Categories
Category: All About Guns
At the end of the 19th century, progress and modernity caught up with the world of military handguns.
Smokeless powder and jacketed bullets replaced black powder and soft lead in most militaries.
The 1899 Hague convention outlawed expanding bullets for warfare, but even before that most major combatants were emphasizing penetration in the specifications. A typical military cartridge went from 11mm down to about 8mm.
With it, shooters enjoyed a slight increase in muzzle velocity. British Webleys and American Smith & Wesson top breaks aside, most European armies ended up with slim double action side-gate loading revolvers in the 7.5mm to 8mm range.
While the swing-out cylinder patent dates to 1865, it was 1892 before the government issued such a sidearm to American troops. But while the US went right back to .45 Colt chambering, Europe switched to smaller calibers launching roughly 100 grain bullets. Muzzle velocity stayed low, around 700 to 750 feet per second. Europeans considered that plenty for officers’ sidearms.
HERE COMES THE NAGANT
Oleg, the author at the firing range after seven shots at ten yards with another sample of Nagant.
Enter the odd and innovative 1895 “gas seal” Nagant. It became the standard Russian and Soviet sidearm until the mid-1930s, and mechanized troops still used it widely in 1945.
While gas seal in itself is an old expedient — used by flintlock Collier and percussion Savage revolvers in the early and mid 1800s respectively — doing it with a metallic cartridge worked far better. The articulated cylinder moved forward around the cone-shaped forcing cone, and the unusually long cartridge case with brass protruding past the bullet front completed the effective seal.
Loaded just a little hotter than the Swiss, the Austrian, and the French counterparts, 7.62x38R reached about 980 feet per second. Even then, you can’t call it a “powerhouse.”
POPULAR DESPITE COMPLEXITIES
In a gun with 4.5 inch barrel and mild 11,000 psi cartridge, cylinder gap pressure loss of 30-40 feet per second was not significant enough to warrant the extra complexity. However, this design remained popular for decades.
It performed fairly well despite some wartime production samples showing very poor machining and fit. Even relatively crude fixed-cylinder designs are easier to machine than swing-out cylinders. So, it’s very likely that the Russia and USSR opted to stay within their level of manufacturing competency.
The best-made samples of this type remained in target competitions until the early 21st century, with one shooter using a Nagant-derived TOZ49 to set a world accuracy record in 2007.
Subsonic velocity of this round came in handy for sound suppression. Nagant is also unique in the capability for effective revolving carbine conversions. In other types, the cylinder gap becomes increasingly problematic as the barrel gets longer.
The camming required for the back-and-forth cylinder movement made the double action pull extremely heavy, around 20lbs. Many 1895 Nagants were produced with single action only triggers. Manufactured with pyramid front and simple notch rear sights, 1895s proved unusually accurate.
I had a theory that the forward motion of the cylinder helped to center the firing chamber against the forcing cone, and the gas-sealing case not only helped the centering but also reduced the free bore. The little flat point bullet with lots of bearing surface became an accidental target wadcutter, making the best of the indifferently manufactured gun and ammunition.
To test this, I employed an 1887 Swedish Nagant in 7.5mm, without gas seal, and two 1930s Soviet-manufactured 1895 revolvers. One of them had the original cylinder, the other an aftermarket cylinder designed for use with 32 ACP and 32 S&W Long ammunition.
TESTING THE NAGANT REVOLVER ACCURACY
Left to right are 32 Long, 32ACP, and 7.62x38R targets used in the comparison.
Test firing off-hand, single action from 10 yards, I got a consistent ranking of accuracy.
32 ACP shot least well. 7.5mm Swiss/Swedish (both countries used the same cartridge) in a tie with 32S&W Long, and — the best of the lot — the actual x38R Nagant ammunition rounded out our testing.
Our target from the 7.5mm Swiss/Swedish testing.
One of the shots from the Swedish gun destabilized and keyholed. The rest gave a consistent group that wasn’t as good as I would have expected given the much nicer fit and finish of the revolver compared to the Soviet samples.
None of the groups went close to the sight picture. In the case of x38R that could have been caused by my use of downloaded 700 feet per second target loads rather than original military ammunition.
Previously, I fired other ammunition loaded by the same factory. From that experience, I can state that their quality control wasn’t great. Any accuracy achieved was due more to the revolver design than to the cartridge consistency.
