The most successful way to bridge the gap between pistol and carbine is the shoulder-stocked pistol, and Mauser lit the path, presaging the development of the sub-guns genre which saw the development of the legendary M3 Grease Gun, the BSA Sten, the HK MP5, and many others. Although the concept of a personal defense weapon went unnamed at the dawn of the 20^th Century, its value was recognized, and the new Mauser pistol became a worldwide best seller. Like Mauser rifles, it loaded from a stripper clip and the bolt could also be held open by an empty stripper clip, allowing the cartridges to be loaded individually by hand.

The ability to hit targets easily with a reliable weapon was the virtue that sold most people on the new pistol. Despite appearing clumsy in the hand, the pistol is easy to handle. Since most folks aren’t dedicated pistol shooters, having a pistol that makes up for some of their lack of expertise is a blessing. Firing with the C96 one-handed easily produces a ¾-inch group at 25 yards. A lot of revolvers won’t even do that from a Ransom Rest fixture. Due to its forward position of the magazine, those who want to use a two-handed grip should put the second hand around the front of the magazine. This gun is shaped differently than other guns and that becomes an advantage for precision shooting.

The pistol also came with a shoulder stock that doubled as a holster. Most small, light, guns are hard to hit with. Not this one. In addition to being about the smallest and lightest gun practical, the stocked Mauser Military Pistol locks-in solidly for accurate firing. Put your second hand around the front of the magazine well and it becomes rock steady. Hits at ong-range (200 meters and beyond) are easily attained. Exactly why this gun is so easy to shoot (both with and without its holster stock) is a mystery. Everyone has a pat answer, but none of them hold up under intense scrutiny. It just is.

Due to its compact size, you could effectively use the stocked Mauser pistol with one hand while still holding the reins of a galloping horse with the other. Of course, steadiness on a galloping horse is relative, but some cavalrymen of the day used it that way while others used it just as a pistol. The ability to go back and forth between being a pistol and a compact carbine sets the stocked Mauser Military Pistol ahead of the “modern” PDWs that are too big to fill the role of a pistol.

The stocked Mauser Military Pistol was very compact. Fitted with a holster harness, it was often worn on the belt and, sometimes, a sling was used. The rig also fits nicely in a briefcase. Without the stock, you have a very thin pistol that lends itself to concealment. In one instance between WWI and WWII, when it was common for Europeans to carry pistols, a group of men sharing a train compartment decided to compare pistols to help pass the time. The first three produced various .25 automatics but the fourth pulled out a full-size Mauser Military Pistol. There was a surprised silence as they beheld this comparative behemoth then one of the men said, “you’re in the military, aren’t you?” The fourth man smiled and nodded as he holstered his Mauser pistol.

Easy handling and concealability weren’t the new automatic pistol’s only virtues. In all its long history, no one has ever been able to fault its reliability under the worst combat conditions. When you drew this pistol, you could be sure that it would work. Screws are often a source of trouble in pistols as they loosen and back out. The only screw in this pistol is the one holding the grips on. Power was another virtue. The pistol was originally chambered for the flat-shooting .30 Mauser cartridge which launched an 86-grain bullet at 1410 FPS, easily penetrating 11 standard 7/8-inch boards and equaling the penetration of a .357 magnum armor piercing round. Penetration on the battlefield (where the enemy is constantly trying to hide behind cover) is paramount. Due to the light bullet weight, there was very little recoil, and this came to the forefront between the wars when the select-fire Mauser Military Pistol Model 711 came out. Despite a very high cyclic rate, the pistol was controllable in full-auto, so long as the holster stock was attached. If a close-range emergency dictated full-auto fire without the stock, you would turn the pistol on its right side and let it arc to the right without climbing. In WWII, German dispatch riders often carried this pistol, as did some members of the Nazi SS.

While less common than the original .30 Mauser chambering, the pistol was also made in the powerful 9mm Mauser. It fired a 128-grain bullet at 1362 FPS. In China, they made a copy in .45 ACP.

For those wanting the most compact survival rifle practical, the stocked Mauser Military Pistol has no competitors. Certainly not the current Air Force “survival” rifles”. These skeletonized abominations are glorified zip guns and the hardest things to shoot accurately that I have ever encountered. Not to mention, they also lack the power to deal with large game or to stop a determined attack by man or beast.

THE STORY OF TWO PISTOLS

There are two different Mauser Military Pistols shown in the photos. The near mint example was brought back as a war trophy by an officer in the 24^th Infantry Division in the Philippine Campaign of WWII which saw some of the hardest and most intense fighting of the war. He was issued a M1911A1 pistol and an M1 carbine, but used the pistol for most of the fighting, and using the carbine only for long range shots. He had grown up using his father’s pistols killing snakes and was quite adept with them. Whether the Japanese who had originally owned this Mauser Pistol had gotten it as a private purchase pistol, which was common, or had taken it as a war trophy in China is unknown.

The second pistol in the photos is a stocked Mauser Military Pistol that was loaned to me by Hunter’s Lodge in Ethridge, Tennessee. They have a number of them in inventory. This one is a well-worn WWI 9mm version but without the red “9” on the grips that these models are known for. It functioned flawlessly and despite the well-worn barrel, it still shot accurately. The holster stock was a bit longer than normal, which suited me as I take a 15 9/16-inch length of pull if a stock is being made to fit me. One of the photos shows the now rare stock sling for this gun.

TIPS FOR USERS

The Mauser Military Pistol has a heavy metal bolt stop to prevent the slide from coming out of the gun. It’s a good idea to check this part for cracks and replace it if need be.

If you want to be sure that the locking lugs are working properly, there is a simple test for that. Knowing that the barrel must recoil slightly to initiate the unlocking process, hold the pistol by the barrel and try to pull the bolt back. If the locking lugs won’t let it move, the test is passed.

This pistol is very fast and easy to take apart and put back together, but one thing that none of the manuals tell you is that these guns usually need a sharp tap from a block of wood to snap together in the last assembly step. Just make sure that the lug on the right side is aligned with the notch on the frame.

The number of pristine condition Mauser Military Pistols is small, and their collector value is high. Do not despair, though, if all you can get is a worn out, beat up one. Eugene Golubstov at Lugerman.com is one of the few total restoration gunsmiths in the world. He can take any junk Mauser pistol and refurbish it, inside and out, so that it’s indistinguishable from one that has just left the Mauser Factory 100 years ago. He can also do major and minor repairs and re-barreling on these guns.

CONCLUSION

It is a testimony to the genius that went into this pistol that, today, 128 years since it first came out, there is still no other weapon that precisely fills the niche of the Mauser Military Pistol.

An assembled prototype fitted with a 7-inch barrel. This PDW is so compact and balanced; the magazine is at the physical center of the gun. Handling and operating a weapon of this level can only be described as instinctive.

By David Lake

By now, Battle Arms Development should be on your radar and in your gun-related vocabulary. If you’re not familiar, then take note right now, Battle Arms Development (BAD) is one of the most forward thinking and capable manufacturers in America’s gun market today. Battle Arms always seems to bring new and improved items to market without much ado – they don’t celebrate every advance in function or ergonomics or performance and they don’t ever seem content to rest on their past achievements; they hold claim on many “firsts” and “bests” in the industry. BAD just continues to hand us really good products on a regular basis and their products never seem to disappoint.

BAD’s latest groundbreaking ideas are focused on the PDW (Personal Defensive Weapon). The PDW, by basic definition, is a carbine but made lighter, smaller, more adaptable and more capable than a standard rifle or carbine. The PDWs from different companies all seem to boast varied advantages. Some are indeed very small in their collapsed state; maybe only slightly larger than a pistol. Some feature calibers that are better suited to short barrels to optimize efficiency and power from a compact weapon. Some PDWs are feather-light and might maintain more common dimension and caliber and capability, but come at a significant weight savings over a typical battle-rifle. Whatever the genesis behind any particular PDW offering, they all seem to come at an inevitable compromise. Something is always given up in order to fulfill the requirements of the end user or target market: be that military, law enforcement, private security, or even the discerning consumer.

Now for some broad and general assertions: The AR-15 is the most widely used small arm (rifle or carbine) by America’s professionals and hobby shooters. Every agency and department has the AR-15. Every soldier and police-officer knows how to use the AR-15. Every citizen that would call himself an enthusiast has at least one AR-15. And every respectable armorer or gunsmith knows this rifle’s function and nuance inside and out. These are irrefutable arguments in favor of the AR-15. Any astute maker of small arms would be unwise to try at changing this trend. Yet, in the race to develop and exploit the growing demand for the PDW, many small arms firms choose to build their PDWs on a new and unfamiliar platform or utilize unproven technology or materials or even introduce new obscure calibers. These specialized calibers can range from the totally ineffective to the economically impossible. Some PDWs utilize pistol calibers, which are just pistols with a buttstock (not a demonstrable improvement). Some PDWs only wear the name as it is assigned and feature none of the qualifying criteria to be considered a proper PDW. Some are even heavier than the basic battle rifle upon which they’re based. The PDW should be an appropriate replacement for both carbine and sidearm without much compromise to the strengths of either. This asks much in the way of power and accuracy. This also demands that the weapon be as light and compact as possible, that the operation is fast and familiar and the construction is rugged and strong. A PDW in the hands of agency or security personnel may never be called upon to fulfill its lethal role. It may live its life and do its duty in total concealment under a vest or coat and must execute this role without becoming an impediment to the agent’s mobility and comfort. But if and when the PDW is taken to task, that weapon must become a decisive and crushing force.

If you have ever tried to decide between the capability of a carbine and the convenience of a sidearm, the PDW solves the problem.

We can believe that when Battle Arms Development steps up to a challenge, they will succeed as the images seen in this article well demonstrate: this is how BAD does the Personal Defensive Weapon. The basic AR-15 has been abbreviated to make it light, compact and concealable while the manual of arms of the ubiquitous AR is maintained. Parts interchangeability and serviceability remains common. Diagnosis and repair of malfunctions can come right from the old manuals. BAD has made improvements wherever possible, yet has not hobbled or otherwise handicapped the AR-15. The PDW presented here represents a collaboration between Battle Arms Development and Cross Machine. The lines that would divide concept, engineering and execution have been blurred over the many months of design, revision and prototyping. Suffice to say, Battle Arms and Cross Machine have been synergistic partners in this project. Herein, we will not discuss the specifics of the upper half, nor the caliber of the BAD PDW. It will be enough to recognize that the upper is short and powerful. The lower and the stock are on parade here today.

At first glance, the obvious “new” on this rifle is the stock’s design. It appears similar to the other PDW style stocks that are becoming increasingly common but, be assured; the only similarity is the purpose of that stock. The design of other PDWs tends to leave a gap under the users cheek when the stock is deployed. These also tend to require a special bolt group that either uses an integral buffer, or a buffer configuration that prevents normal service and disassembly of the rifle. The BAD PDW allows for a solid and proper cheek weld as it features an integral comb of molded textile carbon fiber that bridges that gap. The BAD PDW does require its own unique buffer; but this buffer interfaces with any standard AR-15 or M16 style bolt carrier, and does not alter normal function or operation. The tool steel shafts actually ride on ball bearings and Teflon, so the stock moves and feels like it is, well, on ball bearings and Teflon. And totally new to the market is that this PDW stock is actually part of the receiver. The receiver is created with the stock’s mounting structure machined right in. This saves weight, makes for a stronger and more compact design, and ultimately saves on cost. This is truly unique in the market.

To cater to the needs of the accessory market, BAD has also created an add-on PDW stock with all the advancements and beneficial features of the PDW receiver, but the stock can be attached to any AR-15 lower receiver. The add-on PDW stock assembly is, however, slightly heavier and larger than the integral unit. Both stocks, when collapsed, are the same compact length of 6 inches from the buffer’s face and both use the same specially designed buffer. When fully extended, the add-on stock is 10 inches long and the integral PDW lower will extend to 9.5 inches. The add-on stock, when joined to a receiver, weighs a little over 3 ounces more than the integral receiver.

The fit and finish of both units is perfect. The type 3 hardcoat anodizing is a durable and attractive protective finish. The rods are hardened tool steel that rides in Teflon bushings and are locked into any of 5 positions by steel ball bearings. The stock, when moving, encounters very solid and satisfying “clicks” as the ball bearings snap positively into the detent locations. The hardened locking button is cut on a wire-EDM machine. This locking button can be actuated by the knuckle at the base of the thumb of the “gun hand” while the shooter’s free hand can reach across and position the stock where it may be required. The butt plate is larger and smoother than most other DW stock applications. The most impressive feature of the BAD PDW and accessory stock is both are as solid as any fixed stock on the market. There is no perceptible wobble, shake or rattle in the system. They are expertly designed and crafted with an artist’s pride. Suffice to say that it is an over-achieving piece of engineering and is peerless in execution. Battle Arms assures us that the price of these units will be very competitive with the current offerings for items claiming similar capabilities.

