Bushnell Tactical Introduces New Elite Tactical Scope

Bushnell Outdoor Products, an industry leader in high performance sports optics for more than 60 years, has introduced a new 1-8.5x 24mm short to mid-range riflescope (SMRS). The Elite Tactical 1-8.5x 24mm riflescope is available with the BTR-2 illuminated, mil-hash reticle in a first focal plane design. The new tactical SMRS 1-8.5x 24mm scope combines close quarters precision with outstanding mid-range capability. With true one power magnification, this scope delivers instant target acquisition at close range combined with the ability to acquire targets at extended ranges by taking advantage of the versatile magnification range. The scope is built with a 34 mm tube to allow room to dial at extended ranges, and features sturdy T-Lok locking target turrets with .1 mil click values and 10 mils per revolution. The riflescope features the versatile Ignition illuminated BTR-2 reticle with 11 brightness settings (an off position between each setting) for quick adjustments in any light condition. The Ignition reticle increases overall brightness at any setting, with improved concentration of light on the illuminated portion of the reticle. The mil-hash BTR-2 reticle is designed to allow marksmen to quickly make range, holdover and windage adjustments. The reticle has a chromium backing on the muzzle side to eliminate the possibility of light emitting from the front of the scope. Bushnell Elite Tactical series scopes are built to withstand the rigors of the field, whether in military and law enforcement situations, competitions or countless rounds at the range. With fully multi-coated optics and the new anti-reflective Ultra Wide Band (UWB) coating, the scope delivers light transmission across more of the visible light spectrum than before. This feature leads to enhanced clarity, exceptional brightness and true color from dawn to dusk. Built from high-quality forged aluminum alloy, the scope features a robust 34mm one-piece tube and Argon purging. Integrated to deliver long-lasting performance and reliability, Argon provides added resistance against corrosion, reduced chances of fogging and longer seal life. The scopes are 100 percent fog proof, shock proof and waterproof. Bushnell takes all-weather performance a step further with its patented RainGuard HD lens coating. The permanent, water-resistant finish gives shooters a clear view when weather conditions present a challenge. Contact Bushnell Outdoor Products, 9200 Cody Street, Overland Park, KS 66214. Phone: (913) 752-3400. Website: www.bushnell.com.

Upgraded SureFire M300 Mini Scout Light

The M300 Mini Scout is a powerful, lightweight weapon-mounted light that quickly and securely attaches to any Mil-Spec Picatinny rail via its integral thumbscrew clamp. Powered by a single 123A lithium battery, its virtually indestructible LED generates 200 lumens of tactical level light shaped by a proprietary TIR lens into a beam with plenty of reach yet enough surround light for close-quarter work. The ergonomic M300 is activated by clicking its pushbutton tailcap switch or, for fingertip control without altering your grip on the weapon, by pressing the included pressure-activated tape switch. Built from lightweight aerospace aluminum, hard anodized with a Mil-Spec finish, and O-ring sealed to keep out the elements, the ultra-compact M300 will endure the rigors of combat without weighing down your weapon. For more information contact SureFire, 17680 Newhope Street, Suite B1, Fountain Valley, CA 92708. Phone: (714) 545-9444. Fax: (714) 545-9537. On the web at www.surefire.com.

TacStar Announces New Adaptive Tactical M4 Stock For Ruger 10/22

TacStar – a Lyman Brand and a leader in the field of tactical accessories – has introduced a new synthetic stock for the popular Ruger 10/22: the first in a line of accessories created by Lyman’s partnership with Adaptive Tactical. Incorporating four innovative patents, the Adaptive Tactical 10/22 Stock’s groundbreaking design is loaded with more features than any other stock on the market and is offered in both black and camo finishes. The patented features include a removable barrel insert in the forend, which allows the stock to accommodate both standard tapered barrels and .920″ bull barrels, with no ugly gaps. In addition, a reversible Stowaway rail is concealed in the forend. Rail up; the outside surface blends with the contoured forend. Rail down; the accessory rail is exposed for mounting a bipod and/or other accessories. An adjustable M4 type butt stock provides a 4-inch adjustment in length of pull and is equipped with convenient storage compartments for two spare Ruger rotary magazines. (Magazines not included.) Finally, the stock’s comfortable pistol grip accepts an optional accessory TacTRED Monopod that can be extended from the grip. TacTRED provides a quick, stable, single point rest on any surface and ensures maximum tripod-like stability when used with a front rail-mounted bipod or front rest. TacStar’s new AdTac 10/22 Stock and TacTRED Monopod, as well as all TacStar and Lyman products and brands, are available nationally through firearms and sporting goods dealers and mail order companies. You can contact them at TacStar, Lyman Products Group, 475 Smith Street, Middletown, CT 06457. Phone: (860) 632-2020. Fax: (860) 632-1699. Website: www.tacstar.com.

SAM7K Pistol Variant Added To K-VAR Product Line

Continuing with plans to expand the SAM7K series, K-VAR added another AK pistol to its product line and is now available to customers. The SAM7K-02 enters the mix sporting a tactical hand guard with attached flashlight that allows shooting enthusiasts to easily locate the target. The hand guard (sku: KR-016B) is the original Bulgarian hand guard set that includes the latest generation design lower hand guard with flash light made from Mil-Spec black polymer. The integrated flashlight emits a very bright glow for fast target acquisition. The flashlight uses two 3-Volt lithium batteries (CR 123 ASL) and is designed for milled-receiver Krinkovs. The 7.62x39mm, semiautomatic pistol keeps the same outstanding integrity and specifications as the original SAM7K. You can reach them at K-VAR Corp., 4001 South Decatur Boulevard, #37383, Las Vegas, NV 89103. Phone: (702) 364-8880. On the web at www.k-var.com.

ATI Introduces New FX 45 Titan Lightweight

The new Super X Pump Marine Defender from Winchester Repeating Arms is ready for any weather while on the water, for home protection and competition shooting. The SXP Marine Defender features an inertia-assisted action for faster cycling of shells. Matte Hard Chrome Plating on the barrel and magazine tube offers excellent protection against the elements. A drop out trigger group allows for easy cleaning. The Super X Pump has an 18-inch barrel and uses the Invector-Plus choke system. A cylinder choke is installed, allowing the SXP to shoot anything from slugs to buck shot. The magazine holds a total of five shells and a removable TruGlo fiber-optic front sight is included. The Super X Pump is drilled and tapped for scope bases. For better handling in all weather conditions, a tactical ribbed forearm gives you more control. The Synthetic stock also features a textured gripping surface and has an Inflex Technology Recoil Pad. Suggested Retail Price is $399.99. For more information contact them at Winchester Repeating Arms, 275 Winchester Ave., Morgan, UT 84050. Phone: (801) 876-3440

Super X Pump Marine Defender From Winchester

The new Super X Pump Marine Defender from Winchester Repeating Arms is ready for any weather while on the water, for home protection and competition shooting. The SXP Marine Defender features an inertia-assisted action for faster cycling of shells. Matte Hard Chrome Plating on the barrel and magazine tube offers excellent protection against the elements. A drop out trigger group allows for easy cleaning. The Super X Pump has an 18-inch barrel and uses the Invector-Plus choke system. A cylinder choke is installed, allowing the SXP to shoot anything from slugs to buck shot. The magazine holds a total of five shells and a removable TruGlo fiber-optic front sight is included. The Super X Pump is drilled and tapped for scope bases. For better handling in all weather conditions, a tactical ribbed forearm gives you more control. The Synthetic stock also features a textured gripping surface and has an Inflex Technology Recoil Pad. Suggested Retail Price is $399.99. For more information contact them at Winchester Repeating Arms, 275 Winchester Ave., Morgan, UT 84050. Phone: (801) 876-3440.

Reed Exhibitions Out as SHOT Show Manager

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the largest trade association for the firearms industry, has announced that it has reached an agreement with Reed Exhibitions to terminate the agreement the parties had for the management of the SHOT Show. Accordingly, effective immediately, Reed Exhibitions will no longer be manager and producer of the SHOT Show.

Reed Exhibitions provided service to NSSF and the customers of the SHOT Show for more than three decades, however, the company’s decision to restrict the sale of certain types of firearms (particularly AR-15 derivatives) this year at the large Pennsylvania consumer hunting and fishing show – an event unrelated to NSSF and the SHOT Show – was in conflict with NSSF’s mission to serve the shooting sports industry. This Reed decision resulted in many industry firms cancelling their participation at the Pennsylvania expo and ultimately caused the event to be cancelled. As a result, both organizations (NSSF & Reed) decided it was in the best interest of the SHOT Show to end their relationship.

Some SHOT Show exhibitors were considering their non-participation at the 2014 SHOT Show if Reed continued on as its manager.

Reed’s decision to ban AR-15 type rifles from the Pennsylvania show was made during the time when the firearms industry was under severe stress and in danger of faltering from the attacks by members of Congress, led by Obama/Biden, who were predicting that an anti-gun “tidal wave” would sweep the firearms industry away.

The SHOT Show – the Shooting, Hunting and Outdoor Trade Show – is owned and sponsored by NSSF. It is the largest and most comprehensive trade show for all professionals involved with the shooting sports, hunting and law enforcement industries. The 2014 SHOT Show will be held Jan. 14-17 at the Sands Expo and Convention Center in Las Vegas.

New SHOT Show Management Company Chosen by NSSF

After what has been described as an extensive national search involving the trade show industry’s top management companies, the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) has selected ConvExx as its new SHOT Show management partner.

ConvExx replaces longtime NSSF partner Reed Exhibitions, which became uncomfortable with managing the SHOT Show due to its extensive displays of “black rifles.”

Based in Las Vegas, ConvExx is privately held and has produced more than 200 shows and events, working with more than a million exhibitors and attendees.

ConvExx produces the annual Specialty Equipment Market Association (SEMA) Show, which at nearly 1 million net-square-feet and 135,000-attendees is ranked as the fourth largest trade show in America by Trade Show Executive magazine (SHOT Show is ranked 16th).

“We’re excited to have ConvExx on board as our new management partner,” said Chris Dolnack, NSSF senior vice president and chief marketing officer. “ConvExx offers a unique combination of extensive large-show and Las Vegas experience, which will serve our exhibitors and attendees well.”

“We’re thrilled to be selected to help NSSF manage the SHOT Show,” said ConvExx Chairman Chuck Schwartz. “The SHOT Show is one of the premier trade show events, and we are proud to be associated with NSSF and the shooting sports industry.”

Sturm, Ruger to Open Third Factory

Sturm, Ruger & Co. has announced that it plans to open its third manufacturing plant, a 220,000-square-foot facility in Mayodan, North Carolina.

This will be the company’s first major expansion in over 25-years. It is expected to be finalized in late-summer. The company currently employs over 2,000 people in its two plants in Newport, New Hampshire and Prescott, Arizona.

NSSF Files Suit Against Connecticut’s New Gun Law

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the trade association for the firearms and ammunition industry, has filed suit in federal court for the District of Connecticut alleging that Governor Dannel Malloy and the leadership of the Connecticut General Assembly misused the so-called “emergency certification” exception to circumvent the safeguards of the normal legislative process and in violation of Connecticut statutory law in order to pass Senate Bill 1160, a package of strict gun control regulations.

The suit further alleges that enactment of the new law violates fundamental due process rights guaranteed by both the Connecticut and United States Constitutions. NSSF is asking the court to declare the law invalid and issue an injunction prohibiting its enforcement. “A 139-page bill was assembled behind closed doors, bypassing both the public hearing and committee processes, and quickly sent to floor votes on the same day in both the House and Senate where legislators did not have adequate time to even read the bill.

“The governor then signed the package into law the next day. All of this is in violation of guarantees citizens are supposed to have under Connecticut State Statutes and protections in our State and U.S. Constitutions for which our forefathers fought,” said Lawrence G. Keane, senior vice president and general counsel, NSSF.

“Our suit focuses on this abuse of process that has resulted in enacted law that does nothing to improve public safety, while resulting in adverse effects on law-abiding citizens, manufacturers, retailers and sportsmen’s organizations,” said Keane.

Non-Licensed Exports to Canada Limit Now $500

The State Department Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) has revised sections 123.16 and 123.17 of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) to increase the dollar limit of exports of certain firearms, and firearm parts, components, accessories and attachments to Canada without a license from $100 to $500 (wholesale). This has been a F.A.I.R. Trade Group effort that has been an undertaking of several years.

These amendments implement the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, which restricts DDTC from requiring an export license:

(1) for certain firearms and firearm components for end-use by the Canadian Government when the total transaction value does not exceed $500 wholesale; and (2) for certain firearms components for end-use in Canada when the total transaction value does not exceed $500 wholesale.

FAIR has been advocating this issue on behalf of industry for quite some time. They thought they had attained victory back in 2005 when the House of Representatives and the Senate passed the appropriations legislation, but it had to continue to work with DDTC to ensure they implemented the legislation.

Following are excerpted portions from the Federal Register Notice. Please review this revision carefully, as the firearms and parts and components that qualify for the license exemption depend on the final end-user. In addition, there are several conditions that must be satisfied to use the license exemption failure to meet these requirements could subject the exporter to fines, penalties, or other enforcement action.