The results of 32S&W Long relative to 32 ACP were not too surprising: shorter freebore and better obturation thanks to its softer lead bullet likely produced the improved accuracy.
OTHER PERKS
The absence of the cylinder gap flash and the attendant noise came as a welcome bonus to the improved accuracy. On a clean 1895, empties will fall out under gravity, while a dirty gun requires slow and laborious use of the ejection rod. Inspired by more modern designs, Nagant started producing a swing-out model in 1910, but few were sold.
Turns out that simultaneous ejection of seven very long cases with just thumb pressure is less reliable than sequential ejection of single cases. That problem wasn’t solved by 1914, when German conquest of Belgium put an end to the experiments. Today, despite around 2 million 1895 Nagants in the world, it seems only Fiocchi and PPU load the ammunition. For American shooters, a conversion cylinder with 32S&W Long appears to be the best way to keep these relics running with acceptable accuracy.
Slightly longer and more energetic 32 H&R Magnum ammunition may be used in conversion cylinders only. It provides power level similar to the original cartridge, along with accuracy similar to 32S&W Long.
Categories
Remington Model 788 6mm
Categories
Some Red Hot Gospel there!
Much has been written about the M14, most of it about the rifle’s development and surprisingly little about its use in combat. The select-fire M14’s time in action was relatively short, but those who fired it in anger during the Vietnam War will never forget the last American military rifle constructed of walnut and steel.
The M14 Concept
At the end of World War II, the U.S. Military had an unusually high number of small arms types, using a wide range of ammunition: the M1911 pistol (.45 ACP), the Thompson and M3A1 submachine guns (.45 ACP), the M1 Carbine (.30 Carbine), the M1903 Springfield and M1 Garand rifles (.30-06), the Browning Automatic Rifle (.30-06), and the Browning M1917 (water-cooled) and M1919 (air-cooled) machine guns (.30-06). All of these were fine weapons, but U.S. small arms logistics had become unduly complex.
During 1944, U.S. Ordnance began development of a new cartridge—the 7.62mm T65. This would later be slightly modified (during 1954) to become the standard 7.62×51 NATO round. To fire it, a new M14 rifle would update the proven M1 rifle, leveraging the new NATO round to specifically replace the Garand and the squad-automatic BAR—while it was also believed that the selective-fire M14 eliminated the need for submachine guns.
The M14 concept represented practical thinking: a single rifle filling multiple roles while using the same ammunition. From a logistical standpoint, it all makes sense. However, in actual practice no military has ever been able to make it work across the board. Specialized troops with special weapons exist for a reason. But, on its own, the M14 and its powerful cartridge had much to offer.
Changing Times, Evolving Enemies
Behind the Iron Curtain in the 1950s, the Soviets slowly developed the SKS rifle and AK-47 rifle (both chambered in 7.62x39mm). When the AK-47 finally entered service in 1956, U.S. Ordnance described the new weapon as a “submachine gun”, and the Kalashnikov design was not given much credence—U.S. Ordnance particularly disdained the Soviet intermediate cartridge. Meanwhile, the M14 was adopted as the U.S. Military’s standard rifle in 1957.
By the early 1960s, the U.S. mindset about battle rifles was challenged by a growing number of insurgent actions around the world. The light weight and high firepower of the communist AK-47 made guerrilla forces more competitive on the battlefield than ever before.
In response, U.S. Ordnance quickly placed its focus on the AR-15 rifle, and by 1963 more than a thousand of the 5.56mm rifles had been tested in Vietnam. U.S. Special Forces adopted the AR-15 during 1963, and with favorable reports on the new rifle and its ammunition coming from Southeast Asia, momentum was quickly building for a change in battle rifles. In March 1964, the M16 rifle entered large-scale production, and by 1969 it had become the U.S. Military’s standard service rifle.
The M14 in Vietnam
Modern evaluations of the M14’s combat performance seem to quickly devolve into shouting matches between fans of the M14 and the M16. Suffice it to say that they are both excellent rifles, and no shooter is “wrong” if they have a preference. Also, it is important to remember that given a choice, an infantryman will choose everything. He wants light weight coupled with great firepower. He wants reliability and accuracy. He wants tremendous shoot-through-coverand man-stopping knock-down power. Coupled with that he wants all the magazine capacity he can get.