Here at Small Arms Review, we know and recognize the trends in small arms design and development. We have seen them all come and go. We have seen established companies flounder as they refuse to keep up with the times. We have seen promising new startups fail only by their own misplaced enthusiasm. We can authoritatively say that the future will demand unconventional design and the use of advanced materials and a degree of risk taking in small arms design. The consumer is becoming increasingly well-informed and demands that his new gun be something special – and genuinely new. Numbered are the days of cookie cutters and rubber stamps churning out the basic black rifle in a new box with a new name. The new consumer won’t be fooled by yet another “AR.” Battle Arms Development does it right.

Many consider Glock the standard by which fighting pistols are held based on capacity, weight/firepower ratio, ruggedness, and reliability. A new product from FAB Defense in Israel and currently distributed in the U.S. by the Mako Group seeks to capitalize on these positive traits with the KPOS Glock-to-rifle conversion stock. The KPOS aluminum stock chassis transforms a Glock handgun into a viable personal defense weapon (PDW) category.

The KPOS was designed with personal security details and covert operations in mind, especially if the Glock 18 machine pistol is utilized. The KPOS arrives with Picatinny style rails along the top, sides, and bottom allowing for performance enhancing accessories such as vertical forward grip, optic/red dot sight, flashlight, or laser aiming device to be mounted. The aluminum framed KPOS stock features a side folding stock that further reduces the weapon’s footprint when folded. The KPOS measures 13.5 inches with stock folded and 21.5 inches with stock deployed and weighs less than 4 pounds with a Glock 17 mounted. For comparison, a Glock 17 installed in the KPOS is smaller and lighter than a mini-Uzi. The KPOS unit tested works with Glock 17 and Glock 19 compatibles (G17, G18, G34, G22, G35, G19, and G23). Other KPOS models for SIG Sauer and Springfield handguns are expected.

In the U.S., the KPOS converts your Glock pistol into a Short Barreled Rifle (SBR) classification and must be treated as such with an approved Form 1 from the BATFE before you possess this stock and install a weapon in the KPOS. Failing to do so is a violation of Federal law with extremely serious consequences that may result in fines and/or imprisonment.

The KPOS stock arrives in a hard case that includes folding forward vertical grip, modified Glock slide back plate for charging handle adaptation, and detachable single point sling. The patented KPOS design locks both the front and back of the Glock into the KPOS frame without requiring any tools. The Glock’s railed dust cover is used as an attachment point in the front and a simple wedge block in the rear secures the frame. This prevents the pistol from moving ensuring reliability and stable point of aim. The Glock’s back plate located at the slide’s rear is switched out with a modified version enabling a charging handle to project out the KPOS’s left side for slide manipulation when installed in the KPOS. The Glock’s open sights are still accessible, though mounting a red dot or other type of optic is best for extending effective range.

Many will question the utility of employing a pistol cartridge in a shoulder fired weapon. Most engagements happen within a 100 yard range, especially in a civilian setting, with handling and reliability playing more of a factor in quick, reactive engagements than specific caliber used. Less experienced shooters will find the lower recoil pulse and muzzle blast of a pistol caliber fired from the shoulder easier to manage, which often times will translate into better accuracy.

A Glock handgun is transformed into a much more potent package when mated to the KPOS stock. A Glock17 using a Lone Wolf Distributors stainless barrel with threaded muzzle was mounted in the KPOS for this review. One note of importance here that once registered as an SBR, a weapon used with the KPOS is required to stay in this configuration and should not be used in other applications. The KPOS allows the mounting of a suppressor if a user desires. The barrel shroud is easily removed allowing for a suppressor’s diameter. The advantage derived from the Glock KPOS SBR is that effective range and shootability is increased compared to a handgun; thus the PDW reference at the beginning of the article. This is based on the KPOS’s multiple points of contact when interfaced with the shooter. This consists of shoulder, cheek, and hands spread further apart for more stability compared to when handling a handgun.

The KPOS’s rail system maximizes potential with accessories such as an optics, lights, lasers and vertical forward grip. The vertical foregrip has fast become a standard accessory on any rifle or carbine equipped with a forward accessory rail. The increased leverage and control offered by the vertical foregrip aids in weapon manipulation and stability when firing. An Aimpoint H1 and Insight Technology M6x Tactical Laser Illuminator were added to the KPOS’s rails.

The Glock 17 used in conjunction with the KPOS conversion was a proven performer with upwards of 4,000+ rounds fired without issue. Importantly, the Glock maintained its reliability once installed in the KPOS. Installation is accomplished by first turning the KPOS upside down. Towards the back of the stock located near the folding stock hinge point is a pin. Remove this. This allows you to next slide the metal retaining plate out the back. After this, insert the Glock all the way towards the front where there is an interface between the Glock’s dust cover and the KPOS that locks the front of the Glock down. Make sure the Glock’s front dust cover side rails slide into the KPOS unit before turning the locking mechanism located on the side towards the fully engaging the dust cover’s cross slot. If done correctly, the GLOCK should not be able to move at this point. Slide the metal wedge plate up against the Glock’s rear frame and reinsert the pin.

A wide range of 9mm loads were tested including 115gr, 124gr, and 147gr JHP and FMJ loads from Black Hills, CCI, Federal, Hornady, Remington, Winchester, and Wolf. The Glock KPOS SBR was sighted in 1 inch high at 25 yards, which gives an approximate 50 yard zero and 7 inches low at 100 yards trajectory depending on exact ammunition used. This is a flatter trajectory than most would expect. The decision to utilize the threaded Lone Wolf barrel is a nod to future plans to incorporate a suppressor with the Glock KPOS SBR as 147gr 9mm is an obvious choice for use with a suppressor. Range evaluation consisted of a mixture of drills establishing durability, reliability and handling. Firing behind cover, engaging multiple targets, magazine changes, targets at CQB distances to 100 yards, and off-shoulder shooting made up the bulk of these drills. Rounds fired during T&E quickly rose to over 800 with only a few range visits as it was too tempting to keep feeding in the Glock magazines. No failures were experienced no matter how quickly or how many 33-round Glock magazines were fired. This is a credit to both Glock and the KPOS chassis being well designed as to not interfere with the mounted weapon’s functioning. Purposely induced malfunctions were cleared in the same manner as one is accustomed to with a Glock thanks to the side charging handle and operating controls not being compromised with the KPOS stock chassis. A large portion of the Glock slide and ejection portion is not obscured, which further assists in no reliability issues.

The compact size of the Glock KPOS SBR cannot be overstated. A DeSantis DSD shoulder holster rig was tested as one carry method. It is not being represented that the KPOS SBR is a substitute concealed carry weapon in lieu of inside the waistband carry. However, the DSD rig proved a viable carry method under certain conditions. The KPOS chassis with stock folded is smaller than a mini-Uzi and rides under the user’s right arm with multiple 33-round magazines carried under the left arm. Many would favor discrete off body carry of the KPOS SBR in a back pack or attaché/briefcase with another 9mm Glock handgun carried concealed thus offering advantage of same caliber/magazine interchangeability. The availability of proven Glock factory 33-round 9mm magazines is huge advantage for the Glock KPOS platform. The increased capacity represented by the 33-round magazines should not be underestimated compared to other non-9mm calibers within Glock family, not to mention other manufactures as a whole. The KPOS’s folding stock is quick to deploy and sturdy once unfolded in the shooting position. The two-handed grip afforded by the KPOS’s vertical forward grip combined with Aimpoint H1 red dot sight picture is more than adequate reacting to a situation until the stock can be deployed.

In an effort to determine the advantage of mounting a Glock in the KPOS, the Glock that was installed in the KPOS was fired in its pistol configuration at 15, 25 and 50 yards at a plate rack featuring multiple 6-inch round targets. This was an effort to establish a baseline of field accuracy with shooting done standing unsupported. The Glock was then installed in the KPOS and fired in the same format. The accuracy and increased time differential in falling the plates definitely supports the advantages offered with the incorporation of the Aimpoint H1 red dot sight and ability to shoulder the weapon. While plates were successfully engaged at 15 and 25 yards with relatively few misses with the Glock in its original form, 50 yards was challenging with results less than satisfying. The KPOS Glock SBR proved much faster at 15 and 25 yards with 50 yards hits routine thanks to the shoulder stock and red dot sight. The Aimpoint H1 red dot sight assisted in engaging targets at close distances with the red dot easy to pick up rapidly, while at the same time increasing accuracy out to a hundred yards far beyond normal open sight capabilities. Handguns can engage targets at ranges much further than most realize, but this is not the norm and often under pristine conditions with plenty of time to set up. The Glock’s consistent trigger pull, controllable light recoil, firing from a closed bolt, and minimal muzzle blast, further accentuates this accuracy advantage. The muzzle blast differential between a 9mm carbine versus obnoxious rifle muzzle signature is further accentuated in confined spaces such as inside a home if serving in a personal defense role. The old standard touting the advantage of having both a carbine and handgun chambered in the same caliber should not be casually dismissed, especially if an organized logistics chain cannot be counted on. The Glock 19 handgun resting in the holster on your hip can also utilize the 17 or 33-round magazines used with the Glock 17 in the KPOS slung around your neck or resting under your arm in the DeSantis DSD shoulder rig.

Of late, it seems more Glock carbine options are appearing in the market. Few offer the total package of the Mako KPOS in terms of metal manufacturing, folding stock, ease of install/conversion, and Picatinny style rails allowing for easy adaptation of accessories. A pistol caliber carbine can never be compared across the board to a weapon firing a rifle round due to effective range and lethality of the pistol round versus a rifle cartridge. However, a 9mm carbine typified by a KPOS Glock SBR is not a weapon to be ignored. Beyond a doubt the KPOS Glock is much more potent than any handgun due to its increased effective range and shootability thanks to the ability to be fired from the shoulder. The ability to keep a PDW configured like the Glock KPOS will outweigh its limitations in many people’s minds. The KPOS converted Glock is substantially smaller than several other SBR rifles it was compared to consisting of AKSU-74 Krinkov/Suchka, 9mm AR, and SIG556. The KPOS Glock conversion’s portability to effective firepower ratio will trump a rifle’s power for many. The KPOS enhances the Glock handgun into a PDW with effective range over 100 yards via shoulder stability and sight enhancement options with the Picatinny style rails. The KPOS chassis seamlessly integrates the Glock. There is no compromise in handling or reliability with mating the Glock to the KPOS. A user has a just as positive feel with the KPOS conversion as one would with a dedicated PDW or SMG. A survey of the existing market will demonstrate few other matching weapon system options in terms of size, reliability, and capability as the Glock KPOS SBR, especially for the civilian consumer.

Sites of Interest

Mako Group
1 Lenox Ave
Farmingdale, NY 11735
(866) 753-9444
www.makosecurity.com

Aimpoint, Inc
14103 Mariah Court
Chantilly, VA 20151
www.aimpoint.com

DeSantis Holster and Leather Goods
431 Bayview Ave.
Amityville, NY 11701
(800) 424-1236
www.desantisholster.com

Glock
6000 Highlands Pkwy
Smyrna, GA 30082
(770) 432-1202
www.glock.com

Insight Technology
9 Akira Way
Londonderry, NH 03053
(866) 509-2040
www.InsightTechnology.com

Lone Wolf Distributing
57 Shepard Rd.
PO Box 3549
Oldtown, ID 83822
(208) 437-0612
www.lonewolfdist.com

The phone call from Carl Bertil Johansson in early summer 2009 came out of the blue. The founder of the Swedish company CBJ Tech had read an article I’d written about military Personal Defence Weapons (PDWs) for soldiers who do not normally carry a rifle. I had concluded that the optimum weapon configuration would be a compact machine pistol like the 9mm Brügger & Thomet MP9. I had also observed that the gun’s ballistics could be transformed by adapting it to fire the 6.5×25 CBJ cartridge. He thought this idea sounded promising so had contacted Brügger & Thomet, who were interested enough to supply him with an MP9 featuring a prototype barrel in 6.5×25 calibre. Initial testing had made him so enthusiastic that he was calling to invite me to Sweden to try the gun and ammunition combination for myself. How could I refuse?

