On April 29 through May 1, 2011, the National Rifle Association (NRA) held its 140th Annual Meetings and Exhibits in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The official attendance of 71,139 is the second largest NRA Annual Meetings and Exhibits on record for the longest running shooting and hunting show in the world. With a record braking 559 exhibitors, the exhibit hall was packed with NRA members the entire weekend, many of whom traveled from all over the country to attend the event. Additionally, most seminars and workshops were standing room only.

In addition to the industry display booths, and in conjunction with the show in their own exhibit area, are displays of rare, historic and interesting collector firearms sponsored by NRA affiliated clubs. This year, there were 26 gun collector affiliates that participated with displays in this 51st year of awards competition. These gun collector groups take great pride in their displays in not only presenting weapons of rarity and historical note, but in the professional looking displays as well. While the NRA primarily focuses on shooting and hunting, they are well aware of the value of collecting and displaying significant weapons to the public to educate them on the history and the roll collecting plays within the gun culture. The competition between the affiliated clubs and their displays is intense.

In recognition of this, the NRA awards medals and certificates in a number of different categories. These include:

• Best Arms Awards – Each year a maximum of ten sterling silver numbered medallions are awarded to those collector arms judged best on display (and not necessarily will ten be awarded). Firearms are judged on their individual quality, condition, originality, collector importance and historical value.
• Certificates of Recognition – In 1981, the NRA Gun Collectors Committee authorized an award for unique displays of items related to firearms. Up to ten certificates are normally awarded in any one calendar year. An item which has received a Certificate of Recognition is not eligible for this award in subsequent years.
• Best Educational Display Awards – In 1962, the Gun Collectors Committee authorized the Best Educational Group Awards to recognize outstanding displays that creatively and effectively present a well-organized theme. The committee has divided the Best Educational Display Awards into four categories: Antique Arms (pre-1898), Classic Arms (1898, 50 years prior to the show), Contemporary Arms (50 years prior to the show to current) and Combined Arms (collections that represent a mixture of more than one category.) Emphasis is placed on recognition of those exhibits that best inform the NRA members and general public of the historical, technical and cultural aspects of firearms and related items.
• The National Firearms Museum’s Spirit of Collecting Award.
• The Best Miniature Arms Awards – Each year, since 1987, sterling silver numbered medallions have been awarded to those miniature arms judged best on display. In 1998, the Collectors Committee decided to heighten competition for this award by presenting only three medals each year.
• The NRA Gun Collectors Committee Trophy – This sterling silver bowl is a perpetual trophy awarded for the display judged best of each year’s Annual Meeting and Exhibits. The winning organization’s name is engraved on the trophy and the organization receives a miniature of the trophy to retain. This is the top honor and the award all strive for.

World renowned Thompson submachine gun collector and author Tracie Hill is the force behind bringing the validity and legitimacy of collecting and displaying historic machine guns to the forefront of the NRA community. For so many years, machine guns were taboo at the NRA show and considered “evil” within the NRA hierarchy and by many even within the general NRA membership. His efforts have truly enlightened all that collecting historic classic machine guns is just as legitimate as collecting any other historical firearm and he has done it in a most profound and professional way.

He broke the ice within the NRA and the NRA Collectors Committee with exhibits of the iconic Thompson submachine gun winning awards from the judges, and the public, and winning the coveted NRA Gun Collectors Committee Trophy and a number of Best Arms awards beginning in 1998. Under the sponsorships of several NRA affiliated organizations over the years that include the Thompson Collectors Association, the Dallas Arms Collectors and The American Thompson Association, he has been responsible for winning the coveted NRA Gun Collectors Committee Trophy six times.

With the success of having displayed, and winning multiple awards, for Thompson exhibits, it was decided to become ambassadors of the Class III world and bring to display some of the other wonderful and historic collections that exist. The first foray into other machine gun exhibits was in 2006 when the Thompson Collectors Association and the Dallas Arms Collectors sponsored a Maxim machine gun exhibit at the NRA show in Milwaukee that won the NRA Gun Collectors Trophy and a sterling silver Best Arm medallion for a Colt Model of 1904 Maxim. (See Small Arms Review, Vol. 9, No. 12, September 2006.)

In 2011 in Pittsburgh, under the sponsorship of The American Thompson Association, they presented an exhibit entitled The Machine Gun Designs of John Browning. The 30×10 feet exhibit featured a Colt Automatic Gun Model 1914 on a Marine Light Landing Carriage, a New England Westinghouse Model of 1917 water-cooled machine gun on a Model of 1917 tripod mounted on an M1 machine gun cart, a Winchester Browning Automatic Rifle (BAR) Model of 1918, a Colt Browning M2 .50 caliber water-cooled mounted on an M3 anti-aircraft mount, a Buffalo Arms .30 caliber ANM2, an Inland Arms M1919A6, a GM/Frigidaire .50 caliber M2 HB on a M3 tripod and a twice-size cut-a-way of a .30 caliber Browning. Accompanying the display of the firearms were lighted display cases that contained tools, manuals, accoutrements, medals, awards and ephemera relating to the guns with explanatory signage for everything present. Additionally, a professionally printed 8-page handout describing all the weapons on display was freely distributed to all show attendees that expressed an interest. The response by those attending the show was overwhelmingly positive with many thanking us for bringing such a collection and making it available for close-up viewing.

These displays are not slapped together at the last minute. A full year of planning is required to establish what and how the display will be presented: what guns, accessories, accoutrements, historical information, signage, handouts, glass cases, lighting, overall theme, etc., all has to be thought through and decided upon well before the start of the show. This collection of Browning machine guns came from the Robert Segel collection with additional pieces from David Albert and Phil Askew. Helping set up the display and staffing it during the show answering questions and highlighting the historical aspects were David Albert, Richard Vensel, Jackie Vensel, Tom Davis, Phil Askew, Bill Yenglin, Robert Segel, Jennifer Segel, Tom Rasch, Tracie Hill and Thomas Hill. The human element and the truly enthusiastic volunteers set a high standard for that very much helped guarantee a successful presentation to the public.

