Category: General Discussion

Reject the timeline! Embrace anachronisms!

What is it?

We’re offering an optic mount for attaching the New Primary Arms Micro Prism scopes to M14, M1A, M1 Garands, and BM59’s. These optics are using a “mini ACOG” mount that is a little more rare but works perfectly in this case because the mounting footprint nests into the rear sight ears on these rifles. The 1x is a fantastic alternative to a red dot for those concerned about astigmatism or battery life. These have an etched reticle like a scope that is perfectly usable when off. The eye box and eye relief is very forgiving as well approaching the usability of a red dot. The 3x is stunning. It’s amazing to get so  much out of something no bigger than a fairly common red dot. The eye relief and eye box are not nearly as forgiving as the 1x, but great for a low power scope.

For more details on these MicroPrism scopes, check out the Primary Arms website and watch these YouTube videos for a third party take on these optics: Garand Thumb Military Arms Channel Brass Facts Tactical Rifleman

Why did we do this?

Ever since I saw this Forgotten weapons video (below), I’ve been intrigued by the concept for a low power scope on a Garand or M14. I’ve never been happy with some of the tall scope mounts for the M14, nor the side mounted scopes on the Garand. Forward mounted scopes were always an option and the mounts are solid, but the long eye relief scopes are really not my cup of tea. I had in mind some tinkerer’s plans of taking a relatively cheap G36 1.5x optic tube and fabricating a custom one-off mount for myself to use and trying to mimic the look of the original optic from the video. But when I got an M1A and the Primary Arms SLx MicroPrism scopes came out, I had an epiphany. The mounting footprint would nest nicely in the rear sight ears on the Garand of M14 essentially making the idea more viable and even as a product to offer. The final result lived up to my expectation, although I find myself enjoying the 3x far more.

Bubba No!

I can hear it now, the purists are groaning. Well, we sort of agree with you, but with caveats of course. The truth is, we don’t really advocate for putting these on good collector grade Garands, but even if you did, it is a reversible operation and should not harm collectability as long as you kept track of those rear sight parts. At worst a small amount of scuffing of Parkerizing might be found. For shooter grade, commercial made cast receivers, and tanker carbines, I see no reason to fuss. That is ultimately a matter of taste and best left to the customer to decide. The matter for M1A’s and M14 is entirely different. Given that M14’s were never really surplused, virtually none of the rifle’s carry any historical provenance of their own and again this is left to taste. 

Summary

If you’re looking for something to add some capability to your rifle without much weight or bulk, this is a really good option.

We are VERY happy to announce the release of our mag release.

This has been an off and on development for more than a year and there have been several times where we have had to bite our tongue in conversations with customers and the public when it comes to magazine change ergonomics. There were several obstacles to make this work, and we had to increase the testing regimen to make this a successful product. With ergonomics, the feel of the thing needs to be just right. We think we achieved that but we are open to making some variations over time to maximize the users experience.

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

There was also the major hurdle of installation. The assembly on our early prototypes were nearly impossible because the spring that needs to be tucked into the trigger housing. We created a simple process of using a common flat head screw driver, a nail(or punch if you have it), and an included slave pin for installation . The installation method of this part we think is the most ingenious part of the design and one of the main reasons you don’t see more ergonomic magazine releases for the Mini-14 and Mini Thirty on the market today. Watch the video below to see what we mean.

But why would I need this? My factory magazine release works just fine. The factory magazine release works great. We’re not saying ours is superior in function. We offer improved ergonomics. The idea that something needs to be broken before anyone should make improvements is something we 100% disagree with. Most innovative work doesn’t fix something broken, but is just incremental improvements to a previous item.

If you have any questions, comments, or concerns, you can comment below.

Do you ever daydream your Mini-30 is that unicorn VZ-52/57? Do you ever wonder what it would be like to use a Rasheed? Do you wonder what it would be like if NATO had adopted .280 British in the 1950’s? What if someone scaled up the M1 carbine to take 7.9×33 Kurz? Here at Cogburn Arsenal, we wonder those things a lot.

