Designers who missed the mark...

[Rembrandt]

Fascinated by footnotes in history that propelled some inventors to fame....and others who misread the political winds.

John Browning was fearful that his successful A5 shotgun would be banned by politicians for hunting because it gave the hunter an unprecedented five speedy shots.....which many thought were unethical and unsportsmanlike. Rather than wait for politicians to outlaw the A5, he began designing the over/under Superposed. Thinking that hunting would be relegated to no more than two shots. By having the Superposed ready and in the product line, he'd be ahead of the curve and capitalize on the situation. Law never came about....and the Superposed filled another market niche.

Bill Ruger who was certain politicians would limit magazine capacities and geared his products and marketing to 10 round limits. Didn't happen, Ruger had to earn the trust and respect of the marketplace back after angry gun owners dissed his products.

Oliver Winchester who was comfortable making lever actions, had little desire to go with designs that might compete with his domination of the rifle market. Frequently bought patent rights and designs then shelved them.

Any others you can think of that missed the mark?......

[dakota.potts]

I have to say Hugo Borchardt missed the mark massively through his own self-assuredness. His C93 is considered to be the first successful self-loading pistol with a detachable magazine in the grip. It fired a stout cartridge in a manageable system and was known for its accuracy. He took it to military trial where he was asked to make a number of changes including re-orienting the mainspring to get rid of the massive mainspring housing on the back of the gun, and modifying the grip angle for comfort. He thought his gun was great as is and refused to design the requested changes. Instead, it was given over to other engineers who designed this:



It's my opinion that the Borchardt name would be as common today as Luger is if he had decided to take on the changes himself.

[44 AMP]

wow, those footnotes are quite ...creative..

I'm curious where the one about Browning might be found. This is the first time I've ever heard any account of what Browning was fearful of, and how that was the reason he was working on the Superposed design, when he died.

Bill Ruger who was certain politicians would limit magazine capacities and geared his products and marketing to 10 round limits. Didn't happen,..

This one I know a little bit about, and sorry, but it DID HAPPEN!

Ruger was actually RIGHT. And while he was working in his own interest, he wasn't working against the rest of us, they way it was reported, and assumed by so many underinformed people. Ruger got blamed for advocating for a 10 round mag limit. What he didn't get credit for was his advocacy keeping us from getting a 7 or possibly even 6 round limit.

They had the political power, a magazine capacity limit WAS going to be in the new law. There was no changing that. The capacity they were discussing was mostly a debate between those who wanted only 6, and those who wanted 7 as the limit, so the 1911 service pistols would be spared. Ruger's "butting in" put 10 rounds on the table, and it was adopted as a compromise, letting them have a mag capacity limit, just allowing a few more rounds to make it easier to pass.

It absolutely did happen, but in our press (who should have been both sympathetic and HONEST, and weren't) Ruger didn't get credit for "saving 10" he got the blame for losing everything above 10.

people have been beating that drum ever since, despite the fact that Bill Ruger is long gone, and so is the law he tried to keep from being worse than it actually was.

I don't know if Winchester ever bought a design and shelved it to prevent competition, or not, but it wouldn't surprise me if he had. Also wouldn't surprise me if he bought a design with the intention of making it, someday, and priorities changed and it stayed on the shelf.

Winchester got big and rich making Henry's leverguns, and hugely big and rich with Browning's designs as time went on.

I'm not sure if that qualifies as having "missed the mark".

I think, if you want to talk about designers who "missed the mark" you need to look at two different things. First is whether or not the design worked (overall, how well it filled the intended use, etc.)

And second, how well it worked when it came to market popularity.

I consider them very separate matters.

[jmr40]

Thanks for pointing that out about Bill Ruger. The AWB and 10 round mag limit was imposed in 1994 and expired in 2004, before many current shooters were involved in shooting. Even at the time Ruger was criticized by people who didn't understand the inside story. It seems that 20+ years later only one side of the story is being repeated.

I coached high school football for 30 years. Several times in every game on 4t down the coach has to decide whether to punt or go for it. Most of the time the smart thing is to punt and wait for the advantage to be in his favor.

Bill Ruger, like most guns rights advocates at the time could have drawn a hard line and not accepted any limits. But his pushing for a compromise at 10 rounds, along the 10 year limit on the ban was the equivalent of punting on 4th down. It ended up being the smart call and we eventually won the game when the law was not renewed in 2004. Had it not been for Bill Ruger and his political connections we might very well be stuck with 6 or 7 rounds still today.

[44 AMP]

we might very well be stuck with 6 or 7 rounds still today.

