Categories
All About Guns

Scotland’s Only WW2 Military Firearm: Albion Motors No2 MkI** Revolver

Categories
All About Guns

Dangerous Guns

After shooting the Bannerman Mosin-Nagant conversion recently, the subject of dangerous military rifles came up when I was talking with a friend. And y’know, there are more than a few designs and conversions that are widely considered dangerous…some really are and some aren’t. To name a few:

  • Canadian Ross M1910. Yeah, fiddle with the bolt wrong and you can get it to fire unlocked. Most were modified to make this impossible, though.
  • Italian Vetterli M70/87/15. This was a conversion of the early 10.4mm black-powder Vetterli rifle to smokeless 6.5mm Carcano. Not uncommon to find examples with cracked locking lugs. Yikes!
  • Austrian M1888/24. Similar to the Vetterli, this was the M1888 Steyr straight-pull of 11.15mm converted to 8×57 smokeless. Unlike the M95 family of straight-pulls, the 1888 design used a tilting wedge at the rear of the bolt to lock – not as strong as the later rotating bolts.
  • American Winchester 1895 Lee Navy. Smallbore, high pressure, and could be possible to blow the bolt out with a combination of a worn bolt stop and bad headspacing. Sarco’s Glenn DeRuiter was tragically killed by one of these rifles.
  • Japanese Type 99 Naval Special. This was a late war rifle that used a cast iron receiver (as well as some other iron parts). The barrel was changed from the standard Arisaka design, though, so the bolt locked into a steel barrel extension. The iron receiver thus saw no pressure, just as an aluminum AR15 receiver doesn’t take any pressure.
  • Polish wz.91/98/25 Mosin Nagant. A conversion to 8×57 Mauser, these rifles were equipped with new 8mm barrels and are perfectly safe to shoot.
  • French M1915 and M1918 Chauchat machine rifles. This is a case of ignorance – for all the flaws that the Chauchat does have, it is not unsafe. You will often hear that the .30-06 M1918 version was too high-pressure for the design, but this is just outright not true (note that the guns were used in 8×57 and 7.65×53 without any trouble).
  • Plus at least a few more that escape me at the moment…

Of course, any firearm can become dangerous with overpressure ammunition or broken/worn parts in the wrong places. But it’s interesting to look at the guns that are teetering on the edge of being unsafe in their issued condition – and also at the quite safe guns that have managed to develop an unearned reputation as dangerous.

Categories
A Victory! All About Guns Leadership of the highest kind One Hell of a Good Fight The Green Machine War

The Wagon Box Fight, 1867 by KERRY DRAKE

Sioux and Cheyenne warriors who gathered west of Fort Phil Kearny on the morning of Aug. 2, 1867, had several reasons to feel confident as they prepared to attack civilian woodcutters and the U.S. Army troops assigned to protect them.

Nine months earlier, Lakota, Cheyenne and Arapaho warriors had attacked troops along the Bozeman Trail about four miles north of the fort, which is located near present-day Story, Wyo, on the east flank of the Bighorn Mountains halfway between the present towns of Buffalo and Sheridan. Tribal leaders sent out a small band of decoys that managed to lure Capt. William J. Fetterman into an area where he and all 80 of his men were ambushed and killed. At the time, it was the worst military defeat ever suffered by the Army on the Great Plains.

 

wagonbox1.jpg
On Aug. 2, 1867, Oglala Sioux warriors attacked troops and civilian woodcutters replenishing Fort Phil Kearny’s wood supply several miles northwest of the fort. Wikipedia.

 

Red Cloud’s War

In the summer of 1867, looking to repeat their success, Indians—furious that white men the year before had built three forts along the new Bozeman Trail across their land in the Powder River Basin—planned attacks on two of the forts. The federal government contended the forts and defense of the trail were necessary because the route offered the quickest path to gold mine discoveries in Montana. The conflict became known as Red Cloud’s War.

