Why did Savage move the charging handle to the side of the receiver on the M1 guns?

[jbbarber]

My two cents... 

1. When the M1 was being developed, the 28/28A1 had been used by the Marines extensively in central America during the 30's and on limited scale other overseas locations. The British in African campaigns in mid 1940.  The top cocking is no problem on the range.  extensive combat operations... debris is getting inside, which for all practical purpose would seem to be most extensive from the top in a combat environment, same logic would assume less debris from the side.  I would assume this was at least taken into consideration at the time from input from previous mentioned users.   AND/OR

2.  Simply .... quicker, cheaper (machine time, jig changes etc.), easier to produce efficiently, to get as many out the door daily as possible. 

JB

  

[2ndArmored]

On 8/21/2023 at 1:41 PM, JJX said:

Yes, it was on top of the AR10, but that really did not last. I always wondered it that was so it would be protected by the carry handle, which is more of a rear sight base. 

True.  Though I wasn't meaning the M16 was a top-cocker like the 1921/8 Thompsons or the AR10.  Just that its charging handle is located in the middle of the weapon in left/right symmetrical fashion.

[Rekraps]

53 minutes ago, 2ndArmored said:

True.  Though I wasn't meaning the M16 was a top-cocker like the 1921/8 Thompsons or the AR10.  Just that its charging handle is located in the middle of the weapon in left/right symmetrical fashion.

It's interesting how throughout all the wars that weapons with charging handles have been used, nobody every complained. It seems as though the soldiers in the field simply adapted to whatever they were given. I personally never gave it a second thought when I was in Europe in the 80's carrying a M16A2. It was just my gun.... we never practiced "quick magazine changes" or "quick charging" with opposite hands. All this "theater" style stuff is YouTube based. We've seen it, the guy wearing Jeans and a T-shirt in full Molle gear as he shoots at a range, always careful to use the latest popular techniques to load, charge and unload his fully equipped, triple scope mounted, double mag stacked, forward handled, side folded, bipod included, single mount sling enabled, door busting compensator modified, super light trigger packed gun. 

Not that I care!

[StrangeRanger]

Don't confuse aftermarket gadgetry with sound ergonomic design. 

The idea of being able to reload, clear and charge an SMG without breaking the firing grip dates at least to the MP38 and was part of the original design concept of the M16. In both cases that's a few years before YouTube.

[Chip]

On 8/20/2023 at 3:40 PM, 2ndArmored said:

The charging for the 1903 Springfield, 1917, M1 Garand, and M1 Carbine are all right-handed operations.  Same with the later Grease Gun.  Maybe with the Ord Dept's influence on the new Thompson's design, they wanted that consistency.

I think you hit on it there.  This is pure speculation and I don't have an M1.  I do have a SCAR 17 that came set up with a left side reciprocating charging handle.  When not paying 100% attention I've had the charging handle clip my support hand thumb which really hurts.  Having a reciprocating charging handle on the same side of the gun and pointing out in the same direction as the back of the firing hand seems like a good way to keep the reciprocating handle from snagging the support hand, clothing, etc.

Again pure speculation, but the nested design and placement of the M16/AR15 charging handle directly behind the bolt seems like a simple way to make it non-reciprocating.

Interesting stuff

[Rekraps]

19 hours ago, StrangeRanger said:

Don't confuse aftermarket gadgetry with sound ergonomic design. 

The idea of being able to reload, clear and charge an SMG without breaking the firing grip dates at least to the MP38 and was part of the original design concept of the M16. In both cases that's a few years before YouTube.

You are correct... I got off topic.

[TSMGguy]

I acquired a really nice M1928A1 in the early 1990s. I showed it to my father, an ETO veteran with five campaign stars. He said, "Oh, an old-style top cocker." I asked which TSMG he favored, and he said, "Neither". His combat engineer battalion had not been equipped with them that he remembered. He recalled firing the TSMG in training for familiarization only. 

[Rekraps]

4 hours ago, TSMGguy said:

I acquired a really nice M1928A1 in the early 1990s. I showed it to my father, an ETO veteran with five campaign stars. He said, "Oh, an old-style top cocker." I asked which TSMG he favored, and he said, "Neither". His combat engineer battalion had not been equipped with them that he remembered. He recalled firing the TSMG in training for familiarization only. 

My Father in Law was a tank driver in the Pacific during WW2 and he carried a TSMG (no stock) that was a top charger (1928). He told me he never gave it a second thought and then went on about how effective the 1911's were! Ha.

[rpbcps]

Reading this topic reminded me that my personal weapon for six years during the 1980's, 'Fusil d'Assaut de la Manufacture d'Armes de Saint-Étienne F1, (FAMAS F1), had a central charging handle, positioned under the carrying handle which gave the weapon the nickname 'Le Clairon' (the bugle).

The weapon was also designed to be able to change the extractor / ejector from a right-handed to left-handed user, very simply. We were taught how to do that in basic training, and a picture paints a thousand words, so if interested, check out link below where Ian demonstrates how easy this was to do. In basic training a few recruits managed to loose the small spring in the breach block, and received a few slaps for that, so they did not make the same mistake in the future.

The FAMAS can also fire grenades direct from the barrel, so every member of a platoon had the option to fire anti personal or anti vehicle grenades and with the supplementary fire selector switch, added around 1985,  (under the butt stock), we had a three round burst option on the weapon, as well as full auto.

No aftermarket gadgetry on this one, just a sound ergonomic design. Like your father, Rekraps, I never gave my old personal weapon a second thought, until reading this topic this afternoon.

Stay safe

Richard

 

 

Edited August 24 by rpbcps
Typo.

