No announcement yet.

Firearms trivia question Wednesday April 22

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Firearms trivia question Wednesday April 22

    Sorry this is late, I was out of town.

    Who sucessfully sued the US Government over rifles manufactured at the US Springfield Armory? Winning not only a lump sum but royalties for a few years as well.

    Who and why?
    Float-CFI, Photo Guide, Fishing Guide, Remote Kayaking
    Guest Cabin, Flight Reviews, Aerial Tours

  • #2
    The Mauser brothers...

    Float Pilot,

    I believe the answer you are looking for is the Mauser Brothers/Factory. They sued and won because the 1903 Springfield copied many of their designs/ideas.

    Kirk out.


    • #3

      The royalty payments made to the Brothers Mauser were for patent infringements on the metal cartridge loading strips that allowed a rifle to be reloaded really really fast, a capability that impressed then President Roosevelt when he confronted those pesky 93 model 7X57's in Cuba, and was included at his insistence, as well as going from the retractable rod bayonet to the blade type held over and used clear into and past the Korean War. (An original bayonet manufactured in 1905 will fit perfectly onto the muzzle of a Garand as will a blade made in 1957 fit a Model 1903 with the 1905 modifications) Payments ceased on our entry into WW I, and were not resumed after the war. Our Ordnance Corps engineers and Officers were very careful to make the Model of 1903's features just different enough that it couldn't be sued as a copy.
      Those same officers mandated the original Caliber .30 Ball cartridges, model of 1903 (.30-03) use the same 220 gr. cupro nickel round nose bullet as the Krag at the same velocity, giving us the 1-10 twist in '03's, 1917's, and M1's and M-14's. It wasn't until 1906 that they changed the jacket metal to what we know today and started using a 172 gr. spitzer boattail (!) bullet (M1 Ball) till neighbors of rifle ranges complained about the extreme range of those rounds, and they went to a 150 gr. flat base at 2700 fps (M2 Ball) though the M1 Ball cartridge was held over for use in machine guns.
      The bolt stop/ejector/magazine cutoff was a melding of original ideas and holdover ideas from the Krag, not the Mauser. Ordnance officers were still holdovers from the Indian Wars, and thought that a repeating rifle would waste ammunition, (an argument that the Marine Corps management used to limit the use of the 'bullet spraying' M1 Garand till after Grunts started stealing them from Army troopies), so they insisted that the rifle be capable of single loading effortlessly while keeping a full magazine 'in reserve' till Troopers were ordered to use the stored rounds and commence rapid firing.
      The two lug bolt was by then in the 'public domain', as well as the claw extractor. The 03 used a cone breach that improved feeding, the front ring did not include the interior buttress that strengthened that part of the receiver. The third safety lug was intentionally moved to engage the side of the rear bridge rather than a cut in the bottom of the raceway, and at first the Springfield's early toolroom models had a split bridge to accomodate the safety lug........
      Last edited by Darreld Walton; 04-23-2009, 04:04. Reason: .


      • #4
        After General Buffington (who was trying to have the KRAG RIFLE improved) retired as the Chief of the US Springfield Armory,and Chief of Ordnance, an interesting thing happened.

        On Nov. 21, 1901, Captain William Crozier was appointed to the job as Chief of Ordnance. He was also promoted from full time Captain to General. This is odd becauise it just so happend that Capt Crozier was the designer of the 1901 RIFLE. He was appointed by Theodore Roosevelt over many other officers, just two months after Roosevelt took the Office of President after tha assassination of President McKinley.
        The New York Times made a point of it in their Nov. 22 1901 paper.

        By April of 1902, Crozeir had some 1901 model rifles being built at Springfield for field testing. This included being tested by the President.

        After a few modifications, the blade bayonet, the stripper clip system and a few others, the Rifle was deemed perfect by February 1903. And thus became the Rifle Model of 1903.

        By March of 1904 the first law suit struck since the Stripper Clip was an exact copy of the Mauser Stripper Clip.

        Eventaully the US was forced to pay royalties to Mauser two patent infringments on the stripper clip and five patent infringments on parts of the rifle action.

        Then something really weird happened. Mauser claimed that the old KRAG rifle also violated some of the Mauser Patents. I am still researching which ones. So $200,000 was paid off to Mauser and Mauser then started to get a few cents for every stripper clip the US made.

        But is gets worse......

        General Crozier was re-appointed to his office when President Rooseevelt started his second term in 1905.

        So around 1906-1907, after Mauser had made good on their legal cases, the company of DWM " Deutche Waffen and MunitionsFabrik in Berlin", decided they would sue the US Springfield Armory as well.

        This time DWM claimed that the new US cartridge of 1906. (the 30-06) was a patent infringment against some patent they held. (still researching which one)

        That particular case went on until 1928 when the last appeals were filed and the US eventually paid DWM $412,000 for a patent infringement on the 30-06 cartridge design.....
        Float-CFI, Photo Guide, Fishing Guide, Remote Kayaking
        Guest Cabin, Flight Reviews, Aerial Tours


        Footer Adsense