplifies target acquisition and sighting while enhancing accuracy should be a major attraction to law enforcement officers whose opportunities for regular shooting practice are almost nonexistent.

We can sum up, then, by stating that the Steyr Scout Rifle we tested was a very pleasant surprise, save for the easily corrected misfires. It is light, accurate and appears to be sufficiently robust for consideration as a scout-sniper backup rifle and for use in law enforcement. Military customers will probably wish to add some modifications, such as camouflage buttstock and perhaps a flash suppressor, but Steyr’s little Scout Rifle is excellent as it is. Although we were initially skeptical about the entire idea of the scout rifle, the Steyr product convinced us of the concept’s efficacy. We believe that the Steyr Scout Rifle deserves consideration as a candidate for the spotter member of any military scout-sniper organization and by law enforcement as a patrol carbine in combination with the appropriate ammunition.

Knob Creek Range, West Point, Kentucky; 24 May 1997

Many of the machine gun and small arms enthusiasts from around the world had gathered here for a rousing weekend of shooting events to celebrate the Tenth Anniversary of Machine Gun News magazine. (Apparently this was also the Swan Song, as MGN disappeared several days later).

The conversation turned to the passing of Eugene Stoner earlier this year, and some of the people who had been at the military ceremony for Mr. Stoner described the Salute that the military had arranged for his memory. There had been an exception made from standard protocol, and in addition to the firing of the M-14 rifles, one soldier fired a full 20 round magazine in his honor.

The participants in that conversation included Vietnam Veterans, Class 2 manufacturers, policemen, gunsmiths, and a number of others whose lives had been touched by Mr. Stoner’s work. We all wanted to honor Eugene Stoner, and most of us felt that the memory would be better served by a true full auto salute with his designs. On Saturday morning, the honor guard volunteered, then gathered for instruction at 13:45. At 14:00, the following events occurred:

I called for the attention of the crowd, and gave a short thanks to Mr. Stoner for his designs and innovations that have affected us all. This was kept to about 90 seconds or so, to keep people’s attention, as well as briefly educate them. Then a moment of silence was called for. At the end of the silence, I asked Mr. Engel to proceed. He called the Honor Guard Volunteers to order (They were at Dress-right-Dress at the orange line on the main range, in front of the firing line)

On his command of “Ready”; “Aim”; “Fire”! They all emptied 20 rounds on full auto. On his command, they all recovered to port arms, then on order reloaded another magazine. Mr. Engel repeated so that there were three repetitions. Mr. Engel then inspected each rifle, turned to the range officer for clearance to leave, and then the Honor Guard left the field to the left.

When the Honor Guard had exited the range, a “Slick” pulled in over our heads. The Huey was from Firelands Museum of Military History, and he was to sit at 100 feet and his door gunner was supposed to work over the treeline at the end of the range with an M60. (We had red smoke, so we just had to do a little recon by fire…..) Unfortunately the slick worked up too much dust and it interfered with visibility, and the pilot called off the mission. This was the right, responsible choice.

When he was gone, I waited to be sure he was not making another pass, then introduced Mr. Reed Knight, with Gene’s Stoner LMG. Reed fired a 200 round belt from one hand in the overhead position, and the LMG just sat there and chugged away, rock steady. The crowd roared approval- the LMG in action is a truly amazing sight.

I thanked all involved, and turned the range back to the Range master. It was my sincere hope that the echo of those volleys will stay in the memory of all who were there to witness it, and that they will continue to honor the genius of Eugene Morrison Stoner.

Honor Guard Captain:
John Whitworth Engel

Honor Guard Volunteers:

Denny Foutch: M4
Allen Kirchner: M16A2 Shorty
Jim Alderman: M4
Dennis Todd: M16 LMG
Dudley Calfee: M16A2
Frank James: M16A1
Mark Layton: M16A2
Craig Arritt: M16A2
Charles Cox: XM177
Mark Serbu: M16A2
Matt Smith: M16 / M4
Vic Petras: M16 9mm
Dan “Kel” Whelan: M16A1
Henning Brown: M16A1
Terry Thomas: M16A1

On 23 November 1997, John Whitworth Engel of Engel Ballistic Research was seriously injured while testing out a new bolt action rifle in .50 BMG. This was not one of his designs, but a new prototype from another manufacturer. The bolt exited to the rear of the receiver and went through his arm. He is hospitalized, and we are presently waiting for word of his recovery. Prognosis is that there will be quite a bit of surgery necessary for him. Our prayers are with Whit and his wife Karen.

Few firearms in the civilian NFA world have garnered such wide ranging attraction, and criticism as the short barreled version of the ubiquitous Stoner/Colt military standard- the “Shorty M16”. This “Shorty” label can variously be applied, and be construed to describe, virtually ANY version of the standard M16 rifle with a barrel length LESS than that originally intended by Eugene Stoner in his benchmark design. Despite real-world reasons to the contrary, NFA gun owners have had a virtual love affair with the shorter barreled versions of the design. While trying incessantly to chop the barrel on this weapon down to ridiculous proportions, they still expect the original design, forgiving as it may seem, to perform and function as well and reliably as the standard 20” barreled rifle. The firestorm of reliability complaints can usually be traced to a practical misunderstanding, or unfamiliarity, with the design concepts of the base design as envisioned by Mr. Stoner. As such, this article will attempt to bring to the forefront the practical and mechanical aspects of the synergistic effects of altering the barrel length on the overall reliability and functionality of the design.

In the world-wide catalog of short-barreled designs employing small caliber, small case cartridges, such as NATO 5.56mm M855/M193, there is basically a three way division of mechanical operating systems employed by the various firearm designs: the first and most basic mechanically, is some form of blowback direct acting type action as typified by such guns as the FAMAS, CETME Modello LC, or the numerous H&K incarnations. These rely upon the direct backward force generated against the bolt face in propelling the projectile down the barrel to function the self-loading mechanism of the specific design. Due to this direct action energy transfer, it readily becomes apparent that barrel length, per se, has no relevance upon functional reliability, as the backward impulse imparted to the bolt face by the forward projectile movement remains, in practical applications, nearly constant down to all realistically employable barrel lengths. An HK53K is a good example of this in action; with a barrel length little more than 4”, it functions reliably in the full-automatic mode.

The next type of basic design, and the most commonly encountered, is a gas operated mechanism operating through some form of piston/action rod movement acting upon a bolt carrier to transfer the energy of the expanding propellant gases to work the self-loading action. Guns in this type group include such designs as the Galil SAR/Glilon, Beretta SCS70/90, SIG 551, or Zastava M85. Though they may seem similar in design concept to the M16s’ direct gas system they are fundamentally different for one very basic reason; all gas operated, moving piston type designs allow the face of the gas piston to rest in close physical proximity to the actual gas port on the barrel from which the high energy operating gas stream is tapped. This close proximate relation allows the high energy gas stream to almost immediately, in time relation, begin transferring its energy into mechanical movement of the operating mechanism by impinging upon the face of the gas piston and start it moving the operating parts rearward. The short distance between the gas port orifice and the face of the gas piston, as a function of time, is the critical relation which allows reliable functioning.

The distance between the gas port on the barrel, and the muzzle, is the critical factor on ANY gas operated design because the duration of TIME between projectile passage of the gas port (when high energy gas can begin to act upon the operating mechanism), and projectile exit at the muzzle (when gas pressure instantly drops to ambient atmospheric levels), is the only point in the action cycle that operating energy is available to function the mechanism. Thus, it becomes clear that the most important of design criteria is to allow for a sufficient exposure to the high energy gas stream, in terms of TIME, to consistently transfer energy from the propellant gases to the operating mechanism through the gas system. In almost all piston actuated gas operated designs the size of the gas port hole is determined by the MINIMUM amount of gas (energy) needed to start the piston backward and instill sufficient residual momentum to overcome the mass of the operating parts, plus the recoil spring energy, there-by allowing for the self loading cycle to repeat itself. The port size is then optimized for this minimum level, plus a sufficient reserve to compensate for adverse conditions, or variations in ammunition. The significant design advantage of this type system is that once the piston/bolt carrier is started moving backward at the required velocity, any excess gas can be bled off through a venting system, so it is self compensating for differing ammunition or environmental conditions. By sizing the gas port hole larger than absolutely necessary for normal operation, an operating reserve is built in, yet because of the venting or gas bleed off, there is no worry of excess energy not being able to be dissipated. It becomes apparent then that there are two separate factors, in terms of energy, to be considered. First, it is necessary to allow for the gas stream to instill SUFFICIENT energy to cycle the action through the recoil phase, and secondly, it is necessary to prevent EXCESS energy over and above that required for reliable extraction/recoil spring compression from being instilled as residual momentum into the operating parts. Thus it is that RELIABLE ultra-short barreled, gas-operated designs, like the AKSU-74 or Micro-Galil, invariably utilize a gas piston type action, with a self compensating cylinder provided with overboard bleed vents. Such designs may also typically utilize a muzzle mounted expansion chamber type device to provide for more reliable functioning by providing a fractional time delay in the absolute pressure decay of the high energy gas stream prior to the instantaneous drop to ambient pressure after muzzle exit. These devices, in effect, lengthen the effective distance, and thus add time, between the gas port and the muzzle. It is an absolute misnomer to call these devices “sound moderators”, or believe they exist for any reason other than to improve functional reliability. (Use of these devices may significantly increase the velocity of the bolt carrier, and it would be prudent to adjust gas port size accordingly).