It is important to note that the license exemption dollar limit for all countries other than Canada remains at $100.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 22 CFR Part 123 RIN 1400¨CAD07 [Public Notice 8371]
International Traffic in Arms Regulations: Canadian Firearms Components Exemption

AGENCY: Department of State.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The Department of State is amending the International Traffic in Arms Regulations to implement a statutory provision regarding the exemption from licensing for export to Canada of firearms components not exceeding $500 in value.

DATES: This rule is effective July 8, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Sarah J. Heidema, Acting Director, Office of Defense Trade Controls Policy, Department of State, telephone (202) 663-2792, email DDTCResponseTeam@state.gov ATTN: Part 123, Canadian Firearms Components Exemption.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Department of State is amending the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) to implement section 520 of the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act 2012 (Pub. L. 112¨C55), which applies to fiscal year 2012 appropriations, as carried forward for fiscal year 2013 by the Full Year Continuing Appropriations Act 2013 (Pub. L. 113-6). The Department has the authority to regulate the export control program pursuant to the Arms Export Control Act, 22 U.S.C. 2778. Pursuant to section 520, the Department cannot require a license for the export of certain firearms and firearms components for end-use by the Canadian government with a total transaction value not exceeding $500 wholesale, and cannot require a license for the export of certain firearms components for end-use in Canada with a total transaction value not exceeding $500 wholesale. ITAR 123.17 is revised accordingly. In addition, ITAR 123.16(b)(6) is amended to remove the words “for personal use,” as the firearms exemption at ITAR 123.17 includes use of the exemption for an end-use other than personal use. This rule implements a statutory mandate, and concerns a foreign affairs function of the United States. Therefore, the Department is publishing this as a final rule, and is not soliciting comments.

Text of New Rule on Exempt Canadian Exports

3. Section 123.17 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
123.17 Exports of firearms, ammunition, and personal protective gear.

(a) Port Directors of U.S. Customs and Border Protection shall permit the export without a license of:

•(1) Parts and components for USML Category I(a) firearms, except barrels, cylinders, receivers (frames), or complete breech mechanisms, when the total value does not exceed $100 wholesale in any transaction, except to any of the countries or entities as provided in 126.1 of this subchapter;

•(2) Parts, components, accessories, or attachments for USML Category I firearms, except barrels, cylinders, receivers (frames), complete breech mechanisms, or fully automatic firearms and parts and components for such firearms, when:

i. The total value does not exceed $500 wholesale in any transaction;

ii. The export is to Canada for endues in Canada or return to the United States, or temporary import into the United States of Canadian-origin items and return to Canada for a Canadian citizen; and

iii. The exporter makes a declaration via the Automated Export System, pursuant to 123.22(a) of this subchapter, and the exporter is eligible to export under this exemption or

•(3) Parts, components, accessories, or attachments for USML Category I firearms, including fully automatic firearms and parts and components for such firearms, when:

i. The total value does not exceed $500 wholesale in any transaction; pursuant to 120.1(c) of this subchapter; or

ii. The export is to Canada for endues by the Canadian Federal Government, a Canadian Provincial Government, or a Canadian Municipal Government; and

iii. The exporter makes a declaration via the Automated Export System, pursuant to 123.22(a) of this subchapter, and the exporter is eligible to export under this exemption, pursuant to 120.1(c) of this subchapter.

ATF Head Confirms Straw Buyers Rarely Prosecuted

President Obama’s choice to head the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives told a Senate panel last month that, the arrest of “straw buyers” was a top Justice Department priority but the department rarely prosecutes cases “due to limited resources.”

The testimony from U.S. Attorney B. Todd Jones came during a rancorous confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, where Republicans – led by Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa – questioned Jones’ credentials, his leadership of the U.S. attorney’s office in Minnesota, and his role and involvement in the Fast and Furious gunrunning probe that let more than 2,000 weapons be “walked” across the U.S.-Mexico border to drug smugglers.

Jones acknowledged in questioning by Sen. Ted Cruz, Texas Republican, that of 48,321 cases involving straw buyers, the Justice Dept. prosecuted only 44 of them – saying that “hard decisions” to prosecute were made based on “limited resources.” He also acknowledged that as the U.S. attorney in Minnesota, he never prosecuted anyone accused of being a straw buyer.

“The data demonstrates that it is not a priority for the Obama administration to prosecute those who illegally try to buy firearms,” Cruz said.

Jones took over as acting director after the Fast and Furious operation was made public, although Grassley noted that he served as chairman of the advisory committee to Attorney General Eric Holder from 2009 through 2011, when the operation was in effect.

Jones has now been confirmed as director of ATF. Grassley had asked that the hearing be postponed, saying Jones was the focus of an open investigation by the Office of Special Counsel on his conduct as U.S. attorney in Minnesota.

“When there is a pending investigation, the committee obviously doesn’t have the full information about the nominee,” he said. “In this case, there are allegations of gross mismanagement and abuses of authority in Mr. Jones’ office. And there is a complaint that Mr. Jones retaliated against a whistleblower. These are serious charges, and ones that are of particular concern to me.”

On April 12, Grassley said the OSC reported two pending matters involving the U.S. attorney’s office in Minnesota – a prohibited personnel practice complaint and a whistleblower disclosure alleging gross mismanagement and abuses of authority. A month later, he said the OSC gave the committee an update, saying the whistleblower disclosure case had been closed but the prohibited personnel practice complaint was moving to mediation.

Grassley said employees within the U.S. attorneys’ office had written anonymously to the OSC asking for “a review of the patterns, practices, treatment, and abuse that [they] have suffered.” He said they claimed Jones “had instituted a climate of fear, had pushed employees out of the office, dismissed employees wrongly, violated the hiring practices of the EEOC, and put in place an Orwellian style of management that continues to polarize the office.”

Separately, he said, Donald Oswald, former special agent-in-charge of the FBI’s Minnesota division, wrote to the committee to voice his concerns about Jones.

Magpul Joins Suit Against Colorado’s New Law

Magpul Industries has joined 54 Colorado county sheriffs in filing a federal lawsuit against the state’s recently signed gun-control bills.

But even if the lawsuit is successful, the Erie-based firearm magazine marketer is still planning to leave Colorado. “Just to clarify, we are still moving, regardless of the outcome of this legal action,” said a post on the company’s web page. “That train has left the station, and we are well into the selection and negotiation process as well as arranging many elements to be prepared to launch and already moving some production out of state.”

The lawsuit challenges two bills signed in March by Dem. Gov. John Hickenlooper: House Bill 1224, which restricts ammunition-magazine capacity to 15 rounds, and House Bill 1229, which requires background checks on all gun sales and transfers – including temporary transfers. “This isn’t good public policy. These are really awful bills,” said Weld County Sheriff John Cooke at a press conference. “They are unenforceable and encourage disrespect for the law, which puts both law enforcement and the public in greater danger.”

The Democratic state legislature approved the bills, along with a third bill requiring gun owners to pay for their own background checks, with no Republican votes.

Another manufacturer, HiViz Shooting Systems, has announced that it would move from Fort Collins to Laramie, Wyo.

NYC Taxpayers Help Sponsor Bloomberg’s Gun Control Group

The webpage of Mayors Against Illegal Guns (MAIG) appears to have been purchased and hosted by City of New York, the Weekly Standard reports.

The group was co-founded by New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg and Boston mayor Thomas Menino to “share best practices, develop innovative policies, and support legislation at the national, state, and local levels that will help law enforcement target illegal guns Mayor Bloomberg’s press secretary, Marc La Vorgna, confirmed the City of New York’s involvement with the domain’s purchase and hosting, to the Standard.

When asked whether the purchase and subsequent hosting of the domain by New York City’s Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications was accidental or intentional, La Vorgna replied that the purchase had “definitely been vetted.”

La Vorgna continued, saying that, “Mayor Bloomberg’s push for changes to federal firearms law was part of the New York City agenda” and compared it to other efforts Bloomberg, as mayor, has undertaken – like the effort he and other mayors are involved in to limit the use of food stamps in purchasing sugary drinks.

The Mayors Against Illegal Guns website, according to La Vorgna, like other Bloomberg efforts to lobby the federal government, was done as part of “his capacity as mayor.”

Maggie Haberman and Steve Friess of Politico add, “At minimum, the use of a city web server and city employees underscore what critics have long derided as a blurring of the lines between government resources and Bloomberg’s own multi-billion-dollar fortune, his company, and his pet interests in his three terms as mayor.”

It is unclear why Bloomberg, who has a net worth of $27 billion and has given millions of dollars in donations to Mayors Against Illegal Guns Action Fund, would involve the City of New York in purchasing and hosting the webpage for Mayors Against Illegal Guns.

The author publishes two of the small arms industry’s most widely read trade newsletters. The International Firearms Trade covers the world firearms scene, and The New Firearms Business covers the domestic market. Visit www.FirearmsGroup.com. He may be reached at: FirearmsB@aol.com.

The SKS carbine or Samozariadnyia Karabina Simonova was the first Soviet series production weapon chambered for an intermediate-range cartridge. The SKS carbine was conceived during World War II to supplement the semiautomatic SVT 38 and SVT 40 (Samozaryadnaya Vintovka Tokareva) and 7.62x54mm bolt action Mosin Nagant battle rifles. The 7.62x39mm round would eventually replace the powerful long range 7.62x54R rifles and short range 7.62x25mm cartridge used in Soviet submachine guns.

The SKS is a gas operated, semiautomatic-only carbine that has a fixed 10-round magazine that is designed to be loaded through the top of the receiver using stripper clips. The Soviet SKS weighs approximately 8.8-pounds with an overall length of 40.16 inches, which is somewhat heavy and long for its midrange round. The rear sight is calibrated for a range of 100 to 1,000 meters, with a 300 meter battle sight position. The action’s locking mechanism is a tilting-bolt design.

Although well made and reliable, the SKS design was dated at the time of its post-war introduction, which was at the dawn of the select-fire, detachable magazine assault rifle. Work was already well underway on Kalashnikov’s AK-47 design around the same time period that the SKS was being placed in large scale production during 1949. Despite large numbers of SKS carbines being manufactured, its front line service in the Soviet Union was brief.

The SKS was distributed and manufactured in a number of Communist satellite nations, and was in front line service for a longer period of time in many of those countries. U.S. Forces encountered the SKS during the Vietnam War were it was fielded by Viet Cong guerilla fighters and the North Vietnamese Army.

In addition to the Soviet Union, the SKS was manufactured in Albania, China, East Germany, North Korea, Romania, Vietnam and Yugoslavia. Although the non-Soviet SKS carbines were the same basic design, there were small detail differences on the weapons manufactured in the aforementioned nations. Once shunned by collectors, many of the SKS variants that were once cheap and plentiful have become difficult to find and have gone up in value as interest in collecting them has increased.

Soviet Production

The Soviet SKS carbines were manufactured at the Tula Arsenal from 1949 until 1956 and at the Izhevsk plant from 1953 to 1954. The Tula manufactured SKS carbines can be identified by an arrow inside of a star marking and date of manufacture on top of the receiver cover. The markings vary slightly in small details. Some of the early 1949 Tula markings were rather crudely done. The Tula markings were changed during 1955-1956 to a small star on the left side of the receiver. The Izhevsk plant’s SKS two year production run was short compared to the Tula Arsenal, making the Izhevsk carbines less common. The Izhevsk SKS carbines are identified by an arrow in a triangle inside of a circle symbol along with a date of manufacture, which like the Tula markings, can vary slightly in small details. Most original stocks were made of birch, except for very late Tula production which were laminated.

When first imported to the U.S. during the 1990s, the Soviet SKS carbines sold for as little as $99. Most had undergone an arsenal rebuild and appeared in like-new condition. A few features that may appear on refurbished rifles are Soviet rebuild markings that include a box symbol with a line inside or a diamond icon on the top cover or buttstock, blued bayonet and bolt, black painted parts, XXXed out or mismatched serial numbers, or a laminated replacement stock. There were a few Soviet SKS carbines imported that had not undergone the rebuild process; these rifles are highly desired by collectors. Some Soviet SKS carbines have additional “new” receiver serial numbers that were added by the importer. This came about as a result of an ATF directive claiming that original serial numbers having Cyrillic or non-Roman characters were not being properly recorded by FFL dealers transferring the carbines making them difficult to trace by the ATF.

Albanian Production

During the Cold War period the Soviets began to supply military aid to Albania. The Soviet military supply line ended when Albania cut its ties with Russia in 1961 and in 1968 Albania withdrew from the Warsaw Pact. Communist China also assisted Albania with military hardware, which included Chinese Type 56 SKS rifles, and Type 56 milled receiver AK rifles. After Albania broke ties with the Soviet Union, and left the Warsaw Pact, the country continued its relationship with China.

China provided technical assistance and parts to Albania in order to help them establish their own weapons production, which began with the SKS rifle, at the Uzina e Municioneve Gramsh state-owned factory in central Albania. Series production of the Albanian SKS known as the Pushkë Gjysmë Automatiku Shqiptar tipi 56 (Albanian Semi-Automatic Rifle, Model/Type 56) began in 1962, with the Type 56 designation originating with the original Chinese SKS. Also in 1962, the manufacture of M43, 7.62x39mm ammunition was established at the state owned M Poliçan factory.

