Author: Grumpy
Arex Delta Gen.2 nerdy review
The MC2sc is a nice-looking pistol to boot. The grip texture is effective.
Note the magazine ledge — you can rip a mag out if necessary.
I’m not sure causation is at play here, but one good thing at least coincident with the COVID pandemic is the plethora of tiny pistols with punch. Companies have innovated with small 9mm pistols managing to pack double digits of rounds into pocket-sized packages and consumers are buying them in droves.
The latest introduction is the Mossberg MC2sc. Shipping with two magazines, a flat base ultra-compact configuration yielding 11+1 total capacity and an extended version with 14+1, there’s no longer a reason not to carry a 9mm with plenty of capacity. This one even offers a rail cot for a miniature red dot like the Crimson Trace model shown here. If you like, you can stick something up front too as the MC2sc features an accessory rail.
Sights
The MC2sc is ready to go for red dot sight use. And it plays well with the included traditional iron sights.
The pistol makes use of traditional dovetail cuts for both front and rear sights, and in them you’ll find standard three (white) dot sights. The rear sight features a “U” notch cut. This is a style really growing on me. I find it significantly faster to acquire a good sight picture compared to traditional square notches. The approach doesn’t lend itself to 50-yard bullseye shooting, but then again, defensive pistols like this one are designed to prioritize fast hits on target. Don’t get me wrong — it’s not like “U” notches aren’t precise. Their precision possibilities are far above and beyond what most of us mere mortals can shoot.
The optics cutout is forward of the rear sight dovetail cut, so you can mix and match red dot and iron sight configurations. The MC2sc doesn’t use one of those combination rear sight/optics mounts. You’ll also notice the heights of the rear sight and optic are carefully coordinated. You can clearly see the iron sights through the bottom of the optic pre-installed on this pistol. It’s visible in the bottom 15% or so of the sight window, so the irons don’t obstruct your view of the red dot.
You can order the MC2sc with standard 3-dot white sights or with tritium night sights.
Takedown
Field stripping the Mossberg MC2sc is a nifty process requiring no press of a trigger. In a nutshell, the procedure removes the striker assembly completely, allowing easy cleaning of an area prone to collecting excess oil and goo. That’s a good thing, as generally the striker and spring channel should be fairly dry. If exposing all that is part of the regular slide and barrel removal process, you’ll have a nice and clean striker by default.
To disassemble the MC2sc, drop the magazine, ensure the chamber is clear, and lock the slide open. Now press directly inward on the slide cover plate while pulling down at the same time. It’s a tight fit, but when successful, the plate will slide right out, exposing the striker assembly channel. Now just depress the slide lock lever and allow the slide to ease forward. The striker assembly will come right out the back, channel liner, spring and striker together. The pistol is not in an impossible-to-fire condition, as there is no firing pin present after field stripping. At this point, the slide will come right off the front of the frame and you can pop out the recoil spring and barrel for cleaning.
It’s a clever design and what’s not to like about being able to completely avoid a trigger press to field strip the pistol?
How Does It Shoot?
I shot the heck out of the MC2sc out at Gunsite in the heat of summer. Hot? Yep. Let’s sum it up like this. All present agreed the thermometer topping out at 108 was a cool day — on the hot ones I could stick a raw egg in my pocket in the morning and have a hard-boiled egg for lunch.
One of the benefits of experiencing a new gun out at the Gunsite Academy is you really get to run it through its paces. We did plenty of holster work, standard range plinking and slow fire, speed drills, and lots of shooting and moving. The two magazines got a veritable workout and spent much quality time tumbling in the dry desert sand. I didn’t have any mechanical trouble with the pistol or the steel magazines, even dirty. I did learn something new about polymer. It will get a bit sticky in ultra-low humidity conditions, so now and then I’d have to help a mag out the bottom — apparently the inside of the magazine well got a bit hot and dry. To be clear, this was a (lack of) humidity issue. When I got the same pistol and same magazines back home here on the east coast, everything worked normally. Just something to be aware of should you find yourself in exceptionally arid conditions.