The MP9

The MP9 has been developed from the Steyr Tactical Machine Pistol or TMP, to which Brügger & Thomet acquired the rights in the early 2000s. This innovative Swiss company has made a number of modifications, the most obvious being a side-folding shoulder stock, which transforms the steadiness of aim and the effective range. They have also added a NATO accessory rail on top for optical sights, ghost ring rear sights with an adjustable foresight, a trigger safety (similar to the Glock system), a suppressor attachment on the barrel sleeve (B&T also make the suppressors), and translucent magazines for 15, 20, 25 or 30 rounds. Options include a Picatinny rail under the barrel in lieu of the fixed handgrip, and a fixed skeleton rather than folding stock. The standard colour of the body is black but green and coyote tan are also available, as is a blue version adapted to fire Simunition FX training ammunition (which can also work with the new Force on Force cartridge recently introduced by ATK) and a red “manipulation” gun which cannot fire live ammunition and is used for safe handling training.

The result is an exceptionally compact and lightweight submachine gun or machine pistol, largely made from polymer and weighing just 1.4 kg (3.1 lbs) empty. Loaded 9mm magazines weigh 240 grams (8.5 oz) for 15 rounds to 440 grams (just under 1 lb) for 30 rounds. The MP9 is 303 mm (11.9 inches) long with the stock folded and 523 mm (20.6 inches) with the stock unfolded. Barrel length is 130 mm (5.1 inches). Unlike most SMGs (with the notable exception of the Heckler & Koch MP5 series) the gun fires from a closed and locked bolt, utilising a rotating barrel locking system; it will still fire when the muzzle is pressed against the target. The cyclic rate of fire is 750-800 rpm. The single shot/automatic selector and manual safety switch is a push-button by the thumb.

According to B&T, about 5-6,000 MP9s are sold every year. The gun is widely exported and is now in service with many special forces and close protection teams. The use of the ubiquitous 9mm cartridge is a significant selling point, along with the compact dimensions, the open holster (the gun clips into it) and the availability of the training versions. The modest penetration of 9mm ammunition isn’t felt to be an issue as hardly any of the expected opposition use body armour (this may not, of course, remain the case indefinitely), and around 50m is regarded as an adequate range for its particular role.

The nearest competitor to the MP9 is the Heckler & Koch MP7. The most obvious difference between them is that the MP7 is available only in HK’s unique 4.6×30 calibre, whereas the MP9 fires the 9×19 NATO, aka Parabellum or Luger, which is readily available from many manufacturers in a very wide range of loadings. At least, that was the case until recently, when the first example of the B&T MP9 in the 6.5×25 CBJ version appeared.

The 6.5×25 CBJ

Carl Bertil Johansson is an experienced gun designer who has worked with Aimpoint and SAAB Bofors among others, but set up CBJ Tech to develop his idea for a high-performance cartridge. The company, a family-run business, is based in southern Sweden and owns a Cold War bunker that provides very secure accommodation for workshops and range testing.

CBJ started development of the 6.5×25 cartridge in the late 1990s at the time of the NATO competition to select a new PDW round. This was intended to replace the 9×19 with longer-ranged ammunition able to penetrate NATO’s CRISAT target (equivalent to contemporary Russian body armour) at 150 metres. The only cartridges officially tested were the 5.7×28 FN developed for the P90, and HK’s 4.6×30 for the MP7. It proved impossible to reach political agreement on which to choose, so no decision was made.

FN and HK both started with “clean sheet” ammunition and gun designs, but Carl Bertil decided on a different approach, reasoning that a cartridge that was interchangeable with the universal 9×19 round by means of a simple barrel swap would have a much wider appeal. It would mean that existing guns could be adapted to fire the new cartridge, and also that guns in the new calibre could be easily changed to 9×19 if required; even the magazines remain the same.

This design principle meant that the new CBJ cartridge would have the same overall dimensions as the 9×19 (including the rim diameter) and would need to develop a comparable recoil impulse to ensure reliable gun functioning. The cartridge that emerged from this study was the 6.5×25, with an extended, necked-down case and a short bullet protrusion. Several different loadings in three ballistic groups have been developed.

To compete with the 5.7mm and 4.6mm rounds in meeting the NATO PDW long-range penetration requirement, a sub-calibre loading is used. The standard military “ball” loading is actually a 4mm calibre tungsten bullet in a plastic sabot. The bullet weighs 2 g (31 grains), 2.5 g with its sabot. There is a “spoon-tip” version designed to encourage more rapid bullet upset on impact, and a training variant using cheaper core material. All of these are fired at a muzzle velocity ranging from 730 m/s (2,395 fps) from a 127 mm (5 inch) barrel (the recommended minimum barrel length) to 900 m/s (2,950 fps) from a 305 mm (12 inch) barrel. The tungsten-cored loadings fired from a 12 inch barrel match the trajectory of the 5.56×45 NATO from an M4 Carbine and have much superior penetration to its standard SS109/M855 ammunition, being able to punch through 9mm armour plate. From a 12 inch barrel, velocity at 300 metres is 578 m/s (1,900 fps) at which range it will still penetrate the CRISAT target.

The 6.5mm version of the MP9 has the barrel extended to 150mm (5.9 inches), giving a muzzle velocity of just over 800 m/s (2,620 fps). By comparison, the 5.7×28 P90 and 4.6×30 MP7 both fire as standard 2 gram (31 grain) bullets at about 720 m/s (2,360 fps). A brass-jacketed 6.5mm ball round weighs 7.5 grams (115 grains) compared with 6.2-6.4 grams (96-99 grains) for the 5.7 and 4.6 rounds and around 12-13 grams (185-200 grains) for 9mm. Loaded 15 and 30-round 6.5mm MP9 magazines therefore weigh about 165 and 290 grams (5.8 and 10.2 oz) respectively. Steel and light-alloy cases are being considered by CBJ, but the initial emphasis is on brass.

The other ballistic groups fire full-calibre 6.5mm bullets. One group, primarily intended for police use, fires lightweight 2.5 gram (38.6 grain) bullets at the same velocities as the sub-calibre loadings. These consist of the HET (high energy transfer) brass bullet and a frangible (polymer/metal powder blend) version for use in training or when barrier penetration needs to be minimised. The HET will also penetrate the CRISAT armour target at short range, but these rounds are most effective within 50 metres as the lightweight bullets rapidly lose velocity. The third ballistic group has just one round – subsonic armour piercing – intended for use with a suppressor. It is much heavier than the other bullets at 8 grams (123 grains) and can also penetrate the CRISAT target.

The 6.5×25 cartridge cases were previously made by reforming 9×29 Winchester Magnum brass, but CBJ Tech now has cases specially made for them. These use slightly thicker brass, requiring some adjustment to the propellant loads. The colour of the sabots has not yet been firmed up; originally these were black but this was changed to white to aid recovery from the indoor range’s backstop which has an outer layer of shredded black rubber. For production purposes, different colours may be used to indicate the loading.

SAAB Bofors was initially involved in helping to market the 6.5x25mm while the NATO competition was running, but is no longer involved with the project. CBJ Tech is continuing to develop the ammunition and demonstrate its capability in a wide variety of converted submachine guns and pistols. Those tested to date range from the Steyr AUG SMG to SIG Sauer and Glock pistols. Where necessary, pistols are fitted with barrels extended to 5 inches. A substantial purpose-designed SMG, the CBJ MS, was initially developed to use the new round and features a folding bipod and an optional large-capacity drum magazine in order to act as a light support weapon out to 400m. However, CBJ Tech is now mainly focused on adapting existing 9mm weapons, particularly the MP9 as this is seen as the ideal combination for the PDW role in which there is growing military interest. The remarkable performance of the 6.5mm cartridge, especially in armour penetration, is such that CBJ is intending to offer their conversions only to military and police customers.

How it Works Together: the MP9 in 6.5×25 CBJ

Once in Sweden I had the opportunity to test-fire the MP9 in both 9mm and 6.5mm calibres alongside other weapons for comparison purposes, in two locations; an outdoor range in semiautomatic fire and in CBJ’s indoor range on automatic. Before this, I had only been able to handle the MP9 so I was keen to see how it performed.

In either calibre the MP9 is a pleasure to shoot. I found the spacing between the butt, the pistol grip and the forward handgrip suited me well. The fat, forward-sloping front handgrip greatly aids control and I would certainly not wish to do without it. For semiautomatic fire the little 1.5x Trijicon sight proved ideal and the effective range of the 6.5mm version firing the saboted tungsten ammunition would probably be around 200 metres. In 9mm calibre or for close-range work a 1x holographic red-dot sight (also tried) might be preferred.

Given the MP9’s small size and weight I was surprised by its controllability in automatic fire. As a UK civilian my opportunities for firing automatic weapons are nearly zero but I found no trouble in keeping the rounds on target when firing short bursts; the little gun was much easier to control than an M16 I tried afterwards.

There was very little difference between firing the 9×19 and 6.5×25 versions of the MP9. Subjectively, the 6.5mm version felt as if it had slightly less recoil. My arrival coincided with CBJ’s working up of loads using their new cartridge cases. They hadn’t finalised this process and the 6.5mm version suffered some failures to feed with the new cases (although it performed very well with the older ones) but that was expected to be a temporary glitch.

A key question in my mind was this: OK, the little 4mm tungsten bullet goes through armour like the proverbial hot knife through butter, but how does it perform against unarmoured personnel? This question could only finally be decided in combat, of course, but ballistic gel provides a repeatable substitute for testing purposes. CBJ Tech has the facilities for this, and performed some tests for my benefit. I witnessed three different cartridges being compared at about 5 metres range; the standard 6.5mm saboted ball (this one first had to penetrate a CRISAT target), the full-calibre 6.5mm HET and the 9×19 NATO FMJ. The results are shown in the photograph. The least impressive was the 9mm, while the 6.5mm HET showed far more disruption with rapid bullet upset. The saboted ball also performed significantly better than the 9mm, and according to previous tests I was shown, the spoon-tip version demonstrates even faster upset as one would expect. Interestingly, on one of the test shots of the saboted rounds the sabot was found stuck into the surface of the gel block, which showed that it had followed the bullet down-range quite closely.

To sum up, the Brügger & Thomet MP9 is arguably the best of the new breed of PDWs – or machine pistols or compact SMGs if you prefer. For only about double the size and weight of a pistol (but half the size and weight of an M4 Carbine) it offers perhaps ten times the effective range plus controllable automatic fire. The use of universally-available 9×19 ammunition is proving to be an important benefit, but if more range or penetration is required the gun can easily and reversibly be converted to the impressive and versatile 6.5×25 CBJ. For any military or law enforcement organisations contemplating a weapon in this class, this could be a winning combination.

More information about the 6.5×25 ammunition is presented on the CBJ Tech website at: www.cbjtech.com.

Brügger & Thomet’s website is: www.brugger-thomet.ch/.

Anthony G Williams is an independent ammunition consultant and co-editor of Jane’s Ammunition Handbook. He maintains a website at www.quarry.nildram.co.uk

Personal Defense Weapons, or PDWs, are all the rage. Personal Defense Weapons as a genre are designed to be handy and unobtrusive to carry so as not to interfere with the military duties of combat support and combat service support troops. At the same time they are to be sufficiently lethal as to provide effective defense for the cook, driver, artilleryman, or aviator who might have dire need of an individual weapon in an emergency. While traditional handguns have inadequately filled this niche for decades, military planners have now rightfully begun to expect something more from the firearms industry. The realization that stashing a three-foot assault rifle within the confines of a truck, limousine, or helicopter is not really practical has spurred the recent expansion of several major arms manufacturers into the PDW market. The FN P-90, the H&K MP-7, and the B&T MP-9 represent but a few of these recent offerings.

It has been said that nothing in life is free and this adage applies in spades to small arms design. If you build a weapon that is lightweight and easy to carry you cannot very well expect it to stop a target wearing body armor at 1,000 meters. Lest we become too enamored with today’s whiz-bang PDW offerings, however, let us appreciate that the concept is hardly new.

The WWII-era M-1 carbine has been described in print as an early PDW. Designed to be light and handy while firing an intermediate-sized round, the fully automatic M2 version actually comes closer to meeting the criteria of an assault rifle than a PDW. While no doubt a great improvement over the M1 Garand as regards portability for second echelon troops like truck drivers and artillerymen, the carbine is still three feet long and is a bit of a nuisance to maneuver within a vehicle.

