How were '03 and Garand barrels rifled?

[Forgetful Coyote]

Just curious, does anyone know the rifling method used to make 1903 as well as Garand barrels? I know that button rifling wasn't totally perfected by Mike Walker until the late 40s-early 50's, so pre-WW2 rifles definitely didn't have button rifled barrels. Hammer forging AFAIK was developed by the Germans right around WW2. So that means MOST 1903 and Garand barrels were either single point cut or broach cut rifled... does anyone know which one? If I had to guess I'd say broach cut since its much faster than single point..

@Frank Green possibly might know??

 

[Forgetful Coyote]

I was able to find this:
"Until WW II, the bore and rifling of the '03 barrel was finished by the above described hook cutter rifling method. To speed up production during WW II, the bore of the barrels was machined by long cutters having many teeth of increasing size called broaches. By pulling two broaches (roughing and finishing) through the barrel it was finish rifled in a couple of minutes......most 03A3-A4 barrels were manufactured by this method. "
-The Springfield 1903 Rifles by Brophy

 

[Steel head]

So something like this?

that’s pretty interesting.

 

[Ravenworks]

Criterion bought up a bunch of the original equipment that made a lot of our stuff and refurbished it and are making stuff for CMP.
Josh would be a good person to ask this question to,I'm sure he could tell you more than you'll ever want to know about it.

 

[Forgetful Coyote]

@Ravenworks who is Josh?
@Steel head - correct.. theres a good article on it here:
https://firearmshistory.blogspot.com/2010/05/rifling-manufacturing-broach-rifling.html
I'd have to think most WW2 era Garand and 03A3 barrels were made this way simply due to the speed of the process. You can make several times as many broach rifled barrels in the time it takes to make 1 single point rifled barrel. However, the 2-groove barrels I imagine were single point cut rifled, since cutting half the grooves will save time if using single point cut rifling while there is no benefit to using less grooves with broach cut rifling. I could be wrong tho...
Interesting side note, apparently the best shooting barrels were the ones made when the broach was nearly worn out and in need of replacement, due to the smaller groove diameter..

Re: 2-groove barrels, apparently some were modified and had an extra 2 grooves added later on? Anyone know anything about this?

Also, was the same steel used for 1903/1903A3, M1917, and M1 Garand barrels?

 

[Forgetful Coyote]

Also found this:
"Lastly, is the cut rifled barrel. There are 2 distinct types: Broached cut & single point cut methods. Both can be used to cut the rifling in a finished, skinny barrel. All M14 G.I. contract NM M14 barrels were produced by the broach cut method. Many consider these barrels to be the finest ever made, in their given contour (most were standard weight, the rest were medium weight, though there is one rare additional heavy weight barrel contract not germaine to this discussion). Broach cut rifling is a fine way to make a barrel, & a reasonably cost efficient method. In the DCM Service Rifle category, many believe that the broach cut barrels won more points, & champions, than any other method. But then, they have been around longer than any other."
http://fulton-armory.com/faqs/AR-FAQs/Barrels.htm

I know Kart still uses broach rifling to make their 1911 barrels. Many say the best 1911 barrels out there. Badger barrels used to use broach cut rifling, I dont think they're in business anymore tho

 

[Ravenworks]

Josh works for Creition, if you call there they will know who you are asking for.
It's pretty interesting to see the history of the equipment they have.
Who knows, you may rebarrel your rifle with a new one made on the original machinery that made your first one

 

[sirhrmechanic]

The tooling is on display at the Springfield armory museum in mass. A must visit place!

Sirhr

 

[Forgetful Coyote]

The tooling is on display at the Springfield armory museum in mass. A must visit place!

Sirhr

Ive heard of a "Springfield National Historic Site"(?) as well.. have you been there too?

 

[sirhrmechanic]

That is what I am talking about. Most of the SA was turned into a technical/community college. But there is one building there that is still a great museum and the "off limits" reference collection of small-arms that SA housed there. After WW1, American officers were sent to Europe to acquire every bit of military technology they could get their hands on. The material was brought to SA where it was examined, reverse engineered, copied, considered, folded, spindled and mutilated. The 'off limits' collection (I've seen a small slice of it) is one of the finest in the world. It is there for reference and is accessible. But not with your (free) entrance to the museum!

Been there more times than I can count. And if you live in Central Mass and want to attend, I am giving a talk on Edwardian Technology at the Springfield Museums next week. Gonna be a hootenanny!

