There were a number of accessories and accoutrements manufactured for the Reising guns. Virtually all Reising accessories found today are rare, and generally expensive. The accessories were originally intended for military or police use.

Carrying Cases

There were two types of devices manufactured for the transportation and storage of Reising guns. The first was the hardcase manufactured much like those for the Thompson submachine gun. The Reising cases were made of a black vulcanized fiber, reinforced with metal corners and fittings. The case dimensions were 37 3/8 inches long, 4 5/8 inches wide and 8.5 inches deep and the empty case weighed 13 pounds. The inside of the case provided space for a Reising Model 50 submachine gun, four magazines and two fifty-round boxes of .45 caliber ammunition. The interior of the cases were lined with felt, usually blue in color. A local subcontractor manufactured the hardcases exclusively for Federal Laboratories of Pittsburgh, PA who marketed the cases for police and commercial sales. The original retail cost of the Reising hardcase during 1942 was $16.50. At one time, Reising hardcases were inexpensive. Unfortunately, the situation has changed for those collectors who might desire an original case. Today, when the original cases can be found in mint condition, they command a premium. Most of the hardcases were sold to police departments for storage of the gun and, as it often turned out, the hardcase was a bad choice for long term storage of the weapons because of moisture. Many Reisings that were stored in the cases for many years without attention eventually rusted from dampness that formed inside the case.

The Canvas Carrying Case

Few of the Reising canvas carrying cases have survived. Offered to police departments in the 1940s by Federal Laboratories, the cases were made from a brown color canvas. The stress areas of the cases were reinforced with light brown leather. Four pockets were provided for storing spare magazines. The flap designed to secure the gun, also covered the magazine pockets. The soft cases were not very popular and are less common than the hardcases.

Military Cases

The only known military cases for the Reisings were the ones used by Marine paratroopers. The cases were made in two styles, both for carrying the folding stock Model 55 during a parachute jump. One was a “holster” style case designed for attaching the weapon to the jumper’s leg. The other style, made of canvas with a camouflage pattern, was for carrying the weapon above the reserve chute. There were reports that when the Reising was carried above the reserve chute, the weapon would often strike the jumper in the face when the main chute opened. Both of these cases were manufactured at the U.S. Marine Depot of Supplies in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Magazine Pouches

The early commercial magazine pouches were advertised as a “magazine belt” with pockets for carrying spare magazines. There were several types manufactured. One style was designed to hold five twenty-round magazines. This rare pouch had a large single cell for holding the magazines. It had only one flap with two snap type retainers. These pouches were made of dark green color canvas. Another type of commercial magazine pouch had separate pockets for carrying three magazines. This three-cell pouch had separate flaps for each pocket. The flaps were manufactured of light brown canvas, with a dark brown color trim sewn around the outside edge of each flap. The flaps were secured with painted round metal snap-type buttons.

Another magazine pouch manufactured for the Reising was very similar to the military five cell pouches, originally made for carrying the Thompson submachine gun magazines. The Reising pouches were dark green or brown in color and had a separate flap for each of the five cells. Like the aforementioned three cell pouches, the five cell pouches had a different color trim sewn to the outer edge of each flap. The five snaps on this pouch were similar to the military pouch “lift the dot” style snaps. Original commercial Reising magazine pouches are rare.

The khaki-colored military issue pouches intended for the Reising magazines were very similar to the common five cell pouches that were issued for carrying the Thompson submachine gun twenty-round magazines. However, the pouches that were issued with the Reising had slightly longer cover flaps and the studs for the snaps were located slightly higher than those on the Thompson pouches. Reising magazines are too long to readily fit into the Thompson pouches, although the 20-round Thompson magazines will fit into a pouch designed for the Reising magazines. It is believed that the original Thompson pouches were reconfigured to be issued with either weapon. Pouches procured by the Marine Corps were manufactured by The Russell Manufacturing Company of Middletown, Connecticut under contract NOm 35935 at a cost of $1.44 each.

Slings

The very early Reisings that were originally intended for police use were manufactured without any provisions for attaching a carrying sling. In later production, some of the Reisings were fitted with sling swivels, either on the left side of the stock or on the right side. The later “military” style guns had them mounted on the bottom of the stock. The slings intended for use with the Reising were manufactured in two styles. One was a heavy tan leather sling, with brass fittings produced for the police market. The Marines were issued mustard colored slings that resembled the M1 carbine sling. All of the Reising slings that were examined were marked “U.S.M.C. BOYT – 43 -” Boyt being the contractor that manufactured the slings. Although these slings resembled the common carbine sling the space between the snaps was considerably wider. The M1 carbine slings were commonly utilized on the Reisings as well.