While associated with the Military Armament Corporation, Gordon Ingram and Mitch WerBell actually chased the U.S. military PDW market with some enthusiasm nearly four decades ago. Realizing that a handgun of any flavor, much less a big bore cannon like the M1911 .45, which was the service weapon of the day, was a difficult weapon with which to develop proficiency, Ingram and WerBell set out to convince the U.S. military that the MAC series of submachine guns held the most promise for arming second echelon troops for whom direct engagement with the enemy was a rare unintended consequence of their regular jobs. WerBell in particular traveled to Southeast Asia to demonstrate his weapons to military officers in a combat theater, stirring considerable interest and notoriety but few paying contracts. Given that the targets of the day did not typically wear body armor, a case could be made that they were following a doctrinally sound path.

To quote from the original Military Armament Corporation promotional sales literature for the .380 MAC-11, “The MAC/Ingram M11 is totally new and unlike any handgun ever produced. It falls loosely in the category of submachine guns…yet offers far more, in that it combines pistol mobility and an exceptionally heavy, high volume of automatic fire over reasonable, common combat ranges. Offering a sustained rate of selective semiauto or full automatic fire, the M11 successfully bridges the gap between less efficient pistols or revolvers and the limited applications of more cumbersome machine guns and submachine guns of an earlier bygone era… The vehicle driver, rear area technician, armor crewman, aviator, and crew-served weapons gunner all must have available to them a light, easily-carried automatic weapon which can produce a heavy volume of fire effective at a reasonable range.” Sound familiar? Perhaps this PDW concept is not quite so cutting edge as we might have believed.

The stubby little MAC series submachine guns were indeed handy. By the manufacturing standards of the day they were amazing. Constructed of sheet steel pressings with a minimum of machining reserved for the bolt, barrel, and fire control system, the little buzzguns could be churned out en masse for a song. Offered in 9mm, .45 ACP, and .380 calibers, the designers tried to make the MAC weapons appealing across the military and special operations spectrum.

The full sized MAC-10 in 9mm or .45 is about as compact as one might hope for in a weapon firing a general issue military cartridge. It is, however, at six pounds four ounces unloaded still uncomfortably heavy. This is, incidentally, the same weight as an unloaded, full-sized M16A1. The accelerated rate of fire necessitated by such a short bolt travel in such a tiny package makes control a challenge and effectively negates whatever training benefit a military organization might obtain over a conventional handgun.

The under-appreciated MAC-11 in .380, however, is an interesting option. Where a full size MAC-10 in 9mm tips the scales at nearly six and one half pounds and dances around rather vigorously on full auto, its .380 baby brother weighs only three and one half pounds and is fairly controllable with appropriate technique. While it does cycle at a breathtaking 1,600 rounds per minute or greater dependent upon the ammunition used, with a sound suppressor in place it is pleasant to shoot and, at reasonable ranges, acceptably accurate. If equipped with an extra six inches or so of muzzle attachment to prevent one’s shooting one’s own fingers off, the truck driver or helicopter pilot armed with a MAC-11 would be much better prepared to handle unpleasant encounters with the enemy than his counterpart armed with a conventional handgun. If the threat consists of enemy personnel bereft of body armor, a cloud of .380 projectiles is up to the task. Considering that the MAC-11 dumps its thirty-two round magazine in 1.1 seconds, from the perspective of purely Newtonian physics that’s the muzzle energy equivalent of one and one half .50 caliber BMG rounds. That’s not too shabby for a gun that weighs three and one half pounds and fits in a holster.

To quote further from the promotional literature, “With its high rate of fire and relative ease of control, it has been likened to a one-hand shotgun for its massive bursts of sheet fire… Training is greatly simplified and, as a positive adjunct, combat confidence and troop morale increase with the sure knowledge of improved hit-probability.” While the claims of near-supernatural effectiveness and ease of control might be sugarcoated somewhat, the MAC-11 did bring some interesting capabilities to the table.

The prevailing thought in the sixties and seventies was that machine pistols were interesting novelties but that they had no practical military or law enforcement applications. It was assumed that the blistering rate of fire combined with the compact platform made the military application of the fully automatic handgun more dangerous to friendly bystanders than to the enemy. The Glock model 18 has shown this to be at least somewhat presumptuous. The fully automatic Glock pistol is certainly not an appropriate issue weapon for every cop on the street or your typical Army cook but in the right hands with a little training, fire discipline, and a shoulder stock, a serious shooter can keep most of his rounds in a standard tactical silhouette at reasonable handgun ranges even at more than a thousand rounds per minute. Additionally, given that the Czech M61 Skorpion was a product of a similar era and vision and has gone on to render extensive and successful service in applications spanning both ends of the moral and legal spectrum we can see that the concept, at least at one time, had some serious merit. If nothing else, this gives us cause to rethink the practical applications of Mr. Ingram’s tiny little .380 subgun.

The MAC folding stock design has been much maligned. While extremely compact and ingeniously designed, the MAC stock requires two different manipulations for deployment and is fairly flimsy. First, the wire butt assembly must be compressed together and rotated around into its deployed position. Then the stock catch may be depressed and the stock struts extended. While the stock does wobble badly and, on the MAC-11 at least, is too short for all but the most Lilliputian of shooters, it folds up to practically nothing and provides a much more stable and effective shooting platform than one would find simply shooting the weapon off hand. This seems like one of those classic half-full/half-empty, optimist/pessimist arguments. While the wire stock on the MAC subgun is hardly in the same league with, say, the new multidimensional offering on the FN SCAR, it is still a tremendous improvement over a typical handgun sans stock and a little time on the range proves it.

On the range a serious shooter can achieve some fairly respectable performance with the little MAC. Firing semiautomatically with the stock extended placed all rounds easily within a pie plate out to fifteen meters and the 32-round magazine can keep you launching projectiles one at a time until you get bored with it. The sights are rudimentary at best but still more than adequate for the intended mission. The open bolt design does serve as a detriment to accuracy but its mass is so small that the deleterious effect is minimal. Even in the hands of inexperienced shooters, the MAC and its flimsy folding stock consistently provide better semiautomatic performance on the range than does even the most advanced tactical handgun. Taking a firm stable grip and keeping bursts between three and five rounds, a seasoned shooter can still keep a large percentage of his rounds on that same unfortunate pie plate firing fully automatically so long as a suppressor or similar muzzle attachment is employed. As a former Army helicopter pilot myself, I would much sooner sport a .380 MAC-11 with a half dozen magazines in a survival situation than an issue 9mm handgun and a fraction of the ammunition for nearly the same weight and space envelope.

One of the down sides to servicing the second echelon mission for small arms is that those troops in question are not in general “gun guys” and they do not have the luxury of extensive, regular, and repetitious training time on their individual weapons. In the case of a tiny submachine gun like the MAC-11, this is a recipe for finger amputations or worse. Considering there is not any effective mechanical impediment to allowing one’s support hand to slip out in front of the MAC-11 during recoil, the gun really is exceptionally dangerous to someone not adequately trained in its employment. Before the MAC weapons could have been safely deployed with combat troops some redesign would have been required to make it a little bit tougher to shoot one’s fingers off.

The MAC-11’s time has clearly past. Technology and history have moved on to other things and Gordon Ingram’s diminutive little submachine gun never made much of a splash outside of U.S. collectors’ circles. Were the circumstances slightly different, however, and the military leadership a bit more open-minded, some variation of a MAC series submachine gun might have found its way into the hands of sixty percent of the soldiers in the U.S. armed forces. At the very least that serves as food for thought.

The concept of a PDW (Personal Defense Weapon) is to provide personal firepower in between that of a pistol and a carbine. Several attempts have been made: the 5.7x28mm caliber by FN, the 4.6x30mm by Heckler & Koch as well as the 6x35mm by Knight’s Armament Company. The U.S. military has asked from time to time for lighter and more compact versions of the M4/M16. Colt was involved with one in particular, showed up with it and then told it was nice but they really do not have a requirement for it.

Around 1997, Colt’s Manufacturing Company, Inc. went to work on a new project. Colt was approached by Michael Harris of Special Analytical Services (SAS) with a concept of a mini-assault rifle that would have the purpose of being a personal defense weapon as well as have law enforcement and military applications. By design, the intent of the MARS was to replace the 9mm pistol as well as numerous variations of submachine guns. A Colt development team, headed by Engineer James Taylor, set out to bring Harris’ concept to life. The MARS was designed with the concept of having a smaller and lighter weapon that could win a fight against an AK47. The MARS was, and still is, different from the FN and the H&K cartridges. The 5.7×28 and 4.6x30mm cartridges primary purpose was to defeat body armor. Unfortunately after they defeat the armor, they have very poor terminal performance. They are ballistically very similar to the .22 Winchester Magnum cartridges. Harris believed the MARS could replace 80% of all pistols and submachine guns as well as up to 20% of rifles and carbines.

The 5.56x30mm Cartridge

The MARS fired a newly developed 5.56x30mm cartridge. Ballistically, the 5.56x30mm MARS cartridge is very similar to the .221 Fireball. The new cartridge was developed to enhance accuracy and range over current cartridges such as the 9mm NATO and 5.7x28mm. The MARS cartridge exploits the high energy densities of modern ball powders. The 5.56x30mm cartridge would be effective out to 300+ meters. Another goal was to enhance lethality over existing small submachine guns. The 5.56x30mm cartridge would have the penetration capabilities of the 5.7x28mm cartridge but have increased lethality over that as well as 9mm NATO ammunition. The MARS cartridge was a wildcat cartridge that was never made in quantity. All 5.56x30mm ammunition was hand loaded by Michael Harris. The cartridge began with the standard 5.56x45mm cartridge case. It was trimmed down and formed in a custom die to the proper dimensions of the 5.56x30mm cartridge. It was loaded with a 55gr full metal jacket boat tail (M193 Ball bullet), 62gr full metal jacket boat tail with penetrator core (M855/SS109 bullet) as well as a tracer bullet. Using the 55-grain bullet, the MARS rifle would fire it at a muzzle velocity of 2,620 fps out of its 10-inch barrel with muzzle energy of 838 ft/lbs. There was a problem found with the pressure levels within the 5.56x30mm MARS cartridge as the case was prone to bulge or rupture.

The MARS cartridge can be loaded to any mission specific configuration which could include hollow and soft point bullets as well as ball and armor-piercing. It is loaded up with magnum pistol-type ball propellant, which is burned at rifle pressures to achieve higher velocity in its short 10.5 inch barrel. The MARS is battlesight zeroed in at 200 meters and the path of the bullet stays within approximately 3 inches of the line of sight. The 5.56x30mm bullet will penetrate a Kevlar helmet and vest at 300 meters. The MARS was also chambered for the 9x30mm MARS cartridge which was a necked down 10mm magnum cartridge case.

There were three prototypes made during the course of development. The upper and lower receiver, bolt and stock assembly were all shortened. According to Colt’s MARS Project Manager Jim Taylor, every component was basically walked through the manufacturing process. The components nearly all started out life as standard M4 components and were modified to MARS specifications. Due to the shorter 5.56x30mm cartridge, a new magazine was created. This enabled the magazine well to be shorter contributing to the shorter upper and lower receiver. The magazine was made from a standard GI 30-round magazine. Material was removed from the middle and welded together. The follower was cut down as well. The magazine was merely a prototype and very clumsy but worked well for the testing and proof of concept.

The overall length of the collapsible stock was shorter than the standard carbine. The front portion of the stock just ahead of the locking latch was removed of an inch. Due to the shorter buffer tube a modified buffer was designed. It was similar in design to the standard buffer, just shorter. Due to the decrease in length, two tungsten weights were used and with the use of tungsten, the smaller buffer was nearly identical in weight to the standard H buffer.

The bolt carrier was shortened overall, particularly the rear behind the bolt carrier key and used a modified firing pin. The carrier key was shortened and only has one carrier key screw. The firing pin was shortened and the rear head was removed. The rear of the firing pin is visible from the top of the bolt carrier. The bolt is the standard rifle bolt assembly.

