M1918A2 with Pistol Grip?

[Big Al]

Does anyone know the history behind this BAR? It certainly isn't a garden-variety M1918A2.

Edited February 17, 2015 by Big Al

[emmagee1917]

It is a standard M1918A2 fitted with a FN ( Belgium ) made trigger pack . It featured a " slow down " device , pistol grip , the trigger shaped mag release , and the experimental T1 mag guides . Dates from the late '38 , early '39 time period.

Chris

[gunhistorian]

Didn't the M1923 have a pistol grip like the one in the photo? (Fat, finned barrel though?) Although the caption indicates a different model (M1918A2), I wonder if this is an interim piece. Not being a BAR guy, and having lost my edition of "Rock and Hard Place", I'd be interested in additional details.

[darrylta]

Several things that caught my eye on the photo;

It used a WWI flash hider, the bipod is mounted on the flash hider and not the gas tube.

And the front grip is very WWI looking.

It is a transitional gun for sure.

-Darryl

Edited February 18, 2015 by darrylta

[emmagee1917]

Nope , I know of which I speak .

This pistol grip is different ( well , trigger frame ) because of the little hook like " trigger " mag release below the trigger area and the lack of a mag release button inside the trigger guard . Several earlier model BARs had pistol grips ( '23 , '28 , R75 , Monitor , etc. ) , but not this mag release .

The flashider is the "WW2 " design , not WW1 . You can see the flat face of the hex nut type set up just in front of the bipod . The WW1 style was a smooth tube shape and will not take a bipod .

The gas tube mounted bipod was between wars production , earlier than this set up.

The front handguard is WW1 style , they did not replace them when the guns were converted into "A2" style unless damaged . You can see this example was cut down to expose more of the barrel for better cooling . This was supposed to be standard , but many were not cut.

It looks like this gun may have had a new barrel installed , note how long the " fat " diameter sticks out in front of the reciever .

Note also the modified buttstock and the mono-pod at the rear.

Chris

[emmagee1917]

Oh , while this IS a M1918A2 with the experimental FN grip , many changes were done during WW2 and Korea , so it is kinda-sorta transitional in that sense.

Chris

[Big Al]

Thank you very much, Chris.

[gunhistorian]

Emmagee1917 causes my ignorance or curiosity to be aroused. Who manufactured the the BAR (the A2)? Why use an FN manufactured trigger housing (or whatever the proper nomenclature)? My understanding is that Winchester went bankrupt in the late '20s (I think). The Nye Committee hearings state that the new Winchester corporation sold what BARs they had -- primarily experimental models -- to Sedgley (spelling?). Maybe Jim Ballou covered this, but I don't have access to his book anymore.

[Big Al]

Winchester was a licensee in BAR production from Colt, since they were the patent holders in the Western Hemisphere. However, this is most-likely and Ordnance Department experiment.

[gunhistorian]

Still, the question remains: Why an FN trigger housing rather than a Monitor or the BAR '23 (or subsequent model) housings with the vertical rear grip? Seems strange, especially if it is in a manual produced by the (then) War Department.

[StooperZero]

hmmm.

 

 

 

i dont have one on hand but how 'difficult' would it be to convert a FN grip/magwell assembly to fit a standard BAR receiver?

[emmagee1917]

This is an early A2 design . Most , if indeed not all ( OK , prob'ly all ) , between war A1s and A2s were converted from existing stock piles of WW1 BARs . This particular A2 was built to test the FN trigger group which had a rate reducer in the grip assembly . The fact it has a pistol grip too , is not the main reason it exists. Remember that the early guns were select fire ( semi / full ) and with the development of the lighter M1 Garand replacing the '03 , the heavy semi-auto Bar was not needed , so , ergo , the testing of a dual rate ( fast / slow ) full auto only gun. This design was not adopted , so is just a foot note in BAR development. Remember also , during this time , FN and Colt were very close and had split the world markets between them and shared development between each other . There was no real difference in an FN trigger unit or dealing with Colt . If it had been adopted , Colt would have made the sales in the US.

WW1 was Colt , Winchester , and Marlin-Rockwell . Between wars only Colt was making any and I don't think the military bought many ( or any , not sure about R75s ) during this time . WW2 was A2 production only by New England Small Arms ( NESA) and IBM Corporation . Korea was Royay Typewriter Company ( ROT ) .

Stooper , This unit would prob'ly drop in , other ones , not so sure . The mags would have to be modified as the latching is way lower on the mag .

Chris

Edited February 23, 2015 by emmagee1917

[StooperZero]

The mags would have to be modified as the latching is way lower on the mag .

 

 

but you could use the $10 FN BAR mags then.

 

 

 

 

Would be approaching ugly ducking status though.

 

 

[emmagee1917]

Not that up on the oversea's BARs as I'm more USGI WW2 interested ( with a bit of WW1 and Korean overlap ) . If these mags are 30-06 and not 7mm or .308 , then yes . The only mag of this type I ever ran across was by accident in a trade . One of these was mixed into the batch . It was in 7mm and I could not figure out why M2 ball would not fit. It had internal spacers to shrink it up and the external mods were low on the rear spline , so it fit the gun but would not lock in . Other mags had a different external size and I'm not sure about them fitting in at all .

Chris

[StooperZero]

FN 3006 mags have a giant "X" pressed into them.

[gunhistorian]

Fascinating! Many thanks, guys. This historical/developmental stuff is fascinating.

[darrylta]

Speaking of BAR mags, I lucked into a lot of blued BAR mags. I haven't gotten them yet, they appear

to be getting scarce of late.

Darryl