Flash Hider

A device intended to conceal the muzzle flash of the Reising when fired at night was mentioned in the early H&R literature. This device was a metal tube that could be slid over the compensator and secured with a small screw. The overall length of the device was nine inches and had a threaded cap on the muzzle end. A short two and one half inch, three piece insert with four carefully spaced, separate baffles was fitted to the inside of the tube. This insert decreased the inside diameter of the tube body. The purpose was to break up and disperse the explosive flashes from a fired cartridge. A patent was filed on July 16, 1942 and Patent 2,356,728 was awarded August 22, 1944. The flash hider was only shown in the very early Reising literature. Although depicted in later parts breakdown photographs, it was not mentioned in the text of later manuals. Apparently there was little market for the device and it was discontinued.

Muzzle Compensator

All Model 50 Reisings were fitted with a compensator or “climb arrester” intended to keep the weapon’s muzzle from rising up when being firing in the full automatic mode. Early literature indicated that the compensator was an option, but all known production M50s and early production Model 55 Reisings were fitted with the device. The Reising compensator was 3.25 inches long and was manufactured from thin .060 inch metal tubing that had six lateral slots cut into the top. The two front slots were longer than the four rear ones. On the front of the compensator, the top half was cut away leaving a half circle shelf on the bottom. The device was internally threaded with 7/8-24 threads and screwed onto the end of the barrel. After the compensator was properly indexed on the barrel it was then center punched at the bottom to secure it in place. A patent was filed on January 6, 1941 for the Reising compensator and Patent number 2,313,669 was granted for the device on March 9,1943. The compensator shown in the patent drawing has fewer slots than the actual production version. The design was similar in design to the Cutts compensator fitted to Thompson submachine guns. The Reising compensator’s effectiveness in controlling muzzle rise was limited. Early Model 55s were fitted with compensators, but the Marines requested that the guns be manufactured without them to keep the overall length of the weapon to a minimum.

Brass Catcher

Federal Laboratory salesman Edward E. Richardson designed a brass catcher for the Reising submachine gun. A patent was filed on June 28, 1943. The device was also designed to be used on the Thompson submachine gun. No examples of the brass catchers are known to exist – only the patent drawing.

Magazines

The .45 caliber magazines produced for the Reising fit the M50, M55 submachine gun models and the semiautomatic Model 60. The magazines were manufactured in a twenty-round and a twelve-round configuration. The magazine body was fabricated from .030 inch sheet metal. The magazine follower and floor plate were also constructed of sheet metal. Some later Reisings had magazine wells that were designed to only accept the twelve-round magazine. The twenty-round magazines were originally blued, and the twelve-round magazines were finished in a colorless Parkerizing.

All original magazines were marked H&R – REISING over MODEL 50 – CAL 45 MAGAZINE over HARRINGTON AND RICHARDSON ARMS CO. over WORCESTER, MASS. USA. Some of the original twelve- and twenty-round magazines have the markings NE-1 numerically ascending up to NE-9 stamped on the front lower portion of the magazine. The NE markings represent the primary contractor of the magazines, the New England Small Arms Corporation (NESA); the dash number represents the magazine contractor or subcontractor. The U.S. Ordnance Department required that all parts and magazines have some type of contractor’s code or marking on them.

The Reising twenty-round capacity magazines were the double stack, single feed design. This design has often come under criticism as being unreliable and susceptible to jamming. These magazines were manufactured for H&R in two slightly different configurations. One version had five holes located on the right side of the magazine. These holes allowed the operator to visually check the number of rounds that were loaded in the magazine; the other style had no holes. Early magazines were finished in a semi gloss blue, while later production had a dull brush blue finish.

The twelve-round magazines, introduced in October of 1942, were designed to fix some of the feeding problems encountered with the earlier twenty-round double stack design. The twelve-round magazines were manufactured with indentations in the bodies to allow the rounds to be stacked in a single row, rather then the double stacked row of the twenty-round magazine. The followers in the twelve-round magazine were flat on the top. After the twelve-round magazine was in production, manufacture of the twenty-round design was terminated. The Marines contracted with H&R to convert all of their existing twenty-round magazines into the twelve-round type at a cost of forty cents each. Some of the late manufactured twelve round magazines have reinforced feed lips.

During the post-war years the twenty-round magazine were no longer mentioned in Reising manuals, advertisements or literature. Many of the Reisings produced in the 1950s were fitted with magazine wells that had an indented rib at the center, which prevented twenty-round magazines from being inserted. The downside of this design is the obvious limited cartridge capacity.

Today, original Reising magazines are expensive when compared to those of similar weapons. The original retail cost of a commercial Reising magazine in 1942 was $2 and the Marine contract price was $1.50.

Dairt “Oilite” .45 Caliber Ammunitionbr

The Dairt ammunition is of interest to Reising collectors because of the statement on the box that reads: “These cartridges are specifically adapted for the .45 caliber Harrington & Richardson Reising Sub-machine gun.” The Dairt Company reloaded spent cartridge cases using special Oilite Bullets made for them by the Amplex Oilite Products Co., a part of the Evansville Chrysler Corporation. Oilite is a sintered, porous, copper alloy impregnated with lubricant. The bullets are one solid piece, having no separate core or jacket. The ammunition was intended for issue to Defense Plant security personnel.

