I never knew this

[Ajax]

Super interesting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVNQQplAzu0


Andy

[TNsailorman]

Very interesting. I had heard of and seen the WW I pendersen device but not this one.

[GhostHawk]

Awesome! Thanks for sharing.

[pworley1]

That was a lot of engineering.

[Reloader06]

fascinating!! Thanks for sharing.

[Possumcop]

That was excellent!
I couldn't really make out how they turned the bolt to unlock it though.
I'd never even heard/read of this, let alone seen it.
It sorta reminds me of some of the Enfield MG conversions done by the Aussies and Kiwis after the Japs attacked in WWII.

Thank you very much for posting this!

[Scharfschuetze]

That was interesting. Wouldn't you like to have that in your collection.

Here's a link to the Institute of Military Technology where that video was made.

http://www.instmiltech.com/

[williamwaco]

WOW, I would buy a ticket to see that in action.

[backbencher]

That was excellent!
I couldn't really make out how they turned the bolt to unlock it though.
I'd never even heard/read of this, let alone seen it.
It sorta reminds me of some of the Enfield MG conversions done by the Aussies and Kiwis after the Japs attacked in WWII.

Thank you very much for posting this!

Very much like the later SMLE experiments & Charlton production, but instead of wartime experiments or expediency, you have a peacetime arsenal making custom metalwork, folding side mount sights, custom stock to cover the operating rod, adjustable gas block... wait, are we talking about a Springfield 1903 or a custom piston AR?

[John Allen]

that is really cool. I have never seen a video about this before.

[Mk42gunner]

We saw how it closed the bolt, but I want to see it in a live fire demonstration.

Robert

[Multigunner]

Before adopting any autoloading rifles the ordnance department experimented with a few .25 Remington caliber rifles. I wonder how well the .25 Remington would have done as a selective fire weapon for an assault rifle?

I once had a PDF of a sort of in house journal for Springfield armory and it had a lot of information about these field tests. Wish I still had it but that was two PC meltdowns back.

I think Julian Hatcher's brother designed and built one of the rifles they tested.

Pershing had ordered some .35 Remington rifles during WW1 but they never got to the front. Plenty of Winchester SLR carbines in .35 made it over there in use by the French and British in an assault rifle role.

[30calflash]

Before adopting any autoloading rifles the ordnance department experimented with a few .25 Remington caliber rifles. I wonder how well the .25 Remington would have done as a selective fire weapon for an assault rifle?

I once had a PDF of a sort of in house journal for Springfield armory and it had a lot of information about these field tests. Wish I still had it but that was two PC meltdowns back.

I think Julian Hatcher's brother designed and built one of the rifles they tested.

Pershing had ordered some .35 Remington rifles during WW1 but they never got to the front. Plenty of Winchester SLR carbines in .35 made it over there in use by the French and British in an assault rifle role.

The 25 Rem probably would have worked like the 6.5 Jap in the Fedorov AR built by the Russians in WW!. They understood full power 30 cal with a switch wouldn't work.

[43PU]

I have a Mark 1 but it is in a 1903 Config I don't have the Pederson for it sadly.

[Multigunner]

The Pederson Device being semi-automatic should be legal to own, though probably classified as a handgun by itself since theoretically you could fire rounds from its chamber extension when not installed in a rifle.
Only problem there might be that without the Mk1 rifle's sear with its kicker type disconnect it would work as a full auto.

A device based on the Pederson with its own integral disconnector would probably be legal. The .22 LR conversion kits for the AR15 are much like the Pederson in concept.
The British had a similar device to convert SMLE rifles to short barreled 7.65 Luger or 7.63 Mauser (forget which) autoloading carbines. Not sure but these may have been selective fire. The design was intended for the Home guard but not produced.
These and the Delise suppressed .45 ACP carbines could have been made up from worn out or DP'ed SMLE rifles, of which the Brits had tens of thousands on hand.

Which reminds me, Springfield tested a short Springfield 1903 based .45 ACP catbine. I suppose as a possible officers PDW or for non combat personnel like cooks and drivers who would not be expected to be well versed in the use of full powered rifles. The idea being something like that which lead to the M1 carbine. Easier to learn to use effectively than the handgun and lighter and more convenient than the Infantry rifle.