The lower receiver was modified to make it more compact and to accept the shorter magazine. The magazine well was cut in the middle, material removed and electron beam welded back together to accept the shorter magazine. This is easily seen in the prototype due to the bottom of the magazine well not being straight. The new process of electron beam welding allowed the fabrication of prototypes for a relatively modest cost. According to Colt project leader Jim Taylor, the MARS rifle may have been the first extensive use of electron beam welding for firearms prototyping. Due to the desire to maintain the bolt design and existing cam path in the bolt carrier, the MARS rifle had to modify the location of the hammer/trigger pins, selector lever and the automatic sear had to be moved slightly rearward. On the prototype MARS lower receivers, the fire control holes were drilled as per mil-spec for the M4 carbine. The original holes had to be plugged and new ones drilled in the proper location. Due to the hammer being moved rearward, a large steel roll pin was installed to prevent damage to the lower receiver if the trigger was pulled without the upper receiver installed. If the hammer was to fall on the aluminum receiver it would damage the receiver because it would hit the inside of the receiver on an angle rather than square. Due to the firing pin head being shortened, a pocket was cut into the hammer where it will strike the firing pin. This pocket allows the hammer to strike the firing pin square rather than on an angle. Also, if the disconnector was to fail, the firing pin could not protrude through the breech face to detonate the primer unless the bolt was locked. Additionally, if the hammer was to ride the bolt, there would not be sufficient energy to fire the cartridge. The MARS was designed to make use of as many existing machines and fixtures as possible to minimize the potential cost of going into production.

The upper receiver was made shorter as well. The upper receiver was cut right in front of the fired cartridge case deflector, material removed and electron beam welded back together. Additionally the ejection port dust cover was shortened. Standard handguards were used as well as the gas tube. The bayonet lug was removed from the front sight assembly. The 10-inch barrel uses the standard 1/7 inch twist and has the standard A2 compensator. The top of the barrel is stamped “MARS” to denote the caliber.

Preliminary Colt testing of the MARS indicated some highly desirable characteristics. Although relatively small, the weapon pointed like a rifle. The MARS equipped with a 1.5x optical sight firing low impulse 5.56x30mm cartridges at a relatively low cyclic rate appeared to many who fired it to be one of the easiest weapons to learn how to shoot. In hindsight, it appeared the use of the proprietary 5.56x30mm cartridge was an impediment to selling the weapon. Colt wanted to have a proprietary cartridge. Perhaps a more suitable solution would have been to go with the already currently available .221 Remington cartridge. With modern propellants, the .221 Remington cartridge may have been loaded to achieve the goals set out by Harris and Taylor for this proof of concept, and to do it without chamber pressure problems.

MARS was patented on October 27, 1998 (U.S. Patent Number 5,827,992) by Colt engineer James Taylor and Michael Harris (founder of Specialized Analytical Services). Unfortunately the MARS never found acceptance and never entered production. The main interest in the MARS was by the Israelis as a possible replacement for their police Uzi SMG. This was exactly the type of market the MARS was designed for. The production numbers that were discussed would have been 2,000 guns per year for a term of 10 years. Due to this low number of units versus the cost to tool up for the MARS, Colt decided against going into production. Colt had also felt that introducing a new compact firearm would hinder sales of their M16A2/M4 carbine variations.

I would like to thank Project Leader Mr. Jim Taylor for his assistance with this article by providing first hand knowledge of this program. I would also like to thank Colt Defense for providing access to photograph this interesting prototype weapon.

(Small Arms Review contributing editor Christopher Bartocci works as a Technical Specialist for Colt Defense LLC. The articles written by this author are of his own research and evaluation and in no way represent those of Colt Defense LLC.)

Almost twenty years before the West went PDW-crazy with advent of micro-caliber rounds that made the concept viable at last, a machine pistol was created in Poland showing all the features required from that seemingly novel class of automatic weapons. It was officially called the Pistolet maszynowy wzór 1963 (PM-63), but most people refer to it as the “Rak” (Polish for cancer). It was lightweight, compact, capable of serious firepower, yet holsterable to leave the hands free for whatever job they were needed for. When boxy just started to seem sexy, those classy, curving lines of the Rak pleased the eye of beholder.

The re-armament of armies with automatic rifles chambered for intermediate ammunition throughout the 1950s and 1960s resulted in growing marginalization of the classic pistol-caliber submachine gun. Yet, it was this very same process of warfare modernization that nearly brought it down to the brink of extinction, paradoxically, brought it up back again – although in a completely different guise. A new wave of compact submachine guns, or even machine pistols, were meant to be the self-preservation weapon for commanders, gunners, drivers, pilots and the like. Thus, a PDW-style weapon had to be devised from scratch because the level of technology available in the 1950s did not allow for the intermediate-round assault-rifle to be cut down any smaller, and the classical submachine gun was too large and bulky to fill the need. Something completely new was needed – and quick.

There was one additional problem to the East of the Iron Curtain. Wartime experience had proved that the 7.62×25 Tokarev round was too powerful to have a controllable compact submachine gun chambered for it. Additionally, despite the remarkable energy level and penetration of this round, its terminal ballistics were less than stellar. It was even worse in its handgun ammunition role. The Soviet Army, having re-armed itself from a 19th century virtually recoilless, revolver (the M1895 Nagant), they loathed the large, heavy and kicking like a mule, yet inefficient Tokarev M1933 pistol. After the war in 1951, the Soviet military went to another extreme adopting instead a small-sized, blowback Makarov pistol. It was chambered for a new round, the 9×18 “57-M-181S”, designed by Boris V. Syemin, referred to colloquially as the “Makarov round.” It was reasonably accurate and efficient at pistol distances, but way too weak to have any effect at the classical “front-line” submachine gun ranges. On the other hand, its small size and limited level of energy allowed for creation of the compact machine pistols, like the Stechkin APS. In the field, though, where obsolete tactical doctrine called for it to perform a surrealistic role of the soldier’s primary combat weapon, it was soon deemed inefficient and replaced with a folding stock AKS-47 automatic rifle.

One of the facets of the post-Stalinist “thaw” in the Eastern Bloc was the drive towards legalization and solidification of the satellite-states dependency on the USSR and, in military terms, taking shape of an alliance to counter-weigh NATO. The treaty was signed in Warsaw, Poland, in May 1955, and therefore it was called the Warsaw Pact – even though it was steered solely from Moscow and served solely Moscow’s interests. De facto, it changed the situation marginally – it was still the Soviet Union that commanded the “allied” militaries directly from Moscow, but in appearance they were now independent, national military forces – if only on paper. The Treaty allowed for a re-creation of the national façade in each member-state’s military, and loosened the up-to-then iron grip the Soviet Union had over their defense industries and armaments. At the same time the “allied” militaries were shown the hitherto top secret Kalashnikov rifle and Makarov pistol with their respective ammunition, whose appearance was met with amazement. A lot money was spent by the Czechs on their intermediate round while their new Big Brother already had such ammunition for several years. So much money was wasted to buy licenses to manufacture the “world’s most advanced” models like the M44 Mosin-Nagant carbine, the PPSh41 and PPS43 submachine guns or the TT33 pistol, while the seller knew perfectly well that they’re obsolete and even worse – that immediately after the new rounds and arms are de-classified, the “allies” would have to pay even more for another set of licenses. The growing concern over these practices made the new post-20th Party Congress Soviet leadership take an unprecedented step. As the military establishment was adamant that the 7.62×39 chambered rifle had to be the backbone of each “member-state” army, the manufacturing licenses for SKS and AK-47 were for a limited time offered at very reasonable discount prices, while in the handguns department they were left to their own devices altogether. This was a remarkable step aside from the Stalinist-era extortion-style marketing, and most Warsaw Pact states jumped upon the occasion. The neo-Stalinist Czechoslovak leaders of the era chose to literally “stick to their guns” – and became the only Warsaw Pact state to have their army completely kitted-out with domestic hardware.

Wilniewczyc Redux

Piotr Wilniewczyc, the creator of the most famous Polish small arms, the Vis wz.35 (a.k.a. the Radom) pistol and the Mors wz.39 submachine gun (SAR Vol. 8, No. 3) survived the war, and after the cessation of hostilities returned to work. His weapons designing abilities were not needed, though as the official position of the new rulers was that designing indigenous guns is pointless, as the superiority of the Soviet small arms design is prevalent. He started to teach mechanics again, at first in the Lodz Technical University, as the one in Warsaw was laid in ruins. He then returned to the capital, and while teaching the young engineers, he wrote several books that for years were the backbone of small arms designers’ education in Poland.

After 1955, the Polish small arms design school was revived; as fortunately many of the pre-war foremost designers survived both World War II and the subsequent civil war and political purges. In 1957, Wilniewczyc started the design of his first post-war semi-automatic pistol, the WiR wz.57, chambered for the 9×18 round. His design eventually lost to the competitors, the group of young military small arms experts who designed what later became the P-64 Army pistol.

While still honing his WiR wz.57 design, Mr. Wilniewczyc started to think about the compact, light automatic weapon for close-combat role, chambered for the pistol round: something along the same lines as the APS Stechkin, but from the first instant intended to be a purely self-defensive weapon, and not the primary armament. It was meant for platoon leaders, support weapon crews, airborne troops and the Ministry of Interior special services. In late 1956 and early 1957 he had already created a study of such weapon, with the grip-mounted magazine well and slide telescoping the barrel, something of a cross between a classic submachine gun and a semi-automatic pistol. It was an incarnation of the ideas developed by his former subordinate from pre-war times, Jerzy Podsendkowski, in his 1944 MCEM-2 weapon, designed in Great Britain. The MCEM-2 was an ancestor to the whole generation of the post-World War II submachine guns with grip-contained magazines and breech bolts telescoping the barrels. The Czech Holeczek submachine guns (Sa-23/25 chambered for the 9×19 and Sa-24/26 for 7.62×25) and Israeli Uzi being just two most famous of the lot.

The 1957 study weapon was blowback operated and already fitted with the rate reducer. The form of that slide proved to be the most outstanding (some would even say outlandish) features of the Wilniewczyc gun. It is an outside slide, reciprocating along the rails on top of the frame just like an ordinary semiautomatic pistol, but contrary to the APS, also with an outside slide, this weapon fired from an open, and not closed bolt. The barrel, fixed yet easily replaceable, was connected to the frame by five ribs – just like in John M. Browning’s FN pocket pistols.

At that time the code-name Rak was born. Several urban legends are connected with that name; the most persistent of them making it an abbreviation from Reczny Automat Komandosów (Commando Hand-held Automatic Weapon). The late Professor Stanislaw Kochanski, close associate and pupil of Mr. Wilniewczyc, disputed the theory. The word “Automat” was used in Russia when Mr. Wilniewczyc studied small arms designing there during the WW1, and later on, up to this date (e.g. Avtomat Kalashnikova, the AK), only for automatic rifle-class designs. Mr. Wilniewczyc was a terminological purist. He time and again chastised his students and co-workers alike for such blunders, and it is highly unlikely that he would ever call his work using the wrong term, as it was chambered for the pistol round. According to Kochanski, the name Cancer could stem from two things. First, the cocked weapon was very unusually shaped for those days as it looked as if it was positioned backwards, just like the canard airplane flying the horizontal stabilizer first. In the Polish language there is an expression “chodzic rakiem”, meaning “walking backwards”, like the cancer moves. The indirect proof that the name was used as a word – and not as an acronym – is Wilniewczyc’s own joking remark from the times, where he fought an uphill struggle against the terminal illness that eventually killed him in December 1960. He is reputed to say that, “Either the cancer is going to finish me first, or I would finish the Cancer earlier,” playing on the names of his gun and his illness.

The cancer got the better of him on December 23, 1960. After his death, the Rak design team with Marian Wakalski, Grzegorz Czubak and Tadeusz Bednarski took over the whole of the design and started to improve it.

The Novel Design

What started to emerge after a year of their work was a truly remarkable gun, with many novel and unconventional design treats. Rak was a selective fire weapon, yet the trigger had no selector lever of any kind. It fired semi-automatically when squeezed lightly and fully automatic if squeezed all the way back. This was pioneered in the Czechoslovak Sa-23/25 SMG, but the Polish design is radically different, using only the general idea. Soon, in 1969 the Austrian Steyr MPi-69 joined the dual-squeeze-selective-fire club, but the feature remained unique until in 1977 when the space-age Steyr AUG rifle made it a household idea.

The slide was still an outside-riding type, similar to the Danish M/1945 Madsen. According to Kochanski, Wilniewczyc deemed that a vital advantage of his design, making the Rak much more difficult to jam. He compared such a slide to the Roman sandal – if a pebble enters it, all the wearer has to do is shake it out and continue walking. If that pebble enters the high laced boot (or the bolt buried under bolt cover, deep inside the receiver) it takes much more time and effort to get it out. He might well be right – but on the other hand (or foot?) it is a lot harder for the pebble to enter the Boondocker than the Roman sandal.