[anjong-ni]

I was handed my first M16 in Ft. Ord in 1970.

Having followed development ofthe little plastic .22 rifle in "Popular Science", nobody ever paid attention to where the charging handle was.

Having shot lots of other stuff in my youth, I remember finding the M16 c/h quite odd and clumsy.

I have an original AR10 with the c/h in the carry-handle. Best possible placement.

When they decided to move it, the easiest new location was probably "the back"...Phil

At exactly 4:00

 

 

Edited August 25 by anjong-ni

[Merry Ploughboy]

From how I interpret what is stated on page 66 of "The Black Rifle" by Stevens and Ezell, only the first seventeen Armalite AR-15s ever had the "finger" on top charge handle.  The charging was moved because the top mounted handle got too hot during sustained full auto fire, and it also could not be operated while wearing Artic gloves.

MHO, YMMV, etc.  Be well.

[Rekraps]

20 hours ago, rpbcps said:

Reading this topic reminded me that my personal weapon for six years during the 1980's, 'Fusil d'Assaut de la Manufacture d'Armes de Saint-Étienne F1, (FAMAS F1), had a central charging handle, positioned under the carrying handle which gave the weapon the nickname 'Le Clairon' (the bugle).

The weapon was also designed to be able to change the extractor / ejector from a right-handed to left-handed user, very simply. We were taught how to do that in basic training, and a picture paints a thousand words, so if interested, check out link below where Ian demonstrates how easy this was to do. In basic training a few recruits managed to loose the small spring in the breach block, and received a few slaps for that, so they did not make the same mistake in the future.

The FAMAS can also fire grenades direct from the barrel, so every member of a platoon had the option to fire anti personal or anti vehicle grenades and with the supplementary fire selector switch, added around 1985,  (under the butt stock), we had a three round burst option on the weapon, as well as full auto.

No aftermarket gadgetry on this one, just a sound ergonomic design. Like your father, Rekraps, I never gave my old personal weapon a second thought, until reading this topic this afternoon.

Stay safe

Richard

 

 

Excellent post. I suppose most soldiers never ever think about it....

[Rekraps]

14 hours ago, anjong-ni said:

I was handed my first M16 in Ft. Ord in 1970.

Having followed development ofthe little plastic .22 rifle in "Popular Science", nobody ever paid attention to where the charging handle was.

Having shot lots of other stuff in my youth, I remember finding the M16 c/h quite odd and clumsy.

I have an original AR10 with the c/h in the carry-handle. Best possible placement.

When they decided to move it, the easiest new location was probably "the back"...Phil

At exactly 4:00

 

 

Yep and he did not even pinch his fingers!

[NFA amnesty]

It's not a big deal to me canting the weapon left so I can pull the bolt back while keeping my right hand in the firing position, however it would have been better to have put the charging handle on the left side as other folks have pointed out.   You know the Germans must have completed an ergonomics study and decided the left side for the bolt hand was the most efficient design for right handers!!

[LSU Tiger]

On 8/17/2023 at 12:49 PM, StrangeRanger said:

Getting the bolt handle out of the line of sight is one of the improvements in the M1

It is.  I read somewhere that one of the Ordnance Department's complaints with the M1928A1 was that some (evidently too many) men used the actuator as a rear sight.

[jpw43]

On 9/1/2023 at 1:24 PM, LSU Tiger said:

It is.  I read somewhere that one of the Ordnance Department's complaints with the M1928A1 was that some (evidently too many) men used the actuator as a rear sight.

I remember there was a page in one of the manuals that actually showed how to use the actuator and front sight to engage a target.

Don't have the manual handy right now.

[bug]

1 hour ago, jpw43 said:

I remember there was a page in one of the manuals that actually showed how to use the actuator and front sight to engage a target.

Don't have the manual handy right now.

Page 16 of the Gale & Polden manual. I've been shooting that way for 25 years.

[imageaudio]

It would seem logical to assume that in addition to the easy of production benefits mentioned previously, there would be a corresponding benefit in the ease of maintenance.  Specifically, not only because of the fewer parts associated with the M1A1 fixed firing pin bolt vs. the Blish locking system (or even the M1 bolt which retained a hammer, firing pin and spring), but the fixed firing pin M1A1 bolt just doesn't have any moving parts so no hammer or springs to wear out, break or be lost during field stripping or depot maintenance.   

[rpbcps]

On 9/4/2023 at 3:00 AM, jpw43 said:

I remember there was a page in one of the manuals that actually showed how to use the actuator and front sight to engage a target.

Don't have the manual handy right now.

As Bug said, Gale & Polden manual

[Doug Quaid]

13 hours ago, rpbcps said:

As Bug said, Gale & Polden manual

But how do you get the German guy to stand at attention like that 20 feet in front of you?

They need to add that information to the manual.

[Doug Quaid]

When you consider the fact that

the 03 Springfield, Garand, Thompson M1, M1 Carbine, M14, and every non-military gun you own all have THE EJECTION PORT AND BOLT HANDLE ON THE RIGHT SIDE,

there must be an actual reason for it, that relates to 90% of people being right handed.

Clearly, the intention is for the user to work the action and clear jams with his right hand and hold the gun with his left.

You CAN tilt the gun 90 degrees and work the bolt with your left hand, but there is no reason to think that it is intended, or that making the user take his right hand off the stock to work the bolt is some kind of mistake.  If it's a mistake, it's a mistake on 99% of guns.

 

[jpw43]

20 hours ago, rpbcps said:

As Bug said, Gale & Polden manual

That's the one!
Looks like the German is only armed with binoculars!