The exhibit of The Machine Gun Designs of John Browning won the top honor of the NRA Gun Collectors Trophy and a sterling silver medallion for one of the Best Arms at the show for the New England Westinghouse Model of 1917 water-cooled machine gun, serial number 6, on a Model of 1917 tripod. The medallion is numbered and registered to the gun and stays forever with the gun should it ever be sold.

It should be noted that as sponsor of the exhibit, this is the third time The American Thompson Association has won the NRA Gun Collectors Trophy. But even more importantly, with the displays of Thompsons, Maxims and Browning machine guns over the last 13 years, machine gun collecting has been recognized and accepted within the main stream gun collecting fraternity as the historic, relevant and legitimate endeavor that it is with the stigma of being “evil” finally disappearing.

Miniature 1/3 Scale MG 34

Another machine gun also won an award at the 140th NRA Meetings and Exhibits in Pittsburgh. The Miniature Arms Society, a recognized NRA collector affiliated organization, had a display showing many fine examples of the art and craft of miniature arms makers. These are not toys but a testament to the skill of making actual working miniatures that fully represent their full-size brethren except in a diminutive size. The judges award just three sterling silver medallions each year to those miniatures that represent the height of the art. Robert Segel, a Miniature Arms Society member, submitted a fully functional 1/3 scale German MG 34 light machine gun on fully functional Lafette, one of only six made by MiniArt in Moscow, Russia in 2006, and won one of the Best Miniature Arms sterling silver medallions. The medallions are numbered and registered to that gun and if the gun is ever sold, the medallion must go with it.

Miniature Arms Society (MAS) president Wayne Driskill (left) and MAS member Robert Segel display the 1/3 scale MG 34 that was submitted for judging.

The fully functional MG 34 in 1/3 scale, one of only six made by MiniArt in Moscow, Russia in 2006 on fully functional Lafette is displayed with the numbered and registered NRA sterling silver medallion for Best Miniature Firearm. It is one of three awarded to miniature arms.

Tracie Hill, Robert Segel, Jennifer Segel and The American Thompson Association president Tom Davis accept the NRA Gun Collectors Trophy and silver bowl during the NRA Gun Collectors Committee awards presentation ceremonies. (Lloyd Hill)

Back at the display after the awards presentations, (left to right) Tracie Hill, Phil Askew, Tom Davis, Jennifer Segel, Robert Segel and David Albert proudly display the NRA Gun Collectors Trophy, silver bowl, and silver Best Arm medallion.

Robert Segel accepts a numbered and registered sterling silver medallion for one of the ten BEST ARMS on display during the awards ceremony for the New England Westinghouse Model of 1917 Browning water-cooled machine gun.

During the Second World War, over 30 million 250-round fabric belts were procured for the U.S. Army to feed their different .30 cal. Browning machine guns used by the infantry.

The objective of this series of three articles is to describe the evolution and the many variants observed as a function of manufacturer, starter tang design, fabrics weave and color. Part 1 will be dedicated to design development and the different manufacturers; Part 2 will be dedicated to the numerous production variants and Part 3 will be dedicated to the various packings.

A first attempt to address this vast subject was provided by the author’s contribution in Dolf Goldsmith’s book The Browning Machine Gun – Volume III – Supporting the Rifle Caliber Brownings. Since that publication, much new information based on further surviving specimens and a key official U.S. report dated October 1945 shed further light on this subject. This latter report issued by the Chief of Ordnance/Industrial Service Office/Small Arms Division and entitled Machine Guns – Development and production of metallic belt link and fabric ammunition belt contains a wealth of extremely detailed data on production figures and historical background on development process. When applicable, some parts are literally excerpted from this report in the following article.

After the First World War, much of the development work on fabric machine gun belts was done by Russell Manufacturing Co. of Middletown, CT in cooperation with the Springfield Armory. The original M1917 machine gun belt was based on the U.S. Patent No. 1,168,876 by F. Frissell, assignor to the Russell Manufacturing Co., issued on January 18, 1916. This called for two distinct layers of fabric, each including a set of warp strands interwoven with a set of weft, or filling strands. Each set of warp strands was to be crossed at regular intervals from one face of the composite fabric to the other and back again to form pockets for the cartridges. However, it was found that only about one-half the warp strands could be crossed, for more would be so crowded as to make the edge objectionably wavy. Therefore, it was found necessary to cross only about half the warp strands and stitch the others in place at the point of crossing. This weaving feature is clearly illustrated in the patent drawings. As a result, the pockets were not as strong or rugged as desired and the cartridges were not firmly gripped.

These original M1917 belts are fitted with two tapered 4.5 inch long brass starter tangs riveted at each end of the belt to facilitate the insertion into the feed block. Cartridge pockets are numbered with ink markings every 25 rounds to indicate to the gunner the number of rounds that have been expelled from the belt. The fabric also bears an ink stamp referring to the Frissell Patent date which actually is January 18 1916. However, for an unknown reason, all belts observed are consistently wrongly inked “Pat. Jan. 18 ‘15” therefore showing 1915 instead of 1916. These original 250-round M1917 belts were still standard issue for the infantry until 1941.

Really intensive sampling and development work on fabric belts by Russell Manufacturing Co. was resumed in 1928. A new and more rugged belt was developed and accepted by 1933 and patented in November 17, 1936 by J. Hendley, assignor to the Russell Manufacturing Co., under number 2,061,072. It is a modification of the 1,168,876 patent in that it allows substantially all the warp strands to be crossed from one side to the other between pockets without undesirable distortion and without making the belt unduly wide at point of crossing. This is accomplished by a change in the weave which also permits the formation of a hollow pocket between the small ends of the cartridge pockets. This affords greater flexibility than is possible when this area is woven solid and achieves better alignment of the cartridges. The new design permits herringbone weave, twill weave or almost any manner of weave desirable. This new design of belt became standard for production of new belts by Russell from the late 1930s on.

It can be noted that the features of the 2,061,072 patent were not only incorporated in .30 cal belts but also in both .22 and .50 cal. Browning belts according to the patent number also inked on the latter two types of belts.

Since the stock of the early 250-round M1917 .30 belts on hand for the infantry was sufficient, the first contracts of .30 cal. belts produced following the 2,061,072 Patent were mostly intended for the Armored Force which required 100- and 150-round belts.