 

wagonbox2.jpg
Oglala Sioux Chief Red Cloud led the tribe’s resistance to the U.S. Army’s incursion into the Powder River Basin in the 1860s. Whether he was at the Wagon Box Fight is unclear. First People.

 

Sioux Chief Red Cloud had vowed to kill every white man found on the Indians’ land. The Indians harassed troops and white travelers more or less continually. The next large attacks after the Fetterman massacre came in August.

One contingent of warriors battled soldiers and civilians at the Hayfield Fight on Aug. 1, 1867, near Fort C.F. Smith on the Bighorn River in southern Montana Territory. Early the next morning, Red Cloud and more than 1,000 warriors gathered and attacked woodcutters and soldiers near a spot about six miles northwest of Fort Phil Kearny.

What happened over the course of six hours on August 2 became known as the Wagon Box Fight, a relatively small battle that became well known for several disparate reasons. It was the Army’s first chance to claim victory after the Fetterman disaster, though in retrospect the fight seems more like a draw. At the time and since, there were widely conflicting reports on the number of Indian casualties, and for this reason too the fight continues to draw the interest of students of the Indian Wars.

Finally, the fight is important in the history of tactics because it was the first time a large force of mounted tribesmen faced sustained fire from relatively rapid-shooting, breech-loading rifles. The warriors’ old tactics of closing fast on horseback for close combat with their enemies no longer worked—and they paid a heavy price.

The wood supply

Hundreds of infantry and cavalry soldiers based at Fort Phil Kearny needed a steady supply of wood from forests on the slopes of the Bighorn Mountains for construction at the fort, as well as a constant supply for fuel for cooking and for the next winter’s heating.

Protecting the contracted civilian woodcutters was thus one of the Army’s most important jobs if the troops were to survive in hostile country. The wood line where the prairie met the mountain forest was about six miles from the fort. Wagon trains of woodcutters and their soldier guards suffered constant small attacks during the entire two years Fort Phil Kearny was in existence.

 

wagonbox3.jpg
View toward the Bighorn Mountains and the site of the Wagon Box Fight, from the reconstructed stockade of Fort Phil Kearny. Vasily Vlasov, Panoramio.

 

On August 2, the tribes tried something much larger. The Indians held a distinct advantage because their foes had split into two groups. Civilian woodcutters decided to stay at a camp near the wood line, about a mile from a makeshift stock corral the soldiers had fashioned from14 wagon boxes, removed from their running gear and set on the ground. Logs were transported from the woodcutting camp to the fort resting directly on the running gear.

A wagon-box corral

The wagon boxes were 10 feet long, two and a half feet high and four and a half feet wide. The wood was only about an inch thick, with no lining. The boxes eventually served as the main line of defense against a massed Indian force determined to overrun the corral and the 32 men using it as cover.

Capt. James W. Powell was in command of C Company, 26th Infantry, which at the end of July had relieved the company previously guarding the woodcutters, and so his troops were new to the job. He set up operations at the corral.

Early on August 2, Powell sent 13 men out from the corral to guard the woodcutters’ camp and another 14 to escort wagons carrying wood to and from the fort. That left the captain and Lt. John C. Jenness at the corral with 26 enlisted men.

The soldiers at the corral were joined by two civilian teamsters who had left the fort that morning to hunt deer. The pair saw Indian smoke signals and tried to get back to the fort, but wound up at the corral instead.

The first attack

The Indians set their sights on the camp’s mule herd, with 200 warriors on foot trying to scatter the animals, but the mule herders kept the attackers at bay until a new wave of Indians managed to drive off the herd and set fire to the woodcutters’ camp. Simultaneously, about 500 Indians attacked the woodcutters. Then the woodcutters and their soldier guards tried to move toward the fort, bypassing the corral.