With all that shooting, I had the opportunity to properly evaluate the carry convenience vs. shooting performance tradeoff between using the 11- and 14-round magazines. The larger one features a grip extension sleeve, effectively lengthening the grip.
My hands are size large, probably average-ish for a man. Using the more compact flush magazine, I get a solid two fingers (middle and ring) on the grip while my pinky remains mostly below the grip base. Using the larger magazine and sleeve, I get a very comfortable “all fingers” grip on this pistol. I noticed a big difference in the joy of shooting using the larger magazine, so for me, that’ll be my practice and plinking configuration, while the flat base will be peachy for ultra-concealment. Don’t get me wrong, I had no trouble controlling the MC2sc with the smaller mag installed, it’s just more fun to shoot with a bit more grip surface area.
The trigger is flat with a little nub at the base of the shoe to help prevent finger slippage to the guard area. I measured pull weight a hair over 6 lbs. It’s a perfectly serviceable polymer, striker-fired trigger. I did find my large trigger finger developed a bit of a hot spot after a couple hundred rounds, but admittedly, this isn’t going to be a high-round count per outing pistol under normal usage.
Ammo And Accuracy
With all the shooting in different conditions, I never had a failure of any kind for ejection or firing. During the Gunsite shoot-a-thon, I fired hundreds of rounds of Hornady Critical Duty 135-grain ammo. When back at home, I added four other brands to the mix: Federal Syntech Action Pistol 150-grain, Norma MHP 108-grain, Black Hills HoneyBadger 100-grain and Federal HST 124-grain.
Given the compact, pocket nature of this pistol, I did some accuracy testing using a Ransom Multi-Caliber Rest from 15 yards. Shooting five-shot groups, I measured 2.2″ for the Federal Action pistol, 2.48″ for the Norma MHP, 1.82″ for Black Hills HoneyBadger and 1.33″ for the Federal HST.
The MC2sc is a pocket pistol with punch. Comfortably at home in a cargo or coat pocket, it’s small enough to fit in many standard pants pockets with a proper pocket holster. Or carry it IWB and take advantage of its 14+1 capacity using the extended magazine and grip sleeve. MSRP for the standard white-dot sight model is $555 and $653 for a tritium night sights version. At this time, Mossberg doesn’t offer a red-dot included packaging, so you’re free to select the miniature red dot of your choice.
———————————————————————————– Wow, another black gun! Who would of thought of that? Grumpy

Over the past week, there’s been a rapid succession of legal decisions regarding the Biden administration’s ban on pistol braces.
In Washington D.C., Judge Drew B. Tipton took center stage, hitting pause on the new rule. Gun Owners of America (GOA), the Gun Owners Foundation (GOF), and the State of Texas were behind this legal push.
This ruling not only covers all GOA members but also extends to anyone working directly for Texas and its agencies.
Erich Pratt, GOA’s Senior VP, dubbed this move an “assault” by Biden on gun owners, while GOF’s Sam Paredes hailed their partial halt of the rule as a message to anyone infringing on the Second Amendment.
“While Congress was slow to act on this wide-reaching rule, GOF stepped in to defend the millions of Americans facing legal jeopardy,” said Paredes in a press release obtained by GunsAmerica. “We are proud to have helped partially halt this rule, and hope it sends a message to anti-gunners hellbent on continuing the assault on the Second Amendment.”
Are You Covered?
| Lawsuit | Judge/Court | Organization | Who is Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| GOA, GOF vs. ATF | Drew B. Tipton | Gun Owners of America (GOA) | GOA members, Texas state employees |
| SAF vs. ATF | Jane J. Boyle | Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) | SAF members |
| Mock v. Garland | 5th Circuit | Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) | FPC members, Maxim Defense’s customers, individual plaintiffs’ resident family members |
Meanwhile, over in Bellevue, WA, the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) was busy challenging Biden’s Arm Brace Rule as well.
Along with Rainier Arms, LLC and two private citizens, they succeeded in clarifying a preliminary injunction by Judge Jane J. Boyle. To their relief, the injunction indeed covers SAF members.
“SAF has received numerous inquiries from individuals as to whether the injunction covered our members,” said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut.
“We are pleased to see that Judge Boyle agrees with our interpretation and that our members are indeed protected under this injunction,” he added.