In October of 1941, it became apparent that the supply on hand of .30 cal. web belts for use by ground troops amounted to only about 25% of the total needed to meet requirements for M-Day (Mobilization Day). Furthermore, the need for belts loaded prior to packing and shipment, would generate a major increase in the number of 100- and 250-round belts needed, which in turn would necessitate a dramatic increase in manufacturing facilities.

In January 1942, Russell granted the government a non-exclusive, irrevocable, non-transferable royalty free license to manufacture, or to have manufactured, machine gun belts under their Patent No. 2,061,072 – this license to continue until one year after the cessation of the national emergency.

The very first war-time productions of 250-round belts were provided by the Russell Co. and the Schlegel Manufacturing Co. of Rochester, NY. For the first productions, Russell used the marking R.M.C. and then switched to THE RUSSELL MFG CO.

By June 1942, in addition to Russell and Schlegel, five more facilities had initiated production of the 250-round .30 caliber belt. In the next few months the remaining facilities who had received contracts initiated production. By end 1942, a total of 13 different U.S. manufacturers were involved in the production of 250-round cal. 30 fabric belts.

The first productions of George C. Moore Co. of Westerly, NY, were marked G.C.M. Co and then switched to GEO. C. MOORE CO.

To these must also be added the import by the Ordnance Department of a total of 489,700 belts from the British company Thomas French & Sons of Manchester from June through December 1942.

It can also be noted the existence of belts exhibiting standard features of U.S. belts but bearing the Canadian property mark “Arrow in C” with the manufacturer’s marking S.C.C. LTD. So far, such belts dated 1942 and 1943 have only been reported to the author bearing the Canadian Property Mark.

It remains unknown whether these are specific production by a U.S. manufacturer for export to Canada or Canadian domestic production. Some Canadian collectors suspect that SCC might stand for Syracuse Cordage Company of Syracuse, NY, but no real evidence to confirm that identification has come to light so far. Another educated guess is that SCC might stand for Samson Cordage Co corresponding to the Samson Cordage Works described in the U.S. Ordnance report of 1946. Here again, no real evidence to confirm this supposition is available. Pending reliable evidence, SCC remains as “unidentified.”

The following table summarizes the 14 different manufacturers as well as their production figures as provided in the 1945 report. Details on location of these companies were found in the Official American Textile Directory of 1923. So far, specimens manufactured by the Samson Cordage Works have not been definitively identified.

It can be noted that these production figures are different from those presented in Dolf Goldsmith’s book where only production figures between June 1942 and March 1943 are displayed.

From January 1942 until May 1944 a total of 28,283,433 belts were produced with monthly production rates rising and falling as a reflection of variation of demand for the material. The production output reached its peak monthly production in July 1942 when it reached 2,368,500 units. Then the output was diminished steadily to a low mark of 264,323 in July 1943 from whence it rose to 1,324,584 in December 1943. After this, production again fell off until it was terminated in May 1944.

The manufacture of these belts was begun again in 1945 when it was indicated that stocks were reaching a low level. In January 1945 a requirement of 3,000,000 belts was received. This was increased to 7,100,000 in February and to 11,200,000 in May. Steps were taken to secure production from six facilities. In June 1945, the requirement was reduced to only 4,250,000 belts. Production orders originally set up for the International Braid Co., Murdock Webbing Co., and the Oehrle Bros. Co. were cancelled and no production was realized from these companies in 1945. The Russell Manufacturing Co. realized first production in May, followed the next month by the George C. Moore Co. The Warren Featherbone Co. manufactured only 7,451 belts by V-J Day when all production was terminated, thus making Featherbone belts dated 1945 the scarcest WW2 U.S. cal. 30 Browning belt for collectors.

For 1945, the George C. Moore Co. produced 320,832 belts and the Russell Manufacturing Co had produced 1,703,372 belts when terminated.

All together, over thirty million 250-round .30 cal. ammunition fabric belts were manufactured during the war. The Link, Metallic Belt, Caliber .30, M1 was adopted by Ordnance Committee action in August 1945 for the belting all caliber .30 ammunition. This action reclassified the fabric belt as Limited Standard. (The author is deeply indebted to Frank Hackley, Anaheim, CA for the sharing of his knowledge on U.S. Small Arms Ammunition management system and to H.E. Wanting, Bedburg-Hau, Germany for his constant help in improving the manuscript and pinpointing the smallest inaccurate detail.)

2006 marks the 100th Anniversary of the quintessential American 20th Century military cartridge. While outdated by modern cartridges it has been kept alive by nostalgia and the deep affection of shooters and collectors the world over.

The average gun enthusiast may be forgiven for wondering what all the fuss is about. After all, didn’t the .30-06 start its service life with a 150-grain spitzer bullet and end its service life with basically the same 150-grain bullet? Well, yes it did, but for the first 50 years of its service life it was available in a myriad of military loadings and for the following 25 years it was used as a vehicle for testing ideas in small arms ammunition development. By the turn of the 21st century, its military use was limited to training purposes and for military salutes.

This article will focus on the U.S. military evolution of the .30-06 and only briefly touch on non-US development and civilian use. Even so, this will be a superficial look at the official U.S. rifle and light machine gun cartridge through two World Wars and countless “Police Actions.”

Politics and Cavalry Charges

To look at the use of the .30-06 around the world is a lesson in geopolitics. Its spread around the world didn’t really occur until after WW2 when the U.S. sought to influence foreign governments, either to stem the spread of communism or to develop trade – and what better way than to provide these friendly governments with your excess munitions. Eventually the .30-06 was used in almost 50 countries.

Even a cursory look at the various .30-06 loadings and how they were developed illustrates the changing face of warfare through the 20th Century – from cavalry charges to “dirty tricks.” The development of the .30-06 through the 1920s and 30s reflected the lessons learned during WW1. However, by the advent of WW2, cavalry charges had been relegated to the history books and the importance of the aircraft was becoming obvious.

During WW2, the diverging requirements of ground, air and sea warfare often resulted in serious development and production delays for the various .30-06 loadings. Basically, they were trying to have a single cartridge do everything.

As the U.S. became more and more involved in S.E. Asia after Korea, it seems that running wars became the province of the intelligence agencies and not the armies, navies and air forces actually doing the fighting.

The .30-06 was replaced by the 7.62mm NATO round in 1954 and U.S. military production for combat use ceased in the 1960s.