Three soldiers and four civilian contractors were killed, but Powell managed to divert the Indians’ attention by mounting an attack on the rear of the Indian force from the corral, which allowed the rest of the woodcutting camp’s occupants to hide in the timber or get to the fort. Within 15 minutes, an estimated 800 Indians on horseback surrounded Powell and his men at the makeshift corral.

Using field glasses to scan the area, Lt. Jenness reportedly told the men he spotted Red Cloud at the top of a hill with other Indian leaders. It has never been verified that Red Cloud was at the scene, and because the lieutenant didn’t know what the man looked like, Jenness may have misidentified another chief.

Trapdoor Springfields

Unlike Fetterman’s troops, who carried muzzle-loaders that could only fire three rounds a minute at most, the men at the wagon boxes were equipped with new breech-loading Springfield trapdoor rifles. Seven hundred of these weapons were brought to the fort a short time before by wood contractor J.R. Porter of the Gilmore & Proctor firm. They could fire 15 to 20 rounds per minute. Unfortunately, there hadn’t been any time for target shooting, and Army weapons training was known to be dubious at best. Still, most of the men managed to at least become familiar with the new rifles in the weeks since the weapons had arrived.

 

wagonbox4.jpg
New, breech-loading Springfield Model 1866

 

The soldiers punched two-inch holes into the wooden wagon boxes so they could fire through them. Yokes, bags of grain, kegs and other equipment were stacked between wagons for protection. Some men fired over the tops of the boxes, and blankets covered the tops to hide the men’s positions and provide limited protection from the arrows raining down on them.

The Indians were primarily armed with bows and arrows, lances and war clubs, though some had firearms captured months earlier during the Fetterman attack. They didn’t have much ammunition, however. The soldiers at the Wagon Box Fight began the battle with 7,000 rounds on hand—and this large supply saved their lives.

Once the attack began, most of Powell’s men kept their ammunition in their hats. Although this was convenient, it left their heads exposed to the sun and its sweltering heat. In addition, the troops had to deal with the stench: Indians coated their arrows with burning pitch that set fire to hay and mule and horse dung.

The soldiers’ superior firepower drove back the initial wave of Indians and they retreated to about 600 yards from the corral and spent the next few hours making separate attacks on foot.

A long fight

Powell was at one end of the corral, with Jenness stationed at the other. Participants later reported that a few Indians managed to get within 5 feet of the corral, but none penetrated the barrier.

Jenness was shot in the head and killed, as were two privates, Henry Haggerty and Thomas Boyle. Two other privates were wounded in the fight.

A teamster, R.J. Smyth, later recalled the lieutenant’s bravery during the battle. “Lt. Jenness had just cautioned me not to expose my person, and to hold my fire until I was sure of getting an Indian at each shot,” Smyth said. “He had moved a few feet from my box when he was shot through the head, I think he died instantly. He was a grand, good man, and a fearless officer. I told him to keep under cover. He stated he was compelled to expose himself in order to look after his men.”

Several soldiers wrote firsthand accounts of the ordeal. Sgt. Samuel S. Gibson, who at 18 was the youngest soldier at the corral, recorded the most detailed and dramatic version of the event. He had been dispatched to guard duty at the woodcutters’ camp and had a skirmish with several Indians before he and another soldier made it safely to the corral.

“The whole plain was alive with Indians shooting at us, and the tops of the boxes were ripped and literally torn to slivers by their bullets,” he wrote. “How we ever escaped with such slight loss I have never been able to understand, but we made every shot tell in return, and soon the whole plain in front of us was strewn with dead and dying Indians and ponies. It was a horrible sight!”

Gibson added, “The Indians were amazed at the rapidity and continuity of our fire. They did not know we had been equipped with breech-loaders and supposed that after firing the first shot they could ride us down before we could reload.”

 

wagonbox5.jpg
The monument at the site of the Wagon Box Fight was built by the Civilian Conservation Corps in 1936. Wikipedia.