The third type of operating system is, in reality, a simplification of the piston actuated, gas operated system. This is commonly known as a ‘direct gas’ type of operating system because the energy of the expanding propellant gases is transferred directly to the bolt/bolt carrier without the intervening action of a piston or action rod. This is the heart of the M16 design. By simplifying the mechanical end of the design by eliminating a need to employ a separate gas piston or action rod, a significant amount of weight and complexity was eliminated, unfortunately though, so was a significant amount of forgiveness in terms of operational reliability when deviating from the original rifle specifications. The only current production, short barrel, designs to employ this type of operating system are the numerous “M16” variants, and the Daewoo K1. So now with a bit of the mechanical differences explained between various short barreled automatic weapons, some with a reputation for reliable function, some with a not so good reputation, we are ready to delve into the specific functional problems encountered when trying to extract reliability from the M16 design when utilizing other than the original barrel length of 20” (and the usage of the original fixed stock).

The M16 ‘Shorty’ problem is no mystery to solve. Many people have erroneously attempted to correct mis-behaving guns by altering what they perceive is a “timing” issue related to barrel length. That is to say, they believe that a gun with a short barrel should employ an altered point of release of the hammer by the automatic sear during the final dwell movement of the bolt carrier during the counter recoil stroke to compensate for problems encountered when utilizing a shorter barrel. Timing IS NOT the problem. If a certain receiver will work with a 20” Barrel, it will work just fine with ANY barrel length, theoretically (there may be other inherent problems with a particular receiver, but that is beyond the scope of this discussion). The problem with Mr. Stoner’s gun, when altering barrel lengths, is that the gun and ammo were designed as a SYSTEM, with everything balanced in harmony: gas generation pressures and volume from the cartridge, gas port size, gas tube length, cylinder and piston displacement (bolt carrier and bolt), recoil counter balance energies, etc. Stoner designed his cartridge and gun as a paired system to function in harmony with a 20” barrel, period. The problems arise when solutions are attempted that do not take into account the synergistic effects on the entire operating system when altering a single component or variable in the entire equation. The direct gas type operating system needs to be understood completely before an effective solution can be achieved. While the below discussion is also relevant to the semi-automatic mode of fire too, it will be seen that functional reliability problems often encountered with short barrel M16’s are mostly peculiar to the cyclic mode of fire due to the high speed of the operating components when operating automatically resulting in, most commonly, “light primer strikes” though “short recoil” may evidence itself in the semi-auto mode too.

The M16 operating system (Gas system), to function reliably in the recoil portion of the cyclic operating mode, needs two things from the energy contained in the burning powder charge: 1. Sufficient energy to begin functioning the reciprocating parts and overcome the counter recoil energies contained in case extraction and the recoil spring/buffer mass and, 2. Sufficient exposure to those minimum energies in the time spectrum to overcome these counter recoil forces, complete the extraction cycle, and instill sufficient residual energy in the operating system, as retained potential energy, to fully compress the recoil spring/buffer throughout its’ travel limits. This covers the first ‘half’ of the operating cycle, up to the point of counter recoil. The other potential area for problems is in the portion of the operating cycle that encompasses the counter recoil travel of the operating components during re-chambering and final bolt carrier dwell movement following bolt lock-up.

The two most common problems with these “shorter” barrels ( i.e., barrels with LESS distance forward of the gas port than the standard 20” barrel), are “short recoil” (failure to extract fully and/or re-chamber a fresh round), & “light primer strikes” (bolt CARRIER rebound during counter recoil). These are really very simple to understand in the context of time exposure. The problem with these “Shorties” is NOT, I repeat NOT ‘timing’, it is TIME. There is a direct correlation between the location of the gas port and the remaining length of barrel before the muzzle exit point. THIS IS ALL THAT MATTERS, the length of barrel FORWARD of the gas port. This is TIME. The design substitution of a long gas tube to pipe gas stream energies directly back into the bolt carrier “cylinder”, instead of using a gas piston located in close proximity to the gas port, has the practical mechanical effect of inducing a time delay into the operating system between when the high energy gas stream exits the barrel at the gas port, and when it can actually start to force the moving components rearward. This design “feature”, combined with the extremely short distance from the gas port to the muzzle combines to produce the majority of the functional reliability issues experienced with this particular short barrel weapons system.

Assuming you have not altered the diameter of the gas port hole, if you swap an 11.5” barrel, on an otherwise properly functioning receiver, you may FIRST experience short recoil; this is clearly indicated by the fact the high energy gas stream delivered to the operating system sufficient energy to BEGIN the extraction/recoil cycle but then stopped; it did not instill enough residual energy to overcome the counter recoil forces and movement stopped when the pressure it was exposed to instantly dropped to zero as the bullet exited the muzzle. Had it continued to be exposed to this high energy stream for just a little more TIME, you would have no “short recoil” type functioning problems at all. TIME is the key to building up in the operating system that residual energy, over and above that required to begin extraction, to complete the recoil cycle. Three barrels that ALL work reliably are the 20”, the 16”, and the 14.5” M4; notice anything between them? They ALL have the same or greater (in the case of the 16”) amount of tube BEYOND the gas port to the muzzle. Ever wonder why Colt came up with the 14.5” barrel anyway (from the Colt Model 653)???? It is the least barrel length, while utilizing the other standard carbine components, that held the minimum distance from the gas port to muzzle exit point the same as the standard rifle barrel. Colts’ never did achieve TOTALLY RELIABLE operation of a “Shorty” gun until they went to the 14.5” barrel. Do not believe what you may have heard about the late 1960’s XM177/E1/E2 muzzle device being used as a “sound moderator”; that device was, pure and simple, a pressure accumulator designed to delay the high pressure decay in the operating system for a fraction of a second longer than a plain 11.5” barrel, enough to get “reliable” operation, by instilling just a bit more residual energy to the operating system before the pressure dropped instantaneously at the muzzle exit point.

Mr. Stoners’ genius was evident in his design of the direct gas system using the bolt and carrier as the gas cylinder and piston, instead of using a large separate piston and rod set-up like other designs; this works great AS LONG AS THE OPERATING SYSTEM IS EXPOSED TO THE REQUIRED MINIMUM ENERGY LEVELS FOR ENOUGH TIME. The long gas tube used eats up time; look again at other gas operated “Shorty” designs, they all have a piston which is physically located very close to the gas port; gas stream energy can immediately begin to transfer energy to the piston as soon as it leaves the barrel, for all intents and purposes. Shorty Galils work fine, shorty M16s’ have trouble. Colts’ attempted to solve the problem with the redesign of the operating system to include a gas piston arrangement in their experimental Model 703, work which later showed up in the Taiwanese version of the M16A1, their Type 65 rifle. The civilian ‘Rhino Conversion’ for the M16 also capitalized on that work when that company added, in reverse engineering to Mr. Stoner, a gas piston operating system to improve operating reliability, the same as the new ZM-Weapons Co. is doing today.

For most people struggling with the problem of short recoil, there seems to be almost a universal belief that the answer lies in increasing the size of the gas port hole in the barrel. Opening up the gas port hole will only add more VOLUME of gas to the system; since, in the practical application, pressure remains nearly the same you will in all likelihood achieve the next problem commonly encountered, i.e., “light primer strikes” causing failure to fire and stoppages after two or three shots. Light primer hits are caused by ONE thing (assuming your gun is mechanically OK to start with); excess counter recoil energy is not being dissipated upon completion of chambering and the bolt CARRIER rebounds off the rear of the barrel extension and the bolt itself literally starts to unlock again, at which point the hammer, traveling only under the spring energy imparted to it from the comparatively weak hammer spring, hits the backward traveling bolt carrier with insufficient energy to send it forward again, relock the bolt head, AND strike the primer anvil with enough energy to cause ignition of the cartridge. Under these circumstances, the hammer has acted basically as an anti-bounce deadener. The reason the gun will fire correctly for MORE than one round, but will usually stop after two or three, is that the face of the bolt carrier and the rear of the barrel extension experience a cyclic increase in what is known as the “coefficient of restitution”. This physical phenomenon is best described as a decrease in the ability of the impacting metal surfaces to return to their original “shape” or “height” following repeated impacts, thereby robbing them of their ability to absorb, or “deaden”, the forces of impact in the exact same capacity following the initial impact. In practical terms, after the first shot the impacting surfaces are unable to provide a sufficient cushion to prevent excessive rearward movement of the bolt carrier until a point is reached to where the energy of the hammer spring is overcome and firing ceases.

If the gas port hole diameter has been increased in an attempt to cure short recoil, you have now most likely ADDED to your list of problems. By observation of your gun following such a ‘fix’, the operating system obviously is imparted with enough energy to go through the extraction and recoil phase but it now cannot dissipate the EXCESS residual energy that the additional gas volume has now imparted to it by drilling out the gas port hole (giving an effective increase in gas flow per unit time). Remember, Stoner designed every element of the rifle system to work in harmony; any excess gas volume, above what he balanced the gas cylinder (bolt carrier) for by specifying the standard diameter of the gas overboard vent holes in the side of the bolt carrier to a specific size, will impact the system’s performance.