But the action doesn’t stop there. Down in New Orleans, the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) secured a win with the 5th Circuit Court in the Mock v. Garland case last week. The court confirmed that the injunction covers FPC’s members, Maxim Defense’s customers, and the plaintiffs’ resident family members.
Not Covered? Here’s What ATF Wants You To Do To Avoid Becoming A felon
Gun owners who are not covered by one of the injunctions could face felony prosecution. Possession of a short-barreled rifle without an appropriate tax stamp is prohibited under federal law.
Violation of these provisions can result in imprisonment for up to 10 years and/or a fine of up to $250,000 for individuals, or $500,000 for organizations, per the ATF.
In a social media post this month, the ATF presented comprehensive compliance options if the firearm with the stabilizing brace is classified as a short-barreled rifle under the Gun Control Act (GCA):
- Remove the short barrel and attach a 16-inch or longer rifled barrel to the firearm.
- Permanently remove and dispose of, or alter, the “stabilizing brace” so that it cannot be reattached.
- Turn the firearm into your local ATF office.
- Destroy the firearm.
- Register the firearm tax-free by May 31, 2023.
Important note: Simply removing the brace from the firearm is not sufficient, as GunsAmerica previously reported.
Conclusion
It’s been a big week for pro-gun organizations standing tall against an overreaching and unjust ban.
As they continue their battle, your support can make a difference. Consider joining or donating to SAF, GOA, and FPC to help safeguard gun rights. And stay tuned for updates, as the fight will no doubt rage on.
Part I of this post briefly describes Some of the firearms advances before 1791. Part II describes the federal industrial policy for advancing firearms technology.
This post is based on my article The History of Bans on Types of Arms Before 1900. It is forthcoming in Notre Dame’s Journal of Legislation, vol. 50, no. 2, in 2024. The Post also draws on chapter 23 of my coauthored textbook Firearms Law and the Second Amendment: Regulations, Rights, and Policy (Aspen Pub., 3d ed. 2022).
I. Firearms improvements before 1791
While the Founders could not foresee all the specific advances that would take place in the nineteenth century, the Founders were well aware that firearms were getting better and better.
Tremendous improvements in firearms had always been part of the American experience. The first European settlers in America had mainly owned matchlocks. When the trigger is pressed, a smoldering hemp cord is lowered to the firing pan; the powder in the pan then ignites the main gunpowder charge in the barrel.
The first firearm more reliable than the matchlock was the wheel lock, invented by Leonardo da Vinci. In a wheel lock, the powder in the firing pan is ignited when a serrated wheel strikes a piece of iron pyrite. The wheel lock was the first firearm that could be kept loaded and ready for use in a sudden emergency. Although matchlock pistols had existed, the wheel lock made pistols far more practical and common. Paul Lockhart, Firepower: How Weapons Shaped Warfare 80 (2021).
The wheel lock was the “preferred firearm for cavalry” in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Id. The proliferation of wheel locks in Europe in the sixteenth century coincided with the homicide rate falling by half. See Carlisle E. Moody, Firearms and the Decline of Violence in Europe: 1200-2010, 9 Rev. Eur. Stud. 53 (2017)
However, wheel locks cost about four times as much as matchlock. Moreover, their moving parts were far more complicated than the matchlocks’. Under conditions of hard use in North America, wheel locks were too delicate and too difficult to repair. The path of technological advancement often involves expensive inventions eventually leading to products that are affordable to average consumers and are even better than the original invention. That has been the story of firearms in America.
Flintlocks quintuple the rate of fire
The gun that was even better than the wheel lock, but simpler and less expensive, was the flintlock. The earliest versions of flintlocks had appeared in the mid-sixteenth century. But not until the end of the seventeenth century did most European armies replace their matchlocks with flintlocks. Americans, individually, made the transition much sooner. Lockhart at 106.
Indian warfare in the thick woods of the Atlantic seaboard was based on ambush, quick raids, and fast individual decision-making in combat—the opposite of the more orderly battles and sieges of European warfare. In America, the flintlock became a necessity.