Modest Beginnings

The .30-06 was the result of several basic developments that occurred in the late 19th Century: the use of smaller caliber weapons; smokeless powder and rimless cases. The move towards smokeless powder came with the .30-40 Krag introduced in 1892 but this had limited powder capacity.

By 1901, Frankford Arsenal in Philadelphia (the government facility where the majority of ammunition development took place) had developed a rimless .30-caliber round. This was adopted as the .30 Ball Model of 1901 and commonly referred to as the “.30-01”. It used a 220-grain round-nose bullet and it had a thick rim – much thicker than contemporary rimless cartridges. At this time, Springfield Armory was also developing what would become the .30 Rifle, Model of 1903. The .30-01 was also further developed, losing its thick rim but retaining the 220-grain round-nose bullet to become the .30 Model of 1903 – or “.30-03”.

With the rest of the world pursuing pointed bullets, it only took a couple of years for someone to stick a pointed bullet into a .30-03 case that had the neck shortened by 0.10-ins to accommodate the reduced bearing surface of the pointed bullet. Things were simpler in those days and on October 15, 1906, the resulting cartridge was approved as the .30 Cal. Model of 1906, what we now call the “.30-06”.

Loadings

Before discussing the various loadings, we should mention colored bullet tips. The U.S. used these to identify various loadings in the .30-06. The following is a list of the colors used on service rounds and their meaning. Caution is advised if you are using this list to identify a loading as other countries did not always follow U.S. marking practice.

Common U.S. .30-06 Bullet Tip Color Codes

• Black: Armor Piercing (AP)
• Black/Silver: AP Plate Test
• Blue: Incendiary
• Green: AP for UK
• Green/White: Frangible
• Green/Tan: Frangible
• Orange: Tracer
• Red: Tracer
• Silver: Armor-Piercing Incendiary (API) and Navy contract Ball (1941)
• White: Tracer (and unfinished Frangible)
• Yellow: Observation

BALL

The first ball round for the .30-06 used a 150-grain flat-based bullet with a cupronickel jacket. This is referred to as the “M1906” bullet and it remained in use through World War I.

The use of machine guns at long range in that war revealed that the .30-06 was outclassed by rounds firing heavier bullets. Thus, in the immediate post World War I period, the U.S. experimented with heavier bullets. They tested many variations and it is amusing to note that one of the rounds tested at this time used a modified round-nose Krag bullet. The result of these tests was the adoption, in 1925, of the 172-grain boat-tailed “M1” bullet which had a gilding metal (a copper alloy) jacket.

By the mid-1930s it was evident that the use of machine guns at long range was a thing of the past and the recoil of a 172-grain bullet would be uncomfortable for the average GI. As a result, the original 150-grain M1906 bullet was re-adopted in 1937, though it did now have a gilding metal jacket. At first the original nomenclature “M1906 Ball” was used, but this was quickly changed and this new bullet was called the .30 M2 Ball. The 172-grain M1 bullet didn’t go away and continued to be used by the Navy. Initially, M2 ball rounds used a stannic (i.e.: tin) stained bullet to identify them from the M1 and this staining lasted until 1940. To further confuse matters, one of the last lots of M1 ball rounds produced by Frankford Arsenal in 1941 for the U.S. Navy had silver-tipped bullets. These should not be confused with silver-tipped API rounds which didn’t appear until 1943.

During World War II, because of supply problems with strategic materials like copper, the use of a steel bullet jacket was permitted. The jackets were given a gilding-metal plating and are referred to as the “.30 M2 Alternate” – a name which often appears on packaging. Though the supply of copper improved, the M2 Ball and the M2 Alternate Ball bullets continued to be used for the remainder of the .30-06’s military career.

ARMOR-PIERCING (AP)

The first AP round produced in service quantities in the U.S. was the controversial M1917 which had a cupronickel jacket with an exposed lead tip. Since The Hague Convention of 1899 effectively banned the use of expanding bullets on personnel, there were significant worries from the front lines to the extent that General Pershing ordered that it not be used by the American Expeditionary Forces.

The M1917 was quickly replaced by the M1918, which was identical in design except that it did away with the exposed lead tip. It is identified by a smooth cannelure (ring) on the bullet above the casemouth. The M1918 remained the service issue AP for a few years but was replaced in 1922 by a round having a slightly heavier steel core and identified, for the first time, by a black tip to the bullet. It was termed the “M1922” and had a gilding-metal jacket.

By the early 1930s, with the increasing use of armor, significant development took place with high-velocity AP bullets. It resulted in the adoption in 1934 of the high velocity AP M1. It was also identified by a black bullet tip and at 3,180 fps was considerably faster than the M1922 AP’s 2,600 fps. This was very much an interim measure as experimentation continued with this high-velocity series throughout the 1930s. In 1939, this avenue was abandoned and the M1922 was adapted slightly and renamed the AP M2, which remained the standard .30-06 AP bullet until the 30-06 was phased out.

One variation of the AP that wasn’t “service issue” is worth mentioning and this is the AP Plate Test. Loaded at various velocities and provided to companies manufacturing armor plate, it was intended to “proof” the plate prior to government acceptance. Initially they were not identified except by a box label and can be found with a black or a plain bullet tip. From about 1940, when large quantities of these Plate Test AP rounds were made, they were identified by a silver-over-black-tipped bullet.

ARMOR-PIERCING INCENDIARY

While the search for a way to give the small .30-06 AP bullet an incendiary effect started in World War I, it wasn’t until World War II that they had any success. The small lead point filler between the steel core and the bullet jacket was exchanged for a small quantity of a barium nitrate/magnesium mixture called IM-11. First identified by a black and blue bullet tip and called the T15 in 1943, it was quickly changed to a silver bullet tip and called the M14 API. By the late 1940s, they had changed the shape of the AP core which allowed substantially more of the incendiary mixture to be used and this was termed the M14A1.

BLANKS

Blanks were designed to perform a variety of functions from simply noise blanks to the launching of grenades or radio antennas.

In the U.S., the first noise blanks were those using the same paper bullet as used in the .30-03 blank and these were called the M1906 Blank. The paper bullet also contained a charge of powder to facilitate its break up. Some may be found with the tinned cases and in 1909 some .30-03 blanks with this bullet were adapted to the .30-06 chamber by resizing the neck.