The Albanian SKS differs slightly from its Soviet made counterpart by having a long three vent handguard that extends out to the gas block. The buttstock has two separate compartments for maintenance items and a sling swivel on the left side. The 10 round magazine has a slightly different shape than other SKS carbines. The underfolding bayonet is a spike style and black in color. The most obvious difference from other SKS carbines is its hook-type cocking handle. Albanian serial numbers are located on the left side of the receiver and on most major components. The serial numbers generally have three to six numbers followed by a dash and a two digit year of manufacture. The 300 meter battle sight position is marked with a letter D. Large numbers of the Albanian SKS carbines and stores of 7.62x39mm ammunition were destroyed by the United Nations disarming initiative after the Balkan wars. Several NATO countries, including the United States and Great Britain, supplied funding for the destruction project. Only a limited number of Albanian SKS rifles were imported during 2002, the average price was $229.

Chinese Production The Type 56

Chinese production of the Type 56 (SKS) carbine was undertaken during 1956 by a large number of arsenals, and remained in production longer than any other country. In addition to military carbines, China made a large number of their commercial Type 56 carbines for export, primarily for the U.S. civilian market. Chinese SKS carbines were first imported during the 1980s.

Military production of Type 56 carbines can be identified by an arsenal symbol on the left side of the receiver. One of the most common is a number 26 inside of a triangle, the logo of the Jianshe Arsenal. There were a number of different factory codes used by China. The Chinese characters located near the factory code represents “56 Type.” Most Type 56 carbine serial numbers are numeric except for very early production that was assisted by Soviet technicians; these serial numbers were preceded by a letter. Rear sight battle sight positions markings vary from a Cyrillic letter P (P) used on early manufacture, a letter D, Roman numeral III or a number 3.

Due to the large number of factories involved in production there are many small detail differences in Chinese production of their SKS carbines. During early manufacture at the arsenals many milled parts were used, as production continued into the mid 1960s, stamped parts began to replace labor intensive machined ones. One of the first components to be fabricated from sheet metal was the trigger group; eventually some receivers were made of sheet metal. Another cost saving initiative was to pin the barrels to the receivers instead of having to thread the barrel and receiver. Milled lightening cuts in the bolt carriers and other parts were eliminated to save machining. Two types of folding bayonets were used during production in China; the spike style and a blade type.

The Chinese Type 56 SKS carbines are the most common of the genre in the U.S. Some are surplus Chinese military, but most are commercial variants made for the U.S. market. At one time the Chinese SKS carbines were very inexpensive, advertised as low as $79.

East Germany Karabiner-S

The East German version of the SKS is the Karabiner-S. Some of the unique features include a slot in the buttstock for attaching a sling, lack of a trap door in the buttstock for a cleaning kit and there is no cleaning rod, which is normally stored under the barrel on other SKS carbines. The factory markings are located on the left side of the receiver, the first two numbers preceding the serial numbers indicate the year of manufacture. Rear sights are marked with the letters SV. Stocks were made of laminated wood. There are also East German issued Soviet manufactured SKS carbines; these can be identified by a triangle with a number 1 inside it, marked on the receiver near the serial number. East German SKS carbines are somewhat rare. There may be other variants and features, but because of the rarity of the weapons very few are available for study. Many of the East German SKS carbines were destroyed after the reunification of Germany. Most of the East German SKS carbines in the U.S. were war trophies brought back from Vietnam.

North Korea Type 63

The North Korean SKS, designated as the Type 63, is similar to the Soviet configuration. The North Korean star in a circle logo and 63 and a Hangul character representing “Type” are stamped on the receiver’s top cover. The battle sight position on the rear sight leaf is a Hangul character that translates to “height.” Stocks are made of laminated birch with two small reinforcing pins in the wrist area and two pins in the foregrip area. The underfolding bayonet is a blade type. The North Koreans fielded a grenade launching model with a launching sight attached to the left side of the receiver, a gas cut-off valve on the gas block and a detachable clamp-on launching tube. The grenade launcher appears to be a compilation of the U.S. designed M8 and M1 launchers. There may be other variants and features, but because of the rarity of the Type 63 carbines very few have been available for an in-depth study. North Korean carbines were never imported to the U.S. Those that are in the U.S. are most likely Vietnam War trophies.

Romania M56

The Romanian SKS designated as the Model 56 was manufactured in Romania from 1956 to 1962. The serial numbers begin with two letters followed by sequence numbers, followed by the year of manufacture. The M56 carbines were produced in the Uzina Mecanica Cugir plant in Transylvania. The Cugir factory’s arsenal mark is similar to the Izhevsk Arsenal of Russia, a triangle with a vertical pointing arrow inside but without fletching. The 300-meter battle sight position on Romanian SKS rifles is marked with a letter I. The bayonet is the blade type with dull chrome plating. The major parts are marked with the full serial number but the bolt, bolt carrier, receiver and barrel are marked with a similar one to three digit number. The stock is beech wood with a sling swivel located on the bottom. A number of M56 carbines have been imported into the U.S. In 2002, Romanian SKS carbines were offered for $150.

North Vietnam

The Vietnam SKS carbines are marked with a small star with a 1 inside of it, located on the left side of the receiver. The battle position on the rear sight leaf is marked with a Cyrillic letter P. Documented serial numbers are all in the 620,000 to 650,000 range. One of the rarest SKS variants, those in the U.S. are trophies that were brought back from the Vietnam War as none were ever imported.

Yugoslavia M59, M59/66

The Yugoslavian SKS is the Model 59. First manufactured in 1959, the M59 has a few minor differences from the Russian SKS. One is the radius on the front of the gas tube and the stock is made of beech wood. There are matching serial numbers on most of the parts. The battle sight position on the rear sight leaf is marked with a letter I.

The M59 was modified in 1966 to the Model 59/66 that has a permanently attached NATO spec 22mm diameter grenade launcher, gas cut off valve and flip up grenade sight. The attachment of the launcher tube to the barrel added 3.74 inches (95mm) to the weapon’s overall length. There are several variations of the grenade launcher tube configuration. Later tritium and/or phosphorus night sights were added and this variation is often referred to as the 59/66A1. The Yugoslavian SKS variants do not have chrome-lined barrels and chambers because the technology to apply it wasn’t available in that country during production. Manufacture of the 59/66 started in 1966 and lasted until 1970. A large number of the Yugo 59/66 rifles have been imported, many in new or like new condition. During 2003 the Yugo SKS carbines were advertised for as low as $89.

The Disintegrating Metallic Belt Links

During the Second World War, more than 9 billion metallic links were produced by U.S. companies to feed the various .50 cal. Browning machine guns used by U.S. Armed Forces on ground, on sea and in the air.

Two official U.S. documents represent the major sources of information for this study, namely the report published in 1945 by the Chief of Ordnance, Machine Guns – Development and production of metallic belt link and fabric ammunition belt and the minutes of the Metallic Belt Link Industry Integration Committee compiled up to September 1944.

In 1940, the different models of .50 cal. Browning machine guns used on ground, air and sea are fed with the disintegrating metallic link M1. It is a direct scaled up version of the .30 cal. disintegrating link that was designed at the end of the First World War to feed the Marlin aircraft machine guns.

These .50 cal. Links, M1, of standard issue in the U.S. Army were manufactured by Rock Island Arsenal and are protected against corrosion by an electro-plated zinc coating exhibiting a typical light grey appearance. These links produced before 1940 for the U.S. Army are devoid of markings. Specimens bearing the Colt logo are commercial export production; it remains unknown to the author whether these links were produced “in house” by Colt or were subcontracted.

The development of a new link to replace the M1 finds its origin by a requirement of the Chief of Air Corps hereafter excerpted from his memorandum addressed to the Chief of Ordnance on April 24 1940. “In recent developments on remote control mounts and power-driven mounts for aircraft machine guns, it has been found necessary to place the entire ammunition load for a given gun mission in one belt and in one ammunition container. In order to do this in the restricted space involved with some mounts, such as tail guns and engine nacelles, considerable flexibility in the metallic link belt is necessary. The present standard link belt does not give sufficient flexibility to afford utilizing space in the most efficient manner. It is therefore requested that immediate steps be taken to materially increase flexibility in both torsional direction and in the plane of the belt. This matter should be expedited as much as practicable as it vitally affects the machine gun mounts now being given a high priority of development in the Air Corps.”

As a result of the above memorandum, a new metallic link was adopted as standard in February 1941, which almost doubled the flexibility compared to that of the previous type M1. This was accomplished by the redesign of the sides of the center loop, which are tapered; the center loop is also slightly larger in diameter than standard and the connecting ears are more rounded.

A new rust-proofing coating made of iron phosphate saturated with oil was adopted as standard for all M2 links. As the minutes of the Belt Links Committee indicate, this change in rust-proofing coating was made to eliminate the difficulties arising from the electrolytic corrosion resulting from the contact of the zinc plating with the brass cartridge case.

During peacetime in the interwar period, Rock Island Arsenal (RIA) had the exclusive responsibility of the design and production of the metallic links for U.S. Ordnance. During the sole 1940 year, Rock Island Arsenal produced 14.876 million .50 cal. M1 links, most of which was delivered to the Air Force. During 1940, several U.S. companies were asked by the British Government for the production of metallic links and therefore began building new production capabilities.

As soon as mid-1940, bearing in mind the possibility that the United States could enter the war, U.S. Ordnance anticipated a considerable increase of requirements for metallic links, essentially for Air Force use, and therefore prepared for procurements from private companies. In June 1940, the Fort Pitt Bedding Co. of Pittsburg is the first private company to be notified of a contract by U.S. Ordnance for production of .50 metallic links. During 1941, another three private companies began delivery of .50 metallic links to U.S. Ordnance namely: the Barnard Aviation Co. (which later became the General Aviation Co.) in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, the Firestone Steel Products Co. in Fall River, Massachusetts and the National Stamping Co. in Detroit, Michigan.

In December 1941, following the entry of the United States in the War, the mobilization program scheduled a need for 3 billion .50 cal. links for 1942 and 5 billion for 1943. In order to fulfill those considerable requirements, six new private companies began production in 1942 followed by 12 others in 1943.

The salvaging of .50 M2 links was proposed and tried in early 1943 when the supply of links was acute, but because of the unknown factors in the previous history of the links necessitating a 100% inspection, and the cost involved in refinishing and packing, the project was abandoned. At that time, the suggestion for making Grade A and Grade B was also offered, but was not given serious consideration because of the number of complications it would have introduced in the supply program.

It was in September and October 1943 that the maximal full production output of all 22 factories involved in the production of .50 metallic links was reached. At that period, the cumulative monthly rate of all 22 factories reached 522 million links.

The coordinated production of the 22 factories, the organization of raw material deliveries, the development and procurement of machine tools, the harmonization of standards and quality control, all these key requirements have been possible through the Metallic Belt Link Industry Integration Committee. This committee, composed of representatives of U.S. Ordnance and the various manufacturers and sub-contractors, was created in July 1941.

In October 1943, according to the amount of links already in stocks and the actual consumption rate by combat units, the expected production requirement for 1944 was reduced down to a total yearly production of 2 billion only. This reduction in the production requirements drove early 1944 to the complete termination of production for 13 out of the 22 factories and a large reduction of monthly production rate for the remaining 9 factories. Mid-1945, after the close of the hostilities in Europe, 4 more factories stopped production. In August 1945 with the Victory over Japan, only 5 factories were still in activity. From January 1941 to August 1945, a total of more than 9.4 billion .50 cal. Browning links had been produced.

M2 links bear the manufacturer marking associated with a number or a letter, which indicates the machine tool used in order to precisely locate the faulty machine in case of non-standard production.

Experimental Links

The further development of experimental links is described in much detail in the Record of Army Ordnance Research and Development published in 1946 from which the following information is excerpted from.

Although the M2 link was officially adopted as standard on 20 February 1941, and was considered acceptable by the Army Air Force, the link development program was continued in order to keep abreast of the rapid development of combat planes by producing a still stronger and more flexible link.

The development was conducted along three general lines. The first deals with the modification of the M2 link and development of other one-piece designs in an attempt to minimize the modifications in existing manufacturing processes. The second approach deals with the development of a two-piece link in which the connecting loop was joined to the bridge of the body loop by a swivel joint, which accomplished greater strain flexibility than is practicable with a one-piece design without sacrifice of the required strength. Finally the third approach was the investigation of the feasibility of employing materials other than steel to determine whether the advantage of reduced weight and increased resistance to corrosion could be obtained whiteout sacrifice of strength and other characteristics of the steel links.

A considerable amount of study was given to the improvement of the M2 link that resulted in at least 28 experimental models that retained the essential characteristics of the standard link with simple modifications. The final result of the study on one-piece links was the development of the T43 design with increased resistance of the center loop obtained both with the addition of a tab at the end of the center loop to prevent it from opening up under load and also with the addition of stiffening ribs. This test model was the precursor of the model later adopted as M9, which is still nowadays the standard link for modern Browning weapons.

