0:00:47 – What happened to the “Worst AK I’ve Ever Seen”?
0:02:23 – My filming logistics
0:06:47 – PDW vs SMG?
0:08:54 – Do I still do gunsmithing and restoration?
0:10:29 – Did France ever make a 9mm FAMAS?
0:12:09 – What would I do to make a modernized M1 Carbine?
0:14:24 – Did the British consider making an 8mm Mauser No4 rifle?
0:17:26 – Could there be a mini-M1 akin to the Mini-14?
0:18:34 – Did Mauser and others have in-house translators? (Guest answer by Mauro Baudino or the Paul Mauser Archive)
http://www.paul-mauser-archive.com/
0:26:42 – Soviet Bloc vs Finnish/Israeli AKs?
0:28:29 – Unicorn manual to put on the Forgotten Weapons Archive?
0:29:28 – Gun with the shortest time of concept to production?
0:30:42 – Grip-safety-like fire control lever?
0:31:58 – Potential hazards of chamber flags at the range
0:33:26 – Details of my Scottish ancestry
0:35:47 – Would it be possible to make an effective .30 cal pistol cartridge using modern bullet technology?
0:38:12 – Worst military-issued optics
Martin sights on the SMLE
0:40:56 – Thoughts on Othais’ PCSC?
0:42:14 – Could the .30 Carbine be a good modern PCC cartridge?
0:45:27 – Visiting the SIG factory museum in Switzerland?
You can order the Vickers Guide SIG Sauer Volume 1 here: https://www.vickersguide.com/sigvol1
0:48:42 – How would the StG-44 change with a proper development cycle?
0:52:59 – Adventurer’s gear, late 1930s
0:59:38 – Most fun gun to modify?
1:00:42 – How do newly-formed countries purchase arms?
1:02:55 – Long sight radius for better accuracy
1:05:35 – Why are there many 6.5mm rifle rounds, but not 6.5mm pistol rounds?
1:09:10 – Pros/cons of ballistic testing media like gel and clay?
“What would I do to make a modernized M1 Carbine?”
Interestingly there exist U.S. patent for FIREARM CONVERSION SYSTEM which was developed in 1960s to turn (then surplus I guess) M1 Carbine into M16-lookalike:
https://www.historicalfirearms.info/post/186730422214
it was supposed to be cheaper than M16 itself.
The picture you showed is Eliean Donan Castle, which much further up the coast from Kilmartin on the road to the Isle of Skye 15 miles or so short of Kyle of Lochalsh (where bridge to Skye is). Kilmartin is closer to Lochgilphead, sort of near Oban in Argyll. If you do ever go to Scotland, try contacting the Duke of Argyll at Inverary. If I remember correctly, there is quite the gun collection at Inverary Castle.
You are probably not aware that the US Navy had a sub base at the Holy Loch, near Dunoon, in Argyll from 61 – 92. I was there 76-91. I have friends that live in Inverary. He’ll be gone by now, but the old Duke used to have black powder clay shoots on the castle grounds. Lots of clay shooting in the rural areas of Scotland.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eilean_Donan#:~:text=A%20picturesque%20castle%20that%20frequently,the%20island%20to%20the%20mainland.
I should add that Eliean Donan Castle is the castle in the opening sceens of the movie Highlander.
I am so mad with my german great grandfather in stead of working for Mauser he worked for Cooks Travel Agency before WW1
Seriously though he spoke german english french and italian as he ran a hotel for Cooks in Venus Italy
The language spoken at home was french which the chap from the mauser archives says was the lingua franca of the times
I suppose however everybody speaking english is great otherwise Ian couldnt get such great information for us and yes my great granddad liked guns and hunting. I have a photo of him and some friends with all their guns lined up in front of a log cabin in rural Manitoba about 1910
By the way why not a mauser 1896 chambered in .30 carabine necked down to 6.5mm it would solve all the problems Ian mentioned
I think you were saying Grendel when you meant Creedmoor.
M1 Carbine in a CARBINE has the same ballistics at range as a short .357 REVOLVER at the muzzle.
.357 is the same length and pressure, with more powder volume and a larger-diameter bullet (piston surface) – and therefore will always outperform .30C apples-to-apples. With no cylinder gap, .357 delivers .30 Carbine ballistics out of a 10-11″ barrel. It is also the caliber with the greatest range of modern expanding bullets appropriate for its performance, whereas .30C (as alluded in other questions) has the worst.
I always thought it would have been better if the designers had turned the rim off .357Mag rather than .32WSL to create their new carbine cartridge. There’s no real need today; 9×25 Dillon or 10mm not only offer similar ballistics, but also double-stack in a magazine that fits in a reasonable size grip.
It’s probably time for people to walk away from new applications for the .30 Carbine (aka .32 WSL+P).
The commercial loads are predominantly optimized for an 18in barrel.