Due to the cost and complex production process, an alternative to the paper bullet blank was designed that had a casemouth simply roll-crimped over a tan cup-shaped wad and this was adopted as the M1909 Blank. It went through a series of improvements, the most notable of which was the use of a simple red card wad, and was the standard noise blank for the life of the .30-06.

Grenade blanks first appeared on the scene in the early 1920s. Most of these functioned on a rod-type grenade and used a heavy powder charge to propel it. These were eventually standardized as the M3 Grenade Blank in 1941. This was identified by a rose-crimped casemouth with a red seal. Also of note is that throughout its life, the powder charge was a mixture of smokeless and black powder.

One interesting grenade blank from the 1920s is that made for the Viven-Bessiere practice grenade, which functioned by using the residual gases of a ball cartridge with the bullet passing through the center of the grenade. Since the danger space of a ball round greatly exceeds the danger space for the grenade (the bullet being able to travel much further than the grenade), a blank using a solid wood bullet was designed that could launch the practice grenade in range areas too small to accommodate a full-power ball cartridge.

It is worth mentioning here that you cannot safely tell a noise blank from a grenade blank strictly by its appearance. While the U.S., for the most part, used a blank with a roll-crimped casemouth over a red wad as the service issue noise blank, other countries did not adhere to this identification. In addition, there are numerous movie blanks that used military surplus cases, with a rose-crimped casemouth. Lake City made several batches of .30-06 blanks as late as 2002 for veterans’ funerals and these had a rose-crimped casemouth.

While not a U.S. development, Norway, France and Germany made extensive use of plastics for blanks starting in the 1950s. The U.S. did not embrace plastic cartridges in small arms ammunition in those days and even now there seems to be some reluctance. Nevertheless, these are colorful variations and perhaps the most familiar in the U.S. is the blank made of gold-colored plastic that was used in the movie “The Longest Day.”

DUMMIES

The early drill practice dummies (called the M1906 Dummy) had 6 corrugations running down the tinned case and from 1 to 4 holes in the case. It evolved, losing the tin plating, and gradually reducing the number of case holes until there were none, but retained its “Dummy M1906” designation through World War II. It was resurrected in the Korean War as the Dummy M40 and may frequently be encountered with a corrugated steel case.

Dummies for weapon functioning and inspection normally have smooth cases as corrugations might not reveal imperfections in an action or chamber. These smooth-case dummies first appeared at the end of World War I. These were usually tinned with two holes in the case. In 1938 a similar dummy, called the M2, was introduced with the tinned case and from one to three holes. It was made through the 1950s and is often seen with a plain brass or steel case.

The Range Dummy is, as far as we know, unique to the .30-06. It appeared in 1920 as a device for detecting flinching with recruits on the firing range. Identified only by a tinned primer and a groove cut in the head of the case, it was slipped into a magazine by the instructor without the knowledge of the recruit. It remained in use in some places until the early 1940s.

Perhaps the oddest .30-06 dummy is that intended for the Hollifield Target Practice Rod device. A special rod with a sharp point was fitted into the rifle barrel. The “Dotter” cartridge also had a rod in it and when it was “fired” the blow was transmitted to the rod in the barrel which popped out and pricked a paper target hung just in front of the muzzle. Designed in 1908 it was used extensively through World War I.

FRANGIBLE

The development of the frangible cartridge (i.e.: where the bullet breaks up on impact without damaging the target) illustrates the challenges endured by developers faced with different requirements from each branch of the Armed Forces.

In the early 1940s, the basic idea was to be able to train bomber gun crews by having them fire at real aircraft. Initially the Air Force approached the Ordnance Department but nothing happened. To cut a long story short, the NDRC (National Defense Research Committee – a civilian “think-tank”) was contacted. Duke and Princeton Universities got involved and eventually developed the frangible cartridge two years later. The mottled green/gray bullet was a mixture of bakelite and powdered lead referred to as RD-42-93. It was identified by a green and white bullet tip and muzzle velocity was a mere 1,360 fps. It was initially called the T44 Frangible but formally accepted in April, 1945 as the M22. A minor variation, the T74, using a tan over green bullet tip was developed in 1945 using a different propellant. By this time, the limited value of .30 cal. aircraft armament had been realized and most aircraft had been upgraded to .50 cal. machine guns.

GUARD & GALLERY

While these were initially considered separate loadings, they eventually filled both functions. The first Guard cartridges appeared in 1907 for use by sentries at military installations and prisons in urban areas. They were identified by 5 cannelures in the middle of the case and had a very small powder charge (muzzle velocity was 1,200 fps). The cannelures were its downfall as the case would separate in a dirty chamber. The identification was then changed to 6 short corrugations on the case shoulder. Production ceased about 1918 though it was still issued for a number of years after that.

Gallery or “Short-range” cartridges were used for training purposes. Up until 1919, various solutions were tried and the most common being a 198-grain pointed lead bullet called the “Ideal” bullet. It was replaced by a 140-grain lead bullet that became the Gallery Practice M1919. This nomenclature was changed again in 1933 when it became the M1 Guard Cartridge.

Countries like Norway and Germany used plastic cases and/or plastic bullets in .30-06 short-range cartridges from the 1950s. Again, these did not prove popular in the U.S.

INCENDIARY

The earliest .30-06 incendiary round was the M1917 which had a charge of white phosphorous and was identified by a flat tip bullet. The side of the bullet had a small hole that was sealed with solder which melted as the bullet traveled down the barrel – igniting the phosphorous on contact with the air.

This was quickly replaced by the M1918 which was identical internally but had a blackened pointed bullet to match the trajectory of the ball cartridge of the day. With experience passed on from the R.A.F. following the Battle of Britain, the U.S. was able to develop a bullet with a charge of barium nitrate/magnesium as the incendiary agent inside a steel sleeve. It was identified by a blue bullet tip and was accepted as the M1 Incendiary in 1941. It remained virtually unchanged for the rest of its service life.