The third approach based on the use of non-steel materials involved both plastic and aluminum links. Experiments with plastic links that might generate a saving in weight of 60% or more and an entire freedom from corrosion had been conducted over a period of more than 4 years and were still in progress after the close of the Second World War. Several different companies dealing with plastic materials patented various plastic links designs. Among the plastic materials investigated, the most promising was determined to be DuPont FM-1 Nylon as used for the T37 series of links. The major drawback of plastic links at the time was the impossibility to find plastic materials that would stand the extreme climatic conditions specified (both low and high temperatures).

Aluminum was also considered in an attempt to reduce weight and improve resistance to corrosion. However, the lower mechanical properties compared to steel would require an increase in thickness of stock that would nullify any saving in weight. No surviving specimen of WW2 aluminum links has been observed so far by the author.

Packing of Links

During the early 1930s, the first M1 links were packed by 6 pieces in a chipboard carton according to the design of the manual linker type L-56 for which six cartridges are simultaneously inserted into links.

In 1935, the Link Loading Machine Cal. .50 M2 was adopted as standard. This linker enabled the simultaneous introduction of 10 cartridges into links. Therefore, a new 10-link chipboard carton was adopted also. These 10-link cartons bear printed on the chipboard the designation of the content as well the manufacturer (either in abridged or in full text); the cartons are undated.

As of 1942, the approved packing for .50 M2 links was 1,000 pieces in 10-link chipboard cartons. The 100 individual cartons are wrapped in two sheets of waterproof paper, and then packed in an exterior container made of either a fiberboard box or a wirebound wood box. An exterior container made of a nailed wood box was also approved at that time but not used by link manufacturers.

By end of 1942, the use of the two waterproof sheets was abandoned in favor of a unit waterproof envelope. The packing used at this time was not an overseas pack because 90% of the links were being used in this country to make up ammunition belts. In May 1943, after some experience in the handling, storing and reshipping of the links packed in fiberboard boxes, the use of this box was discontinued because of its poor stacking properties and low wet handling strength. Therefore for the last half of 1943 and first half of 1944, all the facilities were using wirebound boxes.

At a production rate approaching one half billion links per month during the last quarter of 1943, this meant that approximately one half-million wirebound boxes were needed monthly. Because of the critical supply of veneer and lumber at this time, and in view of the many other demands for the wirebound box industry, the shortage of wirebound boxes loomed large. A reuse program was set up whereby wirebound boxes were returned from the ammunition belt assembly plants to the link manufacturers.

In March 1944, the Navy Bureau of Ordnance requested that all links to be consigned to the Navy be packed in an approved overseas interior pack and a nailed wood exterior box. At this same time, the method of packing links for domestic shipping was also improved in anticipation of long term storage. A higher quality waterproof envelope was used and openings were properly sealed with waterproof adhesive.

The packing for the Navy consisted of 10 links per chipboard carton, 50 cartons per intermediate fiberboard carton that was then wrapped in a greaseproof paper and dipped in wax; then two of these intermediate packages were packed in an exterior nailed wooden box. This form of packing was both moisture and vapor proof and was designed to withstand the extreme conditions encountered in amphibious landings. From the middle of 1944 on, the total production of three facilities (Fort Pitt Bedding Co., Acme-Lees Division and Grand Rapids Hardware Co.) was packed this way for the Navy.

Fabric Belts

The earliest water-cooled M1921 Browning machine guns for ground use were fed with 100-round fabric belts. The belts are devoid of starter tang and are accommodated in a wood chest that can be fastened to the weapon mount. The design of the fabric is based on the contemporary .30 Browning fabric belts. With the adoption of the M2 Browning machine guns by U.S. Forces in the 1930s, metallic links became standard and fabric belts remained only offered for export.

At the end 1942, while several private contractors were tooling up for the mass production of M2 metallic links, the Metallic Belt Link Industry Integration Committee anticipated that the production objectives of metallic links M2 for 1943 could probably not be met according to delays in the procurement of certain machine tools and shortage of steel sheets. The Bureau of U.S. Ordnance then initiated a study in order to replace metallic links by fabric belts for all uses other than for the Air Force, which required exclusively metallic links. Experiments were very quickly conducted on the basis of a 100-round fabric belt manufactured by Russell Manufacturing Co. and already exported to Great Britain. This export 100-round fabric belt bears at both ends six fabric pockets stitched closed in order to play the role of starter tangs.

On 8 January 1943, a 100-round fabric belt was adopted as standard under the designation M7. This belt is completely made of fabric and is fitted at both ends with fabric connecting loops. These connecting loops, patented by The Russell Manufacturing Co. with U.S. Patent number 2,422,898, enable to assemble two fabric belts together. This feature fulfilled the specific requirement of the Anti-Aircraft Artillery Board that needed a 200-round belt assembly to be fitted into the large Chest, Ammunition, Caliber .50, M2.

The disposable box M2 with a nominal capacity of 105 rounds mounted on metallic links proved capable of accommodating without difficulty a fabric belt with up to 110 rounds. Accordingly, during the first months of 1943, the capacity of the M7 belt was increased from 100 to 110 rounds, while keeping the M7 designation unchanged. In September 1943, all metallic link factories reached nominal production rate therefore enabling to fulfill all requirements for air, ground and maritime uses. The M7 fabric belt was then reclassified as “Limited Standard” and the metallic links M2 became of standard issue for all U.S. .50 Browning weapons.

Unlike what is sometimes written, fabric belts were not reserved for training purposes only in the continental United States. Ammunition belted on M7 fabric belts were definitively used during combat in Europe. These fabric ammunition belts are sometimes seen in period photographs and are sometimes recovered still nowadays in combat areas of North-East of France on the border with Belgium (Battle of the Bulge) and with Germany (Battle of Alsace). No surviving specimen of the early 1943 M7 belt with the original capacity of 100 rounds has been observed so far by the author.

Most M7 belts were made out of green fabric and only a small quantity were manufactured out of white fabric. The belt pockets are numbered in black ink every 25 rounds with numbers ranging from 25 to 100, while the first pocket is numbered “1” and the last “110.” The belts also bear in black ink the designation of the manufacturer, the month and year of production and the reference to the U.S. patent No. 2,061,072 granted to The Russell Manufacturing Co. in 1936 corresponding to the fabric weave.

Production of 110-round M7 fabric belts was shared among 7 factories, which on the other hand were also involved in the production of .30 Browning fabric belts. From April to September 1943, a total of more than 8.6 million M7 belts were produced, which means that these fabric belts are by any means not scarce. It seems that only a small proportion of these millions belts was actually loaded with ammunition and nowadays the vast majority of the M7 found are still in new unissued condition, sometimes still rolled and fastened with a small piece of string, as out of the belt weaving factories. Sometimes the M7 fabric belts were recycled as trousers’ belt or sewn as reinforcement ribbons in sleeping bags.

(Look for Part 2 in the next issue of Small Arms Review that will be devoted to the .50 cal. belt boxes and belt assembling machines.)

Like every accessory in the never-ending line up, technology as well as clever ingenuity leads to some much better options. Perhaps the finest of the breed was developed by Advanced Innovation & Manufacturing out of North Royalton, Ohio with their Manta rail guards.

Manta rails are truly in a class of their own as several things separate these guards from the norm. First is the fact that stainless steel clips are molded into the advanced “Polyunobtanium” material used to manufacture the Manta rail. Unlike traditional rubber rail guards, which will eventually stretch and become loose, the Manta rail guard has flexible molded rail sections that can be pinched to the desired tension or cut to the desired length. Another incredible feature is the Micro Pocket inside the top of the panel, which allows a pressure pad of any size to be slipped into the pocket protecting your switch from heat and external hazards. The Micro Pocket panel also allows for simple removal and installation of your switch. Manta has the answer whether a switch is to be mounted on a hand guard or on a vertical grip. They offer two different diameter sleeves that slide over a vertical pistol grip or the larger vertical grips such as the Grip Pod. The larger vertical grip sleeve can also be mounted over your rear pistol grip to give you an enhanced tactile feel. Molded channels in the very low profile cross clip model enable cords to be placed under and through the rail guard to protect the cord from damage or getting hooked on anything. The 2.75 inch pocket panel also allows an operator to use it as rail guard even if they are not utilizing the micro pocket for a switch. Also offered is a .25 inch Wire Clip to hold a wire in place and .5 inch Cross Clip that allows you to route wire in a multitude of directions or take up any extra length of cord making zip ties a thing of the past.

Manta has a diverse line of rail guards and wire management panels. Depending on your pressure pad and whether you would like it on your rail or your vertical grip, there is a micro pocket push button panel or a standard 2.75 inch micro pocket panel. The micro pocket panels also interface nicely with optional end caps to finish off the look of the switch helping to affix the switch system tighter to the rails and will also prevent dirt from entering the pocket. Vertical Grip Sleeves in 1-inch diameter for standard pegs and the 1.25-inch diameter for larger grips such as the Grip Pod or even your rear pistol grip. Standard Very Low Profile rail guard panels and Very Low Profile Cross Clip panels are offered in 6-inch sections and can be cut to length for a custom fit. Rounding out their wire management products are the Manta Wire Clip and Manta Cross Clip to create a clean rail free from exposed wire that can easily get snagged.

The tactile material is easy to grip even under the harshest condition. It has been tested in extreme cold and more importantly in intense heat. This stuff does not melt. A blowtorch and cigarette lighter were taken to the panel for nearly a minute. Some discoloring and some ash were noticed. The ash was brushed off. Noticeable discoloration and a minute loss of material but no hole and the panel was still 100% functional. In fact, due to the heat resistance of this material, Manta increased the heat resisting properties of their materials and offer what they call the MSS or Manta Suppressor Sleeve. Many operators when they fire their suppressed weapons end up dropping the weapon and transitioning to the hand gun. The rifle hangs just at the point where the suppressor contacts the expensive tactical pants and burns a hole in them. So these covers insulate the suppressor from burning holes in pants (or the shooter). This MSS is so effective that a non-vented area is indexed at the 12 o’clock position to severely diminish the haze and mirage caused by the heat. Even more fascinating as it hides the thermal heat signature of the muzzle. Thermal imaging proves this and it certainly offers an advantage. There is no burning smell from the material.

The Manta rails durability was noticed by the U.S. Marine Corps and is standard issue on their M27 IAR or Infantry Automatic Rifle. This means Manta has a CAGE Code, which is 65M28, as well as National Stock Numbers in Black and Tan for the 1 inch vertical grip sleeves, 6 inch Very Low Profile Cross Clip Panels, 2.75 inch Micro Panel Pocket Panels and the Cross Clips. You will also find Manta products being utilized by military units around the world and even standard issue is some locations. For more information contact: Advanced Innovation and Manufacturing, Inc., 9940 York Alpha Drive, North Royalton, OH 44133. Phone: (440) 237-2460. Fax: (440) 237-2561. Website: www.mantarails.com. E-mail: sales@mantarails.com.

Many participants in the competition for the Belgian Army were based on the submachine guns of World War Two. They did not show much innovation and most of them were eliminated in the first step of the competition. This left only four weapons, the MP RAN (Repousmetal S.A., Brussels), the MP M.I.53 (Imperia, Nessonvaux), a weapon from FN, and the MP VIGNERON (in short “VIGN”) from Précision Liégeoise.

All of these weapons were designed for easy and inexpensive manufacture. The most advanced was the RAN, which had been fitted out with various accessories by designer Witold Porebski. There were different muzzle brakes, a bipod, folding bayonet, and even a rifle grenade launcher. FN, on the other hand, as an example took the Italian Beretta 1938a. The M.I.53 from Imperia was just a revised Sten Mk. II. with a retractable buttstock. Even the rotating magazine well was copied.

The Vigneron was not a technical masterpiece, but nevertheless it prevailed against the competitors. The designer and namesake, George Vigneron, a retired Belgian army officer, had not made an appearance as a weapons designer heretofore. After extensive testing by the Belgian Army, the weapon was officially introduced as “Vigneron M1” in 1952 and became the new standard submachine gun in the army, navy and air force.

The first serial production was launched at the Société Anonyme Précision Liégeoise in Herstal, where the prototypes for the troop trials had already been made. A little later the state arsenal in Rocourt near Liege came into play as a supplier for components. There are some that claim that complete weapons were made there, but it can’t as yet be verified that that is true. To speed up the equipment of the army another production site was consulted. The choice fell on the company AFEM (Ateliers de Fabrications Electriques et Metalliques) from Brussels. The few plastic parts, such as the grip piece, rolled of the line at the Compagnie de Manufacture Herstal (CMH).

The MP Vigneron is a caliber 9x19mm submachine gun firing from the open bolt. With a length of 70 cm even with buttstock retracted, the weapon is disproportionately long and unhandy, but it provides a sight line of 55 cm to the shooter. Remarkable on the otherwise less innovative construction is the safety mechanism: Using a small pivoting lever on the left side above the trigger, the shooter can switch between full auto fire, single shot or safe. The lever is marked with A – R – S. In addition, the weapon features a grip safety. It locks the bolt in both front or rear position and blocks the trigger. Only when it is pressed can the trigger be pulled and the bolt be moved.