Cheers,

Sirhr

 

[Forgetful Coyote]

That is what I am talking about. Most of the SA was turned into a technical/community college. But there is one building there that is still a great museum and the "off limits" reference collection of small-arms that SA housed there. After WW1, American officers were sent to Europe to acquire every bit of military technology they could get their hands on. The material was brought to SA where it was examined, reverse engineered, copied, considered, folded, spindled and mutilated. The 'off limits' collection (I've seen a small slice of it) is one of the finest in the world. It is there for reference and is accessible. But not with your (free) entrance to the museum!

Been there more times than I can count. And if you live in Central Mass and want to attend, I am giving a talk on Edwardian Technology at the Springfield Museums next week. Gonna be a hootenanny!

Cheers,

Sirhr

That is so cool. How does one get access to the off-limits collection?
Also, have you been to the NRA museum? Which one would you recommend as better - NRA vs Springfield?

 

[sirhrmechanic]

If One is a noted collector, historian, professor, weapons-designer, patent researcher, or author, etc.. And writes to the Armory with credentials and a specific research request, said request is considered and if meritorious, access to the requested item is granted. Went as the horse-holder for a guy who restores beltfeds. He needed to see a part missing from a restoration and measure it. We had one thing to see. Saw it... made notes, took photos and left. It's not a tour... it's a research/reference collection.

I visited the Royal Armouries at Leeds reference collection in 2017 to reference a Maxim carriage. It was not difficult, but required that the retired curator of the museum write the current curator. Then set a date. Pay a fee. Be there on time. And descend into a hidden bunker under the City of Leeds while being escorted by a retired Sgt. Major of the 'Hard Squad.' But I got my research done and this winter will be reproducing the carriage! The 'public' area of the Royal Armouries are among the world's best museums, BTW. Of any type. For weapons... top in the world, probably. Maybe the Hermitage or Les Invalides. But worth going to UK just to see it.

Cheers,

Sirhr

 

[Forgetful Coyote]

If One is a noted collector, historian, professor, weapons-designer, patent researcher, or author, etc.. And writes to the Armory with credentials and a specific research request, said request is considered and if meritorious, access to the requested item is granted. Went as the horse-holder for a guy who restores beltfeds. He needed to see a part missing from a restoration and measure it. We had one thing to see. Saw it... made notes, took photos and left. It's not a tour... it's a research/reference collection.

I visited the Royal Armouries at Leeds reference collection in 2017 to reference a Maxim carriage. It was not difficult, but required that the retired curator of the museum write the current curator. Then set a date. Pay a fee. Be there on time. And descend into a hidden bunker under the City of Leeds while being escorted by a retired Sgt. Major of the 'Hard Squad.' But I got my research done and this winter will be reproducing the carriage! The 'public' area of the Royal Armouries are among the world's best museums, BTW. Of any type. For weapons... top in the world, probably. Maybe the Hermitage or Les Invalides. But worth going to UK just to see it.

Cheers,

Sirhr

Oh I see, thanks for the info sir. Have you been to the NRA Museum as well? How do the 2 compare Springfield vs NRA?

 

[sirhrmechanic]

Oh I see, thanks for the info sir. Have you been to the NRA Museum as well? How do the 2 compare Springfield vs NRA?

NRA museum... er... yeah. If you go there, you will see my name on several donated exhibits. We get ink signed Christmas cards from Jim Supica and Doug Wicklund.

It’s a fine museum and easy to get to! They have an Annex in, I think, Kansas. Also good, but not been to that one. Also close to other great museums. DC May be a swamp, but there are good museums there!

Sirhr

 

[E. Bryant]

Been there more times than I can count. And if you live in Central Mass and want to attend, I am giving a talk on Edwardian Technology at the Springfield Museums next week. Gonna be a hootenanny!

Man, I do wish I was in the area and could attend that talk.

 

[GONE BAD]

What a interesting thread!
My thanks to everyone who posted.
Who has more knowledge of these subjects, as a whole, than Hide Members?

 

[Ravenworks]

The tooling is on display at the Springfield armory museum in mass. A must visit place!

Sirhr

I think it's rather unique that Creition ( At the Time it was Krieger) bought the equipment from Springfield Armory refurbished it and continue to make barrels daily.
I was going to post the information up about everything they did with the old equipment and why they did what they did but I am tired (chemo).
When I find the article and video, I'll post the info up.

About - Criterion Barrels

criterionbarrels.com

 

[sirhrmechanic]

I think it's rather unique that Creition ( At the Time it was Krieger) bought the equipment from Springfield Armory refurbished it and continue to make barrels daily.
I was going to post the information up about everything they did with the old equipment and why they did what they did but I am tired (chemo).
When I find the article and video, I'll post the info up.