The outside slide was provided with a muzzle jump compensator – a trough-shaped projection of the slide extending beneath the muzzle, which Polish soldiers christened the “spoon.” This spoon travels with the slide, which enables for another useful unique feature of the Rak; it can be cocked single-handedly by resting the spoon against some hard object and giving the pistol grip a shove until the slide trips the sear and remains in the cocked position. After depressing the trigger, the spoon would now travel back to battery with the slide and will be projecting under the muzzle at the moment of discharge deflecting some of the gases upward to reduce the muzzle jump.

The case extraction is also somewhat unusual. The extractor is conventionally placed in the bolt face of the slide but the ejector is actually a projection of the left magazine lip, as in the Webley & Scott M1909 pistol. Wilniewczyc liked that feature and to implement it he went back to where all burp-gun designers fled from: he revived the Schmeisser staggered-row, single feed magazine. Unfortunately, this was a very bad idea combined with a cartridge as short and stubby as the 9×18. The staggered-row, double feed Stechkin magazine is way easier to fill.

Another Rak gadget is an inertia in-line rate reducer. It retards the return of the slide in fully automatic fire to limit the rate of fire, which in a compact submachine gun is a good idea. The rate reducer consists of two parts: a weight reciprocating within the rear part of the slide, and a spring-loaded lever rising from the rear part of the frame. The weight travels back with the slide. When the slide hits the rear of the frame and rapidly decelerates, the inertia of the weight overcomes the action of the weight spring, continuing on its rearward movement. As the weight slides rearwards inside the slide, it reveals a slit in the bottom of the reducer chamber. Into that slit a spring-loaded reducer lever hook engages that holds the slide open. Then the reducer weight hits the rear end of the slide and, after a very brief interval, it’s the spring’s time to overcome the inertia of the weight eventually slamming it forward inside the reducer chamber of the slide. The conical head of the weight pushes the reducer lever hook out of engagement with the slide slit thus freeing the slide to return to battery. If the trigger is squeezed all the way, the sear remains depressed and the slide is propelled home by the return spring stripping another cartridge from the magazine, chambering it, and fires. If the trigger is squeezed just half-way, the sear is released by the disconnector and catches the slide and holds it until the trigger is released to reset the trigger mechanism.

The rate reducer weight of Wilniewczyc’s original project was truly cylindrical in shape: a single piece made of tungsten – a metal much heavier, but also much more expensive, than steel. This early reducer is set on a guide rod, along which it travels, which at the same time keeps the weight’s spring. It was only known from the patent drawing and it is not sure if it was ever actually made. The later reducer weight is also single-piece affair but longer, with tapering front and rear edges, and with a rear part of somewhat smaller diameter. The guide rod was dispensed with, the reducer weight was made solid, and the spring is much wider in diameter. The narrower rear part (stem) of the weight doubles as the spring guide. Such arrangement was retained as late as early production, and all the Polish Army field manuals, technical manuals and weapon’s charts feature that type of reducer. But after only one year of production, a military review board ordered several changes, mostly to decrease the unit price of the Rak. One of these was to get rid of the tungsten weight. Instead, it was made of steel, elongated to retain the weight. Shortly afterwards it was plain that the elongated one-piece reducer weight increased the wear significantly. As of the early 1970s, all single-piece reducers were ordered to be replaced with a new, two-piece design. This was also an all-steel one, with no tungsten, and consisted of two parts, that according to the late issue technical manual, are called “reducer” (the cylindro-conical forward part) and “inertia weight” (the rest), as if they performed some different roles. The laws of physics make them both travel together and act as a single unit – but now that they are separate, the tensions developed are smaller, and the weight breaks off less frequently than the one-piece model. In its final design, the reducer slows the rate of fire from well over 1,000 rpm to 600-650 rpm.

One of the most characteristic devices of the Rak is the folding forward grip. This is a late addition, though. At first the Rak was fitted with a wooden fore end and a top-folding metal stock with a rotating, U-shaped, arched butt plate that was somewhat reminiscent of the AKS-47, but narrower. The weapon could be fired with the stock in one of the three positions:

• folded with the butt plate folded under the fore end;
• folded with butt plate extended to form a fore grip;
• unfolded for firing from the shoulder.

The butt plate doubling as a fore grip was another Czech influence, even though the Czech Sa-25/26 had a side folding butt. Firing the Rak with both hands had to be inaccurate, as the need to use the stock as the fore grip precluded using it from the shoulder. Also, such fore grip was extended in front of the muzzle, leading – it was feared – to heat, blast and occasional bullet injuries to the weak hand. That is when the compensator “spoon” was first devised – to fight the muzzle jump as much as to improve the safety of use. The compensator shielded the hand from hot gases, precluded extending fingers into the path of the bullet, and if the firer did in fact place his finger in it inadvertently, the slide would have stopped short of igniting the round. However, fitting of the compensator also precluded unfolding the stock with the slide in battery. The firer had to cock the weapon before handling the stock which called for sweeping his hand in front of the muzzle of the cocked machine pistol. This was intolerable for obvious safety reasons.

Nevertheless, in January 1962, the design was sent to the Radom plant, then called the “General Walter” Metal Works, for further development and prototype work. There, in late 1963 and early 1964, a prototype batch of 20 weapons was manufactured; already with a completely redesigned stock. The top-folder gave way to the extendable butt stock with two machined flat stock bars connected by a small rotating sheet metal butt plate. As the new stock precluded using the butt plate as a fore grip, the fore end was also redesigned. It was then made of plastic, and part of the fore end was hinged to form a folding fore grip. That design feature can be traced to the Mauser 1957 prototype submachine gun. Now that the weak hand holding the fore grip was safely tucked under the fore end, the Rak could be fired with both hands holding the grips with the stock resting on the shoulder, which improved the accuracy in burst fire by enhancing control over the gun. The new stock and fore end were designed by two designers from Radom; Ryszard Chelmicki and Ernest Durasiewicz, who were given a Polish patent for it in October, 1972. One cannot help seeing something familiar when observing the ultra-modern HK MP7 with a folding fore grip of almost identical shape and purpose.

The price to pay for all these novelty features was a somewhat shaky and less user-friendly stock and fore end. It was found perfectly acceptable in a PDW-class firearm for second-line soldiers in the 1960s and 70s, when the marksmanship training for such users was tepid enough not to show the deficiencies of the new design. The attrition rate of firearms used in special units was high enough to cover them up, as well. If you got a bunch of snake-eaters tough enough to break a Kalashnikov rifle, then they’re poised to destroy any weapon in the world anyway. Nonetheless, to the objective eye, the fore grip and stock really did possess some design flaws. The flimsy, loosely-hinged butt plate was utterly useless for any purpose – intended or otherwise. It was designed with only one objective in mind: to fit snugly under the rear of the frame while folded. For that reason the plate was but a 2 inch long strip of flat thin metal that was too short and too flimsy to matter. To obtain that all-important flush fit under the frame, one had to rotate it through 270 degrees every time it was deployed or folded, which meant there were no butt plate catch or retainer to keep it open. Many special units of both military and police simply duck-taped it open spoiling the only purpose it ever served efficiently. They also soon developed the practice making the folding fore grip useless. They mostly fired the Rak with fore grip folded, because the hinge was weak and the fore grip soon developed an unacceptable degree of play.

The concept of the PDW-class weapon called for a compact, holsterable weapon. The size and weight of the folded Rak were ideal for that, but initially only the long, 25-round magazines were meant for it. This forced the user to carry the weapon empty – or else the long magazine sticking out from the grip would make his service life, especially the withdrawing, a nightmare. Thus, the next Radom implemented improvement was the creation of a shorter 15-round “holster” magazine, which could be kept inside the grip of the holstered Rak, to give the soldier a chance to fire off those most important first shots straight after the drawing of the weapon.

The first prototype batch of 1964 had all the plastic parts machined rather than molded. The moulds were too expensive to risk making them before the final shape of the stocks was sealed. On the left side of the slide, under the sight, all were decorated with an etched Polish Eagle, which was a clear reference to the pre-war tradition of Polish Eagle marked receivers and slides of Radom made firearms. The powers-that-be were not amused, though, and Radom was ordered that no other weapons be decorated that way.

After the military acceptance testing program was finished, the Rak was officially accepted into the inventory of the Polish Army as the “9mm pistolet maszynowy wzór 1963 (PM-63)”. In 1964, the Radom plant started to prepare for production.

PM-63

Mass production started in 1967, though, and it was only in the latter 1960s that the first new PDWs made their way into the hands of the Polish soldiers, soon becoming the regulation side-arm of tank crews, scouts, RPG gunners, ATG missile-crews and drivers. Soon the down-sides of the small machine pistol started to show, which gave rise to many, not always grounded, accusations leveled at the Rak. Some of these stemmed from the novelty of the design and the lack of experience on the part of the designers. Some were ironed out during the production run such as the twice redesigned magazine catch that eliminated the inadvertent dropping-out of the magazine, while the redesigned stock bars catch facilitated the deployment of the stock. Not all of the users were happy with these changes: the magazine catch, eventually buried into the grip plates, was now hard to release while shooting in gloves. Other problems were rooted in the lack of knowledge and disregard for gun-safety and/or gun exploitation rules. Many reducer levers were damaged during re-assembly, if the reducer lever was not positioned properly prior to re-attaching the slide. In late production Raks, a special bracket was added to eliminate the lever over-travel, which cured the problem completely.

Other design changes were aimed at reduction of the unit price. Already discussed was the all-steel reducer weight replacing the tungsten one, but the changes also included redesign of the frame to replace the deep-drilling of the return spring channel with just milling a groove for it. The chrome plated-all-over barrel of the first Raks was replaced with a blued one, retaining only the chrome plated bore and chamber. The captive recoil spring unit, consisting of a two-piece telescoping spring rod with end pieces holding the spring that enabled the return unit to be detached as one piece, was replaced by a simple spring and one piece short rod.

Two types of special replacement barrels were devised for the PM-63. One was a blank-firing drill barrel meant for troop training and movie industry use. On the outside, the blank barrel was identical to the real one, but the bore was constricted to enable the weapon to cycle fully automatically when firing blanks. It was designed by Marian Gryszkiewicz and Ryszard Chelmicki of the Radom factory, who were given a patent for it in 1978.

The other special purpose replacement barrel was the silenced version for the special forces. The barrel was made longer, sturdier, and the part extending forward of the slide’s spoon was threaded to accept an all-metal sound suppressor designed by Marian Gryszkiewicz (this project was code-named “Safloryt”). As the suppressor casing obscured the sights, the suppressor was fitted with its own set of sights, placed on top of the casing. As the “Makarov round” develops a sub-sonic muzzle-velocity, standard ammunition could be used for the suppressed version. No hard data is available as to how many of these were ever manufactured.

The PM-63 was exported in the early 1970s by the Cenzin Foreign Trade Office. It was at Cenzin’s instigation that a prototype 9×19 variant, called the PM-70, was designed in 1971. To accommodate for the new, more conical-cased ammunition of the significantly higher muzzle velocity and energy level, a heavier .55 kilogram slide had to replace the old model, with corresponding changes to the grip area and magazine. Despite the initial concern, the prototype was shooting well from the very start, and while the recoil was significantly higher, mechanically it fared surprisingly well. Nevertheless, Cenzin didn’t follow through on their marketing strategy and only one batch of 20 PM-70 Raks chambered for the 9mm Luger were ever manufactured.

All in all, within the decade of Rak production between 1967 and 1977, approximately 70,000 basic variant PM-63 PDW-class machine pistols were manufactured.

