Interesting.....

Goose · Apr 29, 2018

I recently purchased a large encyclopedia of small arms.

It traces small arms back to when people threw rocks at each other (literally) and has a photo and description of virtually all of the small arms produced since then up to the present. Even devices for throwing things before gun powder was invented.

Nowhere does it even mention the AR-15. Even in the write up on the M-16 it gives no mention to the M-16's roots in the AR-15. It has a photo and description of the AR-50, but not one word about the AR-15. I thought it strange.

BTW, the book mentions that the BAR was originally intended to be fired from the hip to lay down rapid cover fire while a squad advanced. (Browning Automatic Rifle, military guys will know what it is). In fact, I recall some old war movies that showed just that, some gung-ho SOB charging ahead firing a BAR from the hip. When it proved to be too heavy and unwieldy for that purpose it settled in to its regular use of being fired from the prone position with a bipod. With the smallest man in the squad traditionally being the BAR man because he was the smallest target.

Interesting book.

rustyfarmall · Apr 29, 2018

I do not have that book, but I have 2 or 3 other books that deal with the history of firearms. It is interesting to note that sometimes, those books, even when written by the same author, seem to contradict each other on certain facts. They are still very interesting to read, and some knowledge can be gained, but I think the best advice is to take everything with a grain of salt.

JF in MI · Apr 29, 2018

I seem to remember seeing some BAR cartridge/magazine belts with a steel "D" shaped band where the butt stock was inserted for the purpose of firing from the hip.

UncleTom · Apr 29, 2018

I remember my dad saying that in WWII he would take a BAR anyday. He saw a lot of action.

sourgum · Apr 29, 2018

AR-15 developed in late 1950's by the AR company. Did not sell well for some reason. Around 5 yrs later AR sold the design to Colt which made the M-16 based on the AR-15 design. The M-16's supposedly were developed to compete with or be better than the AK-47.

Goose · Apr 29, 2018

This book does delve into the AK-47, its history and variants, and refers to it as an assault rifle.

Gambles · Apr 29, 2018

Any mention of the M1 Carbine or the M1 Garand?
I've got an M1 Carbine that my father-in-law always liked. He said he used the M1 Carbine to qualify for shooting during WWII.
However, I never told him that my M1 Carbine was a rare one that was actually made in Thailand and was used (allegedly) by their police.

Goose · Apr 29, 2018

It mentions both, and mentions that the M1 Carbine was developed to give officers and NCO's a bit more firepower than their pistols. Also mentions that the M1 Carbine wasn't exactly trouble free because of light weight construction.

lloyd in sc · Apr 29, 2018

Retired infantryman here. The heavy equipment, BAR, M60, etc. was carried by those best able to do it long term. We found in RVN that over 5' 10" tall & over 160# could only keep up on a daily basis if we split up their basic load as they hadn't the endurance.
We would go out 45 or so days at a time & humped day in & out search & destroy.
Big guys had all they could do just to trail along.....

CGID · Apr 29, 2018

Is your book dedicated to issue military arms? If so, as far as I know, the AR designation is only used for arms for the civilian market.

TimV · Apr 29, 2018

It's quite common for firearms "history" books, particularly those more heavily geared to pictures rather than text, to simply repeat, often verbatim or only changed enough to avoid legal issues, things from other sources with little or no original research or fact-checking. Nearly every general-interest firearm book I've owned or read has had errors, ranging from minor to completely egregious, so it's hardly an uncommon occurrence. Depending on what your book is focusing on, it's also possible it is only mentioning war-related firearms, and as the AR-15 in its typical civilian guise is semi-auto, not full-auto or select fire, it is not a military firearm in the sense that to my knowledge no army issues semi-auto AR-15's as a primary troop weapon. If you want a well-done piece on the BAR, I'm linking a video below. The channel it's from, C&Rsenal, has as its object to do a full-length review on every small arm used during WW1, and has been doing it for several years now--the BAR review is #73 of their series. For those tuning in for the first time, the girl doing the firing does it because she is closer in size to the typical WW1 soldier than the main presenter, who's considerably taller and heavier than was common at the time, and so they felt it gave a more realistic feel to the ergonomics, recoil, etc. than it would to have him do it. They do a very thorough job, with history, mechanics, animations, live fire, and personal impressions, and the entire series is worth a watch--they typically put up a new episode every other Tuesday.
BAR review

jacksun65 · Apr 29, 2018

The original design by Eugene Stoner was called the ar10 in 7.62x51. It was shelved in favor of the M14. Later Armalite scaled down the ar10 and called it the ar15 which was sold to the military as the M16 in full auto form. Stoner later went to work for Colt Hence where Colt got the design. He then went to Cadillac Gauge and designed the stoner 63 system still used by the special forces.

Blackstack · Apr 30, 2018

(quoted from post at 00:37:31 04/30/18) It's quite common for firearms "history" books, particularly those more heavily geared to pictures rather than text, to simply repeat, often verbatim or only changed enough to avoid legal issues, things from other sources with little or no original research or fact-checking. Nearly every general-interest firearm book I've owned or read has had errors, ranging from minor to completely egregious, so it's hardly an uncommon occurrence. Depending on what your book is focusing on, it's also possible it is only mentioning war-related firearms, and as the AR-15 in its typical civilian guise is semi-auto, not full-auto or select fire, it is not a military firearm in the sense that to my knowledge no army issues semi-auto AR-15's as a primary troop weapon. If you want a well-done piece on the BAR, I'm linking a video below. The channel it's from, C&Rsenal, has as its object to do a full-length review on every small arm used during WW1, and has been doing it for several years now--the BAR review is #73 of their series. For those tuning in for the first time, the girl doing the firing does it because she is closer in size to the typical WW1 soldier than the main presenter, who's considerably taller and heavier than was common at the time, and so they felt it gave a more realistic feel to the ergonomics, recoil, etc. than it would to have him do it. They do a very thorough job, with history, mechanics, animations, live fire, and personal impressions, and the entire series is worth a watch--they typically put up a new episode every other Tuesday.
BAR review

It's quite common for firearms "history" books, particularly those more heavily geared to pictures rather than text, to simply repeat, often verbatim or only changed enough to avoid legal issues, things from other sources with little or no original research or fact-checking. Nearly every general-interest firearm book I've owned or read has had errors, ranging from minor to completely egregious, so it's hardly an uncommon occurrence.

So, a lot like some tractor books then....

Interesting.....

Goose

Well-known Member

rustyfarmall

Well-known Member

JF in MI

Well-known Member

UncleTom

Well-known Member

sourgum

Member

Goose

Well-known Member

Gambles

Well-known Member

Goose

Well-known Member

lloyd in sc

Member

CGID

Member

TimV

Well-known Member

jacksun65

Well-known Member

Blackstack

Member

Similar threads