About - Criterion Barrels

criterionbarrels.com

That's neat!

I always wondered what happened to the vast majority of the 'stuff' that filled acres of buildings at SA. What's there is a representative of some of the more interesting 'stuff' that went into making rifles over the years. The plant is not intact.... by any means!

So at least some (or most) went off to be put to good use!

Cheers,

Sirhr

 

[Ravenworks]

That's neat!

I always wondered what happened to the vast majority of the 'stuff' that filled acres of buildings at SA. What's there is a representative of some of the more interesting 'stuff' that went into making rifles over the years. The plant is not intact.... by any means!

So at least some (or most) went off to be put to good use!

Cheers,

Sirhr

I met the Creition folks at Camp Perry and spent some time talking to them.
CMP was just starting to source their replacement barrels from them.
Somehow we got on the subject of old equipment from the early 20th century.
That is when I learned about them producing replacement barrels on yesteryears equipment.

 

[Forgetful Coyote]

Found a real good in-depth article about Remington's testing of 2-groove barrels and their fight to introduce them, which Springfield Armory fought against and tried to stop. Looks like I was right about 2 groove barrels being single point cut rifled, appears to be a P&W Sine Bar rifler was used, at least by Remington for the 2 groove barrels:

"Such manufacture

was being mobilized through commercial contracts all over the nation, and rifling simplification unquestionably would have substantial effects on the cost and rate of barrel production for everything from pistols to machine guns. Needless to say, barrel rifling was a time consuming process during this period of history. The typical hook type or “cut” rifling machines cut one groove at a time; therefore, the reduction of four grooves to two had the potential of reducing production time and cost nearly in one-half." However, I was wrong about button rifled barrels not being used at all: "In closing, it is also interesting that the Remington Arms Co. began experimenting in December 1942 with development of draw rifling for 03- A3 barrel manufacture. This methodology of using a pushing action on a plug to rifle a barrel was eventually perfected by War's end and the subject of a future article. Indeed, over 35,000 M1903A3 barrels were rifled by this process and accepted by the Ordnance Department." Give it a read. Lot of interesting info about the bureaucracy of Springfield that Mr McNamara was none too fond of. https://www.remingtonsociety.org/remingtons-wwii-experience-with-2-groove-rifling/

 

[sandwarrior]

Found a real good in-depth article about Remington's testing of 2-groove barrels and their fight to introduce them, which Springfield Armory fought against and tried to stop. Looks like I was right about 2 groove barrels being single point cut rifled, appears to be a P&W Sine Bar rifler was used, at least by Remington for the 2 groove barrels:

"Such manufacture

was being mobilized through commercial contracts all over the nation, and rifling simplification unquestionably would have substantial effects on the cost and rate of barrel production for everything from pistols to machine guns. Needless to say, barrel rifling was a time consuming process during this period of history. The typical hook type or “cut” rifling machines cut one groove at a time; therefore, the reduction of four grooves to two had the potential of reducing production time and cost nearly in one-half." However, I was wrong about button rifled barrels not being used at all: "In closing, it is also interesting that the Remington Arms Co. began experimenting in December 1942 with development of draw rifling for 03- A3 barrel manufacture. This methodology of using a pushing action on a plug to rifle a barrel was eventually perfected by War's end and the subject of a future article. Indeed, over 35,000 M1903A3 barrels were rifled by this process and accepted by the Ordnance Department." Give it a read. Lot of interesting info about the bureaucracy of Springfield that Mr McNamara was none too fond of. https://www.remingtonsociety.org/remingtons-wwii-experience-with-2-groove-rifling/

That was indeed a good read FC. Interesting on the button rifling experiment (which had already existed for a long time). The really intriguing part is why did Remington then go to hammer-forged rifling at wars end, as if it was the end all be all. A lot has to do with public perception obviously as military contracts dried up overnight at wars end. The "four is always better than two" mentality. In reality, it doesn't matter if it's 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, multi/micro rifling. As long as it's evenly made and spins the bullet fast enough out the barrel.

 

[Forgetful Coyote]

That was indeed a good read FC. Interesting on the button rifling experiment (which had already existed for a long time). The really intriguing part is why did Remington then go to hammer-forged rifling at wars end, as if it was the end all be all. A lot has to do with public perception obviously as military contracts dried up overnight at wars end. The "four is always better than two" mentality. In reality, it doesn't matter if it's 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, multi/micro rifling. As long as it's evenly made and spins the bullet fast enough out the barrel.