In many other characteristics of the Vigneron the designer made recourse to proven foreign models. The barrel with its cooling ribs and the slotted muzzle brake is similar to the 1928 Thompson. To simplify the complicated manufacturing, the ribs were abandoned in the course of the serial production. The barrel is attached to the receiver by a cap nut like on the German MP40. However, in a rush, it is possible to insert the barrel incorrectly rotated 180 degrees. The weapon still functions but the front sight is facing downwards. There is a well known picture of an Irish IRA member holding a Vigneron with the upside-down barrel in his hands.

The bolt was a copy of the British Sten gun. It is kept simple and milled from one piece of metal. The cocking handle on the left side of the receiver is not constantly connected to the bolt so the handle does not move forth and back when shooting. The tubular receiver, including magazine, is made almost entirely of pressed sheet metal parts. The ejection port on the right side is protected by a spring-loaded dust cover that springs open when cocking the weapon.

The plastic grip-piece with trigger is hooked into the receiver behind the magazine well and fixed with a screw cap on the receiver’s rear end. This design is simple, but it has a disadvantage: When screwing off the cap for removing the bolt, the grip piece drops down. A pivoted connection of the grip piece would have been a more practical solution. For this reason it was explicitly pointed out in the Belgian Army to tighten the end cap firmly. At worst it could come loose and the grip piece falls off when shooting but the weapon would keep on shooting until the magazine was empty. Definitely not a good thing to happen. On some Vignerons in the Belgian Congo, a self-made leaf spring can be found on the receiver end to prevent rotation of the cap.

Two guide rails for the buttstock are located on the sides of the grip piece. The sturdy wire construction looks similar to the stock of the U.S. M3 Grease Gun. The stock can be locked in three possible positions (809, 846 and 887 mm), but even when retracted it stands out more than 9 cm. For this reason the buttstock was often removed in cramped conditions, such as for crews in vehicles. Both rods of the buttstock are designed in a way so that they can be used for cleaning the weapon. An eyelet on the right rod allows the use of cleaning wick, while the left rod has a threaded end for cleaning brushes.

The Vigneron is fed from stick magazines with a 32-round capacity. Here again a proven design was copied: The magazines are almost identical to those of the German MP40. Today, unfortunately, this leads to the fact that many of the phosphated Vigneron magazines are blued and sold as original Wehrmacht magazines on the collectors market. The upper part of the VIG-magazine must be ground off slightly, and then it will fit well to the MP40 magazine well. To fill up the magazine there was a push-down loading tool. The handle of the tool can be moved up and down with the thumb. In order to avoid jamming, the Belgian Army decreed that the magazines should only be loaded with 28 cartridges.

In 1954, the production of the Vigneron M1 reached serial number 21,300. Minor improvements led to the model M2: The front sight got a hood, a V-notch rear sight replaced the peep sight and the dust cover on the ejection port was given a stronger spring. Old M1 models have been upgraded over time and the “1” was partially overstamped by a thick “2”.

Vignerons of the Belgian army were originally marked with the abbreviation “ABL” for Armée Belge / Belgisch Léger on the left side of the magazine well. With most of the weapons still in existence this is thoroughly ground off. Behind this is the year of production, including the model number and serial number. On the right side of the magazine well the Belgian lion is placed. Weapons used by the Force Publique in the Congo were additionally marked with “FP” below the lion, while “CB” means that the weapon was used by the colonial administration (Congo Belge).

Despite intensive efforts, the Vigneron was never sold to other countries in larger numbers. The Belgian army was the only significant purchaser. Only Portugal’s police acquired a few copies that were called “Port Vigneron.” However, many illegal Vignerons appeared in the hands of the Irish Republican Army (IRA) – there was probably a good connection to Belgium in those times.

The Vigneron achieved a very inglorious fame during its use on the African continent. The authoritarian colonial policy of Belgium in the 1950s strengthened the resistance against foreign rule in Belgian Congo. Included in the supply of arms to suppress the unrest, many Vignerons were sent there. Following their independence on 30 June 1960, and the withdrawal of Belgian troops, most of the weapons remained – mostly in state hands like the Force Publique, but partly also in dark channels.

The most prominent victim of this time is probably Patrice Émery Lumumba, the first prime minister of independent Congo. On 17 January 1961, he was shot dead along with politicians Joseph Okito and Maurice Mpolo after days of torture by soldiers from Katangi. The firing squad was equipped with Vignerons and was under the command of a Belgian officer.

Exact production figures of the Vigneron are not known. The total number is said to have amounted to 150,000 pieces. Production ceased at the end of 1962, but the MP stayed in active service until the mid-80s – in addition to the Uzi, which was manufactured by FN under license.

Technical Data:

Caliber: 9 x 19 mm
Action: Straight blowback, open bolt
Length (stock closed): 708 mm
Length (stock position 1): 809 mm
Length (stock position 2): 846 mm
Length (stock position 3): 887 mm
Length of barrel: 305 mm
Barrel: 6 grooves, right hand twist
Weight (w/o magazine): 3,000 gr.
Weight empty magazine: 280 gr.
Weight full magazine: 680 gr.
Weight of barrel: 545 gr.
Weight of bolt: 655 gr.
Weight of buttstock: 375 gr.
Length of sight line: 550 mm
Magazine: 32-rds, double stack, box magazine
Firing rate: 620 rounds/min

(A special thanks to Peter Van Meenen from Belgium)

Visitors will begin in the front entrance/reception area and will immediately notice the uniform display. Here a number of period uniforms and accessories are on display within walk around glass containers so the uniform in its entirety can be viewed in detail. The next room is the dedicated arms room and apart from the standard arms displayed has a number of interesting pieces. Of special note is the number of anti-tank and rocket launchers on display. Such a variety is rare for a museum of this size and well appreciated with a number of different tubes from various countries.

Moving on, visitors will walk through a complete World War One trench section, with a command bunker and uniform display. This room is darkened and has audio in the background to try to give a realistic feel for the battleground. A good majority of the museum after this is dedicated to World War Two, with the various theaters being represented by different static displays and rooms. The Pearl Harbor and the South Pacific room have a mock-up of a control tower on an aircraft carrier and a representation of Japanese Zeros diving in on scale model battleships. In the far corner were also a guard hut and some displays showing Japanese infantry equipment and weapons used during World War Two. Of special note was a rifle grenade on a Type 99 and one of the training model machine guns that are so rare to find today.

The next displays are of a LCVP being loaded up with Marines off a net and also a submarine periscope that visitors can peer through and view their cars from the roof of the museum, complete with sighting wire and handles. Transitioning into the European Theater of Operations, displays of Utah Beach landing, paratroopers, and a French town being liberated are all very well done and highly detailed. Weapons displays are either integrated with the main displays or are in their own separate sections of the rooms. The World War Two rooms take up almost half the museum, clearly illustrating the social and economic impact the war had on the United States.

One of the most iconic images of the Korean War was of a Marine leading the way over the Inchon seawall during MacArthur’s daring amphibious landing to halt the stalemate at the Pusan Perimeter. The Marine was a 1st Lt. by the name of Baldomero Lopez who was killed shortly after that photo was taken as he was leading his platoon against an enemy bunker by sacrificing his own life. Why show this particular Medal of Honor recipient in a museum encompassing almost 200 years of American military history? Because Lopez was from the local area and the museum is representing a home town hero to bring the reality of the war closer to home.

Right next to the Lopez memorial, are two displays indicative of the war, the landing at Inchon, a MASH field hospital, and the Chosin Reservoir with the Marines huddling around in the snow because of how unprepared they were for the Chinese onslaught and the frigid winter they experienced. Down the line, a number of other conflicts are represented but much less to the extent that World War Two was. Of particular note is the Vietnam section which has a number of vehicles from the Vietnam War and a side hallway that represents a patrol creeping through the jungle with a full combat load. This hallway is hardly lit up at all just like the World War One trench to simulate what the actual environment would have been like to the men fighting and dying in these wars. The Vietnam section also had a video on repeat that showed interviews with various Vietnam Veterans about the war and their experiences. Also of a side note here was an interview with a veteran from the 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment, so notoriously nick named “The Walking Dead” which happens to be the author’s current active duty unit.

There is a whole panel dedicated to Operation Desert Storm but none yet on Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom, although these sections are in the planning and development stages. Apart from these large displays, there are a number of miscellaneous items for view to the public that include a virtual flight simulator that puts a visitor in control of a fighter jet, one of the original Ford vehicles used by the Army and a temporary display of bayonets from all over the world. Outside, and around the parking lot are a number of vehicles to include a Patton tank, some radar equipment and a fighter jet in the center of the parking lot.

What is such a treasure trove doing hiding along a highway on the Florida coast? Due to Florida’s good portion of senior citizens, there is also a good portion of veterans in the area. Apart from filling its role as a museum, it has a dining room where any sort of gathering can be reserved, but military reunions are the primary venue. Much of the collection itself was personally donated by veterans in the area cleaning out their war chests to be viewed by a much younger audience. The museum is also a living history participant, taking out some of the vehicles and letting visitors ride in them on specific days. In addition to all these additional tasks, the museum works with schools on tours and interactive teaching tools. So much more than a museum, the Armed Forces History Museum is certainly a community pillar and is certainly worth a visit if a reader should find himself in the St. Petersburg/Largo area.

Armed Forces History Museum

2050 34th Way North
Largo, FL 33771
(727) 539 8371
www.armedforcesmuseum.com

Admission Prices

Active Duty or Veteran: Free
General Admission: Adults $17.95. Seniors 65+ $14.95. Children (4-12) $12.95. Children 3 and under are Free.
Parking: Free

Operating Hours-

Tuesday through Saturday:
10am to 4pm
Sunday Noon to 4pm
Closed Mondays and major holidays

Generations

The M1 Garand is a product of a different time. Soldiers who trained with and employed the Garand in WWII had endured the deprivations of the Great Depression and looked at life in a way that we contemporary Americans cannot even imagine. A friend of mine, who hit the Normandy beaches around 1400 on 6 June 1944, carried a Garand for nearly a year in combat. He used his M1 to shoot an SS soldier through the head at long range on the grounds of Orly airport outside Paris. The perforated black German helmet with its SS runes attesting to the feat hung forgotten from a nail in the barn behind his house for decades – mute testimony to this humble soldier and the wartime exploits he would discuss only when pressed.

During the early days of the Battle of the Bulge my friend and his rifle squad were cut off from the rest of his unit. When trying to cross back into American lines, GIs made trigger happy by stories of Otto Skorzeny’s commandos operating in U.S. uniforms challenged his disheveled mob. Dissatisfied with the fact that my friend knew the current challenge and password the picket asked him who won the World Series in a given year. My buddy responded with some juicy profanity and the observation that he had no idea. He pointed out that when this man was comfortably watching baseball in New York he was hunting opossum in southern Mississippi forests to feed his family. The picket let them pass.

The point is simply that soldiers of this generation had to make do with less than is the case today. The M1 Garand used in this article exemplifies that axiom perfectly.

Touching the Past

This M1 is a rack grade Springfield Armory example purchased years ago through the Civilian Marksmanship Program (CMP). The CMP is itself a throwback to a better time in America when the government trusted civilians enough to sell them surplus military small arms. Suffice it to say that such a program would never survive the legislative process today. The finish on this rifle is about gone but it is mechanically serviceable. What is remarkable about the weapon is the condition of the forward hand guard.

At some point in the past the walnut hand guard split under hard use. Had this happened today the broken component would have been discarded and a new one installed. However, as previously mentioned, this was a different time. The hand guard on this rifle has been meticulously repaired by ripping slots cross-wise across the crack and filling the slots with wooden blocks before sanding the whole affair back to its original geometry and refinishing. The resulting component is still serviceable but now has character.

Meanwhile, in the Land of Darkness, Slavery, and Oppression…

The Nazis launched the Blitzkrieg that overran Europe in the opening weeks of World War II armed with what was essentially a WWI-era rifle. The KAR-98K employed the classic Mauser action that was arguably the finest manually-driven firearm design ever fielded. The KAR-98K fired a 7.92x57mm cartridge as fed via 5-round stripper clips. Despite the remarkable success of the German military juggernaut it soon became apparent that the KAR-98K bolt action infantry rifle was badly outclassed.

Design work began on a semiautomatic replacement for the KAR-98K in 1940 and eventually birthed the G-41. As was typical of wartime German design dogma, two companies produced competing designs that were tested in limited combat troop trials on the Eastern front. Walther and Mauser produced their own versions denoted G-41W and G-41M respectively.

The G-41 employed a novel gas trap design that was fairly effective but involved a great many precision machine parts and was only marginally reliable in the face of battlefield mud. It was also fairly nose-heavy in action. When confronted by the more utilitarian Soviet SVT Tokarev autoloading rifle the Germans were duly impressed and redesigned the basic G-41 action to make it more reliable and more easily manufactured.

The resulting G-43 employed a conventional top-mounted gas piston design copied directly from the Soviet SVT. The locking system incorporated into the bolt involved steel wings that were cammed into recesses milled in the receiver in the manner of the Degtyaryov DP-28 machine gun. A similar locking system lives on in the Combloc RPD light machine gun.