SPORTING

While sporting cartridges are beyond the scope of this article, it is worth mentioning one commonly encountered load that had a military connection. It was made by Remington with a 280-grain round-nose soft-point bullet and packaged in military style boxes with a government contract number. Folk-lore has its purpose as protecting Alaskan bases from polar bears. As has recently been discovered, these were actually a contract for Springfield Armory in Massachusetts for their heavy recoil tests of 1955.

TRACER

The earliest .30-06 tracer you are likely to encounter is the M1917, which was identified by a chemically blackened case and used through World War I. The bullet had a cupronickel jacket until 1921 when it was changed to gilding metal.

In the 1920s there was considerable effort to improve the tracer with the M1923 and then the M1924 Tracers being adopted, both identified by black cases. It was renamed the “M1 Tracer” in 1926 and in 1930 the identification was changed from a black case to a red bullet tip. It remained in service into World War II when the differing requirements of air and ground wars triggered further development. Like its ball counterpart, the use of steel jackets was permitted in 1943 and packaging may be seen labeled “M1 Alternate Tracer.”

While the M1 tracer was used until the end of WW2, a short-trace version was developed in 1942 and became the “M2 Tracer.” Initially it was identified by a white bullet tip but this was quickly changed to a red bullet tip with an additional knurled cannelure on the bullet. Also in 1942, the Air Force voiced the need for a dark-ignition trace; one that would not blind the pilot. The result was a dim-ignition tracer at first called the T10 and later adopted as the M25 in 1945 with an orange tipped bullet. It remained the standard tracer for the rest of the .30-06’s military life.

SPECIAL PURPOSE LOADINGS

While there were many experimental loads developed in its first 50 years, we will concentrate here on a few of the unusual loads that illustrate the .30-06 usage in the 1950s and 60s.

Multiball

The concept of firing multiple projectiles with one shot is as old as ammunition itself. As far as the .30-06 is concerned there were experiments by Greener of the UK in the post World War I period with duplex and triplex loads being developed. In the U.S., it wasn’t until Project Salvo (1952-1961) that serious development took place along these lines. Commonly seen with both the standard length case and ones with an extended neck holding two or three bullets, these were developed by Olin (who owned Winchester-Western). Of note is the powder charge between the bullets to ensure separation and the fact that they had to angle the base of the lower bullets to ensure sufficient dispersion to make it worth while. Some of these rounds had colored bullet tips to identify special lots.

Explosive/Observation

These were designed to either increase damage to a target or to indicate the point of impact – often in a sub-caliber device. There were World War I experiments with a blunt-nose bullet with protruding nipple/firing pin, and World War II experiments using the Pomeroy bullet done by Winchester. The latter bullet is notable in that it has a capsule of dynamite in the nose activated by the bullet’s rotation. Both Frankford Arsenal and Winchester developed observation bullets with a complex internal mechanism called the T99. These appeared in the early 1950s and were identified by a yellow bullet tip. (A yellow bullet tip was used on a number of experimental loadings and not just observation rounds).

Silent Cartridge

Nothing illustrates the changing use of the .30-06 more than the silent .30-06 cartridge. Using the captive bolt principle, these were an all-steel assembly where a piston propelled a steel bullet that had a nylon driving band. It was developed in the 1960s and eventually patented in 1977. The same concept was applied to the QSPR (Quiet Special Purpose Revolver) rounds for the Viet Nam “Tunnel Rats.”

DUDS

Most will be familiar with the Remington “Accelerator” round that uses a .223-cal. bullet in a plastic sabot to provide a high velocity round as pictured in the lead photo on page 42. The concept was used on what is probably one of the .30-06’s rarest loadings – the Depleted Uranium Discarding Sabot (DUDS). This armor-piercing round was developed during the 1960s and 70’s and used the plastic sabot to hold the uranium slug.

These represent just a few of the special purpose loadings from this era. Others include manstopper, helmet test, radio destructor, flare and tear-gas loads.

U.S. Manufacturers

While many military and commercial manufacturers made the .30-06, this is a listing of the main U.S. Military manufacturers. The headstamp letters used are shown in parenthesis.

• Frankford Arsenal, Philadelphia (FA, FAL) made .30-06 from 1906 until ~1961. It closed in 1977.
• Denver Ordnance Plant, Colorado (DEN) made .30-06 from 1941-1944.
• Des Moines Ordnance Plant, Iowa (DM) made .30-06 from 1942-1945.
• Eau Claire Ordnance Plant, Wisconsin (EC/EW **), made .30-06 from 1942-1943. (** Initially they used “EC” on the headstamp but this was changed to “EW” to avoid confusion with Evansville Chrysler – which didn’t actually make .30-06).
• Lake City Ordnance Plant / Lake City Arsenal / Lake City Army Ammunition Plant, Independence, Missouri (LC), made .30-06 from 1941-1945, 1951-late 1970s, 1993, 2002. Also produced the clandestine headstamp “C / N [false date]” in 1953.
• St. Louis Ordnance Plant, Missouri (SL), made .30-06 from 1941-1945, 1952-1957. Also produced the clandestine headstamp “B / N [false date]” in 1953.
• Twin Cities Ordnance Plant, Minneapolis (TW), made .30-06 from 1942-1945, 1951-1957. Also produced the clandestine headstamp “A / N [false date]” in 1953.
• Utah Ordnance Plant, Salt Lake City, (U, UT), made .30-06 from 1942-1943.

The big commercial companies like Winchester-Western, Remington, Peters, United States Cartridge Company (U.S.C.Co.) and UMC also made .30-06 on government contract at various times.

Chris Punnett is author of the book “.30-06” and Editor of the International Ammunition Association’s Journal (http://cartridgecollectors.org).

(Note: The M1903A4 depicted herein was unfired when purchased and came complete with original sling. The 82nd Airborne Division sniper is portrayed by Col. Tom Brown, USA (Ret), who spent several tours in the 82nd and in the 173rd Airborne Brigade in Vietnam. Col. Brown’s uniform and equipment are absolutely authentic for the fighting just after Normandy landings in 1944.)

The onset of World War II found the United States short of many weapons and military equipment, not the least of which was an infantry sniper rifle. Sniper rifles during World War I were converted from both M1903 and M1917 rifles, but between the wars sniping was neglected. Even after World War II began, sniping continued to be neglected and it wasn’t until January 1943 that the Army issued a directive to Remington Arms to set aside 20,000 M1903A3 receivers for conversion to sniper rifles.