Reproductions

Reproductions of Reising accoutrements have recently appeared on the market. These items (so far) include slings, magazine pouches and H&R marked twenty round magazines. Unfortunately, on occasion, reproduction items are passed off as originals. Most original Reising accessories are over 60 years old and if an item is encountered that looks like it was made yesterday, it probably was.

Mr. Eugene Reising 1884-1967

Eugene G. Reising was born on 26 November 1884, in Port Jervis, New York. He attended Lehigh University in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania. During his career, Reising worked for several firearm manufacturing firms as a designer and while working under John Browning, made significant contributions to the design of the 1911 pistol. A designer of some note, Mr. Reising had more than 60 firearm related patents.

During 1938, the world watched as situations in Europe and the Far East deteriorated and it soon became apparent that war was on the horizon. Eugene Reising, anticipating a demand for military weapons, began designing his submachine gun in 1938. Reising’s approach to a submachine gun design was somewhat different than the standard open bolt configuration, common on submachine guns of the day. The open bolt design made the submachine gun a simple and easy to manufacture weapon. However, the flaw of the design was excessive weight, especially when considering their relatively low-power pistol cartridges. Eugene Reising’s idea was to use a delayed locking system like that used in semiautomatic pistol designs and would allow his submachine gun to be accurate in semiautomatic fire and weigh less than any existing submachine guns.

Reising negotiated a deal with Harrington and Richardson in 1939, where H&R would manufacture his submachine gun at their Worcester, Massachusetts facility and he was to receive a $2 royalty for each Reising gun sold. A patent for the Reising submachine gun design was filed June 28, 1940. A second patent for an improved design was filed February 7, 1941. Patent numbers 2,356,726 and 2,356,727 were granted on August 22, 1944.

Harrington and Richardson

The Reising Submachine gun was manufactured by the Harrington and Richardson Arms Company from 1941 to 1943. The first order of 4,000 Reisings, received in March of 1941, was destined for Indochina. Other Lend-Lease orders included 6,000 Model 50s for the Soviet Union and 2,000 for England. During World War II, 114,216 Reisings were produced. By 1943, the Marine Corps had procured 66,500 Model 50 and Model 55 submachine guns in four separate contracts, over half of the total production. The remaining Reisings were purchased by police departments, domestic and foreign governments. Production of the Model 50 resumed at H&R in 1950, primarily for the domestic law enforcement market. Production ended in 1957.

Problems Arise

What made the Reising submachine gun unique was its weight of only 6.75 pounds for the Model 50. This was accomplished through the weapon’s closed bolt design. However, the Reising’s closed bolt feature was also one of the principle reasons for its failure to be consistently reliable in combat. To operate, the bolt tilted up into a recess in the receiver and momentarily locked until the cartridge was fired. Problems arose when dirt or any type of foreign debris got into the receiver recess preventing the bolt from locking up completely and the weapon would not fire. The required lubricants compounded the problem by attracting dirt. The Reising also had several other problems contributing to its poor reputation. The twenty-round magazine was the unreliable double stack, single feed design. Compounding the problem were the magazine’s thin, easily distorted feed lips. After numerous complaints of magazine failures a new magazine was designed and introduced. The new magazine was the more reliable single stack, single feed design, but this reduced the magazine capacity to only twelve rounds. The Reising also had a problem with interchangeable parts. When minor repairs were attempted in the field, it was often discovered that the replacements parts would not fit; it was just another fatal flaw the Reising possessed. The biggest mistake was adopting the weapon without sufficient testing; the rush to get weapons into the field was a contributing factor.

The U.S. Marines first fielded the Reising in combat operations against the Japanese during the battle for Guadalcanal. The abundance of sandy terrain on the tropical island jammed many of the Reisings rendering them useless. As long as the Reisings were kept clean they worked, but keeping them clean in a combat environment was nearly impossible. Another common problem reported by the Marines was that the commercial blued finish on their Reisings began to rust after only a few days exposure to the humidity on the island. After numerous reports of the Reising’s failure in combat, the weapons were pulled from front line service and relegated to rear echelon troops.

During a post war interview, Eugene Reising was questioned about the poor showing of his submachine gun. He stated that there was never a formal complaint received from the Navy Department on the performance of the Reising submachine gun in combat. He explained that Harrington and Richardson Arms, Inc. had in fact not received complaints, but five production excellence awards from the Navy Department. Mr. Reising seemed to be of the impression that much of the Reising gun’s negative image was generated from a single incident on Guadalcanal when Marine Colonel Merritt Edson ordered the guns to be thrown into the sea. He did acknowledge there was a problem with interchangeable parts on the Reising guns, and that this had caused problems in the field. He said that there was such an emphasis on production, there was no time to engineer the weapon to have completely interchangeable parts. He concluded by pointing out that Reising submachine guns were evaluated several times by the military before being approved for procurement.