The time and distance the cylinder (Bolt carrier) travels while moving to the rear and unlocking the bolt, relates to the point where the remaining gas charge is dumped through the ports. The retained gas in the system continues to ADD energy during recoil, energy which cannot be dissipated by the spring energy of the recoil spring and buffer mass. This increased energy, having been transferred to the recoil spring/buffer assembly, will manifest itself as INCREASED driving force during the counter recoil cycle (read ‘cyclic rate’). This is more energy than the carrier/bolt/barrel extension were designed to absorb during re-chambering and so the carrier ‘bounces back’ after chambering and bolt lock up.

The solution to fixing “shorty” problems then is simple, but most people don’t want to believe it. You must return the TIME element in the operating system (Gas system) to the designed level of the 20” barrel standard, while maintaining the original energy levels designed for in the recoil system. The primary reason that excess counter recoil energy is induced into the operating parts is that the gas port hole has been over ported in an attempt to cure short-recoil, but what causes the gun to display a tendency to seemingly NEED that extra ‘power’ in the first place? This is the real START of the problem(s)! The base cause for this then can almost always be traced to ONE element in the system, the barrel, or more correctly the chamber of the barrel. With rare exception, the barrels available from commercial sources are produced with chamber dimensions of SAAMI specification to the .223 Remington caliber, with differing minimum and maximum tolerances around that general specification. Commercial .223 Remington IS different from 5.56mm NATO chamber dimensions, and Colts’ proprietary chamber dimensions are different still. More importantly to our case at hand, if there exists a variance in tolerance in these commercial barrels it usually goes toward the “tight” side in a vain attempt to advertise the barrel in question as being more “accurate”. The problem is that in a MACHINE GUN you DO NOT desire absolute accuracy as a first criterion in designing barrels; it is more important to design in any attributes that would lead toward a higher degree of functional reliability. It should thus be obvious now that what we seek in a chamber of a MACHINE GUN barrel is a dimensioning that allows RELIABLE chambering and extraction, using the LEAST system energy possible. This is the heart of many “troublesome” short barrels installed on civilian M16’s, and why they won’t function reliably.

Almost without exception, the commercial producers of “M16” barrels are selling the exact same barrel, with the exact same chamber dimensions, as those they sell for use in semi-auto AR15’s and clones. Because SOME individual barrels MAY have a chamber dimension that is closer to NATO spec, they may run fine, but most will not. And to compound the problem, most commercial barrels are now sold as being Chromium plated in the chamber area which renders them impossible to alter the chamber dimensioning (be VERY careful about so called “polishing out” a chrome chamber; it generally CAN NOT be done in a uniform manner!). And so, because the chamber dimension is not optimized for high speed full automatic cyclic function, we immediately introduce into the equation a factor of high required extraction energy levels; this is the reason most people want to open up the gas port diameter. It should be noted now that the standard size of .063” for a gas port in a 20” barrel is a dimension optimized for all the preceding reasons, and that because of the reduced TIME element of the short barrels’ gas port-to-muzzle distance, this size is often increased as a compromise to the time factor by adding additional gas volume-per-unit-time, as described above. Since the chamber dimensions of commercial barrels are known to vary widely, it is generally impossible to state with certainty an optimized gas port hole diameter for a specific barrel length such as 10” or 11.5”. The next compounding problem is that a gas port hole selected to give reliable function without exhibiting ‘short recoil’ tendencies may already have reached an energy level in the operating system that will induce ‘light primer strikes’ from excess energy levels in the counter recoil stroke. There is a very fine line between curing ‘short recoil’ and inducing ‘light primer strike’. The best guarantee that a short barrel will function reliably in the cyclic mode is to start with a barrel that was INTENDED from the point of manufacture to be used in a machine gun, as the chambering dimensions will already have been optimized for this intended usage. It is far better to obtain a barrel of ANY length that is a MIL-SPEC M16/A1/A2 new/replacement/surplus part, and then alter the length to suit and re-mount the front sight/gas block assembly in the proper position, than it is to gamble on a ready made “shorty” barrel of unknown pedigree. This DOES NOT have to be a “Colt” barrel; any barrel that can be positively identified as being MIL-SPEC manufactured as an original part or a replacement or spare will do, such as those made past and present, by H & R, GM-Hydramatic, FNMI, ‘Bushmaster-Quality Parts’ (M4 type), or DIEMACO. The trick is to get a “machine gun” barrel from the outset, as then your chance of developing a cascading series of problems while trying to “fix” a problematic gun will greatly diminish.

Since most people use a “CAR”, or telescoping, stock with the short barrels our problems are compounded again. To begin with, the telescoping “CAR” stock assembly, by its’ physical dimensions, has a reduced capacity to absorb recoil energies compared to the original full size fixed stock/recoil spring/buffer assembly. This already puts us at a disadvantage! Remember, any increase in recoil spring RATE, in an attempt to absorb excess recoil energy, will cause an increase in counter recoil velocity leading to light primer hits. (Conversely, there is an incorrect belief that cutting or shortening the CAR recoil spring is the correct answer; while it MAY work for a PARTICULAR combination of barrel/receiver, you are seriously compromising the longevity of your expensive weapon by tremendously increasing operating stresses!! Do NOT cut springs, unless you don’t care for your weapon!!). The most logical place to cure the problem(s) is in the recoil assembly, but that requires some expanded understanding of its’ capacities and inherent weaknesses. Adding mass to the recoil assembly in the form of a different buffer is not a good solution as this only causes an increase in the striking energy of the bolt carrier on the barrel extension, and the added mass may not be sufficient to discourage rebounding. What IS desired is some form of energy ABSORBING function contained within the recoil assembly, or barring that, some form of anti-bounce device to deaden the eventual bolt carrier rebound energy before hammer release. Testing by trial and error for a PARTICULAR barrel/stock assembly may result in satisfactory performance, but do not be tempted to alter the recoil absorbing abilities of the normal recoil spring/buffer assembly, and it is also unwise to significantly increase the mass of the buffer due to increased stresses developed. If you must have a short barrel and can’t make a CAR stock assembly function reliably with your particular barrel used, simply switch to a standard fixed, full length stock/recoil assembly. The increased length of recoil travel and buffer mass increase will almost always give reliable function with a short barrel, without undue stress and strain being imposed on the gun. For those that must use a CAR stock assembly, the most practical thing to do is to obtain, as an “off the shelf” component, one of the “Hydraulic” buffer units currently available. These are a mechanical adaptation of a simple hydraulic cylinder in which the front end of the buffer acts as the piston, acting against a fluid medium, to compress an internal spring, thereby absorbing a great deal of recoil energy without transferring it to the recoil spring. This simple action does much to prevent excess counter recoil energy and its’ attendant problems. By installing this singular component, it will allow the gas port hole to be opened up for reliable function without any further ‘short recoil’ tendencies, while eliminating any problems with ‘light primer strike’. There are other possibilities to solving this delicate balancing act between curing ‘short recoil’ and inducing ‘light primer strike’, but they all require a LOT of advanced weapon modification. Such things to try would be re-balancing the gas venting equilibrium by resizing the vent holes in the bolt carrier side; adapting an expansion chamber type device into the gas tube itself or the front sight/gas block; incorporating on the rear section of the bolt carrier a sliding mass anti-bounce weight device; incorporating on the relieved front face of the bolt carrier a section containing an impact deadening material, such as phenolic composition plastic; or using a set of variable increasing rate telescoping recoil springs.

With the advent of the M16A2-M4 Carbine, Colts’ has for the first time acknowledged that the gun comprises a DEDICATED operating system, utilizing components designed to operate in harmony as a short barreled weapon. The basic system comprises the barrel with Colts’ proprietary chamber dimensions, a modified angle on the cartridge feed ramps, and a modified recoil spring operating in unison with the so called “Hydraulic” buffer unit, or more currently, a one ounce heavier non-hydraulic buffer called the “Heavy buffer”. This Heavy Buffer is marked on the face with an “H”. What is significant is that ALL these features are designed to help alleviate the above mentioned problems, while retaining the ability to posses a usable reserve of available operating energy for adverse conditions, without sacrificing functional reliability in the cyclic operating mode. By employing the hydraulic or heavy buffer unit they can “over port” the barrel gas port to give a valuable reserve of energy for reliable extraction and then dampen it out on the recoil stroke to prevent excess energy build up in the counter recoil stroke. The hydraulic buffer unit is no more than a mechanical means of returning the time element, and thus reliability, of the standard rifle barrel gas port-to-muzzle relationship by inducing a mechanical increase in the amount of recoil energy absorption prior to the end of the recoil stroke. And as the operating parts reach their final dwell movement of the counter recoil stroke, the hydraulic buffer can act as an anti-bounce deadener by allowing any rebound energy to be absorbed in the movement of the hydraulic piston.

For most civilian shooters, it would be most practical to follow Colts’ lead and simply substitute the hydraulic or heavy buffer, after determining the correct gas port hole size for their particular barrel being used. With a better understanding now of the synergistic effects of the change to a short barrel, the civilian M16 owner should be able to assemble a reliable version of the “Shorty M16”, or cure his particular guns’ ill manners!!

When the McMillan M89 sniper rifle was introduced in 1989, it represented a new state of the art for the armed professional as well as the culmination of Gale McMillan’s career as a master rifle builder. One can still measure the state of the art against this remarkable rifle. In a sense, McMillan began the development of the M89 sniper rifle in 1975. Before then, he had only worked on competition guns. His rifles had a reputation for extreme accuracy, so the Marine Corps came to him to help them with their sniper rifle program. McMillan virtually designed the M40A1 that they use now based on his own expertise plus suggestions provided by snipers with extensive field experience using the old M40. That was his first experience building sniper rifles.