If I had to guess, the move to CHF was for the purposes of cutting cost per barrel even more. AFAIK, the custom shop 40-X rifle barrels are still button rifled to this very day tho... which definitely says something. Another interesting note, on not-so-vintage rifles, the Remington MSR shot great in testing when Bartlein was producing the barrels for em. For some 'tarded reason, once the MSR was officially adopted by the Army, Remington decided to start producing MSR barrels in-house via cold hammer forging. Long story short, those didn't shoot up to snuff, and is the reason why the Army dropped the Remington MSR and adopted the Barrett MRAD. Shame, as the MSR seemed like a very cool action design. Tho if I'm honest, I'd have a lot more trust in Barrett being in our soldiers' hands in general, than Remington. Remington has absolutely stepped on their once-good reputation and flushed it down the toilet!

 

[Forgetful Coyote]

On another side note, anybody got any idea how the gov't chose which companies would get contracts for a given rifle? Ie Winchester, Springfield, IHC, H&R, etc for M1's...

 

[Forgetful Coyote]

Thought I should mention something as well that a lot of folks may not think about: when storing your Garand/M14(and I imagine this applies to most any wood-stocked rifle), it is best to store the rifle vertically, muzzle down, with the trigger guard taken out, especially on non-bedded rifles. This helps prevent the wood from compressing over time and to maintain proper fit.

 

[sandwarrior]

If I had to guess, the move to CHF was for the purposes of cutting cost per barrel even more. AFAIK, the custom shop 40-X rifle barrels are still button rifled to this very day tho... which definitely says something. Another interesting note, on not-so-vintage rifles, the Remington MSR shot great in testing when Bartlein was producing the barrels for em. For some 'tarded reason, once the MSR was officially adopted by the Army, Remington decided to start producing MSR barrels in-house via cold hammer forging. Long story short, those didn't shoot up to snuff, and is the reason why the Army dropped the Remington MSR and adopted the Barrett MRAD. Shame, as the MSR seemed like a very cool action design. Tho if I'm honest, I'd have a lot more trust in Barrett being in our soldiers' hands in general, than Remington. Remington has absolutely stepped on their once-good reputation and flushed it down the toilet!

Yes, the move to cold hammer forged was due to cost reasons. Remington was the first to jump on this bandwagon. They would do enough barrels to justify the cost. Starting in 1948, the 721 and 722 were the first to employ this method of barrel making. While they enjoyed a decent reputation in the hunting field for accuracy, they never got that in the competition world. It was a balancing act between beans and reputation. What saved them is so many competitors liked the action.
The problem with the myth that they were the most accurate is what came back to haunt them. They started believing that myth without substantiating it. That the barrel didn't matter as much. Well, newsflash, it matters the most. Unfortunately, they lost the contract due to the sub-standard production method. Because the rest of the rifle has some good qualities.

As far as Barrett, or any other small company getting a contract like that, one might look at who the Senator from their state is. I don't have any more confidence in Barrett than I do in Remington. And, Barretts cost a BUNCH more.

 

[Frank Green]

Just curious, does anyone know the rifling method used to make 1903 as well as Garand barrels? I know that button rifling wasn't totally perfected by Mike Walker until the late 40s-early 50's, so pre-WW2 rifles definitely didn't have button rifled barrels. Hammer forging AFAIK was developed by the Germans right around WW2. So that means MOST 1903 and Garand barrels were either single point cut or broach cut rifled... does anyone know which one? If I had to guess I'd say broach cut since its much faster than single point..

@Frank Green possibly might know??

The two groove barrels where only allowed to be made by single point cut rifling according to the information I have. It was the only method that gave consistent/uniform bore sizes.

Most of the Garand barrels where broach cut and single point cut rifled. I don't know if and or when they did any button barrels from a US arsenal at all.

Germans started button rifling around 1925. Not sure when they stopped doing cut rifling but from a old timer (Joe W.) that we would see at Shot Show in years past (He's now gone) worked at one of the armament factories (believe it was GW) during WW2 in Germany before getting drafted into the German Navy towards the end of the war. He told us all of the rifling machines they had in that plant did all cut rifling. The plant fell in the Russian occupied zone after WW2 and stripped the plant clean and the equipment got pushed into a land fill so the story goes. That hurt to hear! Joe immigrated to the States after WW2 and worked at a few different gun makers here in the States. There is more to the story and it was good!