The Reising in Law Enforcement

Quite a few law enforcement agencies purchased the Reising and many prisons used them to arm their guards. The Reising was less expensive than the Thompson and considered to be more accurate when fired in the semiautomatic mode. When properly maintained, the Reising proved to be satisfactory for its law enforcement role. The primary distributor for the Reising both during and after World War II was Federal Laboratories of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The law enforcement demand for the Reising was such, that H&R resumed production of the weapon in 1950.

The “Commercial” and “Military” Reising Myth

The early manufactured Reising submachine guns are usually classified by collectors as the “police” or “commercial” model – these being the earlier blued guns with the 28-fin barrels. The second reference to the Reisings is the “military” version, the later production Parkerized 14-fin barrel guns. Although collectors and enthusiasts commonly use these references, both of the nomenclatures are incorrect. The H&R factory did not ever acknowledge in any documents separate commercial or military models. The only reference H&R used for the .45 caliber Reising guns was the Model 50, 55 and 60. The Marines procured both the early blued guns as well as the later manufactured Parkerized ones. The police purchased both variations as well.

Transitional Guns

During the manufacture of firearms, there are usually improvements and design changes introduced during the production run. This occurred during Reising production and many submachine guns were assembled with a mix of the new and old design parts. These guns are generally referred to by collectors as transitional guns.

Reising Dates of Production

1941 Serial Numbers: 101-8500
1942 Serial Numbers: 8501-73600
1943 Serial Numbers: 73601-114317

1950 Serial Numbers: K101 to K973
1951 Serial Numbers: L101 to L3589
1952: No production
1953 Serial Numbers: N111 to N327
1954-1956: No production
1957 Serial Numbers: S4700 to S5607

Marine Contracts:

NOm 33387 – 2 February 1942: 2,000 each Model 55 Reising submachine guns.

NOm 33660 – 26 February 1942: 11,500 Model 55, and 11,500 Model 50 Reising submachine guns.

NOm 36828 – 13 July 1942: 20,000 Model 55, and 5,000 Model 50 Reising submachine guns.

NOm 37893 – 13 October 1942: 30,000 Model 50 Reising submachine guns (plus a 3,000 overrun).

Receivers

The receivers on all of the .45 caliber Reising models were machined from 1.25 inch round steel stock. The early 1st design/late 2nd design receivers are easily identified by the direction of the logo stamped on the top portion of the receiver. The receivers on the earlier guns have the logo marked on the top so that it is read from the right side of the weapon. The receivers used on the later manufacture guns are marked to be read from the left side. In virtually all cases, except for transitional guns, the early receivers read from the right side will have the 28-fin barrels and other early features. Receiver’s read from the left side will have the 14-fin barrels and late features. The early receivers will have one spring-loaded end cap locking ball to secure the bumper plug and later receivers will have two locking balls. A slight discoloration of the finish may be evident near the center of Reising receivers. This was a result heat treating to harden the bolt locking lug. This is particularly noticeable on Parkerized guns. The early 1st design receivers were heat treated manually while the process on 2nd design receivers was automated.

Barrels

All .45 caliber models of the Reising were fitted with barrels made from nickel steel. The breech end had 7/8-18 threads to screw into the receiver. The cooling fins were turned on the barrel with a form cutter. The barrels were rifled by the broaching method with a 1 turn in 16 inches, right hand twist. During the third Marine contract, the number of radial barrel cooling fins was reduced from 28 to 14 in order to increase the structural strength, and to reduce labor hours.

Disassembly Screw

There is a single screw assembly is used to secure the barreled receiver to the stock. It consists of a threaded fastener with a curved washer attached. The washer is attached to the stock by two nails and the washer is secured to the shank of the screw to retain it when loosened. The configuration of this assembly on the early models is different than on later versions. On the early guns the screw is small, requiring a tool to turn it. When tightened, the screw head fits flush with the stock. On the later production, the screw is larger in diameter and thicker. The edge of the screw head is knurled and extends slightly below the stock. This type can be tightened or loosened easily by hand, or with the rim of a cartridge.

Bumper Plug (Receiver End Cap)

The Reising had four different designs of bumper plugs. “Bumper plug” was the nomenclature the H&R Company used for the threaded end cap that screws into the rear of the receiver. In the early designs, the recoil spring guide rod was manufactured as an integral part of the end cap and was a hollow steel pin. This style cap was used in many of the early model Reisings. There were a few problems encountered with this design as the steel guide pin would often break off the cap and bind the recoil spring causing the weapon to jam. The second design of end cap was similar to the first except that a solid steel pin replaced the hollow guide pin used in the earlier design. The pin was still an integral part of the cap. This style proved to be no more reliable than the original design.