I think the NY "SAFE" act shows how "might be stuck" would more likely be "are stuck".

[Rembrandt]

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

I'm curious where the one about Browning might be found. This is the first time I've ever heard any account of what Browning was fearful of, and how that was the reason he was working on the Superposed design, when he died.

"The Browning Superposed" by Ned Schwing. Page 27, "The Genesis of the Superposed".

"The reasons for his interest in the over/under design were really twofold. First he was looking for a continued source of income. He was concerned the rising protests against repeating arms (conservationists called them "game exterminators") would have an adverse effect on the sales of his previous semiautomatic designs. He told his son Val Browning, "I think there is a market for a reasonable priced overunder gun which will be one of the last shotguns to be legislated out of business". Interestingly, at about the same time the same thought occurred to Edwin Pugsley, vice president of engineering at Winchester, ten years before that company designed and marketed its side by side shotgun, the Winchester Model 21."

The Superposed prototype was completed in the fall of 1923 and patented on October 15, 1923. John Browning died three years later in 1926 while inspecting Superposed production facilities in Belgium.

Brownings concerns about the automatics being legislated followed the era of commercial market hunting, where the widespread taking of game became a business. Market hunters naturally favored his high capacity shotguns along with punt guns and other methods of mass game gathering.

I don't know if Winchester ever bought a design and shelved it to prevent competition, or not, but it wouldn't surprise me if he had. Also wouldn't surprise me if he bought a design with the intention of making it, someday, and priorities changed and it stayed on the shelf.

I have seen in print, (can't find it right off) where this happened. Will dig into my library for a reference. There is an exchange between John Browning and Thomas Bennett that indicated Browning feared Winchester would do that with the A5.

"Winchester, America's Premier Gunmakers" by K.D. Kirkland

pg.13 Quoting John Browning re:Bennett/Winchester "The automatic shotgun put Bennett in a tough position. I'll bet he'd have shelled out a hundred thousand dollars just to have it banished forever from the earth, leaving him with his levers and pumps. If he made the gun and it proved a failure, as he and his advisors seemed to half suspected, it would leave a blot on the Winchester name. Even if he made it and proved a big success, it would seriously hurt one of the best-paying arms in his line...the 97 shotgun. If a competitor got it, and it caught the popular fancy, he'd be left a long jump behind in an important branch of the business. That's why he marked time for two years, and why, once I'd forced a showdown, I got so mad."

Edit:....found the following:

"Browning, America's Premier Gunmaker" by K.D. Kirkland

Pg12; ......"For nearly 20 years Winchester's new firearms were all Browning's (although never known as such), and 34 of the guns purchased by Winchester were never manufactured; the Winchester line could not absorb them, but by purchasing them, Winchester kept them out of the hands of its own competitors."

[dogtown tom]

Rembrandt ....John Browning was fearful that his successful A5 shotgun would be banned by politicians for hunting because it gave the hunter an unprecedented five speedy shots.....which many thought were unethical and unsportsmanlike. Rather than wait for politicians to outlaw the A5, he began designing the over/under Superposed. Thinking that hunting would be relegated to no more than two shots. By having the Superposed ready and in the product line, he'd be ahead of the curve and capitalize on the situation. Law never came about....and the Superposed filled another market niche.

JMB invented the Auto 5 in 1900, licensed production to FN in 1902.
He had models of the Superposed in the late 1880's, yet didn't start working on a production model until 1922.

Not the panic fueled decision you make it out to be. Quite likely he just saw an opening in the market and decided to fill it.

There was no Browning Arms Co to actually sell his designs.....JMB licensed manufacturers to produce his designs. FN, Colt and Remington foremost among them. What became Browning Arms wasn't formed until after his death.

[SHR970]

Two come to my mind immediately:

David Dardick: Dardick 1500 pistol and the Tround

Robert Mainhardt: Gyrojet family of firearms.

[Rembrandt]

Originally Posted by dogtown tom

JMB invented the Auto 5 in 1900, licensed production to FN in 1902.
He had models of the Superposed in the late 1880's, yet didn't start working on a production model until 1922.

Not the panic fueled decision you make it out to be. Quite likely he just saw an opening in the market and decided to fill it.

dogtown,
I've not seen anything suggesting that Browning had Superposed models in the late 1880's. Schwings book on the Superposed has no mention of it. Over/unders were not new, they were available in Europe prior to Browning's patent in 1923. Very few made and very expensive. Schwings book also states Browning's motivation for the Superposed as quoted in post #6. Not saying your wrong, I just haven't heard that or seen it documented anywhere.