Broach cutting is still being used but mostly in the manufacture of pistol barrels barring the real big makers. The down side to the broach method in a rifle barrel is the broach can/will stretch per say as your pulling it thru. If this happens you will see a double lip/step on the edge of the lands but it doesn't seem to be a issue at all with the pistol barrels because the pistol blanks are so short.

Later, Frank
Bartlein Barrels

 

[Forgetful Coyote]

The two groove barrels where only allowed to be made by single point cut rifling according to the information I have. It was the only method that gave consistent/uniform bore sizes.

Most of the Garand barrels where broach cut and single point cut rifled. I don't know if and or when they did any button barrels from a US arsenal at all.

Germans started button rifling around 1925. Not sure when they stopped doing cut rifling but from a old timer (Joe W.) that we would see at Shot Show in years past (He's now gone) worked at one of the armament factories (believe it was GW) during WW2 in Germany before getting drafted into the German Navy towards the end of the war. He told us all of the rifling machines they had in that plant did all cut rifling. The plant fell in the Russian occupied zone after WW2 and stripped the plant clean and the equipment got pushed into a land fill so the story goes. That hurt to hear! Joe immigrated to the States after WW2 and worked at a few different gun makers here in the States. There is more to the story and it was good!

Broach cutting is still being used but mostly in the manufacture of pistol barrels barring the real big makers. The down side to the broach method in a rifle barrel is the broach can/will stretch per say as your pulling it thru. If this happens you will see a double lip/step on the edge of the lands but it doesn't seem to be a issue at all with the pistol barrels because the pistol blanks are so short.

Later, Frank
Bartlein Barrels

Thanks for chiming in sir. I've always wondered if Mike Walker knew about the Lothar Walkther button rifled barrels..?? As LW claims at least that they were doing button rifling since the 20s like you mentioned..

Do you think the German and other European cut rifling machines were any better(or worse?) than the Pratt & Whitney sine bar and "B" series twin spindle riflers?

 

[Frank Green]

Thanks for chiming in sir. I've always wondered if Mike Walker knew about the Lothar Walkther button rifled barrels..?? As LW claims at least that they were doing button rifling since the 20s like you mentioned..

Do you think the German and other European cut rifling machines were any better(or worse?) than the Pratt & Whitney sine bar and "B" series twin spindle riflers?

Your welcome!

I cannot comment personally on the quality of the German/European cut rifling machines as I’ve never seen one up close and watch it run to say if it was better or not than the Pratt’s etc...and as far as the US machines the Pratt hydraulic rifling machines which where last made in WW2 or I think the last where 1952 are the best of the lot. That being said I do know of Pratt rifling machines that are over in Europe. There where a couple in the UK till recently and if I recall correctly Schultz and Larsen rifle barrels in years past where cut rifled and even now if they are still in business are still doing cut rifling the last I heard and I think they are doing it on P&W machines.

Cut rifling has always been known to give a more consistent/uniform twist than a button barrel. Which is one of the key reasons I’ve always said a cut rifled barrel is more forgiving or should I say less load tempermental as to which bullets it will shoot than a button barrel.

Our cut rifling machines we took any short comings out of the Pratt’s. Oil temperature stays room temp as the machine doesn’t heat the oil up and with all cnc controls the uniformity of the twist is even more consistent than the older Pratt’s.

Sinebar machines date from around WW1 till about the early 30’s time frame if I recall correctly. John Krieger had one and had just finished rebuilding it and was using it about a year or so before we left. Not sure if it’s being used anymore.

Later, Frank
Bartlein Barrels

 

[Forgetful Coyote]

Yes, the move to cold hammer forged was due to cost reasons. Remington was the first to jump on this bandwagon. They would do enough barrels to justify the cost. Starting in 1948, the 721 and 722 were the first to employ this method of barrel making. While they enjoyed a decent reputation in the hunting field for accuracy, they never got that in the competition world. It was a balancing act between beans and reputation. What saved them is so many competitors liked the action.
The problem with the myth that they were the most accurate is what came back to haunt them. They started believing that myth without substantiating it. That the barrel didn't matter as much. Well, newsflash, it matters the most. Unfortunately, they lost the contract due to the sub-standard production method. Because the rest of the rifle has some good qualities.

As far as Barrett, or any other small company getting a contract like that, one might look at who the Senator from their state is. I don't have any more confidence in Barrett than I do in Remington. And, Barretts cost a BUNCH more.

True. I woulda much rather saw Sako or Accuracy Int'l in the hands of our men than Barrett. With that said, AFAIK the Sako M10 came in 2nd place in the original PSR competition. @Frank Green any clue how Barrett got the nod if the Sako placed ahead of it originally in the PSR trials??

