Evolution Of Firearms

[SmeeAgain]

When you look at the evolution of firearms, it's been a pretty slow progression when compared to some other things... like electronics.
Then along comes guys like Benjamin Henry, John Browning, David Williams and Eugene Stoner who all thought "out of the box" & gave us some of the greatest designs ever. So far anyway.
Then look at the time frame. All of those mentioned were in the last 150 years or so.
Not very long ago it would be difficult to even imagine 3d printing... but it's common today.
Imagine what our very near future holds.
My impression of the current generation is they aren't stuck thinking in traditional ways. As such, I expect them to come up with something brilliant that makes traditional firearms obsolete.
Of course I don't have a clue what that might be, but we will still be shooting far better than we are now.
Wait & see I guess. I hope I live long enough to see it.

 

[Steel Horse Rider]

The ability to think and innovate has been removed from the general population so I wouldn't hold my breath.

 

[SmeeAgain]

The ability to think and innovate has been removed from the general population so I wouldn't hold my breath.

Time will tell... They aren't all like Beavis & Butthead.
I remember the "anti-establishment" era of the 60's. Some of it could have helped. But those people grew up then ran things for a few decades & look where we are.
Kids today are different. They have a colossal advantage of information / technology at their fingertips & know how to use it.
It only takes one with a good imagination to make a positive difference. Besides, I'm counting on it!

 

[jmr40]

Evolution often comes in tiny steps. While there haven't been a lot of significant changes to firearms design in a long time. There have been significant changes to optics, projectiles, and gun powder that have made rifles, handguns, and shotguns significantly more effective than those of just a couple of decades ago.

 

[AlexanderA]

The ability to think and innovate has been removed from the general population so I wouldn't hold my breath.

The "general population" has never been the innovators. They have been content to plod on with their lives. Progress has always come from a tiny percentage.

Going forward, I would expect Artificial Intelligence to start taking the lead in technical innovation. In other words, we're going to delegate the development of our machines....to our machines. This is exactly what has happened with microchips.

 

[Bill Raby]

I always figured the evolution of firearms became pointless after Colt came out with the Single Action Army.

 

[SmeeAgain]

The "general population" has never been the innovators. They have been content to plod on with their lives. Progress has always come from a tiny percentage.

Going forward, I would expect Artificial Intelligence to start taking the lead in technical innovation. In other words, we're going to delegate the development of our machines....to our machines. This is exactly what has happened with microchips.

I don't want to deviate from the primary topic of guns but look at electronics. We went from vacuum tubes & hard wired chassis to transistors & other simeconductors almost overnight.
Like you said... machines making machines.
I can envision self loading firearms where a fuel such as powder, gas whatever be in one hopper & projectiles in another. Then dispensed into the chamber & ignighted electrically.
That's more crude than we have now but it's different. Somebody smarter than me could make it work.

 

[SmeeAgain]

I always figured the evolution of firearms became pointless after Colt came out with the Single Action Army.

That was one of the few designs Colt can actually take credit for. They didn't do much sense... merely riding along on their name.

 

[CapnMac]

Typically, "innovation" in firearms-something we humans have been pursuing since about 1650 has been defined by a crucial thing: "enough better."

Chemistry coupled with a lack of industrial consistency held things back for a couple of centuries.

The "leaps and bounds" are there in history. How quickly ignition changed from slow fuses to sparking pyrites. Then to the elegance of the flint pan and frizzen. To then be eclipsed by fulminating primers. First as caps, later as enclosed primers.

Once we had nitro-base powder, which reduced fouling by several orders of magnitude, we also had far more industrialized manufacture, too. So, the miracle chemistry was consistent and reliable, and predictable-vitals things for engineering design.

It's easy to forget that consistent metallurgy is relatively new. We humans have been hammering & welding and whittling on metals for several millennia, but, it's only been in the last hundred years that we have industrialized and codified metallurgy and things like heat treating. A mere hundred years ago, metals were tempered "by eye" instead of repeatable, predictable, engineered standards. There has been "enough" change that we don't even consider whether metals are properly treated, tempered, finished.

We have tried virtually every possible way to make handguns lock up. Where we use locked breeches, the Browning tilt is virtually universal. Why? That design is a century old. Well, for one, JMB was a genius and well before his own time. But, it's elegant and efficient. It's hard to get the same results with fewer parts and/or less machining.

Even in unlocked breeches we have experimented with nearly every possible "delay" from none to absurd.

We have "chased" the "new and improved" all over the map. The Blish Lock for one (the Blish principle, of the friction between dissimilar metals under pressure, is "real" but the pressures required are rather extreme-think heavy artillery). Even recently, we have the "deleted" blowback-which is a 1.5# bolt with some rare earth magnets that are alleged to delay blowback--snake oil, and only $250 per each.

Are rotary bolts useful--certainly, in rifles; just not "enough better" to use in pistols. Lugged turnbolts are incredibly successful in rifles, and even the occasional pistol. The number of lugs used, and where they land on the bolt are subject to endless debate-but any "improvement" has to be "enough better" to be adopted and successful.

