9mm military prototype?
- Thread starter BADUNAME7
- Start date
- Status
Shweboner
Member
This appears to be of the more common "Small Red X" series which appears quite regularly on THR.
edited Sarcasm/off picture works now
edited Sarcasm/off picture works now
SDC
Member
No proofs or other markings on it? A dissassembled view might help, as that would show what the general base design was.
Jim Watson
Member
Has some resemblance to a High Standard T-3 but many detail differences. (Trigger guard is not hinged, has slide stop but no safety.)
Perhaps an early prototype before they made up the 1950s Army test guns?
Pure speculation on my part.
Perhaps an early prototype before they made up the 1950s Army test guns?
Pure speculation on my part.
saltydog452
Member
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2004
- Messages
- 1,707
It wouldn't have come frow SW/SE Asia would it?
The NVA were quite adept at making improvised guns from scrap material. Some villages in and around Pakistan/Turkey have a cottage industry of manufacturing weapons from the material at hand.
salty.
The NVA were quite adept at making improvised guns from scrap material. Some villages in and around Pakistan/Turkey have a cottage industry of manufacturing weapons from the material at hand.
salty.
armoredman
Member
This is what happenes when you leave a Kahr and a Tokarev alone together?
Great call, Jim W. I have no doubt that it is an early T-3 model shop gun without the hinged guard. Everything else fits, even to the number and style of the slide serrations, the shape of the hammer, and the position of the slide notches and the sights. The frame shape is the right shape also, and the add-on grip piece in the backstrap is typical of model shop work, as are the rather crude looking grips. The side plate is typical High Standard.
(The argument could be made that after the army rejected the T-3, H-S experimented with a potential civilian pistol without the hinged guard. I think that if this gun came after the T-3, it would have the regular plastic T-3 grips and the T-3 backstrap; I am virtually certain it came before the T-3.)
I think it safe to say that the gun is one of a kind or at least one of a very few. I have no idea what the value would be.
FWIW, if I owned it, I would definitely not fire it. Model shop guns were often made up to prove a concept and were never intended to be fired. For example, parts might not be hardened, or soft and easy to work material might be used instead of steel.
Jim
(The argument could be made that after the army rejected the T-3, H-S experimented with a potential civilian pistol without the hinged guard. I think that if this gun came after the T-3, it would have the regular plastic T-3 grips and the T-3 backstrap; I am virtually certain it came before the T-3.)
I think it safe to say that the gun is one of a kind or at least one of a very few. I have no idea what the value would be.
FWIW, if I owned it, I would definitely not fire it. Model shop guns were often made up to prove a concept and were never intended to be fired. For example, parts might not be hardened, or soft and easy to work material might be used instead of steel.
Jim
Jim Watson
Member
I spotted the Supermatic-esque sideplate later, reinforcing my opinion that it might be a T-3 prototype.
I would not consider shooting it; there have been very few blowback 9mms that would stand much use other than the Astras and if this one pans out will be worth too much to put any wear and tear on. T-3 eventually went to a Mann-type ring in the chamber to retard slide operation but I doubt it helped much.
I would not consider shooting it; there have been very few blowback 9mms that would stand much use other than the Astras and if this one pans out will be worth too much to put any wear and tear on. T-3 eventually went to a Mann-type ring in the chamber to retard slide operation but I doubt it helped much.
IIRC, HS even had special ammo made up to try to take greater advantage of the ringed chamber. Also, IIRC, it didn't work, not to mention that the Army would never have adopted a pistol that required special (and non-NATO spec) ammo.
I have to give it to them that they tried, but the blowback action was just the wrong path. They had a lot of talented people and I wonder why they didn't just bite the bullet and design a decent locked breech pistol rather than trying to keep modifying their .22's. (The G-380 works after a fashion, but it is a big gun in relation to the caliber, and was a dead end with no market.)
Jim
I have to give it to them that they tried, but the blowback action was just the wrong path. They had a lot of talented people and I wonder why they didn't just bite the bullet and design a decent locked breech pistol rather than trying to keep modifying their .22's. (The G-380 works after a fashion, but it is a big gun in relation to the caliber, and was a dead end with no market.)
Jim
Congratulations!
Jim Watson and Jim Keenan,
You have correctly identified the pistol in my photo. This is a little known and seldom seen 9mm designed and developed under at least two government contracts between 1948 and 1951. Perhaps these pistols were also involved in the later trials that included the Colt T-4 and prototypes from S&W and Inglis.
There were three different designs two of which had 7 shot single column magazines and the final design had a 13 shot magazine the design of which was a modified form the Browning Hi Power magazine.