The G-43 was produced under unimaginably arduous conditions. Adolph Hitler’s megalomaniacal leadership had stretched German manufacturing and raw material reserves to the limit. In contrast to the objects d’art that the Germans produced in the 1930s, weapons and equipment produced in the final years of the war were roughly machined and in many cases shoddily produced.

One entire production facility used to produce this line of weapons was purportedly serendipitously destroyed during a strategic bombing raid intended for a V-1 rocket production plant. The plant in question was never rebuilt and that production variant ceased to be as a result.

Making Sense Out of Chaos

In the case of the G-43, the design was tweaked and adjusted throughout its production life in an effort to simplify manufacture and conserve strategic materials. The final iteration was termed the Karabiner or K-43. The transition in nomenclature from G-43 to K-43 was a change in name only purported to be at the direct command of Hitler himself. The G-43 was slightly shorter than the previous KAR-98K rifle and was deemed deserving of the Karabiner or Carbine title as a result. All G-43 and K-43 rifles incorporated a scope rail on the receiver though some were not finish machined. While there is a great deal of overlap in technical features among variants, the K-43 does typically have a larger stamped steel trigger guard than corresponding G-43 versions. This feature was incorporated to facilitate gloved use in the harsh winter conditions typical of the Eastern front.

By the end of the war the K-43 incorporated laminated Beechwood or even occasionally synthetic Bakelite stocks and maximum use was made of high-volume stamping and casting processes to minimize machine time. Markings were austere compared to earlier German designs and niceties such as threaded muzzles and detents on the sight adjustment ramp were gradually phased out in favor of volume production.

The K-43 series rifles employed a detachable 10-round box magazine and could also be loaded from the top via standard stripper clips. Troops were only issued with three magazines to go with these weapons as most loading was expected to be undertaken via strippers. Current estimates are that about a quarter million G/K-43 rifles were produced by the end of the war.

Boys and Their Toys

The weapon used in this article has itself a fascinating history. Picked up on the battlefield in 1945 by an American GI back when the country was sane enough to allow this practice, this particular K-43 was brought back home as a war trophy. In its original condition the rifle included a 4-power Zf4 scope. Finding that German 8mm ammunition was too scarce to allow the rifle to be used for deer hunting, the vet in question gave the gun to his young son. For years this fully operational German sniper rifle resided in the young man’s toy box and was regularly used in neighborhood mock combats with other young friends. Apparently none of the parents involved gave the practice a second thought. As there was no available ammunition the rifle was deemed safe enough to be used as a toy. Suffice it to say such behavior would likely raise a few eyebrows today.

During the course of countless neighborhood battles the front sight hood, magazine, and Zf4 scope were irrevocably lost. The hood and magazine have been replaced with late production versions. Combat abuse notwithstanding, it is a tribute to the German design that this rifle could endure nearly two decades of mileage on the imaginary battlefront while being stored in a toy box and remain in such good serviceable condition. Even the original leather sling is still in good shape.

Practical Tactical

On the range comparisons between these two well-used and high-mileage military weapons resulted in some interesting conclusions. For starters both old rifles were still completely reliable despite the fact that the K-43 was firing fairly vintage ammunition. This in and of itself was rather remarkable considering both these rifles rolled off of wartime production lines some 68 years ago. Both rifles weigh about the same and occupy a comparable geometric envelope so maneuvering indoors is a comparable chore with both rifles.

The K-43 is the more advanced design and tactical drills including reloads and immediate action were simpler and faster than those same exercises executed with the Garand. In both designs the bolt locks to the rear after the last round is fired but the removable magazine of the K-43 makes it easier to top off from under cover. The side mounted sling on the K-43 more readily lends itself to tactical use than the bottom-mounted version of the Garand. Additionally, the charging handle on the K-43 is on the left so the bolt may be dropped on a fresh magazine without taking the firing hand off the stock or rotating the action. Recoil is comparable with both weapons but they are heavy beasts so the experience is not unpleasant.

The sights on the Garand are the American military standard wide peep rear and winged blade front. Windage and elevation adjustments are embodied within the rear sight and are undertaken via large thumb wheels with positive detents.

By contrast, the sights on the K-43 have a more European flavor and consist of a hooded front blade and a ramp adjustable rear V. The K-43 sights are more difficult to adjust for elevation and there is no windage adjustment provision. In practical use the sights on the Garand are much quicker on target and easier to acquire.

The Garand is an overtly more solid design that feels more robust in actual use. The K-43 has a much sloppier feel. However, in this regard the comparison has a more apples-to-oranges flavor. The Garand was produced under secure conditions thousands of miles from the battlefront by a nation blessed with near-limitless natural resources. By contrast, the K-43 was produced in a nation bereft of young, skilled male workers under daily threat of aerial bombardment. Additionally, the inexorable allied advances had cut off the Third Reich from much of its natural resource base. Had the K-43 been produced under 1939 conditions it might feel yet tighter.

The trigger on the Garand is crisp and tight and readily lends itself to precision riflery. The same design has been used in both the Garand and its offspring, the M14, for match shooting since its inception. By contrast the trigger on the K-43 is sloppy, creepy, and long, no doubt the result of harried production and strategic materials shortages.

Despite the trigger disparity, bench accuracy was comparable between the two rifles and was still adequate for combat usage even after more than six decades of hard use. The two cartridges these rifles fire are ballistically comparable and are quite devastating out to the limits of the rifles’ accuracy capabilities.

Philosophical Musings

There are several conclusions that can be drawn from these two rifles, their backgrounds, and a practical comparison on the range. First, they really built quality firearms back in the day. The Garand in particular began life as an enormous block of ordnance steel and the action is nigh indestructible as a result. M1 Garands were still used in U.S. Army National Guard units well into the 1960s.

Additionally, for all their incontrovertible moral depravity, the Nazis made superb weapons. It has been said that wartime German engineers made the best weapons for the worst users and there is great truth to that axiom. Surplus G-43s were actually used as service weapons for years by the Czech Army long after World War II ended. Considering the circumstances under which they were produced the longevity of the G-43 design is remarkable.

The resulting cultural and societal commentary is all the more remarkable. Our nation is unrecognizable from what it once was and the transition has been so gradual that many who lived through it have been oblivious to the change. Like the classic boiled frog, the transformation has been so incremental that the enormity of it is not apparent unless observed from a detached point of view.

In World War II, young men, who in many cases were more familiar with horses than cars, or out houses and well pumps rather than indoor plumbing, donned uniforms and sacrificed to rid the world of a tyrannical dictator preaching a diabolical diatribe of hate. When they came home they brought with them the weapons of a vanquished army just as have warriors in every other culture since the beginning of time. These trophies, all operational and many of them full auto, hung above mantles, adorned veteran’s halls, and, in some cases, resided in toy boxes all across the country.

Members of the Greatest Generation darned socks, patched holes, and repaired equipment as needed to keep things going and useful in a time when dropping by Wal-Mart to pick up a replacement on the drive home from work was not an option.

Today’s warriors can be prosecuted for bringing so much as an enemy bayonet home as a memento of their combat tours overseas and American youngsters are suspended from school for chewing stylized handguns out of their Pop Tarts in the lunch room. In such a draconian, politically correct America, crime and general societal deterioration are made manifest on a scale literally unimaginable sixty-five years ago.

Six and one half decades ago the entire planet was locked in the most stark and overt battle between the forces of good and evil that the world has ever seen. As a result of the incalculable sacrifice of millions of American, British, Australian, and Canadian soldiers as well as those from dozens of other participant nations, evil was thrown back and crushed to allow the unquenchable spark of freedom to take light in areas previously smothered in darkness. As an ultimate result my son now drives a car produced by the same Japanese company that built A6M Zero fighters in World War II and the Germans remain some of our staunchest European allies today.

There is a great deal we can learn from the tools our forefathers used to determine the fate of the world. If we took the time to repair more and discard less the world might be a slightly better place. It strikes me as a healthy exercise to disassemble, assess, and compare these weapons to glean their cultural secrets. At the very least, it gives us cause to pause and ruminate on the sacrifices and triumphs of those who left their homes to go off to a foreign land and fight for freedom. We are the daily beneficiaries of their sacrifices today.

Introduction

During the late 19th century technological advances made truly reliable repeating rifles a practical reality for military usage. Prior to that time such weapons were generally too fragile or complex to withstand the rigors of combat. Arguably the most important of these emerging technologies was the magazine-fed bolt-action rifle. An equally important adjunct innovation was that of small-caliber high-velocity ammunition. These innovations substantially increased the ability of soldiers to achieve lethality in combat. That is, rapidity of fire combined with accuracy to make the soldier a deadlier instrument of war than had previously been the case. On the threshold of the 20th century, U.S. Army Ordnance officers were well on the way to producing a service rifle that employed both these innovations. The product of which would ultimately be the superlative Springfield Model 1903 rifle with its equally impressive .30-06 cartridge. That rifle-cartridge combination would demonstrate its efficacy in both war and peace for more than thirty-three years in its role as the Army service rifle. This essay sketches the historical events and technological changes that underlay the Springfield Model 1903 rifle becoming the service rifle of the U.S. Army.

The closing of the American frontier in the 1880s and early 1890s made it necessary for the Army to rethink its service rifle. That is, in light of the significant technological changes that had taken place since mid-century. Additionally, there was the possibility – albeit fairly remote – of the United States encountering a military threat from South America or even Europe. Amid such uncertainty, one thing remained constant. U.S. Army soldiers needed to overmatch the service rifle of any future enemy. Overmatch in this case was measured in terms of superiority with regards to effective range, wounding, lethal effects on the target, and overall accuracy. Ordnance officers by virtue of their role as weapon developers had a significant stake in rifle modernization. However, the complexity of the problem required more than simply choosing among the most technologically advanced candidate rifles.

Two obstacles stood in the way of rifle modernization. The first was economic, the second doctrinal. The economic problems were those of parsimonious peacetime military budgets. Being perennially short of funds, the Army spent what few dollars it possessed on the maintenance of equipment already in its inventory. The second situational obstacle involved the matter of Army doctrine: How did the Army plan to fight and with whom did it expect to fight. Both the how and who of it were in flux at the time. The only certainty being that the peacekeeping activities on the Western Frontier kept the small Army, some 25,000 men, somewhat gainfully occupied. Savage battles between soldiers and Indians were punctuated by lengthy periods of inactivity and boredom. In addition, there were the much less bloody involvements of the Army in domestic civil disturbances, such as the great railway strike of 1877. However, despite the difficulty and complexity of such peacemaking and peacekeeping missions, senior Army officers remained confident that the existing single-shot service rifle was more than an adequate tool for handling such domestic threats. Despite the absence of monies for modernization and the ill-defined combat need, the Army service rifle was to change dramatically in the years approaching and shortly following the turn of the century. Central to this change were the efforts of the U.S. Army Ordnance officers – only about fifty men at the time.

1880-1892: Single-Shot to Magazine Fed

When the Civil War ended in 1865, the Army had on hand more than million obsolete but serviceable muzzle-loading rifle-muskets. The discarding of such a great number of weapons, in favor of a technologically improved replacement rifle, became unthinkable as defense expenditures began to drop. And so, the Army chose as an option a modification to the rifle-muskets. The product of this effort was known as the “Trapdoor rifle” or “Allin Conversion” as the namesake of its inventor Springfield Armory master armorer, Erskine S. Allin. The rifle-muskets were converted to breech-loading rifles at the Springfield Armory by cutting into the breech and adapting a hinged “trapdoor” breechblock mechanism. This mechanism enabled the loading, firing, and extracting of self-primed metallic cartridges. This modified rifle, and the sixteen variants that followed between 1865 and 1889, served as the official Army service rifle until 1892. The Model 1873 Trapdoor models fired the powerful .45-70 cartridge. This 405-grain bullet had an average velocity of some 1,300 feet per second (f/s). The weight of the rifle was moderately light at 8.25 pounds. Despite the ad hoc design of the rifle, it proved to be both rugged and effective in combat – although speculation on some rifles having jammed during General Armstrong Custer’s Little Big Horn fight in 1876 fueled controversy. No matter, since the late 1880s the rifle had become transparently obsolescent when compared to its counterparts in Europe.

The response of Ordnance officers to service rifle obsolescence was to periodically upgrade the Trapdoor rifle, hence the many variants. However, parallel to that effort they sought to monitor technological change by testing new rifles. These tests had practical utility as they enabled officers to assess such innovative weapons as the Lee, Chaffee-Reece, Ward-Burton, and the Hotchkiss rifles. By such testing, officers kept abreast of technological change. When defense budgetary matters began to improve in the 1880s – Army expenditures rose from $38,177,000 to $44,483,000 – Ordnance officers were relatively well-informed regarding small arms technological change.