Unlike matchlocks, flintlocks can be kept always ready. Because blackpowder is hygroscopic, and could be ruined by much water, it was common to store a firearm on the mantel above the fireplace. Another advantage, which mattered greatly in America but was mostly irrelevant for European warfare, is that a flintlock, unlike a matchlock, has s no smoldering hemp cord to give away the location of the user. Flintlocks are more reliable than matchlocks—all the more so in adverse weather, although still far from impervious to rain and moisture. Significantly, Flintlocks are much simpler and faster to reload than matchlocks. See, e.g., W.W. Greener, The Gun and Its Development 66-67 (9th ed. 1910); Charles C. Carlton, This Seat of Mars: War and the British Isles 1585-1746, at 171-73 (2011).
Initially, the flintlock could not shoot further or more accurately than a matchlock. Lockhart at 105. But it could shoot much more rapidly. A matchlock takes more than a minute to reload once. Id. at 107. In experienced hands, a flintlock could be fired and reloaded five times in a minute, although under the stress of combat, three times a minute was a more typical rate. Id. at 107-08. Compared to a matchlock, a flintlock was more likely to ignite the gunpowder charge instantaneously, rather than with a delay of some seconds. Id. at 104. “The flintlock gave infantry the ability to generate an overwhelmingly higher level of firepower.” Id. at 107.
The Theoretical Lethality Index (TLI) is a measure of a weapon’s effectiveness in military combat. The TLI of a seventeenth century musket is 19 and the TLI of an eighteenth century flintlock is 43. Trevor Dupuy, The Evolution of Weapons and Warfare 92 (1984). So the transition of firearm type in the American colonies more than doubled the TLI. There is no reason to believe that the American Founders were ignorant of how much better their own firearms were compared to those of the early colonists.
Joseph Belton’s 16-shot model
In 1777 in Philadelphia, inventor Joseph Belton demonstrated a firearm that could fire 16 shots all at once. The committee watching the demonstration included General Horatio Gates, General Benedict Arnold, and scientist David Rittenhouse. They wrote to the Continental Congress and urged the adoption of Belton guns for the Continental Army. Congress voted to order a hundred–while requesting that they be produced as 8-shot models, since gunpowder was scarce. However, the deal fell through because Congress could not afford the high price that Belton demanded. Repeating arms were expensive, because their small internal components require especially complex and precise fitting.
Hence, the Founders who served in the Second Continental Congress were well aware that a 16-shot gun had been produced, and was possible to produce in quantity, for a high price. Delegates to the 1777 Continental Congress included future Supreme Court Chief Justice Samuel Chase, John Adams, Samuel Adams, Francis Dana, Elbridge Gerry, John Hancock, the two Charles Carrolls from Maryland, John Witherspoon (President of Princeton, the great American college for free thought), Benjamin Harrison (father and grandfather of two Presidents), Francis Lightfoot Lee, and Richard Henry Lee .
The Girardoni rifle
Likewise, the 22-shot Girardoni rifle famously carried by the Lewis & Clark expedition starting in 1803 was no secret, as it had been invented in 1779. It was used by the Austrian army as a sniper rifle. Powered by compressed air, its bullet his as hard as the modern Colt .45ACP cartridge. John Paul Jarvis, The Girandoni Air Rifle: Deadly Under Pressure, Guns.com, Mar. 15, 2011.
The Girardoni had a 21 or 22 round caliber tubular magazine, and could be quickly reloaded with 20 more rounds, using speedloading tubes that came with the gun. After about 40 shots, the air reservoir could be exhausted, and would need to be pumped up again.
Repeaters in ordinary commerce
As of 1785, South Carolina gunsmith James Ransier of Charleston, South Carolina, was advertising four-shot repeaters for sale. Columbian Herald (Charleston), Oct. 26, 1785.
The American Rifle
The founding generation was especially aware of one of the most common firearms of their time, the Pennsylvania-Kentucky rifle, which is also called “The American Rifle.” The rifle was invented by German and Swiss gunsmith immigrants in the early eighteenth century. When they came to Pennsylvania for religious freedom, they were familiar with the heavy Jaeger rifles of Central Europe.