The case is tapered, which makes it a nuisance to hand-load, and possibly entirely unsuited for use in a notional blow-back action.
Actually, the Carbine could have been made in .351 Winchester Self-Loading, which essentially already is a rimless .357 Remington Magnum;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.351_Winchester_Self-Loading
And while it’s correct that a .357 from an 11″ or so barrel will duplicate .30 USC ballistics, the Carbine round from the 16″ barrel (110-grain at 1,900 F/S) has significantly more muzzle energy (890 FPE)than a .357 from a “2” snub” (average 470 FPE regardless of bullet weight). About twice as much, in fact.
By comparison, a .357 125-grain from a 20″ lever-action carbine can easily match the velocity and energy of a 7.62 x 39mm M1943 from the barrel of an AK. It just loses velocity and thus energy faster due to the poorer ballistic coefficient of its bullet.
cheers
eon
All outstanding points, particularly the reminder about .351WSL – thanks!
Why can’t a magazine manufacturer make a reliable for the .30 carbine?
I don’t think it’s a matter of can’t; it’s more a matter of why.
There are people who like the Carbine as it is, for historical, sentimental, or aesthetic reasons; and more critical customers who don’t see any practical advantage over countless alternatives available today. I think there might have been a market in the 90s (AWB / flood of cheap carbines and ammo), but I don’t see it today.
“(…)reliable for the .30 carbine?”
How does reliability of high-capacity magazine for M1 Carbine compares with magazines for Cristóbal https://guns.fandom.com/wiki/Crist%C3%B3bal_carbine
?
If I remember correctly,
There’s a No4 in 8×57 in the pattern room collection
Along with one in 8×33
They were not wartime projects, rather
They were part of the post war research into the “ideal” calibre that spawned the .280 that the EM2 was chambered for.
I don’t know how well the 8mm shot, I strongly suspect that usual weight of No4 barrel was as ill suited to 8×57 as it was to 7.62×51.
Target shooters and eventually the snipers used heavier free floated barrels in order to counter the dispersion problems.
The 7.65×21 Parabellum (aka .30 Luger) would make a dandy combat round for pistol or SMG if it was loaded to the same pressure as the 9mm Parabellum or 9mm +p. The SAMMI limit for the 30 Luger is much less than the 9mm. Make it a .30 Luger +P.
The British shoot what they call “Match Rifle” at 1000 to 1200 yards using iron sights or Gallian sights often from the supine position. They not quite
“(…)7.65×21 Parabellum(…)would make a dandy combat round for(…)SMG(…)”
Not so fast, even if pressure would be set higher, serious taper remain. This mean banana magazine of considerable capacity would have serious curve.
This is well visible in SUOMI prototype – see 6th image from top here:
https://www.jaegerplatoon.net/MACHINEPISTOLS1.htm
keep in mind that its capacity is only 36 round – c.f. PPSh chambered for 7,62×25 mm cartridge banana magazine holding only 1 cartridge less xor Kpist m/45 chambered for 9×19 mm stick magazine holding also 35 round.
Now imagine you have carry few magazines for these weapon. Which one would be least comfortable?
The CMMG rotary-delayed-blowback-action rifle would be an excellent platform for a modernized .30 Carbine caliber pistol-caliber-carbine.
The CMMG action is lightweight and perfectly suitable for the .30 Carbine cartridge. If a standard AR-sized magazine well is used, that provides more than enough room for a new proprietary polymer magazine for the .30 Carbine cartridge (perhaps one made by Magpul?).
As to guns for an “adventurer” in the late 1930s up through WW2, the 1938 and 1939 Stoeger catalogs are interesting.
First of all, the SMG is unnecessary and undesirable. If you are going to carry a rifle or similar weapon, the SMGs of the period, all first generation machined types with wood stocks, are the equivalent of a second rifle in terms of weight, volume, and etc.
A far better choice would be the Mauser M712 “Schnellfeuer” or the Spanish clone of same, the Astra 903, both of which Stoeger had in stock even after the 1934 NFA. The 7.63 x 25mm cartridge was more common than 9 x 19mm at the time, especially in the Far East, and so ammunition would not be a problem.
Also note that due to the C/96 type structure of both the 712 and 903, changing calibers was merely a matter of field stripping to switch barrel extensions. Stoeger advertised both guns in your choice of 7.63, 9 x 19mm, and .38 Super Auto. Yes, you could order spare barrels in all three calibers if you wished.
Going on to the rifle, an “automatic rifle” would certainly be a reasonable choice. The best would be the FN Model 30 version of the BAR;
https://www.militaryfactory.com/smallarms/imgs/fabrique-nationale-fn-m1930-bar.jpg
Known as the Model D after WW2, it was selective-fire, had a quick-change barrel, a pistol-grip stock, and came in several calibers; .30-06, 7.9 x 57, 7.65 x 53, 7 x 57, 6.5 x 55, and even 6.5 x 54 Mannlicher (the latter for the Greek armed forces). A Model 30 with appropriate spare barrels and bolts would be another weapon you wouldn’t have to worry about scrounging ammunition for anywhere in the world.