Not one of the more than 900 M40A1 rifles McMillan designed for the Marines experienced a single failure. McMillan furnished the stocks and trained the Marine armorers who actually built the M40A1 rifles, and he oversaw the project through its completion. Soon, all the federal law enforcement agencies located near Quantico became familiar with the success of the M40A1, so they approached McMillan for help with their countersniper rifles. McMillan stayed with the lines of the M40A1 with its Remington action, target barrel, fiberglass stock and such. Another 700 rifles were delivered to the Army and many law-enforcement agencies. As the rifles were used in the field over the years, McMillan got a lot of user feedback which would ultimately be expressed as design improvements.

Then about 1985, McMillan built a series of sniper rifles under contract to the Army for their Spec Warfare units. Instead of just rebuilding Remington rifles to make their sniper rifles, he decided to build his own action to correct the few shortcomings on the Remington action. Since the Remington’s bolt stop is on the trigger, for example, it’s quite clumsy to remove the bolt with gloved hands in an emergency such as a jam. So McMillan moved the bolt stop up onto the side of the receiver.

Next, McMillan addressed several safety problems with the potential to be life threatening in case of failure in a combat environment. One problem was the Remington extractor, which is just a little sheet metal spring. While the extractor doesn’t fail very often, it is a definite weakness on the Remington action. So McMillan added an external claw extractor on the bolt to eliminate this potential problem.

Another potentially dangerous problem develops if a case separates or primer blows in a Remington action. With either of these failures, the gases vent right down the firing pin and out the back of the bolt sleeve into the shooter’s face. McMillan incorporated an enclosed cocking shroud that deflects the gas so it can’t get to the shooter.

McMillan developed this receiver strictly for sniper rifles. Made of chrome moly steel, the action generated a lot of accuracy because it was made to closer tolerances than a Remington, with receivers machined to within 0.0002 inch (0.005 mm).

“These guns just shot remarkably well,” McMillan said. “In fact, we were able to guarantee sub-half-minute. Up to that point, nobody in the world made that kind of a guarantee.”

The need for a better stock than the one on the M40A1 became apparent. It wasn’t really a sniper rifle stock, and it had a little too much drop. So McMillan combined his new receiver and a stock designed strictly for sniping.

The result was the McMillan M86 sniper rifle. Its barrels were made in house from a solid piece of chrome moly or stainless steel. First the barrels were precision drilled so neither end was more than 0.0001 inch (0.0025 mm) away from concentricity. Then polygonal rifling was machined into the barrel. Polygonal rifling is superior to the traditional land and groove system because it has no sharp edges, imposes less friction on the bullet (increasing velocity slightly while reducing wear on the bore), and improves heat dissipation from the bore.

The McMillan M86 sniper rifle became the standard sniper rifle of all the SEAL Teams. The Marines have the M86 in limited numbers and favor it over the M40A1. Numerous federal law-enforcement agencies use the M86 as well. The M86 is accurate and durable, and has proven itself in peacetime and in war. It is a superb weapon.

But the M86 is not the ultimate sniper rifle. Hard-won lessons by Navy snipers in the field suggested a number of additional modifications that would transform the M86 into the superior system for delivering long-range hits. Gale McMillan’s quest for the ultimate sniper rifle produced the M89 rifle.

Design of the M89 Rifle

Many of the changes McMillan initially made could be found in the stock design. The M89 stock incorporated a slanted fore-end so the shooter could change the elevation on the target just by moving the rifle forward or backward to raise or lower the elevation. It proved to be much easier to acquire a target that way. The grip was changed, and the stock comb was made slightly higher.

After McMillan got that far in converting the M86, the Navy decided that adding a detachable box magazine and a suppressor would provide the optimum sniper system. So McMillan added a detachable M14 magazine to the .308 Winchester (7.62x51mm NATO) variant, while the .300 Winchester Magnum variant (no international synonym) retained its conventional internal magazine.

Both .308 and .300 M89s featured a 17.5 inch (44.5 cm) barrel with 1 in 12 twist. A few M89 rifles were built with a 1 in 9 twist for testing and evaluation with subsonic rounds. The rifles were issued with Bausch & Lomb 10×40 mildot telescopic sights and Parker Hale bipods. The .308 systems included both 10-round and 20-round M14 magazines. Total system weight including suppressor was 17.1 pounds (7.8 kg) in .308 with an empty 10-round magazine and 17.6 pounds (8.0 kg) in .300 Winchester.

Performance of the M89 Rifle

The M89’s weight dominates one’s first impression of the system. The excellent ergonomics of the stock (including palm swell and textured surface) make handling comfortable and efficient, but 17 pounds is still a lot of rifle. Nevertheless, it is a bit surprising to watch a Navy sniper stand offhand and keep the M89’s crosshairs centered on the torso of a target moving at walking speed 200 yards (183 meters) downrange. “No big deal,” he explained. “A SEAL inserting into a remote shoreline during Operation Just Cause used an M89 to neutralize two hostiles on the beach at about the same distance—from a boat.” The bottom line for Navy applications is that many sniper rifles currently in use weigh between 14 and 18 pounds (6.4 to 8.2 kg) by the time the rifle is fitted with all the bells and whistles necessary for a particular mission, and this is considered an acceptable range of system weights.

The M89’s short barrel did not prove to be a liability at long range. Lake City ammunition remained supersonic at 1,000 yards (914 meters). The same ammo out of an M14 is only marginally supersonic at that range. The Lake City 173 grain (11.2 gram) bullet, however, does not fly particularly true. Federal 308M ammunition with Sierra 168 grain (10.9 gram) MatchKing hollowpoints performed best. For accuracy testing, we relied upon several military and law-enforcement snipers to push the edge of the M89’s envelope. Federal 308M ammo delivered a five-shot group measuring 2.3 inches (5.8 cm) center to center at 600 yards (549 m) fired from the prone position with bipod. With the right man behind the rifle, groups held to a half MOA at 1,000 yards.

Federal modified their 308M ammo for the military by spinning the bullet to close the hollowpoint, so it looked like a full metal jacket. Someone finally concluded this was bending the Geneva Convention, so the Lapua 170 grain (11 gram) FMJ match became the cartridge of choice for military use when the Geneva Convention applies.

A federal law-enforcement sniper achieved a 2.25 inch (5.7 cm) group at 600 yards using the .300 Winchester variant of the M89. The most accurate load in this caliber was the 190 grain (12.4 gram) Sierra match bullet with 70 grains (4.55 grams) of 4350, which produces a velocity of about 3,100 feet per second. Federal made an outstanding round for the military in .300 Winchester which pushed a 180 grain (11.7 gram) bullet at between 3,100 and 3,140 fps out of the M89. The individual responsible for that round is no longer with the company, and it is not clear if that load will be offered commercially. Navy snipers seemed to prefer the .300 Winchester over the .308 Winchester M89 by a ratio of about 2 to 1. One observed that “the suppressed .300 doesn’t kick at all. You want to shoot it all day.”

But that’s not the real bottom line. They tended to prefer the .300 Winchester because it improves their hit probability. The .300 shoots flatter, making range estimation less critical. They can make a mistake of 50 yards (46 meters) at long range and still score with the .300, while such an error might cause a miss with the .308 round.

While the .300 Winchester is certainly capable of being effective beyond 1,200 yards (1,100 meters) from a ballistic standpoint, it does not seem to provide a longer effective range than the .308 cartridge in the M89. Shooter ability is the dominant factor. The ability to estimate range and wind become increasingly important, and the ability to dope out the effects of mirage becomes critical.

It is this latter skill more than any other that seems to limit effective range. The best snipers can detect less than an eighth MOA change in mirage, while the average shooter can tell about a half minute. This skill takes thousands of rounds to develop. Furthermore, many shooters experience a change of effectiveness around 1,000 yards. Success might drop, for example, from 80 percent kills at 1,000 yards to 20 percent at 1,200 yards. So that particular shooter is not “effective” at 1,200 yards. But he can still nail you with a bit of luck.

The only complaint registered by Navy users of the M89 suppressed rifle related to the increase in mirage generated by the hot suppressor if more than a shot or two was required. Some operational requirements could require placing 15-20 shots as quickly as possible. Mirage generated by the M89 suppressor proved to be a serious liability when rapid fire was required using a night vision device on the rifle. Using night optics dramatically exaggerates suppressor-induced mirage. Therefore, placing numerous precise shots using an NVD was difficult to impossible. While the mirage problem can be mitigated by wrapping the suppressor with a cloth that is soaked from the operator’s canteen, this was not a practical tactical option in the real world as far as the Navy was concerned. So other weapons were utilized when a mission required a rifle with night vision capability.

Barrel life in both calibers is about double competing sniper rifles like the contemporary Accuracy International rifle used by the SAS. Intense Navy testing and use in the field suggest an average barrel life of about 10,000 rounds for the thirty M89 systems delivered to the Navy. Rifles are rebarreled when they no longer deliver sub-MOA groups. The M89’s sub-half-MOA precision generally begins to change between 3,000 and 4,000 rounds. These numbers can be improved by simply running a patch down the bore every 10 rounds. But that’s not the real world of military usage.

So the M89 sniper rifle is unusually accurate for an unusually long time. The M89 variant tested for this study is also a suppressed sniper rifle, and the muzzle can first issued with this rifle represented a significant new state of the art in suppressor design.