 

Sometime between noon and 1 p.m., hundreds of warriors led by Red Cloud’s nephew charged the corral on horseback, hurtling toward the wagons in a V-shaped wedge. Powell later recalled that things looked very bleak at that moment, especially because ammunition was running low and his men were exhausted from holding off the Indians for so long.

After Indians on horseback were initially forced to retreat from the corral area, they tried to attack on foot over the next three hours. On Sullivant’s Ridge, a hill to the east, were several hundred Indians out of range who had been watching the battle “like spectators,” but it appeared to Powell that they would enter the fray.

A howitzer rescue

Just at that moment, though, Powell said he heard the sound of a howitzer shell hit and saw a rescue party led by Maj. Benjamin F. Smith, who had 100 men with him.

“The shell fired was in the direction of the Indians [on the hill], but fell short, as I anticipated,” Smith noted in his report, “but [it] seemed to disconcert them as a number of mounted Indians who were riding rapidly toward my command turned and fled.”

The Indians who had been attacking the corral as well as the ones watching the action all retreated.

Smith, arriving at the corral, was shocked to find that most of the men had survived the intense encounter. He had expected them all to be dead. “It was a hard lot to look at. The day was hot and the sun was beating down on them in the wagon beds,” he wrote. “The smoke from their guns had colored their faces and they looked as though they had used burnt cork on their faces.”

Each survivor received a big drink of whiskey from a keg brought along on the rescue mission by the post surgeon, Dr. Samuel M. Horton.

Indian casualties

 

wagonbox6.jpg
Text on the 1936 monument overstates the number of Indian warriors and casualties. Vasily Vlasov, Panoramio.

 

Estimates of Indian casualties in the Wagon Box Fight, though, vary enormously; they range from two dead to 1,500. To date no one has come up with a definitive answer about why there is no agreement on the numbers.

“No [other] event has had more wild, inaccurate tales written concerning it,” writer Vie Willits Garber noted in a 1964 Annals of Wyoming article.

Two respected historians–Stanley Vestal and George Hyde–as well as several Sioux leaders said only six warriors were killed and six more wounded.

But there are accounts of people who later talked about the battle with Red Cloud. They said the chief told them that the count was much higher. Gen. Grenville M. Dodge interviewed Red Cloud in 1885, and he told him more than 1,100 Sioux, Cheyenne and Arapahos were killed or wounded at the fight. A Sioux medicine man, whose name was not recorded, visited the post of Col. Richard I. Dodge at North Platte in the fall of 1867. He told the colonel that the total of dead and injured was 1,137, and that figure was widely reported the same year as the battle.

Hyde’s book, Red Cloud’s Folk was published in 1937, based on interviews Hyde had conducted decades earlier. Hyde said that late in his life Red Cloud, who died in 1909, claimed not to remember the Wagon Box Fight at all. The historian said that was unlikely, given the large number of warriors in the battle and the fact that it marked the chief’s last major fight.

In his official report, Powell estimated 60 Indians killed and 120 wounded–figures held up to ridicule by some historians as “wildly exaggerated,” while his Army superiors believed he was being incredibly modest about the body count. Enlisted men at the scene supported much larger claims, with various shooters putting the number of dead between 300 and 800.

The account of at least one Indian warrior, an Oglala Sioux named Fire Thunder, supports the claim of heavy Indian losses. He described “dead warriors and horses piled all around the [wagon] boxes and scattered over the plain.”

In 1969, at a reenactment of the Wagon Box Fight near Sheridan, Wyo., some Indian descendants of the participants claimed Indian casualties were between 1,200 and 1,500.

Hyde said while he knew of no written accounts of the battle by Indians, they did not regard the fight as a defeat. If the reports of six dead and six wounded Indians were accurate, as Hyde believed them to be, he said they inflicted more damage to the white men at the camp and the corral because they killed a total of six soldiers and four civilians, plus capturing a large number of horses and mules.