 

[sirhrmechanic]

True. I woulda much rather saw Sako or Accuracy Int'l in the hands of our men than Barrett. With that said, AFAIK the Sako M10 came in 2nd place in the original PSR competition. @Frank Green any clue how Barrett got the nod if the Sako placed ahead of it originally in the PSR trials??

USA made!

Weapons are domestic, except in rare cases where things can get waivered.

And by rare I mean things like Welrods and Swedish K’s and other things that are sterile.

Sirhr

 

[sandwarrior]

USA made!

Weapons are domestic, except in rare cases where things can get waivered.

And by rare I mean things like Welrods and Swedish K’s and other things that are sterile.

Sirhr

That'd be nice except, H&K, FN and Sig all had contracts BEFORE they started USA divisions and built factories here... just sayin'

 

[sirhrmechanic]

That'd be nice except, H&K, FN and Sig all had contracts BEFORE they started USA divisions and built factories here... just sayin'

But the factories were part of the deal... beretta was the same way back in the 80s.

I am sure there are More exceptions, but domestic source for lethlity seem to be the rule.

Though don’t we stl have the French Durandel and the Roland in inventory? Maybe there is a NATO exception!

Cheers, Sirhr

 

[Frank Green]

True. I woulda much rather saw Sako or Accuracy Int'l in the hands of our men than Barrett. With that said, AFAIK the Sako M10 came in 2nd place in the original PSR competition. @Frank Green any clue how Barrett got the nod if the Sako placed ahead of it originally in the PSR trials??

Not sure which one your talking about. There was PSR, PSR2 and ASR. PSR1 and 2 Remington and AI came in tied for 1st place accuracy wise. Both had our barrels on the guns.

ASR....Don’t know what to say. Last I heard every place that submitted got bumped out for one reason or another before any accuracy testing was done. That’s what I heard at least. If that’s true I don’t know how Barrett got it? Only if your on the inside will you really know what is/went going on. I’ve heard different rumors on things and I hate commenting on them and not knowing the whole story.

Usually when something like this and being this big of deal gets awarded there is talk everywhere and it’s been real quite.

Later, Frank

 

[Forgetful Coyote]

Not sure which one your talking about. There was PSR, PSR2 and ASR. PSR1 and 2 Remington and AI came in tied for 1st place accuracy wise. Both had our barrels on the guns.

ASR....Don’t know what to say. Last I heard every place that submitted got bumped out for one reason or another before any accuracy testing was done. That’s what I heard at least. If that’s true I don’t know how Barrett got it? Only if your on the inside will you really know what is/went going on. I’ve heard different rumors on things and I hate commenting on them and not knowing the whole story.

Usually when something like this and being this big of deal gets awarded there is talk everywhere and it’s been real quite.

Later, Frank

Well Ill defer to your knowledge then. Wiki says Sako came in 2nd in PSR1.
Far as Barrett beating AI.. Ive read AI's can survive and go on to shoot just fine after being dropped 40 ft.. I can't imagine it was a reliability issue. And as you said they never even did any accuracy testing..??

 

[Forgetful Coyote]

@cplnorton have you come across any files about such info re: the questions in this thread?

 

[cplnorton]

I think you might really like this. This is the shop manual on how M1903 rifles were produced.

https://archive.org/details/unitedstatesrifl00colvrich/page/n5

 

[Forgetful Coyote]

I think you might really like this. This is the shop manual on how M1903 rifles were produced.

https://archive.org/details/unitedstatesrifl00colvrich/page/n5

Just got home from picking up some eggs for my mom to make some after-church lunch for the family.
Thanks a ton @cplnorton as I said previously your contributions on vintage rifles are some of the best in this forum hands down!
And dont be a stranger..!! Check out the MG34/MG42/MG3 vs PKM thread also! Maybe you got some stuff that none of us know or have access to.. and also it aint limited to just those 2 machine gun families, eg: I'd love to see some feedback reports on stuff like the Johnson LMG, the Stinger, ... maybe some US Army training/propaganda videos such as the famous "its bark is worse than its bite!!!" one..

 

[Dan M]

They used a Pratt and Whitney Grasshopper. The two scraping cutters were held in a rifling rod. The operation (Operation 27) and tool drawing/ dimensions/ specifications are all in Colvin and Viall’s work noted above...that data actually was the technical design package provided from Springfield Armory to Winchester for the purpose of manufacturing the M1903 service rifle...