The Rak Heritage

For four decades the PM-63 Rak was a tool of trade for Polish Army soldiers, and never had to be tested in real combat by the original owner. Some of its critics would add here “fortunately,” which unfortunately, is true. Without a doubt, it was a remarkable achievement of the Polish designing and manufacturing capabilities, as the only (except Skorpion) Eastern Bloc burp-gun ever to be manufactured in a sizeable quantity and serving in front-line units of the major Warsaw Pact army. On the other hand, it is a weapon that added her own, inimitable, sins to the long inventory of the blowback burp-guns’ deficiencies. The wobbly useless butt plate, the breaking off fore grip and exposed magazine catch were already mentioned. But the most controversial feature of the PM-63 is arguably her exposed slide-style breechblock. Scores of urban legends surrounded it, while still serving in the Army. Not a single instance of eye-ball crushing contributed to that slide was ever corroborated, even though sporadically gas mask oculars were indeed scratched or even broken. The sights reciprocating with the slide proved no big deal in reality, too. After all, the Rak was not designed for sniping. It is a war time ultimate defense machine pistol: more of a saturation “spray and pray” area weapon. The first shot is more or less aimed, where the rest happen to hit is a matter of recoil, muzzle jump and physical strength of the shooter. Her accuracy was enough for self-defense, and the military users praised her as a handy, compact, well-balanced gun. A shooter unable to score at least Marksman with her was a rarity. On the other hand, Rak was practically useless – or could even be dangerous – for Police SWAT work, as a precision weapon for physical elimination of an armed and dangerous individual on a busy street. Nevertheless, back in the Communist days, where real submachine guns like the HK MP 5 were just something seen on TV, these were in fact used by SWAT teams of the Polish Police, and still can be seen carried by bank guards. Railway Police (SOK) also uses them, and recently there was a botched hold-up in Warsaw, in December 2004, when a railway cop opened up with his Rak wounding one of the would-be robbers.

The unusual design and appealing shape of the PM-63 triggered much interest in the world. Although no foreign army ever officially adopted it as a standard-issue military weapon, some Communist police forces did. Many of these were bought by the former East German People’s Police, where they were called the “klein-Maschinenpistole PM-63” and issued to the DDR SWAT teams (BV, Bereitschaft Volkspolizei) and to the anti-terror units. Some of these survived the fall of the Berlin Wall and even served for a while with the police of the Free State of Saxony in the re-unified Germany, along with the Polish-built helicopters. Smaller quantities of the Raks were imported by other ComBloc countries, like Cuba or Vietnam.

The latter export resulted in a copy-cat version manufactured in China. During the Sino-Vietnamese war of 1979, the Chinese captured some of the PM-63s used by the Vietnamese tank crewmen. The Chinese were just on the look-out for a compact machine pistol for their Special Forces and Police, and so the state-owned Norinco Works copied the Rak and started a limited production of the Type 82 machine pistol. This weapon is known in two variations, differing in sights arrangement. One of these was an attempt at lengthening of the Rak’s sight radius by relocating the rear sight to the rear extreme of the slide. The other has sights identical to the Polish version. Both are copy-cat versions of the early production Rak, with old-style butt catch and exposed magazine catch. The Chinese Rak was also fitted with a second, front, sling eyelet, which points to the fact, that it was devised as a principal weapon, slung across the chest, and not to be holstered. The Rak copy had lost internal Chinese competition to the Schnellfeuer-style Type 85 machine pistol, but nevertheless, the Type 82 was frequently exhibited at the international arms fairs of the late 1980s and early 1990s.

As with all other Communist compact machine pistols, the Rak was frequently used as an urban guerilla weapon by the leftist terrorists of the 1970s. The PM-63 had the dubious distinction of being featured in several high-profile cases. It was probably the East German channel through which the Rak reached the Red Army Faction in Germany. On September 5, 1977, the PM-63 was used during the Hanns-Martin Schleyer kidnapping. In the 1970s it was frequently seen on TV, in the hands of various Palestinian factions roaming Beirut. This was probably the source of the Rak found by the SAS Pagoda Troop storming the Iranian Embassy at the Princess Gate in London, hijacked by the anti-Khomeini Iranian dissidents in 1980. Footage from Panama, taken prior to Operation Just Cause in 1990, show some of the General Noriega irregular “supporters” armed with PM-63s and shooting them towards the crowd of the anti-Noriega protesters. As late as the 1990s, the PLO leader, Yasser Arafat, was photographed with a holstered PM-63 within reach on his desk.

The PM-63 was also used with tragic effect in Poland. On December 17, 1981, shortly after Martial Law was imposed, at the Wujek coal mine the Katowice riot police SWAT team armed with Raks shot 17 miners protesting against the Communist rules.

Shortly thereafter a new compact submachine gun was designed, to replace the ageing Rak. The Glauberyt Project led by the Radom Plant designers, culminated in the new PM-84, with enclosed bolt, but still chambered for the 9×18. Despite apparent success, it was never mass-produced. At that time the 9×19 Luger ammunition was introduced into the Army and Police, and the thoroughly redesigned PM-84 was accepted as the PM-84P. But that’s quite another story…

SAR had the opportunity to be there, as we have in the past, to try out HK’s newest items. Some of these we are not able to discuss with the readers yet, but rest assured that HK is out at the forefront again, innovating and challenging with new designs. When they tell me that we can tell you, then you, the readers will get the first look at some amazing new small arms.

One item that I did have a chance to openly test, was the newly adopted German army version of the HK PDW offering in 4.6 x 30mm, type classified as the MP7. We have some nice pictures of this weapon presented here, and some responses to the test. We will be doing a much more comprehensive test at a later date, when the US market is prepared to receive production models of the PDW- we’ll show you what is coming to the US LE and Military markets at that point.

“Personal Defense Weapons”, “Individual Defense Weapons” and their similar named counterparts are intended to fill multiple roles. The fundamental idea is to arm troops that are not the basic infantry, so that they will have small, effective firepower to utilize if combat comes into their area. This means drivers, maintenance personnel, tank crews, artillery personnel, air crews, and the REMF group in general. Too often these soldiers and sailors are confronted with combat that they are unprepared for. One instance that comes to mind is the US Air Force personnel who were on the airbase in Da Nang during the Tet offensive in 1968. The US Marines were providing defense at the airbase, and the Air Force personnel were generally not armed, M16s were left in the armory. When the VC/ NVA forces overran the Marine defensive positions, it left the Air Force personnel unarmed, with the resultant loss of 18 aircraft and many lives. The lack of weaponry was from orders up the line, where certain officers viewed these military personnel as not being able to perform their jobs if they had to drag their rifles around with them. This policy cost a lot of lives, as well as lost equipment, and that unfortunate situation has been repeated countless times in armies around the world. An issue sidearm/ handgun was insufficient for fighting AK47 armed adversaries.

Giving these support troops a viable weapon is a wonderful idea- a weapon that makes them efficient in defense out to 200 meters, in a package small enough that it can be carried or kept at hand at all times.

Additionally, the MP7 lends itself to Special Operations due to its small size, controllability and probable lethality.

Typical of HK products, the MP7 worked flawlessly, and was smooth to operate. The readers would expect that the German engineers working on this project would not bring an offering to the table until they were fairly certain they had the bugs out and were fine tuning the project, and they would be correct in that assumption. There is, however, a more controversial question here than “Can HK produce a high quality, effective Personal Defense Weapon”. It has to do with the ammunition.

As readers of SAR are no doubt aware, controversy once again engulfs the small arms community. This article is not going to arbitrate a final agreement on it, but I think it is safe to say that if we view the results of steel plate firing and accept the ballistic evidence from HK, we can punch some holes in the side of the argument that is “Dissing” the new smaller cartridges like the FN 5.7 x 28mm and the HK 4.6 x 30mm. While the claims of both FN and HK are that their cartridges are very different, with different results, the “Old School” is lumping them together and saying that neither cartridge has the terminal ballistics necessary to be an effective combat arm.

Your faithful correspondent is here to say that while this may be an old argument, at the risk of being somewhat disrespectful to some very learned men, it is not necessarily true. We went through this with the “9mm vs 45 acp”, the “Magnum” debacle, and more to the point- in the “7.62 x 51mm Nato vs the 5.56 x 45mm” debate. The old school at that time argued that you needed a full thirty cal, with all of its burning propellant, to effectively kill the enemy. The first reports from Vietnam on the terminal ballistics of the new AR15 5.56mm cartridge were that the soldiers were shocked by the massive damage it did to the enemy. Contrary to the naysayers, this new, small cartridge was indeed effective, and at the range of engagement at 300 meters or less, the lighter weight of the 5.56 cartridge allowed carrying extra ammunition with the same combat load, which was a great advantage to the soldier.

Waxing poetic here, this author is fond of semi auto’s in 308 fired with aimed fire, full auto belt feds out to 1400 meters in 308, etc, etc, ad nauseum, but the fact remains that the M16’s 5.56 x 45mm cartridge has proven to be a workhorse- and a very effective battle round. It is a devastating round in full automatic, and very controllable with the proper firearm as a platform, and the proper training. All of this is contrary to what the conventional wisdom was at the time.

Just because something is new, does not necessarily make it better or worse. The factories that are making these new Personal Defense Weapon style firearms have a lot of very knowledgeable people working at them, and they wouldn’t be risking as much of an investment if they didn’t have faith in the end result. I have learned to listen to them, and to try and understand what they are saying before I say “The projectile is too small to be effective”.

The ballistics of FN’s 5.7mm offering are different from the ballistics of the new HK 4.6mm offering. While some are saying “They are both smaller and appear to have less energy”, that is not a scientific statement, and the two new cartridges are not on the same page because they are “Smaller”, so while I have some extensive test time on the 5.7 x 28 FN offering, we will leave this discussion simply to the 4.6 x 30 HK offering.

However, I do have to point out that there have been several terminal instances with both cartridges, and the reported results were impressive. We do not have the written reports at this point, but will bring them forward as they become public. As I write this, there is an LE incident with a 5.7 x 28, where the subject dropped on the first burst, and was totally incapacitated before expiring. Everybody goes home, except the bad guy.

The new HK 4.6 x 30mm round fires a 24.7 grain projectile at a muzzle velocity of just under 2400 feet per second. HK’s claim is that the basic copper plated steel projectile will not only penetrate all standard issue body armor (up to CRISAT specs of 1.6mm titanium and 20 layers of Kevlar), but it will have sufficient terminal ballistics after performing that job. HK has supplied graphics of ballistic gelatin testing that would bear out their claims.

SAR’s conducted a steel plate test and this was the result: At 100 yards, the MP7 was controllable to the point of keeping long bursts on the target, and the penetration was impressive. I have little doubt that the penetration of typical body armor leaves sufficient energy to achieve HK’s claimed terminal ballistics, but that is something that time will tell about.

I fired about 350 rounds through the MP7 over the course of several days (there were lots of other interesting new firearms to be tested). Most of my firing was done at 100 meters, simply because that was where the steel plate was located.

There are three basic firing positions that the PDW lends itself to: as a supported pistol, as an SMG from a two pistol grip at either the hip or extended arm, or as a shoulder braced SMG. All of my firing was done with a 20 round magazine, which would be the primary method of carrying the MP7 in a holster. This would keep the profile compact.

I tried to imagine the various roles that the MP7 might be called for, and starting with the “Drawn and fired as a handgun”, it performed well. The length extending over the rear of the pistol grip and out to the front will throw the shooter “Off” at first, until you get used to the idea- the MP7 is very lightweight, and balanced so that when held in the standard two handed firing position for a handgun, it is very controllable. I fired this position from semi auto only, and burst fire would be recommended for close range targets. In order to consistently hit the target at 100 meters, I used other methods. The reflex sight was very quick and simple to use in all positions.

Firing with the front pistol grip down, using both hands, but keeping the stock retracted, was an impressive SMG style package. Accuracy at long range went up, and I was most impressed with the “Nose”, meaning how compact the whole package would be for an entry team to use. When the firearm is too long, or has ergonomics that bend the wrists into unnatural positions so it must be kept out from the body when maneuvering through doors and other tight spaces, we say the “Nose” is off. This can be adversely affected on most firearms with the addition of a suppressor. While I did not get the opportunity to use a suppressor on the MP7, the ergonomics and small size of the MP7 lead me to believe that the suppressor would still be within a maneuverable package for Entry work.

Of course, my favorite was firing from the shoulder. My belief is that while we need to train for firing from every position, we should always try to get a solid shooting platform, and shoulder fired usually supplies that position. Adding the buttstock to the equation made for a good, solid support triangle, leading to increased controllability. This was evidenced by keeping all rounds on a 100 meter target. Very impressive.

Part of the reason for the good control is the recoil impulse of the 4.6 x 30 mm cartridge. There is a sharp recoil but the time is so fast that the recoil appears to be absorbed in the system, and the cyclic rate is tuned to the gun. Very controllable.

My take on the MP7? Well designed, well executed, and quite reliable in the tests. I saw it take a lot of abuse, and just keep on running. With a full 20 round magazine, at 3.8 lbs the MP7 is very handy, and with a holster will probably be kept with most troops instead of being left in the mess tent. The plan to keep the ammunition offered in the ten cents per round range is a good idea. I think HK has a winner on their hands, and as long as the terminal ballistics bear out the factory claims, the MP7/ HK PDW should be considered by most departments with tactical officers, as well as military support groups, and as a tool for Special Operations teams. SAR gives a thumbs up, and we look forward to bringing a much deeper look to the subject when HK is ready to start importing the PDW version for US use.