The American Rifle was created initially for the needs of frontiersmen who might spend months on a hunting expedition in the dense American woods. “What Americans demanded of their gunsmiths seemed impossible”: a rifle that weighed ten pounds or less, for which a month of ammunition would weigh one to three pounds, “with proportionately small quantities of powder, be easy to load,” and “with such velocity and flat trajectories that one fixed rear sight would serve as well at fifty yards as at three hundred, the necessary but slight difference in elevation being supplied by the user’s experience.” Robert Held, The Age of Firearms: A Pictorial History 142 (1956). “By about 1735 the impossible had taken shape” with the creation of the iconic American Rifle. Id.
As for the most common American firearm, the smoothbore (nonrifled) flintlock musket, there had also been great advances. To a casual observer, a basic flintlock musket of 1790 looks very similar to flintlock musket of 1690. However, improvements in small parts, some of them internal, had made the best flintlocks far superior to their ancestors. For example, thanks to English gunsmith Henry Nock’s 1787 patented flintlock breech, “the gun shot so hard and so fast that the very possibility of such performance had hitherto not even been imaginable.” Id. at 137.
The Founders were well aware that what had been impossible or unimaginable to one generation could become commonplace in the next. With the federal armories advanced research and development program that began in the Madison administration, the U.S. government did its best to make the impossible possible.
II. James Madison and James Monroe, the founding fathers of modern firearms
U.S. Representative James Madison is well-known as the author of the Second Amendment and the rest of the Bill of Rights. What is not well-known is how his presidency put the United States on the path to mass production of high-quality affordable firearms.
Because of weapons procurement problems during the War of 1812, President Madison’s Secretary of War James Monroe, who would succeed Madison as President, proposed a program for advanced weapons research and production at the federal armories, which were located in Springfield, Massachusetts, and Harpers Ferry, Virginia. The Madison-Monroe program was to subsidize technological innovation. Ross Thomson, Structures of Change in the Mechanical Age: Technological Innovation in the United States 1790-1865, at 54-59 (2009). It was enthusiastically adopted with the support of both the major parties in Congress: the Madison-Monroe Democratic-Republicans, and the opposition Federalists. 8 Stat. 204 (1815); Johnson, Kopel, Mocsary, Wallace & Kilmer, Firearms Law and the Second Amendment: Regulation, Rights, and Policy 2209 (3d ed. 2022) (online chapter 23).
While serving as ambassador to France, Thomas Jefferson had observed the progress that the French were making in producing firearms with interchangeable parts. He enthusiastically recommended that the United States do the same. See Letter from Thomas Jefferson to John Jay (Secretary of Foreign Affairs under the Confederation government), Aug. 30, 1785, in 1 Memoirs, Correspondence, and Private Papers, of Thomas Jefferson 299 (Thomas Jefferson Randolph ed., 1829). In 1801, President Jefferson recounted his French observations to Virginia Governor James Monroe and expressed hope for Eli Whitney’s plan for interchangeable gun parts. Letter from Thomas Jefferson to James Monroe, Nov. 14, 1801, in 35 The Papers Of Thomas Jefferson 662 (Barbara B. Oberg ed., 2008).
Under the bipartisan Madison-Monroe program, generous federal arms procurement contracts had long lead times and made much of the payment up-front, so that manufacturers could spend several years setting up and perfecting their factories. The program succeeded beyond expectations, and helped to create the American industrial revolution.
The initial objective was interchangeability, so that firearms parts damaged in combat could be replaced by functional spare parts. After that would come higher rates of factory production. And after that, it was hoped, production at lower cost than artisanal production. Achieving these objectives for the more intricate and closer-fitting parts of repeating firearms would be even more difficult.
To carry out the federal program, the inventors associated with the federal armories first had to invent machine tools. Consider for example, the wooden stock of a long gun. The back of the stock is held against the user’s shoulder. The middle of the stock is where the action is attached. (The action is the part of the gun containing the moving parts that fire the ammunition; the Founding generation called it “the lock.”) For many guns, the forward part of the stock would contain a groove to hold the barrel.
Making a stock requires many different cuts of wood, few of them straight. The
artisanal gunmaker would cut with hand tools such as saws and chisels. Necessarily, one artisanal stock would not be precisely the same size as another.