The "envelope" the physics fit into is pretty narrowly defined. We want a projectile, of a given density, accelerated to a given velocity, along a predictable trajectory, in a man-portable and man-usable package, that is also 'affordable' (manhour costs more than currency).

How to better those solutions? We would need an energy source "enough better" or a projectile "enough better" or a delivery system "enough better." Any, or each, of those is a tall order. The energy density & mass of nitro-base powder is pretty incredible. The system we presently used to transfer that chemical energy to a projectile is very mature.

Only the future knows what the future holds.

 

[SmeeAgain]

Typically, "innovation" in firearms-something we humans have been pursuing since about 1650 has been defined by a crucial thing: "enough better."

Chemistry coupled with a lack of industrial consistency held things back for a couple of centuries.

The "leaps and bounds" are there in history. How quickly ignition changed from slow fuses to sparking pyrites. Then to the elegance of the flint pan and frizzen. To then be eclipsed by fulminating primers. First as caps, later as enclosed primers.

Once we had nitro-base powder, which reduced fouling by several orders of magnitude, we also had far more industrialized manufacture, too. So, the miracle chemistry was consistent and reliable, and predictable-vitals things for engineering design.

It's easy to forget that consistent metallurgy is relatively new. We humans have been hammering & welding and whittling on metals for several millennia, but, it's only been in the last hundred years that we have industrialized and codified metallurgy and things like heat treating. A mere hundred years ago, metals were tempered "by eye" instead of repeatable, predictable, engineered standards. There has been "enough" change that we don't even consider whether metals are properly treated, tempered, finished.

We have tried virtually every possible way to make handguns lock up. Where we use locked breeches, the Browning tilt is virtually universal. Why? That design is a century old. Well, for one, JMB was a genius and well before his own time. But, it's elegant and efficient. It's hard to get the same results with fewer parts and/or less machining.

Even in unlocked breeches we have experimented with nearly every possible "delay" from none to absurd.

We have "chased" the "new and improved" all over the map. The Blish Lock for one (the Blish principle, of the friction between dissimilar metals under pressure, is "real" but the pressures required are rather extreme-think heavy artillery). Even recently, we have the "deleted" blowback-which is a 1.5# bolt with some rare earth magnets that are alleged to delay blowback--snake oil, and only $250 per each.

Are rotary bolts useful--certainly, in rifles; just not "enough better" to use in pistols. Lugged turnbolts are incredibly successful in rifles, and even the occasional pistol. The number of lugs used, and where they land on the bolt are subject to endless debate-but any "improvement" has to be "enough better" to be adopted and successful.

The "envelope" the physics fit into is pretty narrowly defined. We want a projectile, of a given density, accelerated to a given velocity, along a predictable trajectory, in a man-portable and man-usable package, that is also 'affordable' (manhour costs more than currency).

How to better those solutions? We would need an energy source "enough better" or a projectile "enough better" or a delivery system "enough better." Any, or each, of those is a tall order. The energy density & mass of nitro-base powder is pretty incredible. The system we presently used to transfer that chemical energy to a projectile is very mature.

Only the future knows what the future holds.

Reminds me of "someone" at the U.S. Patent Office saying... "Everything has already been invented."
Too bad someone hasn't invented a time machine... yet. I'd love to go into the future & see what's next for firearms.

 

[CapnMac]

U.S. Patent Office saying... "Everything has already been invented."

LoL. Too true. Mind, that "Deleted Blowback" bolt has a Patent Pending . . .

So, having a Patent does not necessarily mean a thing is successfully an innovation.

(Asserting that magnetic flux, with something like 0.00001% the energy potential verses cartridge blowback creates a "delay" is novel, possibly innovative-groundbreaking, probably less so.)

 

[Coyote3855]

That was one of the few designs Colt can actually take credit for. They didn't do much sense... merely riding along on their name.

I'm not sure what you mean here. Did you mean since, not sense? Are you referring to the Colt company or Samuel Colt? Samuel died in 1862 and obviously was not involved in the design of the SAA. What about the Patterson? 1847 Walker? The pocket models? Or if you do mean after 1873, there were multiple models, some more successful and reliable than others. My Colt New Service and Model of 1917 are fine guns and I believe they were Colt designs.

 

[SmeeAgain]

My humble apology for not making sense when I meant to write "since".
A few examples are the lever action rifles, the 1911 and AR series. All of which earned Colt a fantastic reputation.
One thing they ALL had in common were outsiders designing them. Henry, Browning & Stoner.
I know Browning had a close relationship with Colt but unaware if he actually worked for them (as an employee) or not.
I hate to sound like an ungrateful girlfriend but the question "What have you done for me lately?" comes to mind.
I think they could have done MUCH better by employing more or better engineers, paying closer attention to quality control and providing better customer service.
Granted each is expensive but the alternative is where they are now.
Take the current Henry Repeating Arms for example. While they aren't the original Henry, they have a big name to live up to.
I don't know about their engineering dept but I currently own 8 of their rifles (and several others I've disposed of over the years) and every one has been OUTSTANDING quality. The only flaws being a short lived plastic barrel band on a .22 cal lever action rifle. (They offer free metal replacements for merely asking. And they pay shipping!)
The workmanship & attention to detail is also superb.
Their customer service is well beyond the competition.
Colt could have done that but chose not to.