H&K PERSONAL DEFENCE WEAPON TECHNICAL DATA

Type of Weapon: Close-range weapon for all firing positions
Operating principle: Gas-operated weapon
Bolt system: positively locked, rotary bolt head
Calibre: 4.6 mm x 30
Modes of fire: Single and burst fire
Ammunition supply: Staggered magazines for 20 or 40 cartridges
Rate of fire: Approx. 950 rds/min.
Sight: Optical and mechanical sights

By Jim Schatz

Leaner and Meaner

While there are exceptions of course, guns and ammunition used by American military and law enforcement personnel have generally been getting smaller and lighter rather than larger and heavier during the course of the 20th century. The U.S. M4 Carbine, a lighter smaller variant of the M16A2, is now in service with many conventional military units. Compact pistols are more and more often procured for standard police uniformed issue rather than available full size handguns. The standard U.S. military service rifle cartridge has shrunk from the WWI era .30 caliber cartridge (30-06 Springfield), to the 7.62X51mm NATO (.308 Winchester) round in the early 1950’s to the current 5.56X45mm NATO cartridge commercially known as the .223 Remington. HK now offers the small 4.5 pound UMP45 submachine gun that fires the big, powerful .45 ACP slugs yet the weapon is less than half the weight of most other .45 caliber submachine guns. Even the “Ma Deuce” M2 .50 caliber heavy machine gun exists today in a lightweight high cyclic rate of fire variant. The advent of advanced lightweight materials, stronger steels and alloy metals for barrel and bolt construction, and vastly improved ammunition and bullet technology have increased the lethality and performance of today’s modern military and law enforcement firearms while at the same time lightening and lessening the load of the user.

New Start, new concept

Heckler & Koch has been working behind the scenes in their “skunk works” at their Oberndorf Germany facility on a new small Personal Defense Weapon simply called the PDW. Though primarily designed to meet current and future U.S. and European requirements for a military Personal Defense Weapon the obvious usefulness of such a weapon outside of the military becomes immediately apparent to law enforcement and special operations personnel.

To describe the new HK PDW as revolutionary as some may be tempted to do would be stretching things a bit. As a “bullet launcher” the PDW still kills by kinetic energy as small arms have been doing for centuries. It is however safe to classify this new weapon and ammunition system as a substantial development in this relatively new category of Personal Defense Weapons, a category that until recently only included the 5.7mm FN P90.

Most experts categorize a true PDW as a small easily portable weapon about the size of a machine pistol but one that shoots a non-pistol cartridge. Most PDW’s are also intended to be able to be fired using only one hand though with reduced probability of hit. Modern PDW’s are being promoted to replace handguns, pistol-caliber submachine guns and some assault rifles primarily in military support units. These personnel very seldom employ small arms in combat and when they do only for defensive purposes up close. A simple, easily portable weapon that allows for effective target engagement by lessor trained rear echelon combatants is the original role intended for the PDW. Because of the worldwide proliferation of modern hard and soft body armor today’s PDW must also penetrate protective vests and helmets in order to be effective against the aggressor underneath.

The Ammo

The HK PDW is chambered for a new proprietary cartridge developed jointly by HK and Royal Ordnance (RO), HK’s parent company and a division of BAE Systems, formally British Aerospace. RO is also the UK’s premier small arms ammunition manufacturer. The HK PDW fires a small 4.6X30mm high velocity cartridge that looks more like a small rifle cartridge than a pistol round. The overall length of the round is 1.5 inches and contains a 25-grain projectile, which reaches a muzzle velocity of 2,378 feet per second from the PDW’s 7-inch barrel. A copper-plated solid steel projectile develops @ 310 foot pounds of muzzle energy and develops recoil impulse far below that of 9mm handguns. Yet this steel core 4.6X30mm round will defeat threat (former Soviet SPETsNAZ) body armor comprised of 1.6 millimeters of titanium plating backed by 20 layers of Kevlar at ranges beyond 200 meters with sufficient residual energy to inflict lethal wounds after defeating the ballistic protection.

The “family” of 4.6X30mm ammunition currently includes eight various types of rounds many of which are still under final development. This ammo family includes a steel core military penetrator round, two types of extruded solid copper “CQB” cartridges designed specifically for use in close quarters battle were overpenetration is unwanted. One copper CQB round is being produced with a pointed tip and one with a unique “spoon nose” tip to prevent overpenetration in soft tissue or through building materials. There is also a law enforcement hollow point round that will not defeat soft body armor and dummy, blank, tracer and frangible cartridges for the weapon.

In general terms the HK PDW and its 4.6mm round are designed to provide the capabilities of a 5.56mm rifle or carbine out to ranges of just beyond 200 meters yet from a firearm that is similar in size and can actually be carried and fired like a handgun. At 100 meters the 4.6mm projectile fired from the PDW still retains more energy than a 9mm NATO ball round after perforating the threat titanium/Kevlar vest. The round will penetrate two of these former Soviet vests back to back at a range of 50 meters.

The Weapon

The HK PDW is very small indeed and resembles a large handgun. Compared to the HK .45 ACP MK23 Pistol the PDW is slightly larger though the weight of the two weapons when fully loaded (20 rounds in the PDW, 12 rounds in the MK23) is nearly identical at 2.86 pounds. For sake of comparison the PDW is 1/2 inch longer than an HK 9mm MP5K and just over two pounds lighter. With it’s optional 40 round magazine fully loaded the HK PDW weighs in at just 3.39 pounds.

Unlike all submachine guns, small assault rifles and most machine pistols the HK PDW is designed to be fired effectively with one hand at close range targets (< 25 meters). For a proficient shooter it is relatively easy to engage man-size targets using one hand at ranges out as far as 100 meters in the semi-automatic mode of fire. Accuracy is excellent. 3-inch groups at 100 meters and 8 to 12 inch groups at 200 meters from supported position employing the retractable stock for support are well within the capabilities of the HK PDW. The near absence of felt recoil, comparable to that of a lightweight .22 LR rifle, makes the HK PDW extremely controllable in full auto fire, far superior to any pistol-caliber submachine gun, insuring high hit percentages against obscured, multiple or moving targets common on the battlefield.

Specially designed shoulder rigs and thigh holsters offer the user the ability to securely carry the HK PDW on the person for instant availability. From a tactical style thigh rig the PDW can be drawn and fired like a conventional handgun in seconds. A lanyard loop in the leg rig can also be used to automatically deploy the vertical foregrip as the weapon is removed from the holster. A concealed carry shoulder rig has been developed to allow the user to carry the PDW over the uniform for hands free carry while performing other tasks. The design of the shoulder rig also allows the weapon to be presented in seconds and automatically extends the stock as it is deployed from the rig. The lightweight, small size and flat profile of the PDW when worn in the concealed shoulder rig under a light jacket will make it the weapon of choice for personal protection details in the future.

A fold-down vertical foregrip is positioned forward of the trigger guard and below the barrel. This allows the weapon to be fired using one or two hands and in conjunction with a small slide-out buttstock concealed within the polymer receiver of the weapon. The fairly central location of the pistol grip, which houses the flush mounted 20-round magazine, allows for practical use as a one handed gun. Unlike many pistol-caliber machine pistols such as the HK MP5K the new HK PDW offers greater control and probability of hit due to the 4.6mm rounds minimal felt recoil and long eye relief reflex sight.

The HK PDW is gas operated employing a unique clean shooting system similar to that used with great success in the HK G36 weapons system. A multi-lug rotating bolt head that interlocks with the barrel provides for a secure seal of the breech during firing. All operating controls of the PDW are fully ambidextrous to include the magazine and buttstock releases, the M16-like cocking handle and centrally mounted safety/selector lever. Current prototypes of the HK PDW provide both semi-automatic and fully automatic modes of fire at a theoretical rate @ 700 rounds per minute.

The HK Personal Defense Weapon also possesses a combined forward assist/bolt catch and bolt release lever, sling mounting points and an integral Picatinny sight-mounting rail. Back-up emergency iron sights are incorporated into the design as well. The weapon is produced predominately from lightweight polymers with metal used only where absolutely required. The simple design, minimum number of parts and polymer construction translates to very little user maintenance due in great part to its unique short stroke gas operating system. Barrels are removable with a simple wrench and are thus user replaceable. A threaded barrel is available as an option for the attachment of optional flash hiders, sound suppressors or other muzzle mounted accessories.

The Hensoldt PDW Reflex Sight

The sighting system for the PDW, like the weapon and ammunition family are still in the final stages of development. Developed specifically for the Heckler & Koch PDW by Hensoldt, a division of Zeiss, the small PDW Reflex Sight uses a collector to capture ambient light and illuminate a small gold aiming dot. This dot can be seen with both eyes open whether the weapon is fired at arms length like a pistol or when shot from the shoulder using the buttstock for additional support. The sight includes an optional tritium source or battery back up to power the dot during periods of low or no light. A pair of simple recessed Allen head screws allows for internal windage and elevation adjustments of the 7.5 moa dot.

Like everything else about the HK PDW and 4.6mm ammunition, this unique PDW sight is designed to be lightweight, portable and durable under the harshest environmental conditions. For use with the PDW, HK designed their own simple rail grabber sight base that can be used to attach the Hensoldt sight to any Weaver or Picatinny (MIL-STD-1913) accessory rail in under a second and without tools or hardware of any kind. The presence of the Picatinny mounting rail on the top of the PDW will allow a wide range of sights to be attached using currently available rail grabbers.

Operational Uses abound

With a maximum effective range of greater than 200 meters the small size of the weapon, similar to a large handgun, will allow it to be used effectively for VIP protection where the weapon must be concealed yet readily available. Its ability to defeat threat body armor and vehicle windshields and body panels would make it perfect for facilities defense where overpenetration and maximum range of a rifle in urban areas might be of concern. Certainly in a classic role as a PDW for military pilots, drivers, artillery and armor crewman, medics, communication specialists, members of crew served or anti-tank weapons crews, forward observers and behind the front line support personnel the HK PDW will be far better than a handgun from a terminal performance and hit probability standpoint. The 2.86-pound HK PDW promises to be far more portable and manageable than a rifle, carbine or smg, especially in confined spaces like vehicles, aircraft and within mobile communications trailers. The author has worn the PDW in the leg rig while running, climbing and driving. It is a weapon that does indeed “wear” comfortably like a pistol yet hits like a rifle at a distance of more than two football fields.

Current Status

Prototypes of the Heckler & Koch PDW have been undergoing testing for more than four years and to date have seen limited exposure in the United States. At this point the PDW is being shown to select prospective users for design input and comment. HK PDW’s are not yet available for customer demonstrations. Availability of production weapons is not expected before mid-2001. The 4.6mm ammunition is already in limited series production and available from the Royal Ordnance Radway Green factory in England to support the continued development and early user evaluation of the weapon. HK is negotiating with several U.S. ammunition companies to have the ammunition produced in America as well as in the U.K. Projected ammunition unit cost is expected to be very affordable, less than 9mm ball ammunition, and all rounds will be non-toxic to meet growing concerns in this area.

Certainly this new Heckler & Koch Personal Defense Weapon marks a serious attempt to provide the true performance required of a personal weapon and in a small package that can be easily carried and thus always available. If during the remaining testing the weapon and new cartridge perform as expected the HK Personal Defense Weapon could be the future choice for an entire spectrum of users.

About the author: In addition to being a regular contributing writer for this magazine, Jim Schatz is also a full-time employee of Heckler & Koch, Inc. Since 1986 Jim has served with HK in the roles as a training instructor and customer service, sales and product developer for HK’s Federal Operations Department serving all U.S. federal law enforcement and military organizations. The information and opinions provided herein are those of the author and not HK.

It is impossible to accurately assess a firearm without actually firing it and SAAB Bofors unfortunately did not have any fully functional examples of their new PDW at the NDIA Small Arms Conference. Extensive “hands-on” examination of the CBJ MS while at the SAAB Bofors display booth, however, gave a favorable first impression of this latest PDW. Controls are well – placed and their use is obvious after a quick cursory examination of the weapon. We were able to operate the bolt, selector, magazine release and extend and retract the stock without coaching from SAAB Bofors representatives. The little PDW balances and points well, but only time and actually testing the CBJ MS on the range will tell if these general first impressions carry over into actual functional usage of the SAAB Bofors CBJ MS.