There doesn’t seem to have been any formal accuracy requirements for the M1903A4; at least we couldn’t find any standards in any of the four reference books we consulted in preparing this article. According to noted martial arms historian Bruce Canfield, there was no special care taken in manufacturing the M1903A4 rifles and their accuracy was no better than standard service rifles. The trigger on our test rifle, for example, was the same as our standard Remington M1903A3 – hardly sniper grade with two stage 5.5 pound break and significant overtravel. There were other shortcomings, as well. Since no sights were fitted and the commercial Weaver telescopic sights were easily damaged, a damaged scope left the sniper with a very expensive club. Additionally, the scope was not moisture resistant, which was a real problem in the South Pacific campaigns. The Redfield “Junior” mount was nothing more than a commercial unit and the retaining screws reportedly loosened and fell out regularly, but replacements were difficult to obtain through the supply system. Moreover, the gross elevation of the Redfield mount was adjusted by inserting or removing shims. Initial windage was set by adjusting the large screws visible at the rear of the scope mount.

Whatever shortcomings it might have had, the M1903A4 was the only version of the M1903 to have been manufactured as a sniper rifle at the factory. All others were field conversions. The M1903A4 was intended as a stopgap until the M1 Garand could be redesigned as a sniper rifle, but in the end only a very few M1C sniper rifles saw action in World War II, while the M1903A4 was used in every theater of operation throughout the war.

Because there was no way of predicting whether or not a M1903A3 being manufactured as an M1903A4 would deliver acceptable accuracy, all M1903A4s were marked, “US Remington Model 03A3,” but the markings were different from standard M1903A3s in that they were offset to the left so they would not be covered by the Redfield scope mount. The idea was that if the rifle wasn’t sufficiently accurate, open sights would be installed and the rifle issued as a standard M1903A3. Thus, there are no M1903A4s marked as such as far as we have been able to determine. We should also note that every M1903A4 was made by Remington. Smith Corona, the other M1903A3 manufacturer, did not make any M1903A4s.

Like all M1903A3s, the M1903A4 may be found with any number of variations. Most had four groove barrels, but some two groove barrels were fitted as is the case with our test rifle. According to Major General Julian Hatcher, probably the foremost authority on early to mid 20th century military small arms, the two groove barrel had little, if any, negative effect on accuracy. In the case of our test rifle, we have to agree, since it has a two groove barrel and delivered very good accuracy.

M1903A4 stocks were generally the Type C full pistol grip, but many, like our test example, were fitted with the semi-pistol grip “scant grip.” About the only constants were the lack of open sights, the unusual markings, the bolt handle that was forged with a concave shape to clear the telescopic sight and the stock notched to accommodate the non-standard bolt handle.

There were two telescopic sights used, both variants of the 2.5x Weaver 330. The first scopes were marked commercially and had either tapered post or crosshair reticles. Later scopes were marked M73B1, the military designation for the Weaver 330. Our test rifle was fitted with the tapered post version of the commercial 330, although our rifle’s serial number indicates that it was in the last production batch of 6,300 M1903A4s. The final M1903A4s were manufactured in June 1944 when the M1C started being delivered in sufficient numbers to begin replacing the M1903A4.

There seems to be disagreement among the M1903 authorities on total numbers of M1903A4s manufactured. According to Bruce Canfield and Clark Campbell, the number was 28,365. On the other hand, Lt. Col. William Brophy states that 29,964 were produced. We probably will never know with certainty just how many were manufactured, except that the M1903A4 represents a tiny fraction of the 1 million plus M1903A3 type rifles produced by Remington during World War II. When Smith Corona production is added to the mix, the total M1903A3 production rises to nearly 1.5 million. So it is clear that the M1903A4 is one of the rarest production M1903s ever made representing less than 2% of total production, which has driven prices into the $3,000+ range for a good example.

The M1903A4 soldiered on after World War II, despite M1C and M1D sniper rifles that supposedly replaced it. M1903A4s were drawn from storage for the Korean War and surprisingly also saw service in Vietnam during the early stages of that conflict before other, more modern sniper rifles could be procured, making the M1903A4 the last version of the M1903 to remain in military service. Thus, the M1903A4 saw military service for over 20 years, indicating that it must have had some positive attributes. Just how good was the M1903A4 for its intended purpose?

According to Lt. Col. Brophy, the M1903A4 was “…at best a poor excuse for a sniper rifle.” The M1903A4 had no special attention given to its accuracy or its suitability for use as a sniper rifle. The Weaver scope had the benefit of being cheap and available and little else other than being simple to install. But in the context of the time, the M1903A4 wasn’t really significantly inferior to sniper rifles from other nations. The Russian PU with its 3.5x scope was really no better, nor was the German 98K. The British Number 4, Mark 1(T) wasn’t either. All were essentially bolt action service rifles that were pressed into sniper service, except for a few 98Ks that were specially made up as sniper rifles. Consequently, the M1903A4 was not better or worse than other sniper rifles of the time. When compared to sniper rifles from the Vietnam era, the M1903A4 comes off as inferior but, for its time, it did its job and from what research we have been able to discover, did it relatively well.

Our test M1903A4 was unfired when we discovered it in a local gun store and purchased it at a very reasonable price. Since it was new, we were advised by some that the rifle should remain in unfired condition to preserve its collector value. Nevertheless, we do not own firearms that we do not shoot and so shortly after obtaining our M1903A4, we boresighted it and headed to the range to zero it. We zeroed the rifle using Black Hills 168-grain match grade ammunition, but for this evaluation we also tested the 03A4 with Greek 1985 production military M2 Ball, duplicating the World War II 150-grain military load. We also tested Serbian Privi Partizan 180-grain ammunition, imported by Wolf. The Black Hills match delivered 1.25 minute of angle (MOA) at 100 yards (1.25 inches at 100 yards). MOA (1 inch at 100 yards) accuracy is considered acceptable for modern sniper rifles, so the 03A4 – at least our 03A4 – gives up little to modern precision rifles in terms of accuracy. Surprisingly, the Greek 150-grain ball ammunition was as accurate as the Black Hills 168-grain match; probably because the M1903A3 was designed around the M2 ball round. The Serbian Privi Partisan was about 2 MOA. The bottom line is that our M1903A4 delivered acceptable accuracy which would probably improve once the barrel was broken in by having a couple of hundred rounds fired through it.

