1898 -- why that year?

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jderrick

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2006
Messages
16
I'm here in NC where 1898 is the dividing year between antique and modern firearms. Why that year? There are similar weapons on both sides of the line and plenty of "modern" guns before then and "primitive" ones afterwards. So why 1898?

Thanks,
John
 
Ten points for a great question. I always *assumed* that it was because of the Mauser 98, but I have no evidence to support that assumption. In 1933 and 34 when they were drafting that bill, the cutoff was only 35 years prior.
 
What year did the US Military convert fully to smokeless (more powerful) gunpowder for their arms? I recall reading that during the Spanish American war in Cuba, that US troops led by T.R. were impressed with Spain's Mauser rifles and their smokeless powder.
But I'm not even speculating as to the answer to your question (or my own), cause I don't know.
 
Poudre B came out in 1886. The US converted to smokeless with the adoption of the Krag Rifle in around 1894. It was before 1898 and the Spanish war, for certain.
 
Thanks for the info, everyone.

With regards to the Mauser 98, I thought that, but in terms of bolt action military rifles the 1891 Mosin-Nagant was even earlier. I dunno....

One person I know has suggested it's not related to firearms laws, but rather to the laws on what is officially considered "antique" for other goods. But in any case it seems more related to legal or political stuff than the history of firearms development....

Thanks!
 
Actually I've read that Dodd had actually chosen 1870 as the cutoff date for antiques but in order to pass the bill he had to consent to an amendment to move it up to 1898.

I always heard 1898 was chosen because after that large quantities of smokeless powder guns began to be made in the US.

Before that not that many smokeless guns were manufactured.
 
Also NC law was changed last year to mirror Federal law in relation to the definition of 'antique firearm'

They botched it but I have been told this year's General Assembly is looking at correcting that and writing a better definition.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top