Design of the M89 Suppressor

The first suppressor used on the McMillan M89 rifle was designed by Charles A. “Mickey” Finn of Qual-A-Tec, according to Gale McMillan. Finn established the Qual-A-Tec shop in Oceanside, California, in 1986 for the design and manufacture of sound suppressors since Finn’s facility in Carlsbad, California, was busy with the Army’s M9 bayonet contract at the time. Doug Olson ran the Qual-A-Tec shop in Chino Valley from its establishment in 1986 until 1990, about the time that Qual-A-Tec closed its doors. Olson participated in the development of the original suppressors for the M89 rifle. He made all of the prototypes himself.

Qual-A-Tec suppressors featured baffles of Finn’s patented slanted sidewall design, and some later designs featured baffles separated by fluted cones which served as spacers. The fluted cones proved to be so effective that the next logical experiment was to design several suppressors using fluted cones instead of baffles. The M89 suppressor apparently was the first suppressor using fluted cones to be seen in the public domain.

The very first prototypes developed for the M89 rifle were different than the production model, employing slanted sidewall baffles separated by fluted cones. Other prototypes used baffles made from square tubing that were aligned 90 degrees from the bore, with the ends machined to fit the contour of the suppressor tube. A hole was bored though each square-tube baffle for the bullet passage. The baffles vented combustion gas into fluted cone spacers, which acted like coaxial expansion chambers. This arrangement was also used in the Qual-A-Tec amphibious .22 Ruger pistol, although the suppressors of rifle caliber required the welding of a support piece at each end of a square-tube baffle to keep the tube from collapsing. This reinforcement was unnecessary in suppressors designed for rimfire cartridges.

When Qual-A-Tec closed its doors, Lynn McWilliams licensed all of the company’s designs for his own company, AWC Systems Technology. The unique arrangement of using baffles of square tubing separated by fluted cones first seen in a prototype M89 suppressor was employed in AWC’s first-generation Amphibian pistol, which was actually developed at Qual-A-Tec.

The production variant of the M89 suppressor features 14 cones with six flutes per cone, and a primary expansion chamber that extends back from the muzzle over the barrel for 6.6 inches (16.8 cm). A critical feature of the suppressor design is that the rear of the suppressor bears against a shoulder on the barrel well behind the threaded muzzle. Tightening the suppressor on the barrel stretches (i.e., places in tension) the last 6.6 inches of the barrel, which reduces barrel harmonics and improves accuracy. This was a key factor in obtaining the accuracy necessary for the military (Navy) customers, and is a well-established principle which has been used for decades in Dan Wesson handguns and Sound Technology rifles, among others.

The fluted cone design used in the M89 suppressor became the basis for several outstanding suppressors marketed by AWC Systems Technology since 1989. Knight’s Armament Model OHG suppressor for the H&K SOCOM Mark 23 pistol is the latest suppressor using the innovative fluted cone principal for baffle design.

While Doug Olson built the prototypes for the M89 suppressor at Qual-A-Tec, Rock McMillan actually fabricated the production run of M89 suppressors in 1989 under license from Mickey Finn. AWC Systems Technology was the manufacturer of record for the cans fabricated by Rock McMillan, since Gale McMillan did not hold the necessary license for building suppressors. When Doug Olson joined AWC Systems Technology in 1990, he manufactured several more M89 suppressors, and these few specimens made it into civilian hands. It is the second of these M89 suppressors made by Olson at AWC which is illustrated in the accompanying photographs.

The M89 suppressor is constructed entirely of 304 stainless steel. The tube and end caps are coated with black Teflon S. The can measures 1.65 inches (4.19 cm) in diameter and 17.24 inches (43.79 cm) in length. The suppressor extends back over the barrel about 6.6 inches (16.8 cm), so the barrel/suppressor assembly roughly corresponds to a 28 inch (71 cm) barrel in overall length. The suppressor weighs 58.5 ounces (1.66 kg). Cost and weight were irrelevant in the design process. Only maximum sound suppression, maximum accuracy at long range, and maximum durability motivated the design effort.

Performance of the M89 Suppressor

Sound signatures of the M89 were compared to three other contemporary suppressed .308 rifles. The Vaime MK2 is an integrally suppressed sniper rifle which was manufactured in the 1980s in Finland. Optimized for subsonic ammo, the Vaime system was used by the British Special Air Service and the U.S. Secret Service in limited numbers. The Remington BDL with Ciener suppressor represents the most economical conventional technology available in the late 1980s. The Thundertrap suppressor from AWC Systems Technology, which was mounted on a Remington PSS sniper rifle with 20 inch (44 cm) barrel, represents the state of the art in .30 caliber rifle suppressors in the mid-1990s. Table 1 lists their sound signatures with 147 grain M80 ball, 168 grain Federal 308M, and 185 grain Sako NATO subsonic ammunition. Net sound reductions are listed in Table 2.

Notice that the M89 data are reported in two different kinds of decibels: dB(C) and dB(A). These different readings represent different weighting selections on the precision impulse sound meter used to obtain these data. Since most sound meters are used to study sound in relation to occupational health and safety, the meters have several settings that filter out a portion of the frequency spectrum not relevant to some aspect of hearing loss in humans. Four different filtering schemes are commonly used to remove different frequencies at different sound pressures levels for different analytic purposes.

“A” weighting correlates best with hearing loss in humans, since it reduces the amount of irrelevant low-frequency sound that is recorded (up to 55 dB at 20 Hz). “C” weighting doesn’t cut out nearly as much low-frequency sound as “A” weighting. “B” weighting more or less splits the difference. And “D” weighting is only used for specialized measurement of aircraft noise and so is irrelevant to this discussion. Most sound meters provide three filter settings: “A” weighting, “C” weighting, and “linear”. The latter provides no frequency filtration at all. While “A” weighting is firmly established as the international standard for measuring gunshots, Dr. C. Richard Price at the U.S. Army Human Research and Engineering Directorate (formerly known as the Human Engineering Laboratory) at the Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland makes an interesting case for using the “linear” setting.

Price asserts that the unweighted “linear” setting most approximates a person’s subjective opinion as to the intensity of a gunshot, since that “linear” weighting measures more of the low-frequency sounds that slap the face and upper body of the shooter. “A” weighting was developed to most accurately predict the effect of sound on hearing loss, rather than to best model how a person actually responds to the sound.

The problem, which Price acknowledges, is that the sheer mass of data using “A” weighting now precludes changing the weighting standard for evaluating suppressors on the basis of perception rather than health risks. The issue is further muddied because of the increasing interest, at least in northern Europe, of promoting the use of suppressors as hearing protection devices, and that requires an “A” weighting.

Nevertheless, using “A” versus “linear” weighting generates suppressor data that vary by only 1 or 2 decibels, for the most part. Even using “A” versus “C” weighting provides fairly comparable data. A few designs (such as the Sterling Mark 5 submachine gun and recent muzzle cans of the slanted-sidewall type) may exhibit significantly different peak SPLs with different weightings, because these suppressors tend to be especially good at eliminating the lower frequencies. Those manufacturers whose suppressors tend to eliminate lower frequencies better than higher frequencies tend to use “C” weighting, since it makes their products appear better than using the internationally accepted “A” weighting.

The M89 suppressor reduced the rifle’s sound signature by 31 dB(A) using supersonic ammo. The M89’s signature of 137 dB was noticeably quieter than a Ruger 77/22 rifle using Federal Hi-Power high velocity long rifle ammo (141 dB) and was 1 dB(A) louder than a Colt Huntsman .22 pistol with a Military Armament Corporation suppressor. The dominant sounds when firing the M89 with supersonic ammunition were the ballistic crack (sonic boom) of the projectile, and the sound of the bullet striking the target.

Using Sako subsonic ammo, the M89 suppressor achieved a 34 dB(A) reduction. The sound signature of 123 dB(A) was just barely quieter than Jonathan Arthur Ciener’s integrally suppressed .22 rimfire Marlin 780 rifle (124 dB). That is certainly good performance.

The M89’s muzzle signature with subsonic ammo was similar to a pellet rifle. There was no ballistic crack, and the dominant sound by far was the bullet striking the target. When using Sako subsonic tracer, which ignited about 50 yards (46 meters) from the muzzle, the sizzle of the burning trace could be heard clearly.

While the .300 Winchester M89 system seems about 1 decibel louder to the ear than the .308 Winchester system, the decibel measurements are actually the same. The difference is perceived because the .300 holds its peak sound level longer than the .308.

To place these numbers in better perspective, one U.S. Army MENS (Mission Essential Needs Statement) in the early 1990s only required that a rifle suppressor produce a 20 decibel reduction with supersonic ammunition.

So why carry the extra weight? Both Navy and Army snipers have come to the conclusion that modest suppression in a smaller lighter package may be the ideal. Suppressors like AWC’s Spectrum 90 and the Gemtech Specop 3, which are about half the length and weight of the M89, clearly became the wave of the future. The Spectrum 90 quickly became the standard suppressor sold on McMillan sniper rifles. Measuring 8.25 inches (20.9 cm) long and 1.6 inches (4.1 cm) in diameter, the Spectrum 90 weighs 1.6 pounds (0.7 kg). The suppressor is fabricated entirely from 304 stainless steel and is finished in a matte black chrome sulfide. While this design is clearly much smaller than the M89 suppressor, AWC subsequently delivered an even smaller .30 caliber can to the U.S. military. The flow of history also impacted the production of McMillan rifles.