To make stocks faster and more uniformly, Thomas Blanchard invented fourteen different machine tools. Each machine would be set up for one particular cut. As the stock was cut, it would be moved from machine to machine. By mounting the stock to the machine tools with jigs and fixtures, a manufacturer could ensure that each stock would be placed in precisely the same position in the machine as the previous stock. The mounting was in relation to a bearing — a particular place on the stock that was used as a reference point. To check that the various parts of the firearm, and the machine tools themselves, were consistent, many new gauges were invented. Felicia Johnson Deyrup, Arms Makers of the Connecticut Valley: A Regional Study of the Economic Development of the Small Arms Industry, 1798-1870, at 97-98 (1948); Thomson at 56–57.
What Blanchard did for stocks, John H. Hall, of the Harpers Ferry Armory, did for
other firearms parts. Hall shipped some of his machine tools to Simeon North, in Connecticut. In 1834, Hall and North made interchangeable firearms. This was the first time that geographically separate factories had made interchangeable parts. Id. at 58; Merritt Roe Smith, Harpers Ferry Armory and the New Technology: The Challenge of Change 212 (1977).
Because Hall “established the efficacy” of machine tools, he “bolstered the confidence among arms makers that one day they would achieve in a larger, more efficient manner, what he had done on a limited scale. In this sense, Hall’s work represented an important extension of the industrial revolution in America, a mechanical synthesis so different in degree as to constitute a difference in kind.” Id. at 249.
The technological advances from the federal armories were widely shared among American manufacturers. The Springfield Armory built up a large network of cooperating private entrepreneurs and insisted that advances in manufacturing techniques be widely shared. By mid-century, what had begun as the mass production of firearms from interchangeable parts had become globally known as “the American system of manufacture”—a system that encompassed sewing machines, and, eventually typewriters, bicycles, and automobiles. See, e.g., David R. Meyer, Networked Machinists: High-Technology Industries In Antebellum America 81-84, 252-62, 279-80 (2006).
Springfield, in western Massachusetts on the Connecticut River, had been chosen for the federal armory in part because of its abundance of waterpower and for the nearby iron ore mines. Many private entrepreneurs, including Colt and Smith & Wesson, made the same choice. The Connecticut River Valley became known as the Gun Valley. It was the Silicon Valley of its times, the center of industrial revolution. Id. at 73–103, 229–80.
In short, the Founding generation was familiar with tremendous advances in firearms technology. In the American colonial experience, the rate of fire for an ordinary firearm had quintupled. As of 1791, repeating firearms capable of firing 16 or 22 shots had been demonstrated, but they were much too expensive for ordinary citizens. The Madison-Monroe administration’s wise industrial policy, continued under future administrations, led the way towards the mass production of high quality firearms at low prices. No one in 1791 or 1815 could have foreseen all the firearms innovations in the 19th century. We do know that the American federal government did all it could to make those innovations possible.
Pity that it fought for that Monster Hitler! Grumpy
Happy Friday! NSFW






This article, “The End Of An Era: Winchester Closes New Haven,” appeared originally in the May 2006 issue of American Rifleman. To subscribe to the magazine, visit the NRA membership page and select American Rifleman as your member magazine.
Recently, it has become fashionable for some residents of Connecticut to refer to their home as “the munitions state.” It should be noted that the phrase is not meant as a compliment, but rather, quite the opposite. In the eyes of those who use the epithet, Connecticut’s involvement in the production of arms is something shameful and not worthy of commemoration in any fashion.
Yet, a scant six decades ago, Connecticut’s arms industry played a pivotal role in Franklin D. Roosevelt’s call to transform the United States into an “Arsenal of Democracy.” Firms such as Colt, High Standard, Marlin and Winchester went on to produce the pistols, machine guns and rifles that brought about the destruction of the Axis Powers. Two-and-a-half decades earlier, it was Connecticut’s arms factories that helped the Allies defeat the forces of Imperial Germany. Earlier still, it was the manufacturing capabilities of Connecticut that ensured the victory of Union forces over those of the rebellious South.