 

[sandwarrior]

Just got home from picking up some eggs for my mom to make some after-church lunch for the family.
Thanks a ton @cplnorton as I said previously your contributions on vintage rifles are some of the best in this forum hands down!
And dont be a stranger..!! Check out the MG34/MG42/MG3 vs PKM thread also! Maybe you got some stuff that none of us know or have access to.. and also it aint limited to just those 2 machine gun families, eg: I'd love to see some feedback reports on stuff like the Johnson LMG, the Stinger, ... maybe some US Army training/propaganda videos such as the famous "its bark is worse than its bite!!!" one..

Read "The Devils Brigade", and what you can about them. They used them. They got them from Marine Raiders, who were later disbanded as the Marine Commandant didn't want "elite" Marines.

 

[sirhrmechanic]

Read "The Devils Brigade", and what you can about them. They used them. They got them from Marine Raiders, who were later disbanded as the Marine Commandant didn't want "elite" Marines.

Yup. They trained, literally, in the back yard of Schloss Nitrocellulose. They spent considerable time training in vt. After Aleutians and before their assault on La Difensa (at Monte Cassino) where I was last year on the archaeology trip.

Their hikes took them from Ft Ethan Allen all over the area. 50 Mile hikes were the norm. Lots of training in cliff assaults and the like in the Notch. There is a statue to them and the 10th mtn in town.

Tough guys. And one of my favorite movies!

Cheers, Sirhr

 

[sandwarrior]

Holden is awesome I think.

Added: They were formed in my onetime backyard, Ft. William Henry Harrison, right outside of Helena, MT. It was a privilege to go to the annual memorial the 1st SF held every year. And, one year I got to go to their after op dinner. They held a training op in the mountains west of Helena, all the way down to Bozeman. Man, did they look rough coming off that exercise!

 

[cplnorton]

Just got home from picking up some eggs for my mom to make some after-church lunch for the family.
Thanks a ton @cplnorton as I said previously your contributions on vintage rifles are some of the best in this forum hands down!
And dont be a stranger..!! Check out the MG34/MG42/MG3 vs PKM thread also! Maybe you got some stuff that none of us know or have access to.. and also it aint limited to just those 2 machine gun families, eg: I'd love to see some feedback reports on stuff like the Johnson LMG, the Stinger, ... maybe some US Army training/propaganda videos such as the famous "its bark is worse than its bite!!!" one..

Hey thank you for the kind words.

I wouldn't be much of a help with the German info. Most of what I know is 2nd hand and stuff I've seen online or in books. Which I much prefer first hand research.

I've mostly focused on researching the US Side and the heavily into the Marine Corps. Especially Marine Corps Sniper rifles pre Vietnam.

I actually have a ton of documents on the Johnson LMG, probably into the thousands. I found a substantial amount this summer and to be honest I haven't really went thru it in great detail. On the Stinger I know have documents on it as well, but again it's not my main area of focus so I sort of skim over the Machine gun info when I find it.

Is there anything you are trying to find for certain? I can keep a lookout in my docs and post info as I find it. The Johnson stuff I know I have it scattered in my files. As I've found docs on them on every location I've researched for some reason.

For as few as they had, everyone was heavily involved at looking at the Johnson LMG. So you see a ton of info on it.

 

[Forgetful Coyote]

Hey thank you for the kind words.

I wouldn't be much of a help with the German info. Most of what I know is 2nd hand and stuff I've seen online or in books. Which I much prefer first hand research.

I've mostly focused on researching the US Side and the heavily into the Marine Corps. Especially Marine Corps Sniper rifles pre Vietnam.

I actually have a ton of documents on the Johnson LMG, probably into the thousands. I found a substantial amount this summer and to be honest I haven't really went thru it in great detail. On the Stinger I know have documents on it as well, but again it's not my main area of focus so I sort of skim over the Machine gun info when I find it.

Is there anything you are trying to find for certain? I can keep a lookout in my docs and post info as I find it. The Johnson stuff I know I have it scattered in my files. As I've found docs on them on every location I've researched for some reason.

For as few as they had, everyone was heavily involved at looking at the Johnson LMG. So you see a ton of info on it.

Mainly would just like to see feedback reports on them.. what the troops thought of the Johnson and other machine guns, etc. If its too much a hassle by all means don't worry about it sir.
Otherwise tho whatever ain't too much a hassle to dig up and post.. info that you find interesting and what not, we'd all be thankful certainly.

ETA: and of course anything sniper related! Whether it be about our snipers or enemy snipers!