Gale McMillan no longer builds rifles; he passed the torch on to his sons in 1992. Rock and Susan McMillan continue the family tradition building rifles McMillan Bros. Rifle Company, Inc. while Kelly McMillan runs McMillan Fiberglass Stocks, Inc., which he co-owns with his father (McBros, P.O. Box 86549, Phoenix, AZ 85080; phone 602-780-2115, fax 602-581-3825). Gale McMillan devotes his energies to the McMillan Optical Gunsight Company, which is producing a combination day scope and night vision device called the VISIONMASTER, which allows an operator to switch between day and night objectives without changing the zero of the weapon (28638 N. 42nd Street, Cave Creek, AZ 85331; phone 602-585-7868, fax 602-585-7872. McMillan barrels, which had been made by Pat McMillan since 1970, are now made by Bill Wiseman and are marketed as Wiseman/McMillan barrels (Bill Wiseman and Company, P.O. Box 3427, Bryan, TX 77805; phone 409-690-3456, fax 409-690-0156). AWC Systems Technology (P.O. Box 41938, Phoenix, AZ 550-1838; phone 602-780-1050, fax 602-780-2967, catalog $5) replaced the Spectrum 90 in the mid-1990s with the Thundertrap suppressor. Measuring 8.5 inches (21.5 cm) long and 1.6 inches (4.0 cm) in diameter, the Thundertrap weighs 1.8 pounds (0.8 kg). The suppressor is fabricated entirely from 304 stainless steel and is finished the Black-T finish supplied by W.E. Birdsong & Associates (1435 Monterey Road, Florence, MS 39073-9748; phone 601-939-7448). The Thundertrap delivers a net sound reduction of 26 dB (see Table 2). While this is 4 decibels louder than the M89 suppressor, the Thundertrap sounds better than the numbers suggest, because the suppressor generates a substantial frequency shift in the muzzle signature. With a suppressed muzzle signature of 138 db (see Table 1), the Thundertrap produces an SPL that is comfortably below the pain threshold of 141 dB, and well below the ballistic crack (sonic boom) of a .308M projectile, which runs about 150 dB at 1 meter from the bullet flight path.

While quieter suppressors similar in size to the M89 (such as the outstanding Dark Star from Sound Technology and the highly successful MK23 suppressor from S.C.R.C.) remain quite popular for law-enforcement applications—where the sharpshooter deploys close to the target area and stalks are short—the trend for military operations is to favor suppressors of smaller size and weight. Maximum portability for long stalks and extended field operations makes size and weight more important design criteria than maximum sound reduction for most military operational requirements.

The philosophy regarding rifle design is evolving, too. The trend toward modularity in sniper rifle construction has become the dominant design philosophy in the development of a new generation of sniper rifles. One of the best examples of this new trend in sniper rifles is the Accuracy International AW CFI rifle. Combined with Thundertrap suppressor from AWC Systems Technology, the AW CFI system represents an impressive state of the art and what became perhaps the first really serious contender to the McMillan M89 rifle with M89 or AWC Spectrum 90 suppressor. That said, the McMillan M89 rifle with M89 suppressor remains the standard against which I measure the performance of all suppressed sniper rifles, since this system provides astonishing accuracy, superb sound reduction, remarkable barrel life, and a system weight that is 1.4 pounds (0.6 kg) less than an AW CFI rifle with an AWC Thundertrap suppressor. The McMillan M89 suppressed rifle continues to be an impressive system a decade after its introduction, and it remains in service with the U.S. Navy for special applications.

This writer recently visited The Beta Company to see, first hand, what goes into making one of the most interesting firearms accessories for the modern battle rifle. Currently available only to military and law enforcement agencies, the C-MAG is gaining world wide recognition as a reliable alternative to belt fed machine guns and traditional magazines. Class III enthusiasts who are fortunate enough to find (or afford) a pre-ban C-MAG should consider themselves lucky…

The C-MAG is manufactured by the Beta Company in Atlanta, Georgia. With the C-MAG, military forces, law enforcement tactical units, and NFA/Class III enthusiasts, are equipped with a magazine capable of delivering 100 rounds of 5.56mm ammunition. The design incorporates twin drums made of lightweight, impact resistant, thermoplastic materials. Live rounds are aligned internally in double rows along the outside walls of the twin drums. To assist feeding reliability, several “spacer” rounds follow the last live round inside each drum. A major difference between the C-MAG and traditional drum magazines is the use of a non-compressed, low-torsion spring. This allows unlimited pre-loaded storage of ammunition, without the risk of wearing out the internal spring. This excellent feature permits the magazine to be prepositioned and stored in arsenals, depots, or support vehicles for rapid deployment. The unloaded magazine weight is 2.2 lbs. The weight, loaded with 100 rounds of M193 ammo, is around 5 lbs. The feed clip (center stack) is interchangeable for different weapon systems or for replacement if damaged. Feed clips are available for the Colt M16 series, Diemaco C7/C8, Royal Ordnance SA80, Beretta AR70/90, Steyr AUG, FNC, FN Minimi/M249 SAW, and the new HK G36. Due to limited demand, only prototype feed clips are available for the Giat FAMAS, SIG SG-50, H&K33, and Galil at this time. A complete “C-MAG system” consists of the dual drum magazine, a choice of loaders, and a carrying pouch.

Company History/Early Development Issues

The Beta company came into existence in 1983, and has always been based in Atlanta, Georgia. Jim Sullivan is the original inventor of the C-MAG. His name is usually associated with Eugene Stoner, as they worked together on the development of the Armalite rifles. Mr. Sullivan worked with the Beta company as a consultant in the early development stages of the C-MAG. Dan Shea’s excellent “Stoner Chronicles” in MGN covered much of the early years of firearms development by Stoner and Sullivan.

Many companies have tried to develop and produce a reliable drum magazine for the M-16 series of rifles. Metal magazines were too heavy for practical usage. With the advances in plastics materials technology, and with the ability to keep tight tolerances, the C-MAG finally developed into truly reliable mechanism. It had to be made to fit both early and late model M-16s. The center feed clip angles, materials, and tolerances had to be just right to allow proper functioning. Beta engineers determined early on that guns originally designed for plastic magazines were much easier to make reliable feeding devices for. Many gyrations of design and testing were required before a product suitable for military usage was finally perfected. Many variations and options have been investigated. These include clear back covers, last-shot hold open, and others. All these investigations have concluded that the current offering provides the best overall reliability under adverse conditions. Constant feedback from the military units who use the C-MAG keeps Beta informed as to any problems encountered in the field.

Testing Specifications

Although not indestructible, all Beta C-MAG’s are built to international military production standards, and meet or exceed all NATO Mil-Spec tests. Field testing has included continued exposure to temperatures ranging from -40F to +160F. The magazine has proven to function perfectly with ice forming on the exterior, or after submersion in mud and sand. The mags are also resistant to salt water, fuels and a number of chemicals. The C-MAG is in use by all of the U.S. military services, and in many foreign countries. It has seen combat during Desert Storm by 82nd Airborne and Special Forces personnel. The magazine performed well in the desert environment as long as proper gun handling procedures were observed (bolts and dust covers kept closed). Beta is so confident with their product that they do not recommend any spare parts be carried, with the exception of a dust cover (because they are easily lost) and a few spacer rounds (because military units frequently disassemble the magazine and occasionally lose these too). Law enforcement users would normally not require that any spare parts be stocked.

Personal Performance Testing

Reliability of the C-MAG was 100% when good quality ammunition was used in our tests. Our test guns included a full auto Bushmaster/Sendra M-4 carbine, and a Bushmaster V Match AR-15 semi auto. The V Match was set up for varmint hunting, and was topped off with a Tasco Super Sniper SS20X42 scope. The M-4 utilized standard iron sights during our tests. With the assistance of two members of the local Sheriff’s Office Tactical Team members, we ran approximately 500 rounds through the M-4 on full-auto, using the C-MAG with 100% reliability with M193 ammunition. We also fired 100 rounds of reloaded soft point 55gr ammo with no malfunctions. Several hundred rounds of match grade hollow points were also fired with no malfunctions.

Both guns were fired in the prone position, sitting, kneeling, standing, from the hip, and from a bench. The V Match rifle was initially set up for varmint hunting, and with the C-MAG, was turned into the ultimate prairie dog elimination tool. The low profile of the magazine is definitely a plus. It makes the rifle easier to manipulate than the standard, 30- round, box magazines. The overall height of the C-MAG is shorter than a standard 20 round magazine for the M-16 rifle. The only complaint I had was the fact that it is not designed to hold the bolt open after the last shot like a conventional mag, but with 100 rounds of available firepower, I can’t really complain. Some very minor chipping of material was noted on the front of the feed clip due to the speed loading process. The front point of the projectile was responsible for scraping away some of the plastic during loading, although this caused no functioning problems.

When loaded to full capacity for extended periods, the use of a sling system that permits waist level carry is recommended. The extra weight of the total package is enough to warrant a sling system such as this. If required for military purposes, it appeared that a single individual could carry two fully loaded magazines (plus one in the rifle) for a total of 300 rounds. This is probably overkill for most law enforcement scenarios, but the cops involved in last year’s infamous LA bank robbery/shootout might think otherwise. Although two well- placed shots would have stopped that unfortunate chain of events, it appears that certain situations might call for extreme firepower.