The third design of end cap also had a solid integral spring guide pin, but the end of the pin was slightly tapered. This was done to try and eliminate the pin breakage problem of the earlier designs. This style cap was used in most of the early production Reisings fitted with the 28-fin barrel and some of the early production of the 14-fin barrel guns. Unfortunately, the problem of the guide pin breaking still existed. The breakage problem was eventually traced to the receiver threads for the bumper plug not being machined concentric to the receiver.

The fourth design cap was designed to alleviate all the problems of the original one-piece caps. The new cap was designed as two pieces, making the guide rod separate from the end cap. This solved the problem of the bending or breaking of the recoil spring guide rod. The new design spring guide rod was hollow rather than solid. This new design guide rod was used on all but the earliest second design Reising production. The end caps are completely interchangeable between models.

Magazine Housings

The magazine housing on a Reising serves two purposes. One is to hold the magazine in position, the other is to support and guide the action bar. Several different style magazine housings were used on the Reising during their production run. The magazine housing retaining pins also differed slightly between the early and later models.

Stepped Housing (First Design)

The first production Reisings were fitted with a magazine housing that was narrower in width at the rear. This was necessary to house the magazine release and at the same time keep the opening small enough to have a secure fit around the magazine. This housing was made from two separate pieces, the top plate and the housing body. The top plate was attached to the housing by welding.

Magazine Housing (Second Design)

This housing was stamped from a single piece of sheet metal, rectangular in shape, and there was no rear step on this design. A pin was inserted in the rear part of the housing acting as a spacer to keep the magazine in alignment. This eliminated the need for the “step” used in the earlier housing design. This is the most common type of housing and was used in both early and late production Reisings.

Magazine Housing (Third Design)

This magazine housing was also pressed from a single piece of sheet metal and it was designed to only permit the insertion of the twelve-round magazine. The housing was designed with an indented rib at the center that limited the inside dimension of the housing, preventing the use of twenty-round magazines. These housings were used in the late production Reisings.

Magazine Release Lever

One of the components that were changed several times during production was the magazine release lever. The first design was a simple spring steel lever with a hardened steel pin spot-welded to it. The lever was attached to the magazine well housing with a small screw. The rounded end of the lever had small lines depressed into it to make it more slip resistant. These style levers were used on the early blued guns. On later Reisings, this lever was slightly redesigned to have a smaller pin for holding the magazine in place and the lever itself was widened.

The magazine lever evolved into the next design that primarily appeared on transitional mid-production Reisings. These were often fitted along with the milled three-screw trigger guard. This type lever was manufactured in two pieces and was designed to release the magazine by pushing on the lever rather than pulling it. The release tab at the end of the lever was U shaped for added strength. On late production Reisings, the magazine release lever was redesigned to be more durable and easier to operate. These levers were also made in two pieces; the lever and the end piece. The end piece was made so it would pivot and use leverage to release the magazine.

Sights

The rear sight was fitted into a dovetail slot milled into the receiver. The sight on the Reising submachine guns was an aperture style and adjustable from 50 to 300 yards. This could be accomplished by lifting up the sight and sliding a notched elevator forward or rearward. The later manufacture Reisings had a screw installed to secure the sight onto the receiver.

The front sights were an unprotected blade design. On early guns, the front sight was fixed, staked into place and non-adjustable. The very last production 28-fin barrels had front sights that were adjustable for windage by loosening a small setscrew, and drifting the sight right or left. The 14-fin barrels had the same feature.

Part II will cover Reising Accessories.

By Lee Arten

Seven of us were shooting on an outdoor range in Upper Michigan in early spring 2000. There were about three inches of snow on the ground, but there was one bare place to stand, and it had been too long since we got together and much too long since we’d shot outside.

Four of the group were students, two from high school and two from the local university. I was one of three older guys, the father of one of the high schoolers and owner of the three submachine guns, a Reising, an Ingram Model 6, and a Madsen M50 we were there to shoot. The other two “old guys,” Bob and Mike, were shooting buddies. (Sometimes I call them, “The usual suspects.”) They’d already shot the Reising and Mike had also tried the Ingram Model 6. Neither of the collegians had shot full auto before; it was also the first time for Bob’s son, Sam.

I noticed something after each of the newbies had fired their first magazine. After I stepped up and took the gun back, and as I stripped the empty magazine and checked it, they turned around and grinned a huge grin at everyone. I saw the same grin appear again and again that afternoon. Since I was shooting my Madsen M50 for the first time that day, I know that grin appeared on my face periodically too. (I found the M50 reliable, controllable, and slightly reminiscent of the M3, for which I have a fondness. Madsen magazines were remarkably cheap for a while, and before the supply thinned out I had 40 of them.)

Thinking back on this later, I started to call that enthusiastic smile, “The 30 round grin.” The Reising mag only holds 20, the Madsen mag holds 32, and the lone Ingram mag holds 30, so it almost averages out. (If someone in our group had a belt fed I suppose I’d be calling it the 100 round grin.)