 

[sirhrmechanic]

Somewhere I have scans from the Roosevelt library In Hyde Park on the lobbying for the Johnson in correspondence sent between the manufacturer, Holcomb and Vandegrift, and Roosevelt, along with some Congress-types.

IIRC... the letters More or less said we, the Marines, don’t want this. And being told “congrats on your new rifle.” “Yes, sir.”

It was not what I was researching at the time, but I stumbled on the letters and was so fascinated that I scanned them. And I just have to find the files.

Out in LA playing for a few days. But when I get some laptop Time, I’ll post.

Cheers, Sirhr

And I may be remembering wrong... so if someone has more data or the same letters, my apologies. I read them in 2014... been a while!

 

[Forgetful Coyote]

Not sure which one your talking about. There was PSR, PSR2 and ASR. PSR1 and 2 Remington and AI came in tied for 1st place accuracy wise. Both had our barrels on the guns.

ASR....Don’t know what to say. Last I heard every place that submitted got bumped out for one reason or another before any accuracy testing was done. That’s what I heard at least. If that’s true I don’t know how Barrett got it? Only if your on the inside will you really know what is/went going on. I’ve heard different rumors on things and I hate commenting on them and not knowing the whole story.

Usually when something like this and being this big of deal gets awarded there is talk everywhere and it’s been real quite.

Later, Frank

Say Mr Frank, as noted above it says in that book the machine used is the P&W "Grasshopper".. is that the model name for the Sine Bar rifler? It says they have "two scraping cutters per machine" that make 8 strokes per minute.. have you seen a Sine Bar in operation? Does that sound right? I thought the later, WW2-era Hydraulic "B" series riflers were the 2-spindle machines?

Ive also read elsewhere that a single point cut rifling machine can be converted into a broach cut rifling machine.. is that correct? I suppose it makes sense, replacing the cutter box with a broach, and stopping it after 1 pass..??

 

[Frank Green]

The grass hopper machine (not sure who made them as I’ve only seen one. Krieger was given one and it wasn’t used. More of a curiosity thing than anything else) and if you can picture it....there is a big arm or call it a leg on the side of it that rotates and it looks like a grass hoppers leg. Hence the name. It predates the Sine Bar. Yes I’ve seen the Sine Bar work. The Pratt hydraulic machines where two spindle and some of the really big ones where single spindles but not sure who made the single spindles. I want to say P&W.

The two scrapping cutters I’m going to say has nothing to do with the machine. That’s in the tooling. Double scrap cutter tooling was being used/made back even when the cut rifling was done manually by a human pulling the cutter thru the barrel by hand!

Places have converted/modified the Pratt’s for pulling broaches and even pulling buttons. Why because they don’t understand the tooling for cut rifling is one. Another is going cheap. Another is because the machine isn’t complete so they make it work with what is there. I know of places have modified the machines so that one side is for pulling a reamer thru the bore and the other side for pulling a button.

I’ll see if I can dig up some pictures of stuff and post them when I have time.

 

[Frank Green]

First picture is of rifling heads. #2 and #3 head is actually for a 3 hook cutter set up. #6 is of a double hook cutter set up. We've toyed with doing multiple cutter set ups but have abandoned the idea for several reasons. Doing big caliber cannon barrels the double cutter set up makes sense but in small caliber barrels (20mm and smaller) not worth doing.

Next two pictures are of a Sine Bar rifling machine.

Later, Frank

 

[Frank Green]

The earliest powered type cut rifling machines where around the civil war. That being said....hand pulled cut rifling was still being done here in the U.S. by guys like Pope, Zischang, Schoyen where being used till about 1900.

I’m going to look to see if I can find the news video from like the late 80’s. It was done I forget the reason why but they had a new crew in Afghanistan when Russia was pulling out. They are in what I call some remote tent city and if you want to call a tent a gunstore....you name it they had it. I even seen WW1 Luger Artillery pistol hanging from a rope etc....anyways they showed a group of guys hand making AK47’s and there was one guy sitting on the ground hand pulling a cut rifling head and he was hand cutting the rifling/grooves into a barrel!

 

[E. Bryant]

Here is a short clip of the P&W Grasshopper in action:



The video really isn't needed after Frank's written description - it was that good!

 

[Forgetful Coyote]

I was wonder the impression Pope used a lathe converted -> rifling machine...??

'Nother question I wanted to ask Mr @Frank Green .. I read several times ever since Crucible went belly up, barrel makes have or at least had been havin trouble finding good quality steel..??

Yet I still see a website for Crucible.. AND they STILL lisr 416R..?? Whats up with that sir..??