Given their contributions to the security of the United States, it is saddening to see once-great companies fade from the scene. The sense of loss is made even more acute when present-day witnesses have little regard for the historical significance of these firms.

Winchester’s involvement with New Haven goes back to 1856. This view of the New Haven Arms Co. factory, circa 1860, shows Oliver F. Winchester in the window and Benjamin Tyler Henry in the doorway.
The latest factory to close in Connecticut has a tradition spreading back over one-and-a-half centuries. Though now owned by the U.S. Repeating Arms Co., the factory located in New Haven is almost universally referred to as the Winchester Repeating Arms Co. factory due to its long operation under that name.
The New Haven works has produced millions of small arms for both the government and private use over the years. As a result, it is now worth remembering the significance its contribution to the welfare of this country and to the fabric of our culture.
The present-day facility occupies land first used as an arms and ammunition plant in 1872. However, Winchester’s involvement with New Haven goes back even further. In 1856, Oliver F. Winchester established a small factory in New Haven to manufacture Volcanic-pattern pistols and rifles. This firm, operating under the name New Haven Arms Company, later went on to produce the famous Henry Repeating Rifle.
During the Civil War, Henrys were purchased both by the U.S. government and by individual soldiers who recognized their tactical value. Christened by Southerners as “the damned Yankee rifle you can load on Sunday and shoot all week,” the Henry played an important role in the Union’s eventual victory.
Following the Civil War, the Henry’s design was modified so that it could be loaded through a gate on the right side of the receiver. Although this feature was designed by Nelson King, the new brass-frame rifle introduced in 1866 was briefly known as the Improved Henry before it became simply known as “the Winchester” after its manufacturer.
The Winchester rapidly gained an audience among frontiersmen and sportsmen who appreciated its reliability and its ability to fire 13 shots without reloading. During the early 1870s, improvements in ammunition design, as well as manufacturing, led Winchester to develop a new iron-frame, repeating rifle chambered for a center-fire .44-40 Win. cartridge that was ballistically far superior to the rimfire round used in the 1866.
When the Model 1873 entered the market, it was immediately embraced by settlers, sportsmen and Western lawmen, especially the Texas Rangers. Despite its identification as “the gun that won the West” in a 1919 advertisement, most purchasers of the Model 1873 lived on the eastern side of the Mississippi River, where it was a well-respected deer rifle. In 1878, Winchester introduced its first bolt-action rifle, known as the Winchester-Hotchkiss. While the U.S. government purchased a considerable number of the rifles for both the Army and Navy, public acceptance was lackluster.

“I Wish I Had Dad’s Winchester” by Eugen Ivard. Courtesy of Winfield Galleries.
The Winchester company’s survival during the late 1860s and ’70s, when many other arms manufacturers failed, was the direct result of its founder’s decision to pursue foreign sales. Oliver F. Winchester’s realization at the end of the Civil War that the profitability of his firm would depend upon the development of overseas markets was prophetic.
By deploying agents throughout the world, he was able to secure not only government contracts for his arms but, more importantly, protective import legislation that prevented other companies from directly selling their wares to retailers in a number of lucrative markets. This business plan was followed and further refined after Winchester’s death in 1880.
Though lever-action rifles remained a mainstay of the Winchester product line, in 1883, the firm entered into an alliance with John Moses Browning that would expand its model line. Over the next two decades, 10 Browning designs—incorporating improvements developed by the firm’s senior designer, William Mason—were manufactured by Winchester. Among these were two of the most famous rifles to be produced: the Model 1886 and 1894.
In addition, Browning created what was to become known as the Model 1897 slide-action shotgun. The value of Browning’s contributions to Winchester is best demonstrated by the fact that the Model 1894 remained in production through the date that the modern plant was slated for closure.
One firearm made during that period, not normally associated with the Winchester company, is the Model 1895 Lee straight-pull rifle. Chambered for the 6 mm high-velocity cartridge, the Lee was adopted by the U.S. Navy. Its use by the U.S. Marines guarding the consular area in Beijing during China’s Boxer Rebellion brought the rifle to public notice. In newspaper accounts published after the event, the Lee’s effectiveness was given equal prominence to the valor of the Marines themselves.