That grin is one of the rewards of showing new people the front porch of the NFA world. (One of the others is a lot of empty brass to reload.) I haven’t had my Curio and Relics License and my subguns very long, so I’m still only on the porch myself. I have made myself comfortable there, however. Since my first slow steps onto it, I’ve pulled up a nice, solid rocker, found some back issues of Small Arms Review to read, and a table to hold a cold mug of something to drink. The guys I introduced to the Madsen, the Model 6 and the Reising at the range that day in the spring had really only made it to the front steps. However, most of them seem to have decided almost instantly to come onto the porch to look for a chair, at least.

It’s been a few months since I introduced any new people to NFA through my subguns but next month I’ll get another chance. My parents are having their 50th Wedding Anniversary and my siblings and other relatives are flying in from several points of the compass. The same weekend a friend from years ago, a staunch conservative and new NRA member, is coming back to the area from Virginia for a few days. If I can work it out, both my brothers and my old friend will be down at the range with a subgun and a fully loaded magazine as soon as possible after arrival. I can’t wait to see the three of them break out into “30 round grins”.

After the Marines initially tested the Reising Model 50 submachine guns in 1941, they requested a folding stock version of the weapon. The Marines were looking for a lightweight, compact weapon in which to arm their newly formed airborne troops, the Paramarines. Such a weapon was desired so that upon landing the Marine Paratroopers would have immediate access to a weapon with substantial firepower. Most weapons available to the Marines were too heavy or bulky to carry during a parachute jump. The Reising M55 submachine gun was well suited for the task. The U.S. Army and the Marine Corps also recognized the compact Model 55 as a useful weapon for tank crews, though few were ever issued for that particular purpose. Eugene Reising designed the folding stock of the Model 55, and a patent for the stock was applied for on August 3, 1942. On April 24th, 1945, patent number 2,374,621 was awarded to Mr. Reising for his folding stock design. Harrington & Richardson Arms Inc. requested permission from the Marines in August of 1942 to stamp the word “PARASHOOT” on the receivers of 10 guns in order to copyright that name for the M55 Model. Permission was granted by the Marines to do so.

There was only one other weapon during WWII that was designed especially for use by paratroopers. That weapon was the folding stock version of the M1 carbine, the M1A1.The M1A1 carbine was simply a standard .30 caliber semiautomatic carbine, with a folding wire stock. The paratrooper carbine was similar to the Model 55 Reising in that it was extremely light in weight and compact with the stock folded. The carbine also had a wooden pistol grip that was similar to that of the Reising M55. The M1A1 was first issued in the fall of 1942, a few months after the folding stock M55, but was produced in much larger numbers than the Reising. The carbine used a small .30 caliber round with a 110-grain projectile that was often criticized as having limited stopping power.

The Reising Model 55 was advertised by Harrington & Richardson Arms for use as a police as well as a military weapon. H&R’s advertisements of the 1940s depicted a police officer firing a Model 55 with the stock folded. “For use in close quarters its advantages are obvious. It can be easily racked under the dashboard of an automobile or it can be carried conveniently by cyclists or mounted personnel”. (Quote from H&R’s 1943 catalog). Few folding stock M55s were ever purchased by the police, most departments sought the more conventional stocked Model 50.

The compact Model 55 was manufactured in both the early “commercial” and later “military” configurations. Many Model 55s were manufactured during the transitional period and have a mixture of both the early and late features. Quite a few of the milled style three screw trigger guards are mounted on M55 stocks. The earliest M55 documented was in the 12,000 serial number range. This was near the end of the early 1st design, two screw trigger guard, 28/29 fin Reising production. Most of the M55s recorded in my research were in the 12,000 to the 95,000 range. Please note that many of the guns that fall within this serial number range were not all Model 55s, many were Model 50’s. Most of the Model 55s documented were marked on top of the receiver Model 55. There were a few early serial numbered guns with M55 stocks marked Model 50 on the receiver. It is impossible to tell if these particular guns were manufactured as M55s or if they were rebarreled and restocked Model 50s. Early Marine documents refer to the paratrooper model as the M50P.

One of the Reising Model 55 examples that were marked Model 50 on the receiver was examined at the Quantico Marine Base located in Virginia. This weapon was serial number 15296, it had a 2nd design receiver and a 1st design M55 28/29-fin 10.5-inch barrel without a compensator, but with an adjustable front sight. This was also the earliest Reising documented with the 2nd design receiver. This weapon had a very worn blue finish, and the finish wear on the receiver matched the wear on the barrel. It is the opinion of the author after examining this weapon that this Reising was originally manufactured as an early M55 using an M50 marked receiver. It is doubtful that this weapon was ever refurbished, if it had been refinished it would most likely have been Parkerized as were most military arsenal rebuilt weapons.

