S&W Model 1940 Light Rifle

Discussion in 'Curio & Relic Zone' started by lklawson, Jul 13, 2015.

  1. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    Neat. S&W made a PCC for the Brits during WWII. But it sucked. :(

    http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2012/10/17/a-bad-investment-sw-model-1940-light-rifle/

    The way the magazine is inserted is also kinda neat.

    Peace favor your sword,
    Kirk
     

    Attached Files:

  2. ajole

    ajole Supporting Member

    34,498
    10,713
    NE Utah
    That's what happens when a high end pistol maker tries to make a low end military style "rifle".

    Fit, finish and flash are all great. But great is the enemy of good enough, especially when your "experts" are so finely focused on their tiny bit of expertise that they don't even suspect what's out there in the rest of the world.;)

    Not to mention, what makes a gun great for the range, display, and resale value means nothing in the trenches.
     

  3. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    I'm not sure that there was one place where S&W's design mentality went wrong. There were so many issues with the rifle.

    The downward ejecting feature which combined a housing for the magazine was a really neat idea but it apparently wasn't thought through very well. And the too-light recoil spring shows that they weren't familiar with Brit ammo or, again, didn't think it through very well.

    It's almost as if S&W was so busy with other stuff that they threw a team of inexperienced Junior Designers at it, mumbling something about "just build something for them, m'kay?"

    I just think it's neat that 9mm PCC's are now such a hot item and here's a war era one.

    Peace favor your sword,
    Kirk
     
  4. ajole

    ajole Supporting Member

    34,498
    10,713
    NE Utah
    Another point to alleviate S&W of full responsibility...apparently the Brits didn't really get it either. They wanted a "rifle" or carbine, didn't apparently specify weight, and then decided select fire or full auto would be more better.

    Of course, the STEN was the answer. Not a rifle, but everything else, in spades. Light, cheap, FA, and made in England, to boot. It was adopted right about then, too. Wonder if the designers used the criticisms of the Smith to guide their design at all?
     
  5. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    Interesting line of thought.

    Peace favor your sword (mobile)
     
  6. Bull

    Bull Just a Man Supporting Member

    I'd love a full auto STEN..... They look like a hoot!
     
  7. Rerun

    Rerun Member

    8,114
    2,516
    Besides, this weapon was butt ugly to look at...

    A soldier has to have a cool looking and properly functioning firearm to have confidence in the field with it.

    eldar
     
  8. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    Welded and stamped sheet metal, open bolt guns are super simple and cheap to produce. Home machinists can build 'em.

    <insert political rant here>

    Peace favor your sword,
    Kirk
     
  9. ajole

    ajole Supporting Member

    34,498
    10,713
    NE Utah
    Semi thread drift warning....

    So, thinking about the U.S. 9 mm being weaker led to wondering why it was so.

    I read "on the net" that some figure SAAMI was making sure the things the U.S. considered low end guns like Stars or other Spanish guns wouldn't blow up.

    Kind of odd, considering they were built in Europe, one would suppose they were proofed at CIP levels, though maybe not. Besides, I'm thinking the non-military Europeans simply shot them less, meaning slower wear and less chance of kabooms, while the U.S. was possibly seeing used up surplus...or maybe it was just the typical US idea that no one else makes good steel?

    Anyway...anyone got any better explanation as to why S&W didn't realize 9mm wasn't the same overseas?
     
  10. Rerun

    Rerun Member

    8,114
    2,516
    My understanding the power of the 9mm cartridge in Europe was tempered by the sub-machine guns that were firing the Israeli ammunition.

    The Israeli Uzi required more powerful ammunition to allow their SMG to function properly.

    This was discovered when Beretta opened their factory in Maryland during the 1980's and the new M9 pistol had slide separations firing Israeli ammunition.

    eldar
     
  11. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    That came a few years after the 1940 Light Rifle.

    Peace favor your sword,
    Kirk
     
  12. Rerun

    Rerun Member

    8,114
    2,516
    The Uzi was introduced to the Israeli military in 1954.

    The Beretta M9 was issued in the 1980's.

    eldar
     
  13. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    The British acceptance testing of the S&W 1940 Light Rifle was 1940, well before modern Israeli independence and way before the development of the Uzi.

    There is no way that the S&W engineers could have made the recoil spring & buffer too light, misunderstanding the hotter British 9mm ammo, due to the "power of the 9mm cartridge in Europe [which] was tempered by the sub-machine guns that were firing the Israeli ammunition" because neither Israel nor the Uzi existed yet.

    Perhaps you were thinking of something else, my friend?

    Peace favor your sword,
    Kirk
     
  14. moona11

    moona11 King of you Monkeys Lifetime Supporter

    he's thinking about the girl Swaga posted :D
     
  15. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    Hard not to.

    ;)

    Peace favor your sword,
    Kirk
     
  16. Bull

    Bull Just a Man Supporting Member


    I know of some guys that made theirs (several years ago.... Like back in the early 70s) with a piece of pipe....
     
  17. ajole

    ajole Supporting Member

    34,498
    10,713
    NE Utah
    Tempered? Like....reduced? Temperance?:confused:
    Tempered like...get it hot and quench it?

    I don't get it.


    And the 9mm was introduced in the early 1900's, and was hotter in Europe for 40 years prior to Israels existence.

    It was also used in subguns prior to the UZI, but most of them were from the mid '30's onward.

    Most of the hot, supposedly subgun ammo isn't actually normal ammo at all. It's adverse condition ammo, meaning cold. It was designed to be used in Scandinavia, the northern bits of the British Isles, and such places, or in winter.

    I mean...think about it. Is any military going to ship 9 mm everywhere...but have some that's ONLY for sub guns and might break their pistols? Or some that is only for pistols, but might not reliably work in sub guns?

    No.

    They issue the special hot stuff to units in the cold, whether it's the Arctic or the Alps in December, while in the summer or hot areas everyone gets the other stuff, and ALL of it is for any 9 mm in the given unit.

    It IS true that the Uzi has some hot ammo made for it...maybe they were worried about sand?

    And none of that explains why US ammo is weaker.

    But this might.

    Rumor says U.S. Ammo makers simply wanted Euro, and especially German, rounds to be seen as weak by American consumers. Think about it...8 mm and 7 mm Mauser is known to be weaker here, as is 9 mm. It makes no sense, but there it is. Possibly to keep US calibers in the lead in performance!

    This may be a conspiracy.;)
     
    Last edited: Jul 16, 2015
  18. The English rejected all machine carbines that didn't have a very good fit and finish. That is until they left a large number of weapons in France and saw that they needed something fast. Then the STEN 'looked great'.

    That was the sole reason they rejected the H&R(and that looked good compared to the gen 2s) was fit & finish, see collector books on the H&R. So to even get in the running S&W had to give it a good finish and of course S&W wanted the money. When this was designed nobody had yet made a cheap SMG.

    Even the MP-38 was expensive to make and it's simplified replacement(MP-40) cost $2 more to make than the MP-44 did. MP-40 was 4 to 6 times more expensive to make than the STEN.

    FWIW. The English test a few carbines in 7.62x25 thru out the 30's. The Kirly(sp?) would have been a winner.
     
  19. Rerun

    Rerun Member

    8,114
    2,516
    Don't take that tone of attitude with me, whippersnapper...

    It's tough trying to think when one is limited to decaff coffee and is allergic to nicotine!

    eldar
     
  20. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    :)

    Peace favor your sword (mobile)