The M1903A4 is an excellent representation of sniper rifle technology of the 1940s. As we have mentioned, sniper rifles of both our allies and enemies were not superior to the 03A4 in any meaningful way and the rifle delivers good accuracy using quality modern match or service grade ammunition. World War II snipers didn’t have access to match grade ammo like their modern day counterparts, so the Greek ball ammunition test groups are probably more in keeping with 60+ year old reality. Probably the most significant shortfall of the M1903A4 was its scope, but it must be remembered that during World War II, everything was in short supply and the Army had to get its scopes from a company that could deliver the necessary quantities within a short time. The Weaver 330 was good enough for the task at hand. All in all, the M1903A4 was satisfactory for its intended purpose and, like most soldiers and Marines of the period, served its country well.

Everyone who shot our “old soldier” was overjoyed at being able to shoot a rare piece of American military history. We probably will not shoot our M1903A4 frequently, as it is too valuable for frequent trips to the range, but rest assured that it will continue to do what it was designed to do – shoot with reasonable accuracy from time to time and deliver some enjoyment in the process.

By Robert Bruce

“The pattern of machine gun operation in Korea is highly unconventional and contrary to the book, but the ground permits of nothing else. Good fields of fire for the machine gun are rarely met…[this] deprives the weapon of its normal tactical power and persuasion, and throws an extra load on the mortars, the BARs, and the riflemen.” Operations Research Office Report R-13, Oct 1951

John M. Browning’s water-cooled .30 caliber M1917 machine gun was introduced late in WWI and was still going strong during the Korean War more than 30 years later. His air cooled, belt-fed thirties, fielded in the late 1920’s initially for cavalry use, also served in “The Forgotten War.” Built on the same receiver but dispensing with the cumbersome and often impractical water jacket, they were considerably lighter yet still capable of sustained fire. This last characteristic was to prove indispensable against massed formations of Chinese attackers.

BARs vs. BMGs

The remarkable Browning Automatic Rifle, also a late WWI development, is unquestionably one of the most highly praised infantry arms in combat accounts from WWII and the Korean War. Not much bigger than the Garand rifle and weighing only about 20 pounds, this selective fire shoulder weapon was highly portable, accurate, dependable under all weather conditions and hard-hitting. Able to punch out powerful .30-06 bullets at a cyclic rate of some 550 rpm to a maximum effective range in excess of 500 yards, its only significant limitations came from 20 round magazine feed and lack of sustained fire capability.

So, because of the tendency of both North Korean and Communist Chinese to utilize “human wave” assault tactics, vastly outnumbered units of the US Army and Marines counted on belt-fed Brownings of .30 and .50 caliber to even the odds of survival. (A separate feature by Robert Bruce on the .50 cal. M2HB M2 is included in this issue – Editor).

The M1917A1 water cooled .30 cal., capable of almost continuous fire limited only to supplies of ammunition and water, was theoretically ideal for this task and could be found in the weapons mix of every infantry battalion. But, as previously stated, this multi man crewed 95 pound system was found to be impractical due primarily to excessive weight and its need for skilled and frequent attention.

In contrast, the M1919A4, an air-cooled version of this same gun, weighed considerably less at about 50 lbs. on an M2 tripod. Its maximum effective range and cyclic rate of fire were essentially the same as that of the heavier gun with the added benefit of dispensing with water for the jacket (and anti-freeze in winter) plus all the special parts, tools and skills needed to keep the water from seeping out without locking up the barrel. Broken down into three main loads of gun, tripod and a good supply of ammunition, the A4 system was far more easily humped up and down the jagged ridges that characterized much of the Korean countryside. Problem solved, right?

“The interrogations indicate that in the mind of the average gunner “firing in short bursts” is about synonymous with lifting the finger from the trigger for a few seconds at frequent intervals rather than resting the gun at all times when there are no manifest targets and no compelling tactical reasons for firing. This affords no relief to the weapon as far as over-heating is concerned, and it does not conserve ammunition.” ORO-R-13

There is no free lunch, however, and the A4 Browning had its own limitations. In addition to the need for frequent cleaning and proper lubrication that varied depending on weather conditions, the air cooled gun would overheat rather quickly from prolonged firing. Despite having a heavier barrel that acted as a heat sink and radiator, only about 1 belt – 250 rounds — could be fired in a minute before a too-long pause for cool down or panic barrel change was necessary. Since swapping barrels was a several minute exercise that also required careful setting of headspace, this was often a life-threatening problem.

Combat Crapout

“Not less surprising is the percentage of failure in machine gun fire at some time during the course of the average engagement because of mechanical trouble of one kind or another, faulty handling by the crew, etc.” ORO-R-13

Interviews with Eighth Army troops following combat action in the winter of 1950-51 suggested a failure rate for air-cooled thirties in excess of twenty percent. Various reasons were both observed and theorized, including poor mechanical training, neglect of regular and proper cleaning of the guns, and failure to keep ammo clean and correctly seated in the cloth or metallic belts. None of these, by the way, is inherent in Browning’s excellent design that – in the proper hands – is highly regarded for combat efficiency.

The ORO report cites an average figure for company-sized infantry units of just two guns in operation per engagement and, all too frequently, not even one gun was working. When these luckless GIs experienced a total loss of their base of fire belt feds in the heat of an assault or defense, the full burden of firepower was thrown primarily on BARs and M1s. Fortunately, both the auto rifles and the Garands were almost invariably up and running no matter how hostile the weather or their handling.

Epilogue

Disappointment with combat utility of the A4 and A6 Brownings in Korea led to postwar development of the M60 General Purpose Machine Gun. Fielding of the new “Sixty” and its companion, the selective fire M14, was nearly complete when America began sending combat units to yet another Asian misadventure. This time it was Vietnam.

Primary References

FM23-55 and TM 9-2005

Brig. Gen. S.L.A. Marshall, “Commentary on Infantry Operations and Weapons Usage in Korea; Winter of 1950-51,” Johns Hopkins University, Operations Research Office Report ORO-R-13, Oct 27, 1951