There were 33,500 M55 folding stock Reisings procured by the Marine Corps during WWII. This was from about 120,000 total Reising submachine guns made by Harrington & Richardson Inc. 114,000 were manufactured during WWII, and another 5,483 manufactured in the 1950s. All post WWII Reisings produced were full-stocked Model 50s, in the later “military” configuration.

During research for my Reising book I was contacted by a couple of fellow collectors from New Zealand, Trevor Joyce and Dave McCann. During our conversation they told me that there were a fairly large number of Reisings in the hands of New Zealand collectors, and virtually all of them were the Model 55s. They were quite surprised when I told them that in the U.S. the M55 is quite rare, and the Model 50 rather common. They gave me the serial numbers and features of their guns for inclusion in my book. They had a few 4 digit serial number Reisings that were marked Model 50 on the receiver, but had M55 barrels and early M55 stocks with two screw trigger guards and no lateral tie screws. They also have a very rare 15 round Reising .45 caliber magazine in their possession.

The prototype 15 round capacity magazine was quickly developed for Reising submachine guns that were undergoing Ordnance Department testing at Fort Benning, Georgia. The early manufacture 20 round magazines that were supplied with the weapons were causing too many problems, delaying the testing. The improved design functioned well and the prototype 15 round magazine was increased back to 20 rounds for the production models. Even the “improved” design 20 round magazine began causing problems once they were in the field. In October of 1942, the magazine was redesigned again into a straight-line design that limited the capacity to only 12 rounds and production of the 20 round design was stopped. Plans were made to return all of the existing 20 round magazines to H&R to be converted into the more reliable 12 round straight-line, single-stack configuration.

Approximately 10,000 of the early Model 55s were manufactured with compensators, but in July of 1942, during the third contract (NOm 36828), the Marines requested that the compensators be omitted from future production. Barrels for the Model 55 Reising can be the 28, 29 or 14-fin configuration depending on when the gun was manufactured. Most of the Model 55 barrels are not threaded for a compensator, and the actual overall length is slightly shorter due to the omission of the .5 inch portion of the barrel that is threaded. Otherwise the barrels are manufactured in the same way and of the same materials. The Model 55 barrels were 10.5 inches in length.

The folding stock is one of the major items that make the M55 unique from the more common M50 Reisings. The Model 55 folding stocks came on both the early and late style guns. The folding stocks have been equipped with either the older 2-screw trigger guard and small take-down screw, or the stamped or milled 3 screw trigger guard with the large knurled take-down screw. All M55 folding stocks were equipped with sling swivels mounted on the bottom of the forearm and pistol grip. The early M55 stocks lacked the reinforcing lateral tie screws and were slightly thinner. The metal parts are blued on the earlier versions and parkerized on the later models. The wire portion of the stock is made from stiff wire that is .25 inch in diameter. The stock also has a fairly ergonomic pistol grip made of wood. Many Model 55 Reisings have been noted in vintage wartime photographs with the full Model 50 stocks on them. The M55 folding stocks were fragile and it was frequently reported that the stock would inadvertently fold up during firing. The Reising was certainly easier to fire accurately when equipped with the full carbine style stock. Firing a wire stock Model 55 Reising on full auto from the shoulder for an extended period is quite an uncomfortable experience.

The contents of this article were excerpted from the new book “The Reising Submachine Gun Story” available from Chipotle Publishing 702-565-0746.

The U.S. Rifle Caliber .30 M1903- We have them only because we had no other vehicle on which to mount the anti-tank launchers and the remarks with regard to that weapon are the conventional ones-utterly dependable, extremely accurate, very valuable.

The Carbine- My organization being parachutist was equipped with the carbine folding stock, and we found it to be a most effective weapon. It is of sufficiently high velocity to drive its way through the heavy jungle foliage. It is accurate, and most of all, it is light and comfortable, 75 rounds of it on your person leaves you entirely free to carry anything you wish. You don’t even know you have it. The men have confidence in it and it works well. It works extremely well under arduous conditions. I understand that there have been adverse comments on this weapon from the European Theatre to the extent that it lacks precision at ranges in excess of 400 yards. I am entirely ignorant of such circumstances because I have never seen one fired at over 50 yards, at which range they are a splendid weapon. There is a need for carbine tracer ammunition, at first I was required to arm all squad leaders with rifles so that they could use .30 tracer for target designation. If we had carbine tracer, they would have naturally been armed with a carbine, thereby giving them a good deal more mobility. I am told such a thing exists but that the requirement has been rather low, I cannot see why, and I only urge that some thought be given to the distribution. You know that people in the field sometimes do not know what is going on. I didn’t know such a thing existed; and therefore never asked for any. If it had been even hinted that such a thing existed, I dare say, many jungle units would ask for caliber .30 carbine tracer ammunition.