The balance of the firearm was not a problem experienced during our firing exercises. The M-4 with a loaded C-MAG balances perfectly when handling the gun with the upper receiver carry handle. If the drum is used on an Aug or similar bullpup type of firearm, the rearward weight might bother some. On the M-4 carbine, the C-MAG was definitely a showstopper on the firing line. All who shot it were impressed. Those with heavy trigger fingers should monitor excessive barrel heat build-up, and adjust fire rates accordingly. Non-Colt or Bushmaster rifles that utilize stainless steel barrels might be at greater meltdown risks, due to a lack of chrome lining in barrel bores. I would go with mil-spec 4140 or 4150 chrome moly barrels for extended use. Barrel fluting for better heat dissipation might be of benefit in these cases. The overall consensus was that the C-MAG was the perfect accessory for the M-4 carbine.

Loading Options

The conventional speed loader system on stripper-clipped ammo for 20 and 30 round standard M-16 magazines will not work with the C-MAG. I tried to use this method and could only get about 3 rounds into the mag. The plastic follower device is just too flimsy to work.

10 Round Speed Loader: The speed loader uses 5.56 ammo that is already loaded on 10 round stripper clips. The speed loader consists of a very sturdy housing which fits over the feed clip of the drum. It uses a plunger to push the rounds off the stripper clips and into the drum. A magnet is attached to the plunger which removes the empty stripper clip from the drum after ammo is loaded. Using this tool is the fastest way to load up the drum. In the hands of an experienced loader, the magazine can be loaded in about 25 seconds using this method.

5 Round Personal Loader: The personal loader uses 5.56 ammo that is loose. This loader consists of a very sturdy housing assembly which fits over the feed clip just like the speed loader. A plunger is used to push 5 loose rounds into the mag. The rounds are loaded into the side opening of the housing while the plunger is pulled up and out of the way.

Hand Loader: You know what this one is. It produces what some call the “Beta thumb”. One round at a time can be pushed into the mag by hand. This is obviously the slowest method unless you really get good at it. Thick callouses on finger and thumb surfaces are very helpful. Feed pressure remains virtually the same throughout the loading process. However, the first 15 rounds are slightly harder to load due to the curvature/bend at the bottom of the magazine.

Maintenance

The C-MAG is a very rugged device which, for most users, will never need any maintenance at all, or only on very rare occasions. During our performance tests, the only thing we needed to do was to wipe gun oil off the outside of the feed clip with a rag after a shooting session. For the users convenience, a technical manual is included which covers cleaning, disassembly, troubleshooting, maintenance, disassembly, operation, inspection, and parts breakdown. The following summarizes some of the technical manuals information related to operation of the C-MAG:

Cleaning: Recommended procedures for cleaning the C-MAG are as follows when these various conditions are encountered:

Harsh sand, dirt, etc.: Remove with cloth or compressed air. Heavier deposits may require water flushing.

Fine sand, silt, mud, etc.: Soak in water with detergent (optional) to saturate and dissolve deposits. Wipe and shake as necessary to aid in removal. Flush with clean water.

Oils, grease, solvents, fuels (gas/diesel): Remove as much as possible by wiping, then soak or flush with solvent. Use acetone or alcohol. Do not use oily fuels such as diesel, mineral spirits, or kerosene. Wash with detergent and water. Rinse with water to remove solvent and detergent residue.

Corroded ammunition and/or corrosion deposits from corroded ammunition: Remove live ammunition from magazine as per technical manual, and clean the same as oil and grease contamination.

Salt deposits from sea water: Light deposits may be removed by soaking in clean water to dissolve the salt residue. Assemblies with heavier deposits should be returned to the manufacturer for repair.

Lubrication: The C-MAG uses only dry lubricant (graphite) on the inner walls of the drum, covers, and center holes of drive gears. Never use any grease, oil, or other fluid-based lubricants.

Inspection: The feed clip (center stack) should be periodically inspected for cracks and chips. Cracks can occur at upper corners, but may not cause immediate failures. Feed clips which are found to have cracks should be replaced. Excessive chipping (missing material) resulting from loading ammunition should result in feed clip replacement.

Troubleshooting

Loading stops after about 40 rounds; loading is unusually difficult; feed is erratic: These symptoms are all characteristics of a dirty magazine. Disassemble and clean as directed. If not dirty, inspect component parts for damage. May also be symptomatic of dirty or corroded ammunition.

Double feeds in weapon; two rounds, or one round and a casing in upper receiver: Feed clip may be cracked on one side allowing rounds to eject spontaneously.

Live rounds mixed with spacer rounds in feed clip below last round link assembly: One drum hesitated feeding. Drum assembly should be cleaned and inspected.

Magazine will not stay in weapon receiver: The magazine may not be fully seated. The magazine latch in feed clip could be damaged – replace feed clip.

Weapon fires several rounds then jams; magazine feeds ok by hand when out of the weapon: Check for secure attachment between the feed clip and drum assembly. Tighten screws if necessary.

Magazine rattles when empty or full: This is normal. The rattle disappears when mag contains less than about 20 rounds.

Adaptation for Firing Blank Rounds

The C-MAG can be used with blank rounds, although the feed clip and related components must be exchanged with an adapter kit. Usually only sold to military units, the kit can be installed by the operator, or it can be returned to Beta for a no-cost conversion. The kit is designed for use with M200 blank rounds. This would be the way to go for certain tactical training and/or theatrical events.

Price

The Beta Company’s policy has always been to sell only to law enforcement, or to military users. Some units which were manufactured prior to the high-capacity magazine ban have made their way into the civilian market through various dealers. At the time of this writing, pre-ban C-MAG’s were selling for about $650-$750. They are very rare though. A complete C-MAG system (magazine/loader/pouch/dry lube) runs about $210 for government/law enforcement purchase orders. Spare parts are available and are relatively inexpensive. Studies have been conducted which compared the cost of a C-MAG with the standard 30 round magazines used for military duty. Figuring a non-disposable service life of 600 cycles for the C-MAG (60,000 rounds), and the equivalent number of 30 round magazines with a service life of 40 cycles reveals a cost savings of about $150 over the life cycle of one C-MAG.

Conclusions/Future Plans

How about a 9mm C-MAG? You 9mm MP-5 and M-16 shooters will go bonkers over this one. Plans are that they will have one available for law enforcement and military by the end of 1998. Two designs are currently in the testing phase. The MP-5 version will be the first one delivered. This will be followed by the M-16 9mm version. Users who have converted the M-16 5.56 to the 9mm kits available will definitely find this one interesting. There is some 7.62 prototype development work underway, but this will occur in the distant future depending upon demand.

To summarize, law enforcement tactical teams can add this unique accessory to their M-16 rifles. The 9mm version will soon be available for MP-5 users. With the world wide battle rifle trend going to the 5.56mm, the C-MAG designs bring a rugged and reliable option when traveling in harms way. It is the standard by which all magazine feeding devices will be judged by for years to come. As soon as the 9mm version is available, plans are in place for SAR to test one out.

Specifications:

Ammunition:NATO standard 5.56, .223 cal
Capacity: Variable, 1 to 100 rounds
Feed Rate:Can exceed 1300 rds/min
Weight:2.2 lbs. empty – 4.6 lbs. loaded
Storage:Indefinite, loaded
Materials:Impact resistant thermoplastic materials for the main components Corrosion resistant ferrous/non-ferrous materials for minor components

Source:

The Beta Company
2137B Flintstone Drive
Tucker, Georgia 30084
1-800-669-BETA

Chief Gunners Mate, U.S.Navy (Ret.) Barry W. Enoch on: The Stoner 63 in Combat

Many of us know about the Stoner 63 or the Stoner System as it is commonly referred to. Very few of us, however, have actually used this superb weapon in a combat situation. One who certainly has is Chief Gunners Mate, U.S. Navy (Ret.) Barry W. Enoch. If that name sounds familiar, as I am sure it will to many readers, it is for good reason.

Barry Enoch is a founding member of SEAL Team One and used the Stoner 63A extensively during his three tours in Vietnam. He was highly decorated for his actions during this controversial war. He was the recipient of the Navy Cross, two Silver Stars, and two Bronze Stars among other awards and decorations.

It was my good fortune to come into contact with Mr. Enoch while attending the Soldier of Fortune convention in Las Vegas, in October of 1997. He was set up with Jay Tee’s of Marshall, Illinois and had an impressive representation of Stoner 63 rifles to catch the attention of the crowd. He was there promoting his book TEAMMATES: SEALs AT WAR, where he was signing autographs for those lucky enough to be in attendance.

In his book, he gives credit to Mr. Eugene Stoner for the 63A light machine gun, type-classed as the M23 Model 0 (LMG) by the United States Navy. It became the SEAL weapon of choice in Vietnam. In Vietnam, the SEALs operated in conditions that were unfavorable at best. The environment they spent so much time in produced mud, sand, saltwater and the unforgiving rains which were equally hard on the SEALs and their equipment. Just like the men themselves, the Stoner LMG stood up to it all.

A primary requirement for any SEAL unit was to have maximum firepower available to them in combat. The Stoner 63 seemed to fit the bill with a cyclic rate of between 700 and 1000 rounds per minute. The 5.56mm (.223) ammunition was available in 150 round belts that used a disintegrating metallic link. Depending upon the type of magazine used, the weapon weighed between 14 and 16 pounds. The light weight of the 5.56mm belts allowed the SEAL gunner to operate in the field with 600 to 800 rounds of ammunition. Many times a SEAL fire team engaged a superior enemy force and sent them packing due to the heavy rate of fire produced by the MK23 Stoner.