 

[GEM]

No matter what 'science' comes up with - folks will recommend the 1911 or Glock 19 for hundreds of years to come.

Someone will post on the Raygunforum why he wants to carry a BP revolver.

I think, Da DAH, that a major breakthrough or two would be:

1. Adding guidance to pistol rounds that you can carry. AI or laser seeking - something.
2. Have a personal drone follow you around with a mounted gun slaved to a heads up sight in your glasses and taking mental commands to fire.

 

[SmeeAgain]

I'll ALWAYS have my trusty 1911 and black powder stuff!
A few years back a politician claimed we already had "heat seeking ammo". I haven't seen it in stores but YouTube had a great video on it.

 

[J-Bar]

War provides tremendous encouragement for firearms improvement. The fact that we are still shooting projectiles stored in brass cases filled with combustible powders similar to those used in the Spanish-American War and World War One makes me think perfection may have been achieved.

 

[Mike OTDP]

Almost all the developments of the last 90 years have been on the manufacturing end, not the design and operating principles. It's not accidental that Bill Ruger was an expert on investment casting, or that Gaston Glock knew nothing about firearm design but quite a bit about molding plastics.

Where the big advances have been taking place is on the electronic end, and in optics. Thirty years ago, the idea of a red dot sight compact enough to mount on a carry gun was science fiction. Today, it's $250.

 

[GEM]

So the auxiliaries and materials progress but the round itself is pretty static as compared to the other items.

Energy weapons are making it on to ships and defense AA/missile shields (Israel) plus being on armored vehicles. Probably a long time for handguns.

 

[Steve S.]

One theme throughout this evolution has always been a constant - to kill faster and more efficiently. I am a sucker for a nice, accurate single shot in an old, slow caliber - in a firefight however, my nostalgia becomes much less important.

 

[SmeeAgain]

One theme throughout this evolution has always been a constant - to kill faster and more efficiently. I am a sucker for a nice, accurate single shot in an old, slow caliber - in a firefight however, my nostalgia becomes much less important.

I too prefer the antiques. Not so much in shooting them, just appreciation / admiration for the designs & craftsmanship.
They did some pretty astonishing things with limited knowledge of metals and crude tools.

 

[Mn Fats]

John Browning got it right with his many advancements. After that, people have just been waiting on better ammunition to feed his designs or designs based off his designs .

 

[SmeeAgain]

John Browning got it right with his many advancements. After that, people have just been waiting on better ammunition to feed his designs or designs based off his designs .

Mr. Browning may very well be the one who gave us the best & most designs to date.

 

[DoubleMag]

...very near future holds.
My impression of the current generation is they aren't stuck thinking in traditional ways. As such, I expect them to come up with something brilliant that makes traditional firearms obsolete.
Of course I don't...

Unfortunately, some (even on here?) tout such innovations and tech advances as... so-called ''loopholes'' to current bad legislation, EEOs, internal departmental rules.

 

[Archie]

War provides tremendous encouragement for firearms improvement. The fact that we are still shooting projectiles stored in brass cases filled with combustible powders similar to those used in the Spanish-American War and World War One makes me think perfection may have been achieved.

Yet the search continues for 'case less' ammunition and arms. Would ease the payload problems for aircraft, tanks, sea going warships and the humble 'grunt'. Most militaries would love to have a reliable system.

Also I take issue with the initial statement of arms technology stultifying. Many technological advances have been made, better metal alloys, better finishes, more precise (in burning rate) powders, non-hydroscopic primers and better sights and scopes.

I do agree with CapnMac about 'good enough'. Governments will not spend twice as much to do the same job UNLESS there is another benefit. For instance, a rifle that costs twice as much as the current one but lasts four times longer in typical use. However, I think a 'main battle rifle' capable of pinpoint accuracy at 1,000 meters for general issue is pointless, unless it is competitive in value and useage.

 

[buck460XVR]

There's an old saying out there....."iffin' it ain't broke, it don't need to be fixed!". Firearms are like that. Like many other tools that have been around forever, there have been advances in metallurgy, esthetics and ergonomics, but the basics have stayed the same, simply, because they work and they work well. Hand saws, hammers, shovels, forks, knives and spoons for example. Bicycles. Wheelbarrows, wagons, etc. Over my lifetime I have seen several different methods of propulsion proposed/developed for the projectiles used in firearms, but it seems the old standby, gunpowder, is still preferred. Basically, cause it still works better than the others.