Unfortunately the government specified in the contract that this was to be a blowback design. Despite stiffer recoil springs and weights soldered t the slide the recoil was not acceptable. On the early pistols High Standard did experiment with one and two annular grooves in the chamber which actually worked quite well but the final contract prohibited the grooved chamber. I have heard that this was because the government felt that steel cased ammunition would work differently than brass cased ammunition. but this may be just a story.
The government did indeed have several variations of the 9mm round manufactured for this pistol most with lathe turned bullets. I have in my collection four of the about ten different versions if this "T-3" ammunition. I find it interesting that some of the ammunition was hollowpoint.
Here are photos of the other side of the previously pictured pistol which is one of one and probably a concept piece for the other prototypes. The three other designe were produced in lots of four pistole each. there may be a few more of the double coulmn type.
High Standard T-3 Type 0 1 of 1 no serial number
High Standard T-3 Type 1 Serial number 3 of 4
High Standard T-3 Type 1 Serial number 3 of 4
High Standard T-3 Type 2 Serial number 4 of 4
High Standard T-3 Type 2 Serial number 4 of 4
High Standard T-3 Type 3 Serial number unknown
Jim Watson and Jim Keenan,
You have correctly identified the pistol in my photo. This is a little known and seldom seen 9mm designed and developed under at least two government contracts between 1948 and 1951. Perhaps these pistols were also involved in the later trials that included the Colt T-4 and prototypes from S&W and Inglis.
There were three different designs two of which had 7 shot single column magazines and the final design had a 13 shot magazine the design of which was a modified form the Browning Hi Power magazine.
Unfortunately the government specified in the contract that this was to be a blowback design. Despite stiffer recoil springs and weights soldered t the slide the recoil was not acceptable. On the early pistols High Standard did experiment with one and two annular grooves in the chamber which actually worked quite well but the final contract prohibited the grooved chamber. I have heard that this was because the government felt that steel cased ammunition would work differently than brass cased ammunition. but this may be just a story.
The government did indeed have several variations of the 9mm round manufactured for this pistol most with lathe turned bullets. I have in my collection four of the about ten different versions if this "T-3" ammunition. I find it interesting that some of the ammunition was hollowpoint.
Here are photos of the other side of the previously pictured pistol which is one of one and probably a concept piece for the other prototypes. The three other designe were produced in lots of four pistole each. there may be a few more of the double coulmn type.
High Standard T-3 Type 0 1 of 1 no serial number
High Standard T-3 Type 1 Serial number 3 of 4
High Standard T-3 Type 1 Serial number 3 of 4
High Standard T-3 Type 2 Serial number 4 of 4
High Standard T-3 Type 2 Serial number 4 of 4
High Standard T-3 Type 3 Serial number unknown
Last edited:
Jim Watson
Member
What?
You mean you knew all along and this was a test?
Phooey.
I thought you had found something interesting in Grandpa's seachest.
The Detonics Pocket 9 had a ringed chamber and was noted for heavy recoil.
You mean you knew all along and this was a test?
Phooey.
I thought you had found something interesting in Grandpa's seachest.
The Detonics Pocket 9 had a ringed chamber and was noted for heavy recoil.
Eightball
Member
High Standard T-3 Type 1 Serial number 3 of 4 looks pretty sweet, IMO. Were there any reliability tests that compared these things to the M9?
M9 Comparison
I don't believe any comparison would be possible since the T-3 family was designed and tested in 1948 through 1951 over 30 years before the M9 was adopted. The criteria for the guns was probably completely different and the testing was probably different. I have only the final reports to the government for the last T-3 design build and test contract.
Note that the T-3 was one of the first prototypes ith an aluminum frame, double of single action capability and a double column magazine. They also experimented with compensators for these pistols.
I do know that some T-3's were sent to Aberdeen Proving Ground for endurance testing, but have no data resulting from those tests.
There is one of the T-3 type 1 pistols in the Springfield Armory collection - serial number 2. Spring field also has serial numbers 1, 2, and 3 of the type 2 T-3's. Rock Island Arsenal has one of the type 3 T-3's
I don't believe any comparison would be possible since the T-3 family was designed and tested in 1948 through 1951 over 30 years before the M9 was adopted. The criteria for the guns was probably completely different and the testing was probably different. I have only the final reports to the government for the last T-3 design build and test contract.
Note that the T-3 was one of the first prototypes ith an aluminum frame, double of single action capability and a double column magazine. They also experimented with compensators for these pistols.
I do know that some T-3's were sent to Aberdeen Proving Ground for endurance testing, but have no data resulting from those tests.
There is one of the T-3 type 1 pistols in the Springfield Armory collection - serial number 2. Spring field also has serial numbers 1, 2, and 3 of the type 2 T-3's. Rock Island Arsenal has one of the type 3 T-3's
- Status