In the words of Mr. Enoch; “All of the SEALs that carried the MK23 into combat realize just how much we owe to Mr. Stoner.”

A former associate of Gene Stoner told me that he had two uncommon qualities which were seldom possessed by the same individual. He said Mr. Stoner was both a genius and a gentleman. In the very limited time I spent with Mr. Stoner, it was immediately evident that he was indeed a true gentleman. When I first met him, I was intimidated, just by being in his presence. It did not take long, however, for he and his wife, Barbara, to quickly put me at ease. His Stoner 63 system, considered by me to be his ultimate design, shows that the term genius is not a misnomer.

I find the most intriguing design detail of the Stoner 63 system to be that the rifle and carbine configurations fire from the closed -bolt position, while the automatic rifle, light machine gun, medium machine gun, and fixed machine gun configurations fire from the open-bolt position. How is this accomplished without unnecessary complexity?

Gene Stoner managed to perform this feat using two interacting parts, the firing pin and a special collar contained within the bolt carrier. (Fig. 1) The bolt carrier of the Stoner 63 holds this collar (painted white for identification). It is fixed by means of a snap ring to the front, and a stack of Belleville spring washers to the rear. This stack of spring washers is also the buffer assembly. (Fig. 2) This special collar has a D shaped hole in the collar. At the rear of this flat are two steps, one slightly forward of the other. The firing pin base also has a corresponding flat which engages in the bolt carrier cap. This base can be rotated to either of two spring-fixed positions. (Fig. 5 & 6)

In the closed bolt position the bolt carrier cap is rotated so the timer trip is pointing away from the operating rod. (Fig. 7) This orients the firing pin in relation to the “D” collar so the forward step of the flat is aligned parallel to the flat side of the “D”. (Fig. 8) This allows the firing pin to float and ignite the cartridge primer when the firing pin is struck by the hammer.

To switch to the open bolt firing mode, the magazine catch, timer, and hammer are removed from the trigger housing assembly. (Fig. 9) Then, the bolt carrier cap is simply rotated 180 degrees so the timer trip is pointed toward the operating rod. (Fig. 10) This positions the face of the rear firing pin step in front of the flat side of the “D” shaped hole in the collar. (Fig. 11) The firing pin is now held fixed in this forward position. When the bolt locks into the barrel extensions, the fixed firing pin protrudes through the face of the bolt and strikes the primer of the cartridge.

Gene Stoner’s design then gives us a fixed or floating firing pin with the turn of a switch. (Fig. 12) Adding or deleting three parts in the trigger housing assembly completes the transition from closed -bolt or open- bolt firing. Remember, this design was conceived and executed in 1962, before the advent of modern computers and CAD/CAM programs. It merely required genius.

Fig. 12 Top: Stoner 63 operating rod/bolt assembly. Bolt carrier cap is positioned for closed bolt operation.. Note protrusion of firing pin base from rear of bolt carrier cap.Bottom: Stoner 63 operating rod/bolt assembly. Bolt carrier cap is positioned for open bolt operation. Note lack of firing pin base protrusion from rear of bolt carrier cap.

Saving money is usually one of the primary reasons for reloading, although some shooters will argue accuracy is their motive. I doubt however, if tack driving accuracy is the motive of many machine gunners. Many shooters have relied on inexpensive military surplus ammo to fulfill their needs. In recent times of ever restrictive importing laws, along with many sources of ammunition drying up, reloading may be that groups future option.

Shooters of military style firearms have an distinct economic advantage over most other shooters because there are a lot of military surplus components available at bargain prices. Once fired brass, surplus or pulled projectiles, and of course the subject of this article, surplus military gun powders.

Many of the surplus powders available are the ball type. There are a few powders that will cover a wide application of uses. Generally there is reloading data available or existing data for a similar commercial powder can be used. Virtually all military powders currently on the market have a commercial equivalent.

There are probably more powders and applications than contained herein. I am simply sharing with you my personal experiences with the powders and cartridges. I always have had very good results using surplus powders.

There are several sources for surplus powders. These suppliers can usually be found in the classified ad section of any firearms publication such as: Small Arms Review, Shot Gun News, or the Gun List. The suppliers listed in any of those periodicals usually sell their goods at wholesale prices. The catch is if you plan on purchasing a pound or two it isn’t quite the bargain it may appear to be. The reason is the UPS haz-mat charge of $10.00 per shipment, plus the normal ground shipping charge will make a couple of pounds of gunpowder very expensive. Incidentally, there is no haz-mat charge on; these primed brass, loaded cartridges or projectiles. An FFL is no longer required to purchase reloading components through mail order.

In order to purchase cheaply you will need to order a large amount of powder at one time. If you just don’t need very much, get a few of your shooting friends to order along with you. You can ship four eight pound canisters of gun powder for one $10.00 haz-mat charge! The same applies to primers. The haz-mat charge is $10.00 whether you buy 100 or 5000. So to get more bang for your buck (no pun intended) you will need order in large quantity. As a bonus, large orders usually result in even lower prices.

Note: Primers and gun powder cannot be shipped together.

A few years ago I found a great deal on a pistol powder that I regularly use. I told a few friends about the deal, before long the order grew so large that we all enjoyed an even greater discount because of the huge quantity we eventually ordered. I haven’t purchased any pistol powder for four years (and I use a substantial amount of pistol powder). Its real nice not to always be running out of something when reloading. Especially powder, as inexpensive surplus powder is usually not available locally in most areas. Usually it is only available by mail order.

Now that your hopefully convinced on the economics of surplus powders here is a list of what is available and some applications. NOTE: Commercial equivalents are listed only as a possible source of reloading data.

SAFETY FIRST! NOTE: ALWAYS consult a reliable loading data manual for proven, tested loads and complete safety instructions. Never exceed recommended loads. Be aware that reloading manuals often suggest a slightly lower charge when using military surplus brass. Various lot numbers of military powders may vary slightly from lot to lot in burning rate.

WC231; (bulk) A pistol powder that is also a commercial powder manufactured by Winchester. This is the only pistol powder I use, although WC 820 has some magnum pistol applications. WC231 is a flake type powder that burns very clean, and measures well in progressive presses such as the Dillon or Lee line. The cartridges I load with 231 and have had good results include; .45 ACP, 9mm, 38 Special, .38 S&W, 7.62X25, .380, .44 Special and 9X18 Makarov.

WC820; This powder was one of original propellants used by the U.S. government for loading the M1/M2 U.S. Carbine rounds. I personally have found it to be the best powder available for reliable operation in a full auto M2 carbine. In addition to loading the .30 carbine cartridge, it can be successfully used in .44 Magnum and .357 Magnum loads. Because WC820 is rather slow burning for a pistol powder magnum primers are suggested in both the .44 and 357 applications. WC820 is similar to equivalent Commercial H110 powder. H-110 and WC820 are very fine grain ball powders.

The manuals that accompany Dillon presses suggest not using H110 powder. H110 is very fine and can jam the powder bar. However, I have used WC820 in Dillon presses with no problems.

WC 846; This powder was specified by the government to charge the 7.62 NATO round (.308 Winchester) as fired in the M14 service rifle and M60 General Purpose Machine Gun. WC 846 is, of course, great for reloading the 7.62 NATO rounds. In addition it can also be used in 30’06 and .223 rounds. There are a great number of possible uses for this powder in other military and commercial cartridges. WC 846 is equivalent to commercial BLC2 powder.

WC 844; This powder is one of the powders used for loading the M16 NATO round the 5.56mm, (.223 Remington). This powder, of course, works excellent for reloading for the 5.56 round. It too has many other possibilities for other cartridge loadings including 7.62 NATO. WC 844 is equivalent to commercial H-335 powder.

WC680; (bulk) This powder is used primarily for the loading of the Russian M43 cartridge commonly referred to as the 7.62×39. The government reportably used it during the Vietnam War, when government ammunition suppliers were manufacturing 7.62×39 for use in captured enemy weapons. The brass they manufactured was boxer primed as well!

For those who don’t remember, boxer primed 7.62×39 wasn’t available for years for general consumption. As a matter of fact prior to the early 1980’s 7.62×39 was rather scarce (read expensive) in this country until surplus Chinese rounds began being imported in large quantity. Today 7.62×39 is a common cartridge in the U.S.. Boxer primed reloadable brass is available from several manufacturers. There have even been several commercial U.S. gun manufacturers offering their popular models chambered for the Russian round.

WC680 can also be loaded in the U.S. .30 carbine round, but I personally have had better results with WC820 in the .30 carbine.

WC852; One of the original powders loaded in the military 30’06 round. Caution must be used when using this powder because there are up to 8 lots currently available that all have different burning rates!

To attain a military spec velocity of 2750 FPS with a 147 grain FMJ projectile, the powder charge can vary from 47 grains to 63 grains, depending on the burning rate of any particular lot! Be certain to check with the dealer that you purchase from their recommendations on the lot they are selling you.

WC870 Original .50 caliber military powder. Commercial equivalent, H-870. Can be used in sporting magnum rifle loads.

Army manual TM 43-0001-27 is a small arms ammunition guide and the powders and charges the military uses are listed in it. It would be prudent to lower any powder charge listed in the manual, as they may be too hot for reloads.

Thanks to Steve Martin of Reloaders Outlet, Penn Hills, PA