Aftermath

In the Treaty of Fort Laramie in 1868, with the transcontinental railroad nearing completion and opening up a new, shorter route to the Montana gold fields, the government agreed to abandon the forts on the Bozeman Trail, to make the western half of Dakota Territory a large reservation for the Sioux and to allow the tribes to hunt buffalo in the Powder River Basin of what are now Wyoming and Montana. The tribes burned the abandoned forts shortly after the Army left.

The Wagon Box Fight was the last major battle of Red Cloud’s war against the white men he felt had invaded the land they had promised to his people. Some historians credit the battle with teaching both sides valuable tactical lessons. To the Army, it was now clear that Red Cloud commanded thousands of hostile warriors, not just a small number of malcontents.

The tribes, meanwhile, became convinced that they did not have a chance against large numbers of troops unless they could secure similar firepower, which they did by the time of the Battle of the Little Bighorn in 1876.

 

wagonbox7.jpg
FortWiki.com. Click to enlarge

 

RESOURCES

  • Bate, Walter N. “Eyewitness Reports of the Wagon Box Fight.” Annals of Wyoming 41, no. 2 (Oct. 1969): 193-201.
  • FortWiki.com. “Sioux War of 1866-1868.” Accessed Feb. 28, 2014 at http://fortwiki.com/Sioux_War_of_1866-1868.
  • Garber, Vie Willits. “The Wagon Box Fight.” Annals of Wyoming 36, no. 1 (April 1964): 61-63.
  • Hyde, George E. Red Cloud’s Folk: A History of the Oglala Sioux Indians. Vol. 15, The Civilization of the American Indian. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1975, 159-160.
  • Keenan, Jerry. The Wagon Box Fight: An Episode of Red Cloud’s War. Conshohocken, Pa.: Savas Publishing Co., 2000.
  • militaryphotos.net “The Wagon Box Fight August 2, 1867” Accessed Feb. 25, 2014 at http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?195915-The-Wagon-Box-Fight-August-2-1867.
  • Murray, Robert A. “The Wagon Box Fight: A Centennial Appraisal. Annals of Wyoming 39, no. 1 (April 1967): 105-107.
  • The Powell Project. “James Powell Reports on the Wagon Box Fight.” The commanding officer’s official report after the battle, accessed Feb. 25, 2014 at http://powellproject.tumblr.com/post/52483831856/james-powell-reports-on-the-wagon-box-fight.
  • “The Wagon Box Fight.” Annals of Wyoming 7, no. 2 (Oct. 1930): 394-401.

Illustrations

  • The image of the model 1866 trapdoor Springfield rifle is from Wikipedia. Used with thanks. The photos of the monument and the main sign at the Wagon Box Fight site are also from Wikipedia. Used with thanks.
  • The map of the battle site is from FortWiki.com. Used with thanks.
  • The photo of the monument plaque and the view toward the mountains from the reconstructed Fort Phil Kearny stockade are by Vasily Vlasov, from Panoramio. Used with thanks.
  • The photo of Red Cloud is from First People, a child-friendly site about Native Americans and members of the First Nations, with more than 1400 legends, 400 agreements and treaties, 10,000 pictures, clipart, Native American books, posters, seed bead earrings, Native American jewelry, possible bags and more. Used with thanks.

Categories
All About Guns War

The Surrender Revolver of Jefferson Davis

Categories
All About Guns

“NATO Burp Guns” – Winchester’s 1950s Experimental SMGs

Categories
All About Guns War

Battle of Majuba

Categories
All About Guns

S&W Model 60 and 36. Let’s look at them.

Categories
A Victory! All About Guns California

Federal Judge Strikes Down California ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban

US-TEXAS-GUNS-NRA

U.S. District Court Judge Roger T. Benitez struck down California’s “assault weapons” ban Thursday but is staying the implementation of his decision for ten days to give California Attorney General (AG) Rob Bonta time to begin an appeal if so desired.