The Mini-14/Mini-30 rifles hold my interest as a rifle that should have been thought of 70 years ago. There were a few people thinking of it, but never had it’s day. In my mind, the Mini-14 in 6.8 SPC is a functional equivalent to hypothetical U.S. Army’s successor to the M1 Garand and M1 Carbine if .280 British were the standardized NATO cartridge. The FAL was already being developed in this caliber, but the U.S. might have still opted for a home grown design for their service rifle. Logic would dictate that the Army would come up with a hybrid of design features from the Garand and M1 carbine. The resulting rifle would be a near copy of the 6.8 SPC Mini-14. I would love to see a AC556 converted to 6.8 SPC. It would show the hypothetical BAR replacement like the M15/M14E2 was intended to be. Of course, it would need a custom wooden pistol grip stock. Those M14E2 stocks handily score ten out of ten in the Cold War aesthetic category. 

A similar story rings true in post WWII Czechoslovakia. The famous Czech weapons designers took what they learned from some of their fantastic interwar auto-loading 7.92x57mm rifles and meshed it with a German lesson in intermediate cartridges. The child of this was the VZ-52 in 7.62×45. At the demand of standardization, the Soviets killed the development of what could have been a great cartridge. The Czech rifle limped on as a VZ-52/57 in 7.62×39, but it was ultimately doomed. My Czech weapon loving self is left longing for that ten round magazine, stripper clip fed, intermediate cartridge carbine. So I took my Mini-30 and I made some modifications. In all fairness, the VZ-58 carbines that would go on to replace the VZ52/57 were probably the best rifles in the communist side of the Iron Curtain until the AK-74’s entered the scene. Then again, a 5.45×39 VZ-58 would be even better. 

 

The same story is retold a few times over. Winchester wanted to create a small bore light weight alternative to the M14 and developed the Winchester Light Rifle in .224 caliber. The Soviets took some SVT design elements and shrunk them into the SKS. The Egyptians shrunk the Hakim into the Rasheed. Oddly, the Spanish went the other way and increased the M1 carbine to accept the 7.9×33 Kurz. The resulting Spanish rifle has some striking similarities to a Mini-30 or Mini-14 in .300 Blk. Some of these designs are more obscure than the others, but they all have a distinct cold war intermediate caliber carbine that was based in a more traditional rifle layout. Very few of these rifles saw widespread adoption or use. Instead, large western militaries adopted more modern designed rifles using large calibers on par with previous wars. When the West realized the 7.62 Nato was a mistake, they opted for new rifle designs with pistol grips, plastic furniture, and Aluminum. Those decisions led to the skipping over of the rifles that really hold my interest. Light weight, carbine variants of the large caliber, WWII era, auto-loading rifles. 

I’m tired of seeing SKS’s in bullpup stocks with duck-bill magazines. I’m tired of the ACR-esk stocks for Mini-14’s. I just don’t care for taking old designs and forcing them into modern disguise. It’s not just that they are ugly and they never really live up to the new designs. I often find that they don’t live up to the standard configuration. What if we took more modern designs and run them back a little? What if we add a little WWII/cold war aesthetic to our firearms? I think there are a few lessons to be learned from the historical rifles. I think this idea is catching on. Recently we’ve seen retro AR’s, STG-44’s, and Fightlight SCR’s come to the marketplace with some amazing reception. I’m pretty excited about it.

I have nothing against your AR-15 decked out in lightweight aluminum M-lok rails, 800 Lumen flashlights, 1-6x variable scopes, and 2-point slings. There probably isn’t a better self-defense weapon on the market. My problem is that everyone has one, and it’s a little boring. Here at Cogburn Arsenal, we’re trying to cut through the monotony.

-Cole F.

Post Script: When is Kel-tec going to start selling the M43?