The watershed event for rifle modernization came in 1890 when Army Ordnance Department Chief, Brigadier General Daniel Flagler (1835-1899) convened a Board on Magazine Arms. Once again the testing of rifles resumed. However, unlike with previous tests, this board of officers had as its object the true search for a new service rifle rather than simply monitoring technological change. Fifty-three repeating rifles of varying types were extensively tested. Candidate rifles came from all parts of the globe. Exhibitors’ addresses included Austria, Belgium, Demark, England, Germany, Japan, Portugal, as well as the United States. When the testing concluded, the Krag-Jorgensen No. 5 rifle – Denmark’s entry – was the Ordnance Department’s chosen weapon. The inventors of the Krag rifle were Ole Hermann Johannes Krag, a captain in the Norwegian Royal Artillery, and Erik Jorgensen, Master Armorer at Kongsberg.

The Krag was to be the first official bolt-action magazine-fed service rifle of the U.S. Army and it possessed several advantages over its predecessor. The loading capacity of the magazine was five .30-40 cartridges. The 220-grain .30-40 bullet had a muzzle velocity slightly over 1,900 f/s. This smaller, faster bullet reduced time-of-flight to the target as well as flattening the arch of the trajectory, both of which enhanced hit probability. Another feature that the evaluators liked was the fact that the Krag functioned well with rimmed cartridges. Rimless cartridges were still novel at the time and generally not looked upon favorably by Ordnance officers. Additionally, the Krag fired smokeless powder. This was an important issue, for when the Trapdoor fired its black powder cartridge, a plume of smoke easily identified the shooter’s position to an enemy. Or the smoke made follow-up shots more difficult as it tended to obscure the shooter’s field of view. Another advantage was that one hundred of the Krag’s .30-40 cartridges weighed about the same as sixty of the Trapdoor rifle’s .45-70 cartridges. This situation helped to lighten the soldier’s load in terms of ammunition basic load. The Krag rifle and bayonet did weigh more than the Trapdoor rifle, tipping the scales at 9 pounds, 5 ounces.

In the final analysis the Krag’s capacity to be loaded one-round at a time with its magazine being held in reserve in case of emergency would prove its winning features. Known as the “single-loader” concept, it was accomplished mechanically by way of a magazine cutoff – a lever on the rear left of the receiver. When in the “OFF” position the cutoff mechanism prevented cartridges from being moved forward and chambered by the bolt. The Magazine Board summarized its findings as follows: “[the] relative merits of a magazine arm and a single loader for use in the United States service [is such that the] the board adds that it considers such an arm as this Krag-Jorgensen No. 5, which is capable in a high degree of both single-loading and magazine fire, to be vastly superior for use in the United States service to any weapon adapted to single-fire only.”

The Krag’s status as the official Army service rifle was formalized on September 15, 1892, when acting Secretary of War L.A. Grant approved its adoption. However, the weapon’s status was unhinged as the “not-invented-in-America” aspect of the rifle soon fomented controversy; American arms-makers being quite upset with its selection at the expense of American entries. The ensuing uproar was such that Congress directed that $400,000 earmarked for Krag production be withheld until further tests of American arms were conducted. And so, the Congressional constituencies in arms manufacture were given a second chance. During April and May of 1893, the Ordnance Department tested fourteen American rifles. Much to the dismay of American arms-makers a second look changed nothing. Once again the Krag was deemed the superior rifle. And so in 1894 the Krag finally went into full production at the Springfield Armory.

Rational Behind The “Single-Loader” Concept

The fixation that late 19th century Ordnance officers appeared to have had with the “single-loader” concept was not solely their own. Infantry and Calvary officers of the period were also united in their belief that soldiers should first load, then carefully take aim, and only then fire – one aimed shot at a time. This concept was contrary to having soldiers rapidly fire, aimed or not, in the general direction of a large formation of enemy soldiers. This “concentrated fire” technique was fairly representative of Army tactics as practiced prior to 1871. However, by the 1880s, skill in individual marksmanship had relegated concentrated fire to usage only under extreme circumstances. For example, when one’s defensive position was at risk of being overrun. However, as a general rule, officers held that aimed fire was not only tactically better than its predecessor technique, but that it minimized the wasting of precious ammunition.

This trend towards aimed-fire was further enhanced as officers came to recognize the generally poor state of soldier marksmanship in both the Army and the militia. The case was articulated by Lieutenant-Colonel William C. Church, editor of The Army And Navy Journal. In the 1870s he printed numerous articles addressing matters of marksmanship training in the Army and volunteer militia units. His efforts contributed to an awakening by officers to this key aspect of training. Soon, the Army leadership began to place strong emphasis on aimed, accurate long-range shooting. In Addition, other combat skills – such as physical fitness – were tested by fire and movement to sequential shooting positions. Not everyone felt enthusiasm for the new rifle marksmanship. In 1885, Colonel Richard I. Dodge of the Eleventh Infantry complained, “At present the whole army is afflicted with a ‘boom’, a genuine craze on target firing and everything has to yield precedence.”

Along with a new emphasis on marksmanship came added hopes for reduced ammunition expenditure by troops in battle. The psychology of this fixation with ammunition expenditure might have been linked to institutional remembrances of Civil War logistical difficulties. During that war, ammunition had to be trans-loaded from wagons to a fighting position or formation – often by hand-carry while under fire. Such lessons-learned made the expenditure of every bullet appear particularly precious. And so, the “single-loader” concept drove much of the criterion for service rifle adoption. Interestingly enough, this concept was not inter-service in nature. Sailors of the era possessed the Winchester manufactured Lee bolt-action straight-pull rifle, a rifle that fed exclusively from the magazine, an arrangement that did not feature the single-loader concept. Perhaps shipboard ammunition re-supply to landing parties led to markedly different thoughts regarding small arms fire.

1898: The Spanish-American War And The Service Rifle

On April 25, 1898, America found itself at war with a foreign power for the first time since 1846. The Spanish-American War is notable for both American naval successes and U.S. Army shortcomings. In that sense, many war veterans concluded that the enemy’s Spanish Mauser service rifle had outperformed the American Krag rifle during the war. The Spanish Mauser Model 1893 was indeed an excellent combat weapon. Adopted by Spain on 7 December 1893, it had received much positive acclaim by Spanish Army officers. As a token of their esteem, the designer Paul Mauser was awarded the Grand Cross of the Order of Military Merit by the Spanish government. The rifle was very easy to load, reload, and fired quickly. The charger, which was held in position during loading, facilitated this rapidity of firing. Another significant attribute of the rifle was its accuracy. Being on the receiving end of its fire, American soldiers soon learned to duck upon hearing the “peculiar whirring or rustling sound” of the Spanish 7mm. Commonly referred to as the 7mm Mauser, this bullet was in fact the 7x57mm Mauser – a rimless bottlenecked cartridge that used smokeless powder. Its 173-grain round-nosed bullet was propelled at a muzzle velocity of 2,300 f/s. The rifling-twist giving it gyroscopic stability was one turn in 8.8 inches. Moreover, it possessed a relatively flat trajectory and its high velocity made it less susceptible to bullet deflection caused by winds. Both these attributes contributed to its accuracy. Its rifle weight of 8.69 pounds made it ergonomically comparable with that of the Krag.

The exacting accuracy of the Spanish Mausers was somewhat in counterpoise to its wounding effect. In that sense, its resultant wounds were occasionally almost humane. Clara Barton (1821-1912) founder of the American Red Cross and actively engaged in nursing the wounded on the battlefield commented that, “this [Mauser] wound was a small clean perforation, with very little shattering or mangling, and requiring only antiseptic bandaging or care.” She went on to add that wounds to the abdomen were another matter, the risk of infection being significant in that case.

Of the 17,000 soldiers that deployed for the Cuban land campaign in June 1898 most were regular Army. However, included in this number were two Volunteer infantry regiments, as well as Theodore Roosevelt (1858-1919) and his soon-to-be famous “Rough Riders.” Individual weapons carried by these soldiers were a part of the 51,000 Krag rifles and 11,000 Krag carbines that were shipped from the Springfield Armory between April 1 to June 30, 1898. The regulars carried Krags as did the Volunteer Rough Riders. However, most of the Volunteers were armed with the Trapdoor Model 1884 Springfield single-shot .45-70 caliber rifle. Several weeks into this brief war, some Volunteers were issued the Krag. Despite the arming of combatants with the new service rifle, affording them even rudimentary training was another matter. For example, until the first fight of the Campaign, a skirmish at Las Guasimas, not one of Roosevelt’s Volunteers had ever fired their Krags.

Battlefield Lessons-Learned

Following the American Army’s redeployment from Santiago, a board of Ordnance officers visited the troops at Camp Wikoff, (Long Island, New York) for the purpose of interviewing officers and soldiers and to assess comments regarding the performance of weaponry. Some of the officers interviewed who had fought at Santiago indicated that the Krag was used almost exclusively as a “single-loader” with the contents of the magazine being held in reserve. These officers concluded that magazines must be kept for emergency usage only. Other infantry officers took an even more conservative stance as they argued that the Trapdoor rifle was preferable to the Krag rifle because the former has a rate of fire of fifteen rounds per minute and, as such, was expected to be adequate for most combat engagements. In addition, they said that the simpler breech-locking mechanism, on the Trapdoor rifle, was less likely to break given rough treatment by inexperienced Volunteers. However, by the conclusion of all interviews, the board’s findings indicated that many officers from the Cuba campaign stated their desire to have a clip for the service rifle – a clip that facilitated rapid charging of the magazine.

The inequality of Spanish and American service rifles was both real and imagined. For example, the Mauser’s 7mm bullet, had a muzzle velocity of 2,230 f/s and possessed 2,589 Joules of energy. Correspondingly, the Krag’s .30-40 caliber bullet, had a muzzle velocity of 1,755 f/s and possessed 2,045 Joules of energy. During tests conducted at Springfield Armory in 1899, the terminal effects (penetration) test outcomes were fairly close. Bullet penetration of pine butts (alternate sections of pine and air, one inch thick) was the measurement employed. When fired in a side-by-side comparison at a distance of 2,000 yards, the Mauser bullet resulted in 4.06 inches of penetration as opposed to 5.3 for the Krag. Given the slight performance gap between the two rifles, the difference between the Mauser and the Krag might appear as easy to bridge. However, the single lug bolt system on the Krag lacked the requisite strength. That is, in order to increase the muzzle velocity of the bullet to the additional 200+ feet per second, 40,000 pounds per square inch (psi) tolerance was required. The Krag’s structural strength was simply not up to the task; whereas the Mauser rifle with its two-lug bolt easily accommodated the higher pressure.

American attitudes towards the Spanish Mauser likely crystallized in response to the heavy casualties suffered by U.S. soldiers in the battle for San Juan Hill. Many veterans felt that the Mauser was largely responsible for the costliness of that victory and that belief contributed to the movement toward the American development of a Mauser-type service rifle. Another enabling occurrence came in the way of the 20,000 or so M93 Mauser rifles that fell into American hands at the close of hostilities. Without doubt, the availability of rifles for study at Springfield Armory helped American Ordnance officers to better understand the technology that underlay Mauser rifle performance. Soon thereafter, the Ordnance Department began its own efforts to develop a new service rifle. As a first step in that direction, the Ordnance Department entered into an arrangement with the Mauser company and began to develop a modified Mauser rifle at the Springfield Armory. For this, the American government paid $200,000 for the manufacturing license.

1900: The Experimental Rifle

Per the order of Brigadier General Adelbert R. Buffington (1837-1922), Chief of Ordnance, a one-of-a-kind experimental rifle was designed and built at the Springfield Armory and completed on August 25, 1900. That rifle, designated the “Model 1900 Experimental Rifle,” was a combination of both the old and the new and, as such, it took advantage of many on-hand Krag parts. For example, it had the same 30-inch barrel, 10-inch rifling twist, buttstock (with its 13.4-inch “pull”) as well as a similar forestock. Both the safety rib on the bolt and the firing pin component were reminiscent of the Krag’s functional architecture. The Experimental Rifle sighting system employed the Krag front sight. The M1898 rear sight included an aperture that allowed for wind deflection of the bullet and could be positioned for elevation. When the leaf was down, an open notched “battle sight” was adjustable out to approximately 400 yards. No doubt Springfield Armory’s large investment in machine tools and substantial inventories of Krag parts drove this eclectic mix of weapon hardware. Nevertheless, there was a substantial new departure happening. The Experimental Rifle’s receiver was based on the Mauser model, as were its magazine, and bolt mechanism. These included the critical two locking lugs near the head of the bolt. This feature gave the system the strength needed for a modernized high velocity cartridge.

Perhaps not unexpectedly, the single-loader concept still held sway over the Experimental Rifle’s architecture. Present on the rifle was an Enfield-type magazine cut off. It consisted of a thin sheet of steel that hinged so that it would swing over the magazine thereby enabling the rifle to be used as a single loader. The single-column magazine held five rimmed cartridges and projected well below the stock. The rifle’s magazine used the Mannlicher system entailing a follower, flat springs, and an arm. The trigger and sear were like that of the Krag. This arrangement worked rather poorly and resulted in the rifle having an exceedingly long trigger pull.