And while no one begrudges the infantryman his many wants in a battle rifle, there has never been a firearm that gives him everything he desires in just one gun. Ultimately, the American fighting man uses what he is issued, and he has an irrefutable history of using his service arms well.
Could the U.S. Military have performed just as well on the battlefields of Vietnam if the M16 had not replaced the M14 as the primary rifle? I believe the battlefield results would have been similar, as the combat qualities of the American rifleman have always been paramount. Advanced training in marksmanship and fire control could overcome the M14’s less-than manageable qualities when used as a full-auto weapon, and it was also more than capable in semi-auto mode.
Modifications to the M14 were certainly necessary, beginning with a fiberglass stock to replace the original walnut and birch types that tended to swell in the jungle environment. Meanwhile, every infantryman tends to find his rifle to be too heavy at some point. At 10.5 lbs. loaded, the M14 was about 2 lbs. heavier than the AK-47 or the M16, and comments from the troops often reflect this. U.S. troops in WWII complained that the M1 rifle was too heavy as well—but the large amount of deceased Axis troops suggest that the Garand rifle’s performance was just fine.
As a counterpoint to the weight issue, the M14’s 7.62x51mm cartridge was powerful enough to muscle through jungle foliage. Marines describe that, in the absence of an M60 machine gun, the M14 offered the next strongest alternative. In Vietnam, the tactical conditions could vary greatly between one firefight and the next, and the M14 rifle could deliver a high level of firepower, with good accuracy at longer range, whenever called upon. And it certainly earned a legion of fans in the jungles of Vietnam.
From the Source
I recently spoke to an old friend who had considerable experience “in country,” and with a wide variety of U.S. infantry weapons. Captain Dale Dye enlisted in the U.S. Marine Corps in January 1964. He served in Vietnam in 1965 and 1967 through 1970, surviving 31 major combat operations. He emerged from Southeast Asia with numerous decorations, including a Bronze Star for valor and three Purple Heart medals for wounds suffered in combat.
He spent 13 years as an enlisted Marine, rising to the rank of master sergeant. He was chosen to attend officer candidate school and was appointed a warrant officer in 1976. He later converted his commission and was a captain when he was sent to Beirut with the multinational peacekeeping force in 1982-83.
When I asked him about the M14, Captain Dye commented: “The M14 was a rifleman’s rifle and most Marines carried it with enthusiasm early in the Vietnam War. I can distinctly remember guys trying to hide their favorite M14 when the word came down that we were going to be issued the M16.
Despite the best efforts by some commands, many Marines continued to carry an M14 for quite some time after the switch-over was ordered. There was just a certain factor of trust in that rifle. Or maybe it was some kind of Marine Corps ‘mojo’ but it seemed reassuring to carry a weapon that looked, felt and shot like a ‘real’ rifle.”
It’s All Relative
Taste, and trust in rifles is clearly a generational issue. My father was an infantry sergeant in World War II. When he looked at an M16, he thought they were not “proper” rifles. My grandfather, a World War I infantryman, would likely have looked at the M1 Garand with suspicion, considering it inelegant and brutish compared to his M1903 Springfield rifle. My brothers and I considered rifles like the M16 to be completely normal, and truly appreciate the semi-auto AR-15 variants designed for the civilian market.
Combat seems to have an “evening-out effect” about the opinions of small arms. In that light, many of the combat lessons learned in Vietnam about the capabilities of the M14 were overlooked. Since the turn of the millennium, our military has been “rediscovering” the rugged M14’s powerful capability, much to the dismay of America’s enemies.
Alongside the select-fire M4 Carbines and M16 rifles serving on the battlefield, the U.S. Military M14 also serves. Elements of the U.S. Special Operations Command use the Mk14 Enhanced Battle Rifle (the EBR) as a designated marksman rifle, and in Afghanistan the U.S. Army assigns two M14 EBR-RI rifles per infantry platoon.
Civilian-Legal Sibling
While the M14 is still serving as a U.S. Military rifle, civilian shooters can thank Springfield Armory of Geneseo, Illinois, for offering a semi-automatic, civilian-legal version of this rifle in its M1A. Proven on the competition fields and exhibiting the timeless beauty of wood and steel (although you can get it with a black composite stock if you so desire), the M1A is a wonderful opportunity to own the civilian sibling of a proven American service rifle.