The Bazooka- We used it as an anti-barge weapon against Jap landing barges. I reckon you look upon that as makeshift, but it did an extremely credible job. One round of bazooka ammunition in a Jap landing barge and its all over. Unfortunately you have to get pretty close as they are armed with twin 50’s and on some occasions with twin 20’s, and they take effective measures sometimes to prevent you from getting close. We also use it against pill boxes and bunkers in the embrasure attack, and it is, as you may guess, quite as effective as the M9A1 Grenade and a bit more accurate at ranges exceeding 50 yards. But we condemned it in principal for that particular task for the reason that when do not use it as a bazooka you do not use it at all. Now with the anti-tank grenade on the rifle you still have an effective small arms weapon. We used them (bazookas) but the next time we will leave them behind.

At this moment I would like to interject that weight, even down to ounces, is a critical thing. The men are taxed to their physical utmost to the extent unless they are highly disciplined they will throw essentials away. On occasion it is pretty hard to set yourself to the task of coercing a man to hang onto something that you yourself feel he is not going to use.

It has come to my mind at the moment that I have done Mr. Browning a dreadful injustice in omitting one of the finest pieces of ordnance that has ever been designed, and that is the 1919A4 Light Machine Gun, which we used to prodigious effect. It is the most dependable weapon that ever came down the road. My only comments are those of humility. I am a member of the determined and belligerent school, which says, I repeat, which says we have no need for a water-cooled machine gun so long as we have that splendid weapon (1919A4) in our possession”.

General Barnes: “Any comments, questions? (None) Thank you very much Colonel Krulak”.

The “Military” model

The so-called “military” version has several features that differentiate it from an early “commercial” model. One of the most obvious is the finish that is a military gray/green Parkerizing rather than being blue. (Though some transitional military guns were blue.)

The second most obvious feature is the stock. The early “military” stocks were the same as the “commercial” models, but had the lateral reinforcing screws added. The later stocks were redesigned to be more durable. The later “military” stock was beefier and also had lateral tie screws to keep the wood from cracking. There were at least two different diameters of tie screws used. Finger grooves in the forearm area are found on some stocks. The overall length of a Reising is .75 of an inch shorter when equipped with a late style military style stock. The cavity in the forearm area was enlarged for easier access to cock the action bar with a gloved hand. All of the military stocks were equipped with sling swivels mounted at the bottom. A large knurled disassembly fastener that could be loosened or tightened without tools was also fitted. Early military Reising stocks had the hardware blued, while on later production the fittings were Parkerized.

As mentioned earlier the number of radial cooling fins on the barrels were reduced from the 28/29 fins found on the early models to just 14. This was done to give the barrel more lateral strength and to expedite barrel manufacture. The engineers were reluctant to eliminate the barrel cooling fins altogether as was done on the late manufacture Thompson, because of the Reising’s closed bolt operation (although H&R introduced an “improved” prototype model in 1943 that had no barrel fins). All .45 caliber Reising barrels were manufactured from premium nickel steel, and rifled by the time saving broaching method.

The fire control selector lever was redesigned by enlarging it slightly, and turning the outer edges upward. The changes were incorporated to allow the selector to be manipulated easier in harsh combat environments. All fire selector levers were case hardened for increased durability.

There were a few subtle changes during production to the military model as well. A screw was added to retain the rear sight, and two reinforcing ribs were stamped into the area where the sight leaf turns 90 degrees vertically. This gave more strength to the fragile rear sight. Early military versions used the receiver end cap (bumper plug) with the integral, solid guide rod pin. This design was unreliable, causing jams or stoppages when it bent or broke loose from the end cap. Eventually the recoil spring guide rod was made as a separate piece from the end cap. The two piece end cap/ hollow guide rod design proved to be very reliable. The two piece design appeared on mid production “military” models. The breakage of the one piece spring guide rod/end cap was eventually traced to the receiver threads for the cap not being cut concentric to the receiver.

Early “military” production transitional Reisings had a three screw milled trigger guard installed. The milled guard is identified by a pointed projection between the two forward attaching screws. The milled guard was soon replaced by the more cost effective stamped three-screw guard. Another feature that appeared on transitional guns was a two piece magazine release lever that was designed to be pushed, rather than pulled to release the magazine. This design soon gave way to the common two-piece “push or pull’ type release lever. There were several internal changes introduced midway in production of the military model. The action bar and auto connector lever were redesigned to require less machine work and be more durable under extreme use.

In 1943 as the M1 carbine and Thompsons became available, Reising production ceased. Early in 1950 the Reising was placed back into limited production for police and foreign sales. Production continued sporadically until 1957. All Reisings manufactured in the 1950s were Model 50 submachine guns in the late “military” configuration. The folding stock Model 55 was no longer offered. Reisings manufactured in the 1950s are identified by a letter prefix in the serial number. The letter designated the actual year of manufacture. Reisings were advertised for law enforcement use well into the 1960s.

The content of this article was excerpted from the new book “The Reising Submachine Gun Story” available from Moose Lake Publishing 207-683-2959