The Rimmed Prototype Cartridge

The Experimental Rifle was a possible prototype of the future service rifle. As such, its primary object was to test the feasibility of firing higher velocity bullets than had been possible with the Krag rifle. Such a bullet would result in better accuracy than could be realized by the Krag. Experiments were carried out at the Frankfort Arsenal in early 1900 in order to develop a caliber .30-bullet that would have a velocity of over 2,000 f/s. The initial product of this effort (for the Experimental Rifle) resulted in little more than the standard service caliber .30 (Krag) rounds loaded to a special pressure and velocity. Some 11,985 rounds with a chamber pressure of 48,000 psi were made for the test. This rimmed bullet did use a sharper shoulder (advanced approximately .056”) and a greater length of .56”. The retention of the rimmed case served to minimize the problem of proper head-spacing in the manufacture of both rifles and ammunition. Moreover, the rimmed case added strength in the cartridge head, thereby reducing the possibility of failure when the rifle was fired. The primer for this cartridge was known as “H-48.” It employed a non-mercuric mix invented by Lt. C.L. ‘H. Ruggles in 1899. Rimmed cartridges have a rim which seats against the breech face and aids in extracting the case as opposed to rimless cases. They have an extraction groove in the case body, leaving a flange at the base of the case. The bullet utilized in this cartridge was a round-nosed, 220-grain bullet. This modified cartridge afforded 2,300 f/s at the muzzle of the 30-inch barrel. Tests conducted in October 1900 by the Small Arms Board resulted in the board members complaining about the round’s rimmed case. The rim made it feed poorly in the Mauser-type clip. Most importantly, the board was unsatisfied with this initial effort and wanted higher velocities than this first attempt had yielded.

The Test of the Springfield Magazine Rifle

The Experimental Rifle was submitted to the Board on the Springfield Magazine Rifle on the morning of 2 October 1900. The board had gathered at Springfield Armory and its members included (the Board’s president) Major John H. Greer, and captains, Frank Baker, John T. Thompson (of later Thompson submachine gun fame), and Odus C. Horney – Ordnance officers all. The test entailed several phases during which the rifle was subjected to a series of trials in which the harshness of a combat environment was approximated. These subtests included rapid fire at close-quarters (100 feet) against a man-size target – the emphasis here being on the “single-loader” feature. During one firing, forty-one shots were fired in 2 minutes; 29 hits were made. Additionally, an endurance test included the firing of 500 rounds without cleaning the rifle. For the most part all went well, but on the forth string of firing 50 rounds the magazine mechanism failed to feed and the test was suspended until the difficulties could be remedied. Another subtest entailed the intentional fouling of the rifle. For two minutes a fine sand dust was blown over and around the rifle. The bolt was then cycled to ensure the weapons remained functional. Despite this impediment, the rifle continued to function satisfactorily. And then, intentionally defective cartridges were fired to see if such firings would damage the rifle. This time an extractor was broke. The broken part was replaced and the test continued. Next, excessive charges (64,000 psi) were fired with no negative effect. The bolt continued to operate as easily as was the case prior to the firing. Last, an ease of manipulation subtest was successfully completed as each member of the board efficiently worked the bolt and trigger.

The board concluded that the rifle, excepting some minor difficulties, had successfully passed the test. The major advantages of the rifle were cited as its strength and simplicity relative to the Krag. The former quality would serve as a plus for battlefield ruggedness and the latter for ease-of-manufacture. A negative pointed out was the weakness of the magazine, in that it extended well below the rifle-stock and was thereby exposed to being damaged. Additionally, the magazine cut-off was not liked because the magazine could not be filled while the cut-off was in the “OFF” setting. The board submitted its final report with recommendations on 8 December 1900. They recommended that the magazine be modified in order to make it flush with the bottom of the stock. This modification would permit a more compact staggered column of cartridges and make the rifle more like the Spanish M93 Mauser. And, since the rimmed cartridge would not feed in a Mauser-type clip, they recommended the changing over of rimmed cartridges to rimless types. General Buffington approved the report on 18 January 1901. Shortly thereafter work was begun at the Springfield Armory on a new rifle, a rifle incorporating the modifications recommended in the board’s report.

1901: The Modified Experimental Rifle and Cartridges

The 1901 Experimental Rifle was intended to possess all the good features of the M1900 rifle as well as the added improvements resulting from the board’s recommendations. Perhaps the most important revision was that it was the first Springfield rifle to employ the Mauser staggered box magazine, that is, a magazine fully enclosed within the rifle-stock. The weight of the rifle including its rod bayonet was 9.47 lbs. Moreover, there were several minor changes of detail whereby the cost of manufacture were to be lessened.

Aforementioned, the Frankfort Arsenal’s first attempt at developing a new cartridge had resulted in only marginally greater velocities than the standard Krag .30-40 cartridge. Moreover, the rimmed configuration of the new cartridge case did not feed properly from a clip. And so work continued at Frankfort in search of a significantly improved cartridge. In November 1900, they developed another new cartridge with a velocity of 2,500 f/s. However, new problems replaced the old. Along with its high velocity came a correspondingly high chamber pressure of 49,000 psi. And the rimed cartridge was retained despite the earlier protests. The rimmed bottlenecked case was 2.752 inches long and possessed a rim diameter of 0.58 inches. It was loaded with 48 grains of service propellant. In January 1901, the rifle board members expressed their concerns about the excessive recoil resulting from the high chamber pressure as well as the feeding difficulties attending the rimed case. And so, Frankfort developers resumed work. Within 30 days they had developed yet another cartridge. This rimless cartridge yielded a velocity of 2,300 f/s. Additionally, it possessed a chamber pressure of only 45,000 psi. The propellant was 44.5 gr. charge of Whistler-Aspinwall double-based (nitroglycerin type) powder. The bullet was 220 gr., round-nosed, jacketed with cupro-nickel and lubricated with Japanese wax and graphite. The first of these cartridges were fabricated in February 1901.

More than 10,000 rounds were tested in the M1901 Experimental Rifle. These were probably a mixture of the single or three lubricating grooved (also known as “cannelured”) bullets – the Army service bullet was in transition at this time. In September 1902 it was noted that the gas seal of these bullets was poor. And so the so-called “Cole” bullet was tried—it had smooth sides. This bullet had no grooves and was slightly more pointed. The rifle board found this bullet superior in perhaps every way to the standard M1901 cartridges and its predecessors. And so, the board recommended that the three-grooved, cupped-base, round-point bullet, and that the “Cole” bullet should be adopted.

The Trial of the Model 1901 Rifle

Unlike the M1900 Experimental Rifle of which only one was made, the M1901 Experimental Rifle was planned for a much more expansive form of testing. On 6 November 1901, a limited production of 5,000 M1901 rifles was approved. These were to be issued to soldiers for actual day-to-day testing in the field. It was planned that by 1902, production levels at Springfield Armory would be up to 125 per day. Assuming that the M1901 performed well in the field with troops, plans were made to have that production rate upped to 400 per day, with another 250 per day being produced at Rock Island Arsenal. However, once again scarce dollars as well as manufacturing difficulties foiled the plan. Soon after formulating the project, then Chief of Ordnance, Brigadier General William Crozier (1855-1942) decided that this massive test simply was impractical. He scaled it back substantially. On 7 April 1902, Crozier secured $1,700 for the shop model production of 100 experimental M1901 rifles. A board of officers convened at Springfield Armory on 16 February 1903. And following some limited firing at the local test facilities more extensive testing was completed at Sandy Hook Testing Grounds. Additionally, trips were made to ten Army posts during which the rifles were demonstrated and comments of testers and observers solicited.

The board of officers delivered their final report to General Crozier on 28 March 1903. Within the report they summarized the testimony of 223 officers. Further, it incorporated the input of 4,669 enlisted men. The report indicated that the majority of these men overwhelmingly supported the rifle becoming a candidate for the new service rifle.

The board of officers recommended several modifications to the rifle. One of the more significant entailed support for General Crozier’s recommendation that the barrel length be shortened from 30 to 24 inches. He had made this directive the previous year when the 100 prototypes rifles were being produced. This action proved quite important since it eliminated the need to have a full-length shoulder weapon for the infantry and a carbine for the cavalry. This improvement standardized the service rifle and reduced the need for specialty small arms in the Army. Two other recommendations addressed ergonomic improvements. The hand guard was changed to better protect the shooter’s hand from barrel heat, and modification to the lower sling swivel enhanced carrying comfort. However, not all the recommendations worked out completely. The shortened barrel resulted in greater muzzle blast. The rear sight was moved further rearward extending the sight-radius. This change placed the sight too close to the shooter’s eye resulting in a poor sight picture.

With regards to the candidate service rifle’s ammunition, the 10,000 rounds of M1901 cartridges fired by the board were deemed adequate as the service cartridge. But a small lot of the Cole bullet was held to be quite superior. The Cole cartridges (they lacked cannelures) afforded an excellent gas seal. This difference significantly improved accuracy over the three-cannelured M1901 cartridges. The M1901 rifle was chambered for the rimless .30 caliber M1901 cartridge, the same cartridge that the M1903 rifle would be chambered for when it was initially produced. As a bizarre footnote to the aforementioned, and after all their efforts to increase the velocity of the service rifle, Ordnance officers took a step backward. In October 1905, the Ordnance Department ordered the Frankford Arsenal to reduce the velocity of the Model .30 ball cartridges from 2,300 f/s to 2,200 f/s – eight million rounds would be reloaded to this new velocity. The reasoning of the Ordnance Department was that an increase in rifle barrel life would be secured. Once again the fixation with seemingly dubious economies overrode other considerations.

The Enabling Spitzer Bullet and The .30-06

The classic round-nosed bullet, although still very much in vogue during the testing of the M1900 and M1901 Experimental Rifles, was soon to be replaced and a new innovation in bullet design was about to begin. In 1898, the French had adopted a bullet known as “Balle D.” And in early 1904, the Germans developed a flat base, 145-grain, “spitzer” (pointed). Such European technological change was not lost on the U.S. Ordnance Department. Soon thereafter they developed their own flat-based, jacketed “spitzer” bullet. Whether the Americans were simply copying their European counterparts still remains somewhat unclear. In 1894 Lieutenant Colonel J.P. Farley of the Ordnance Department had apparently invented a “spitzer”-type bullet. However, the utility of the concept remained speculative until German advances in high-speed photography captured drag waves on film and thereby displayed its ballistic efficiency. Farley’s sketches were later used as proof that the German “spitzer” bullet was not copied in the development of the .30 M1906. Unfortunately, these sketches served only as part of an unsuccessful defense strategy to a lawsuit bought by Deutsche Waffen-und Munitionsfabriken (DWM) against the Americans over the use of this type-bullet. World War I delayed the legal proceedings. But in 1921, DWM received $412,520.55 as settlement for infringement. Legal issues aside, the “spitzer” bullet would be central to the development of the M1906 cartridge, a cartridge nearly immortalized in 20th century military and sporting usage and better known as the .30-06. When this cartridge was perfected in October 1906, some 150,000 M1903 rifles were called back to the Springfield Armory and chambered for the new round. With the addition of this enabling technological development the combination of the M1903 rifle and the .30-06 bullet became a reality.

Summary: Object Fulfilled – the U.S. Magazine Rifle “03”

The rifle-bullet combination of all the aforementioned efforts became a reality on 19 June 1903, when then Secretary of War Elihu Root (1845-1937) approved General Crozier’s recommendation regarding a new service rifle. The Mauser-like Springfield rifle was designated United States Magazine Rifle, Caliber .30 Model of 1903. It weighed 8.68 pounds, fired the .30-06 (7.62×63) cartridge, the muzzle velocity being 2,800 f/s and it held five rounds in an internal box magazine. The “03” rifle met the requirement of rapidity with accuracy, and yet it still retained the “single-loader” mechanism. The Ordnance officers had done their work well albeit slowly.

In conclusion, the Spanish American War experience coupled with late 19th century military technological change and improving defense budgets served to promote Army service rifle modernization. However, it was the U.S. Army Ordnance officers of the era that provided the catalysis of planning and testing. They deserve the credit for the development of a truly efficient and effective instrument of war – the “03” Springfield rifle. The accomplishment is more impressive given that Ordnance officers of the Gilded Age tended to be punctilious rather than visionary. Small arms firepower in the Spanish American War was a mere foreshadowing of that yet be in 1918 France. Few of those men even dimly imagined what was coming. Rather they possessed outlooks that were fully commensurate with the budgetary and doctrinal realities of the old frontier Army. All of which made them men of their time.

The manufacturing process is done by robots with 14 independent robotic welds allowing for more consistent welding, location and insures the welds heat and depth are the same each time. The magazine sports a new anti glare finish that the OEM claims is the most resistant finish on the market. Each magazine is marked with a LOT code that allows traceability and identifies the manufacturing date. Each and every magazine comes with a Lifetime Warranty against manufacturer defect and is 100% made in the USA. The magazines were tested in a LMT Guardian and they fit perfectly and dropped free when the magazine catch was pressed. The bolt locked open on the last round without failure.

Each magazine is individually poly bagged for storage and sold also in Battle Packs (6 mags per package) and in an Armory Kit (12 mags per package). Contact C Products Defense at 6115 31 Street East, Bradenton, Florida 34203. Phone: (941) 727-0009. FAX: (941) 866-2686. Web sight: www.cpdmags.com.