The Los Angeles Times indicates California adopted its “assault weapons” ban in 1989. Since then, the ban has been incrementally tightened, with more firearm types and more firearm features added to the ban.

The plaintiffs in the case–James Miller, Wendy Hauffen, Neil Rutherford, the Second Amendment Foundation, and the Firearms Policy Coalition, among others–argue that misuse of popular semiautomatic rifles, like AR-15s, is highly publicized, but defensive actions with such firearms get little press.

Benitez concurred, writing:

This Court understands the unquestionable tragedy caused by lawless individuals using modern semi-automatic guns or any gun to injure or kill innocent men, women, or children. Their lives are important. But are their lives any more important than Jane Doe’s or the lives of her family? We hear constantly about mass shootings for days and weeks and on anniversaries.

 

But how often do we celebrate the saving of the life of Jane Doe because she was able to use a semi-automatic weapon to defend herself and her family from attackers? Are the lives of Jane, John, and Junior Doe worth any less than others? Are they less important?

Moreover, Benitez pointed out that the semiautomatics, which California lawmakers label “assault weapons,” are rarely used in crime in the Golden State:

In California, while modern semiautomatics are not rare, they are rarely the problem. For example, in 2022, only three “assault weapons” were used in violent California crimes, according to the Attorney General’s annual report, “Firearms Used in the Commission of Crimes.” For the preceding year, the report announced that only two assault weapons were used in violent crimes, while the 2020 report identified zero “assault weapons” used.

 

Other government homicide statistics do not track “assault rifles,” but they do show that killing by knife attack is far more common than homicide by any kind of rifle.

Benitez further noted:

The State of California posits that its “assault weapon” ban…promotes an important public interest of disarming some mass shooters even though it makes criminals of law-abiding residents who insist on acquiring these firearms for self-defense. Nevertheless, more than that is required to uphold a ban.

He then turned to the Supreme Court of the United States’ Bruen (2022) decision, writing:

Bruen makes clear that, “[t]o justify its regulation, the government may not simply posit that the regulation promotes an important interest.” After all, “the very enumeration of the right takes out of the hands of government—even the Third Branch of Government—the power to decide on a case-by-case basis whether the right is really worth insisting upon.”

He took pains to follow Bruen’s framework for historical evidence of similar bans throughout American history and discovered that repeating rifles were actually protected in earlier decisions:

There appears to be no other law in the nation’s history that prohibited high capacity repeating rifles such as the Winchester lever-action repeater rifles or the Gatling gun. And at least one court around the time of the Fourteenth Amendment specifically protected repeating firearms. “[W]e would hold, that the rifle of all descriptions, the shot gun, the musket, and repeater, are such arms; and that under the Constitution the right to keep such arms, cannot be infringed or forbidden by the Legislature.”

Benitez brought Heller (2008) into the conversation as well:

Justice Alito took pains to point out that this is a conjunctive test. “As the per curiam opinion recognizes, this is a conjunctive test: A weapon may not be banned unless it is both dangerous and unusual . . . . If Heller tells us anything, it is that firearms cannot be categorically prohibited just because they are dangerous.” In Heller, the Supreme Court said the firearms that are protected are firearms “that are not dangerous and unusual and typically possessed by law abiding citizens for lawful purposes like self-defense.”

He concluded by deciding in favor of the plaintiffs, ordering that law enforcement not enforce California’s “assault weapons” ban. However, Benitez stayed his own decision for ten days to give AG Bonta time to appeal the decision if he so chooses.

The case is Miller v. Bonta, No. 3:19-cv-01537, in the United States District Court, Southern Court of California.