During World War II, Winchester was the only private manufacturer of M1 Garand rifles. The firm made more than a half-million M1s.
Following the end of Browning’s collaboration with Winchester in 1903, a young designer hired by Mason was to guide the firm’s product development for the next 30 years. In fairly rapid succession, Thomas C. Johnson expanded the Winchester line by developing the Model 1903, 1905, 1907 and 1910 self-loading rifles as well as the Model 1912 shotgun. Though work was forestalled by World War I, Johnson was also responsible for the Model 52 bolt-action and prototypes for what was later to become the Model 70—the “Rifleman’s Rifle.”
While the United States did not enter World War I until 1917, Winchester’s involvement began in late 1914. It manufactured more than a half-million Pattern 14 Rifles for the British, as well as approximately 273,000,000 rounds of .303 ammunition and nearly 2 million artillery shells. In addition, the French and Imperial Russian governments purchased quantities of the Model 1907 and 1910 self-loading rifles. Once America joined the war in April 1917, the Winchester company immediately offered its facilities to the War Department.
The first arm to be produced under this arrangement was the Model of 1917 rifle, of which 545,566 were manufactured. Later, the firm received a contract for the Browning Automatic Rifle and had the distinction of being the only manufacturer to deliver BARs in time for use in France. Among the other arms developed during World War I by Winchester’s designers was a dual magazine, selective-fire rifle that presaged the modern assault rifle. Chambered for a short, straight-cased .345 round, this rifle was fitted with easily detachable barrels that allowed its use as either an infantry or aerial arm.
Following World War I, Winchester’s management decided to expand operations to include hardware and general sporting goods. This move was prompted in part by Kidder-Peabody, which had become one of the concern’s primary stockholders. Although the arrangement briefly held promise, by the mid-1920s, it had become evident that the firm was rapidly failing. Eventually, it declared bankruptcy but was saved from extinction by the Olin family, owners of the Western Cartridge Company.
Under the Olins’ stewardship, Winchester’s product line was trimmed and emphasis was placed once again on the manufacture of arms and ammunition. Though the 1930s were lean years for the firm, it streamlined its manufacturing and experimented with specialized tool production.
One of the latter programs involved the manufacture of the tooling necessary to make U.S. M1 Rifles. The so-called Educational Contract was a program designed to give the firm a head start on the model’s construction when World War II broke out. Indeed during World War II, Winchester was to be the sole private contractor for this infantry rifle, producing more than half a million of them before the war’s end.

Women played a key role in producing arms for America during World War II. This image shows Winchester’s Helen Wilsznski and others making Garand lock components.
Winchester’s designers were also responsible for what was to become known as the U.S. M1 carbine. The first prototype for this lightweight arm was made in 13 days, and a second, improved version was completed in 30 days. Though Winchester was not the prime contractor, it nevertheless went on to make 699,469 carbines that were to see extensive service in both the European and Pacific Theatres of Operation.
As at the end of World War I, the firm entered a period of retrenchment between 1946 and 1950. The time was not spent idly, however. New models and manufacturing techniques were developed. Experiments were also carried out to determine the value of new materials such as plastics and fiberglass.
To reduce production costs, the firm decided in the early 1960s to simplify its manufacturing processes once again. Adopted in 1964, the changes hurt the company’s image and the public began to classify many product lines as either pre- or post-’64.
Despite these cost-cutting efforts, Winchester’s profitability remained marginal. Consequently, when a labor dispute resulted in a walk-out in 1980, the Olin Corporation decided it was time to divest itself of the Winchester firearm line. In 1981, the New Haven facility was sold to a new firm that took the name U.S. Repeating Arms Co. In turn, this concern was later purchased by the Browning Arms Company, a subsidiary of the Belgian firm, the Herstal Group.

As this is written, however, the New Haven facility is to permanently close, thus ending a century-and-a-half tradition of military and sporting rifles being made in that city. While this a sad event, the contributions of the Winchester factory to the security of this country and the pleasure that its products have given generations of sportsmen must be remembered. In doing that, we do honor to the countless thousands of men and women who spent their energies producing what many have called “the finest rifles in the world.”