However, lose the bipod, and fit a better-shaped pistol grip, more like a Thompson. The bipod is largely unneeded excess weight, and that miniscule pistol grip adversely affects accuracy.
For a handgun, the FN P1935 in 9 x 19mm would be my first choice for a backup gun. The primary, however, would be a Smith and Wesson or Colt large-frame revolver in .357 Magnum, which of course can also use .38 Special. The primary pistol has to provide right-now killing power, and that’s what the .357 delivers. Also, .38 Special could easily be obtained anywhere U.S. troops were, due to .38 revolvers being issued to aircrews and etc.
And NB; Anyone who thinks the .38 Special is a “wimp” cartridge has never been shot with one. Or seen someone who has been.
Finally, since you’ve saved a lot of bulk by subtracting that SMG (granted, you have those spare M30 and machine-pistol bits in your kit), you might want to consider something a bit quieter. Like a Colt Woodsman .22 fitted with a Parker-Hale sound suppressor. They came with a special collet bushing that went on the muzzle of the Woodsman’s barrel, allowing the attachment of the “silencer” without having an obviously threaded barrel;
https://www.rifleman.org.uk/Images/PH%20-%20MM10%20&%2012%20adapters1.jpg
https://www.rifleman.org.uk/Images/PH%20-%20MM10%20&%2012%20adapters2.jpg
And yes, these too were available through Stoeger’s. By mail.
Now, about that bullwhip….
😉
cheers
eon
0:29:28 – Gun with the shortest time of concept to production?
Hmm. I guess the Sten is the candidate here, but this might be considered together with the Lanchester’s development? So first, there’s a UK-mfr. M.P.28,II clone. Too much machining, too expensive. Then the same side-loading layout doodled on a napkin with a far simpler manufacturing process. It is here that the story begins of the 9mm S.T.En. “machine carbine,” a portmanteau named after its designers’ initials. First, veteran of the Gallipoli campaign and Egypt, and holder of a BS in Engineering from Leeds, Major Reginald Vernon Shepherd OBE of the Ministry of Supply, Design Department, at the Royal Arsenal in Woolwich lent the “S.” Second, came the Kent engineer, model train enthusiast, and senior draughtsman of RSAF Enfield, Harold J. Turpin, who designed and built the very first T/40 (Turpin, 1940) for England (or, variously, at Enfield Lock). 1) The UK first purchased expensive Thompsons from the United States, then 2) developed a modified copy of the “product improved” German WWI progenitor of the practical SMG in the form of the Lanchester 9mm, and thirdly, the Sten gun.
So my argument, frankly, is that the swiftest firearm from drawing board to production must go to the Ljungman 6.5x55mm self-loading rifle?
I think even the AG42 was beaten by the FP-45 Liberator pistol;
So strictly speaking, the entire project from RfP to completion of production of a full one million units was actually only about four months.
cheers
eon
Ha! And it shows?! Thanks for that. “Now I know!” 😉
“(…) swiftest firearm from drawing board to production(…)”
I am suspecting it might be Korovin 1941
https://modernfirearms.net/en/submachine-guns/russia-submachine-guns/korovin-1941-eng/
though I was unable to find exact timeline
Another candidate! Well, I’d guess we’d best get to researching… eon’s got us beat on that score. Interesting question, and one we’ll have to contemplate the parameters for…
MC-12W is a military version of the Beechcraft King Air (civilian, light, twin-turboprop, short-range, executive transport) retrofitted with a variety of electronic warfare systems.
I suspect that your coorespondent was referring to the process of installing all that fancy, electronic gear in a stock civilian Beeechcraft King Air 300 series airframe. MC-12 are widely used to eaves-drop on Taliban, ISIS, ISIL, etc. communications. MC-12 even carried “spoof” cell phone “towers” that led to Taliban banning cell phones from meetings.
At the other end of the scale, the first (1960s) C-12s were basically new-production, Beechcraft Queen Airs that had their piston engines replaced with the new Pratt & Whitney of Canada PT6A turboprop engines. The US Army was already flying piston-engined Queen Airs as light transports. The first batch of C-12s did not even have pressurized cabins.
After Beechcraft worked out the bugs on that first batch of C-12s, they further refined the civilian King Air series. King Air was one of the first light, twin-turboprops and it still makes up more than half of that class of business airplanes.
In the 2015 Galipoli miniseries, one of the characters used a rifle with Galilean sights.
My Scottish ancestry is similar, on both sides: all here before the American Revolution, on both sides.
The Craigs don’t have a clan, but that’s okay; I’m fond of the Clan Ross hunting tartan, and I’m entitled to that one through my mother.