AWR Hawkins is an award-winning Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News and the writer/curator of Down Range with AWR Hawkins, a weekly newsletter focused on all things Second Amendment, also for Breitbart News. He is the political analyst for Armed American Radio and a Turning Point USA Ambassador. He was a Visiting Fellow at the Russell Kirk Center for Cultural Renewal in 2010, a speaker at the 2023 Western Conservative Summit, and he holds a Ph.D. in Military History, with a focus on the Vietnam War (brown water navy), U.S. Navy since Inception, the Civil War, and Early Modern Europe. Follow him on Instagram: @awr_hawkins. You can sign up to get Down Range at breitbart.com/downrange.

Categories
All About Guns You have to be kidding, right!?!

The USSR Margolin Olympic Target Pistol – Designed By a Blind Guy & Used By a Princess

The Margolin Pistol

The Margolin Pistol
The Margolin Pistol

You’re young, talented, fearless, and dedicated to a cause.  But in a time of upheaval and war, in the prime of your young  life, cruel fate hands you a crushing blow.  In the violence of the bitter civil war that followed the Russian revolution, all your hopes, dreams, skills, and talent are shattered by a single rifle shot.

A head wound which might have taken your life has instead, blinded you, forever.  A  lifetime of darkness and bitter remorse are all that is left, to the once proud 18 year old soldier, Mikhail Vladimirovich Margolin.

Except Mikhail Margolin was no ordinary fellow. While recovering from his wound, he reflected on all the knowledge of weaponry he had accrued during the Russian Civil War. And then, Margolin got to work.   “First came the study of Braille. Friends helped him to study mathematics, mechanics, and strength of materials, all essential subjects for the arms designer.

His wife read aloud to him from textbooks and books on the history of firearms. He collected guns and enlarged his knowledge of various weapons systems. Most important was his splendid memory: within a few years he was a match for any engineer. As for firearms, there was no disputing his superior knowledge. He got acquainted with the latest models of weapons and took them apart dozens of times in order to let his sense of touch give rise in his mind to a mental picture…”

Margolin had a quite a career;  before he was through, he would accomplish more than many sighted  men.  An air raid warden, in World War II, he once led more than a hundred people from a bombed out building; blinded by the smoke, they were helpless, but he was not.   For this and other actions, he won the prestigious Medal  for the Defense of Moscow.

His contributions as an engineer in the Tula earned him the Medal for the Victory over Germany. At the end of the war, he set his creative and agile mind to the development of sporting firearms.

Dictating to an assistant, making working models from clay aluminum or wood, he crafted several innovative designs, the most remarkable of which was the target pistol which still bears his name.

Christened the Margolin MTsU, the pistol featured several innovative ideas.  The trigger mechanism was smooth and simple. The recoil spring sat in a guide tube beneath the barrel, while at the muzzle, he fixed a compensator to both add weight to the muzzle and to vent muzzle blast gases upward and rearward to reduce muzzle rise. The barrel, being comparatively lightweight, was equipped with under barrel weights for added steadiness.

Most obvious however, is the elevated sight plane.  Margolin’s design feature was intended to increase the accuracy of the pistol. The rear sight is affixed to a bridge attached to the frame, not the slide. The sight is thus never affected by the movement of the slide.

The bridge that made the rear sight stationary combined with the unusually tall sights allows the shooter to hold the pistol lower and thus aligns barrel with the shoulder, reducing recoil yet further, thereby giving the shooter an improvement in control in rapid fire competition. Unseen in target shooting, it is a recognizable feature of the AK-47, and its antecedents, the German StG-43 and 44.

When it was first revealed in international competition, the pistol made a splash, taking home gold medals in the 1948 and 1952 Olympics. More revolutionary ideas were to follow; some being so game changing that they were banned from competition!

You might recognize the pistol from competition.  You might recognize the dainty blaster that Princess Leia carried in the very first Star Wars movie.  The design features were so radical, so otherworldly, that the moviemakers didn’t have to do much more than put it in the Princess’s hand.

Visionary ideas, from a man who never saw through the sights of his own designs, and never fired a shot in competition.

Categories
All About Guns Ammo

Hunting with the Hornady 218 Bee Factory Ammo and Two Classic Rifles