[44 AMP]

Thanks for the information about the Swing book. I'm doing some looking, but so far, the reasoning you quoted from that book is standing alone...

So far, the earliest US gun control law I can find that has any kind of ammo capacity limit is the 3 shot limit for Migratory Waterfowl, which dates from 1934.

1934, over a decade AFTER the Superposed design. Interestingly I ran across (currently unverifiable) information that the reason Browning designed the Superposed was that FN asked him to. Supposedly, during one of his trips to FN, they were selling his automatic really well, (and so was Remington), and FN said they could sell a lot of double barrels too, but couldn't compete against the dominance of English and Belgian doubles in the market, and could he come up with a gun that would?

Browning was up to the challenge, and the result was the Superposed.

I have found nothing, so far, that any kind of ammo capacity limitation was anything of concern in the 1920s (or before). Browning designed a number of "hi capacity" firearms AFTER the Auto 5, including the original prototype for what became the "Hi-Power" 9mm pistol, when FN finished the design after his death.

I have not been able to find any other source (again, so far) indicating there was any concern about mag capacity limits in that era. To me, the idea sounds "revisionist", using modern concerns to explain something in the past where those concerns really didn't apply.

The Auto 5 was a big departure for Browning, from his usual practice. Prior to the Auto 5, Browning sold his designs outright. Usually to Winchester. With the Auto 5, Browning changed his mind, and didn't sell the design outright. He wanted royalties.

Now, MAYBE Winchester was worried about the semi auto design being a failure, or maybe being legislated against, I don't know, but I do know the story that has endured since then is that Winchester balked at the idea of paying royalties and "declined".

One version of the story says Winchester did the patent drawings for the Auto 5 for Browning, apparently assuming that he would sell them the gun, just like he had with dozens of guns before. THEN they heard his demand for royalties, and told him to go pound sand. (perhaps a bit more politely, but with the same effect. Browning responded with "fine", took his drawings and left.

Browning then went to Remington, and was sitting in the waiting room, waiting for his appointment when Remington's president died in his office of a sudden heart attack. Remington was "out of it" for a while, and Browning went to FN, who GLADLY paid the royalties Browning wanted. And, a couple years later, licensed Auto 5 production to Remington, as well.

Also the story says that a few years after that, Winchester wanted in on the gun, was now willing to build it under license, and JM Browning told them, simply, "No."

As the old line goes, "I can't say its true, and I won't say its not, ..but there's been talk!"

I see both the Dardick and the Gyrojet have been mentioned, as I expected...but I wonder if in their cases designers only partly missed the mark?

Clearly the mark of commercial viability was missed, but their designs DID work.

Now, here's another way of looking at "missed the mark", designs that were successful, but have some feature(s) that are ..less than optimum, shall we say? Such as a safety that a normal human cannot reach with the shooting hand (hand holding the gun)??

There are a number of European firearms where the safety can only be easily operated with the non shooting hand. Compared to American designs where the safety can be worked with the shooting hand, I consider those European designs to have "missed the mark".

[shootniron]

John Browning was fearful that his successful A5 shotgun would be banned by politicians for hunting because it gave the hunter an unprecedented five speedy shots.....which many thought were unethical and unsportsmanlike. Rather than wait for politicians to outlaw the A5, he began designing the over/under Superposed. Thinking that hunting would be relegated to no more than two shots. By having the Superposed ready and in the product line, he'd be ahead of the curve and capitalize on the situation. Law never came about....and the Superposed filled another market niche.

Based on his biography...this information is not correct.

The A5 patent was applied for in Feb of 1900...the gun went into production in 1903.

The Superposed was the last gun that John Browning invented, this fact was stated in the book on page 263.. .that it was the LAST GUN he invented...patents were applied for in Oct of 1923 and Sept of 1924. The gun went into production in 1930. He was granted 27 patents for other guns, mostly military, between the A5 and the Superposed. At his death, he had been granted a total of 128 firearm patents.

There is no mention in the book of any fear of legislation as it would relate to the capacity of the shotgun...and besides, the 1897 was already in production and it offered a 6rd capacity. There is much info in the book about the development and testing of the shotgun and contractual dealings on finally getting the gun produced. The A5 was JMB's pride and joy. There is, also, plenty of info about the designs that were bought by Winchester to prevent them from being produced by other manufacturers.

Reference material for this info is the book pictured below..."John M. Browning American Gunmaker" the biography of John Browning...by John Browning and Curt Gentry

I will add, if you are a gun enthusiast, you owe it to yourself to get this book and read it...it will give you some idea of what a firearms design genius JMB was...and not just sporting arms as his contribution to military arms has never been equaled and never will be. It also tells of, perhaps, the most interesting aspect of JMB in that he was a very religious man and actually took 2yrs away from gun making to serve as a Morman missionary in Georgia.

[Rembrandt]

Originally Posted by shootniron

Based on his biography...this information is not correct.

The A5 patent was applied for in Feb of 1900...the gun went into production in 1903.

The Superposed was the last gun that John Browning invented, this fact was stated in the book on page 263.. .that it was the LAST GUN he invented..

There is no mention in the book of any fear of legislation as it would relate to the capacity of the shotgun...and besides, the 1897 was already in production and it offered a 6rd capacity.

I have no doubt your book is correct, but there are other sources that do speak to his fear of legislation against the A5. I'm only quoting what appears in Schwings book.

"The Browning Superposed" by Ned Schwing. Page 27, "The Genesis of the Superposed".

"The reasons for his interest in the over/under design were really twofold. First he was looking for a continued source of income. He was concerned the rising protests against repeating arms (conservationists called them "game exterminators") would have an adverse effect on the sales of his previous semiautomatic designs. He told his son Val Browning, "I think there is a market for a reasonable priced overunder gun which will be one of the last shotguns to be legislated out of business". Interestingly, at about the same time the same thought occurred to Edwin Pugsley, vice president of engineering at Winchester, ten years before that company designed and marketed its side by side shotgun, the Winchester Model 21."

This fits with what you are saying. Not only was Browning concerned but also Winchester executives had the same concerns.

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

So far, the earliest US gun control law I can find that has any kind of ammo capacity limit is the 3 shot limit for Migratory Waterfowl, which dates from 1934.

1934, over a decade AFTER the Superposed design. Interestingly I ran across (currently unverifiable) information that the reason Browning designed the Superposed was that FN asked him to. Supposedly, during one of his trips to FN, they were selling his automatic really well, (and so was Remington), and FN said they could sell a lot of double barrels too, but couldn't compete against the dominance of English and Belgian doubles in the market, and could he come up with a gun that would?

Browning was up to the challenge, and the result was the Superposed.

I have found nothing, so far, that any kind of ammo capacity limitation was anything of concern in the 1920s (or before). Browning designed a number of "hi capacity" firearms AFTER the Auto 5, including the original prototype for what became the "Hi-Power" 9mm pistol, when FN finished the design after his death.

I have not been able to find any other source (again, so far) indicating there was any concern about mag capacity limits in that era. To me, the idea sounds "revisionist", using modern concerns to explain something in the past where those concerns really didn't apply.

Schwings book addresses the topic in regards to capacity of shotguns as they pertained to Game Laws, not Federal firearm regulations. Keep in mind the source of the threat was from, (as Schwing puts it), conservationists calling the repeating shotguns "game exterminators". This followed the era when market hunting had wiped out some bird species and game laws were stepping in to correct the situation.

Schwing addresses the fact there were other motivations for the Superposed design. The statement that Browning and Pugsley both had concerns that game laws might affect their best selling shotguns indicates the threat was there as well as motivation for a backup plan.

[44 AMP]

the topic in regards to capacity of shotguns as they pertained to Game Laws, not Federal firearm regulations.

In this case, the Federal firearms regulation I'm talking about here IS A GAME LAW.

1934 was a big year for federal gun control. The NFA 34 was nothing BUT gun control.

The Federal Migratory Bird act also passed that same year. Best known for creating the requirement that a Federal Duck Stamp must be purchased in order to hunt migratory waterfowl, it also included a ban on using shotguns larger than 10 gauge, and the 3 shot limit.

That IS gun control.

Game laws (at any level) that include restrictions on what gun(s) & ammunition may be used, ammo capacity limits, barrel length limits, etc., ARE GUN CONTROL.

Its just they are the kind of gun control that we (usually) object the least to. And that is because they are the only kind of "sensible" gun control laws, laws that only affect people who play that particular game. They are "sporting rules" They only affect USE in the specific sport, not overall ownership and possession like the gun control laws that we object to.

Do note that when the federal 3 shot limit went into effect, sales of semi autos AND pumps didn't go into the tank, down the tubes, or even fall off to any noticeable degree. Amazing what a simple wooden plug can do, isn't it??

[Rembrandt]

44 AMP, I'd agree with your post.

While I was trying to make a distinction between Federal gun laws as they pertain to public safety-vs-game laws that are for the wildlife, both do have the same origin.

In most cases the Federal firearm laws for game are few, the majority come from the states and their wildlife departments.