Remington-Lee Model 1899: A Final Smokeless Version 

Imagine how Pedersen felt.

He wasn't really competing with Browning here. He was competing with guys like Mauser, Schlegelmilch, Mannlicher, Mosin, and Krag. Browning didn't do hardly anything with bolt actions.

To be honest, Lee's designs were not really all that excellent during his lifetime. The magazine was clever in the 1870s, but by the time he actually got it to work, Mauser and Mannlicher had far cheaper, more durable, and more useful magazine systems available. His actions were not really that impressive, and often trickier to make, so raising costs and discouraging many. His only real success was with the British, who took literally 20 years, from 1887 to 1907, to hammer out all the problems. So Browning was not Lee's problem, Lee was his own problem, because as clever as he was, his best idea (the magazine) was really decades too early for the manufacturing technology, and only the sheer stubbornness of the British government made the Lee rifle a thing to remember.

@@genericpersonx333 And even us British got really close to adopting a Mauser style rifle as our main infantry rifle in 1913. That said, I've always enjoyed shooting No.4's and other Enfields, and never particularly felt envious of those shooting Mausers.

@@derekp2674 For sure, if I was a soldier, I would rather have me a No.4 than a Kar98k any day of the week, but I got to admit that if I was a procurement officer response for finding a weapon to arm millions of conscripts for decades, I would have to admit that Mauser guy really sorted out the important things like durability, ease of reload, and such a lot earlier and a lot cheaper than Lee did, and if it was 1899, I would be negotiating for Mausers for my army, not the Remington Lee or Lee-Enfield. Also, if I was offered a M1917 or a M1903a3, then I would hard pressed to say the Lee had anything over those Mauser derivatives.

It’s a cool design but I wish I could be activated with the magazine in. It makes sense to single load and have the magazine in reserve

In a military rifle it seems completely stupid. The point of a magazine cutoff was to slowly fire single shots until an urgent situation arose requiring rapid fire. Prior to widespread clip loading this was an extremely logical and useful thing to have. What function would this serve? If you pulled your magazine and dropped the replacement you could star single loading, I guess. Seems like extra moving parts for no real gain. The SMLE’s was kept around basically as a safety. You could load your rifle, apply the cut off, then close the bolt without chambering a round.

It is not sensible, it can't be used to keep the magazine in reserve while the soldiers single loading the rifle which was the main function the armies want it to serve at the time, and I doubt that it is an improvement over just single loading into a rifle with a empty magazine so it is not worth the extra parts and cost.

The most sensible? This is the least sensible to me. It's not even a magazine cutoff, it's a magazine bypass, because it only works _without_ a magazine. (How do you cutoff something you don't have inserted?)

It is a sensible design if we start with the acknowledgement that the purpose armies intended to use a magazine cutoff for were obsolete at this time in history. There was no reason to cut off a loaded magazine. This design avoids the silliness while retaining some purpose in allowing the use of the rifle without a magazine.

@Samantha Beaner careful not to cut yourself on that edge

Right? I had to rewind to watch it a couple of times.

@@Skironxd I know right!

I really liked the Lee straight pull design.

@@jeffreyroot6300 There must have been some British interest in the straight-pull Lee rifle. Lee sent his son to England in 1896 with one of the 1895 straight-pull rifles to try and sell it to the British military. Prince George , The Duke of Cambridge (who was the commander-in-chief of the British army) supposedly asked Lee's son "Why did you not show us this rifle before?" I would love to hear the full story of why they chose the bolt-action Lee over the straight-pull Lee to eventually develop into the SMLE.

And those 6mm Lee Navy

More like a cousin.

Alabama cousin? Regular cousin? Or European royalty cousin. There’s more of a difference than you’d think

Theres so many cousins/brothers/sisters of the lee-enfield that you practically wonder how they ever designed anything else.

Not a predecessor. The Lee-Enfield was introduced in 1895.

​More like the Lee-Enfields embarrassingly young uncle.

Chargers were developed for loading directly into the side gate. I think Norway actually adopted a version

You can k31 stripper clips loaded with 30-40 as speed loader

I have a Krag, and It's actually quite easy to reload... I think the advantage of the Krag's loose ammunition is the ability to keep the gun topped up at all times. Of couse, chargers are better overall, but the US Army was used to carrying individual 45-70 cartridges in pouches or bandoliers, and dropping rounds into the Krag felt familiar. That's my theory, anyway. And, as Nichoelass pointed out, a few patterns of Krag could be loaded from a charger, IIRC.

The other huge reason the krag was chosen was that it was cheap to make and "easier" to maintain that most competitiors. And cost is a huge plus in the eyes of the US Army. Aswell as it being rather grunt proof.

The US Krag was modified to take chargers. It was called the Parkhurst Device and was never adopted because it was developed in 1901-1902. By then the US Army knew it was going to replace the Krag and saw no point in an add on for it.

Thank you for your serving. Long live the Republic.

Ahh good old Drum. What unit are you with? I was a 91b with the 107th MP out of utica before they moved to the City.

@@Steve_I I'm actually appart of the other unit that is in utica.

When you have a tube magazine that take enough time to load that the total rate of fire is the same as a single shot rifle the magazine cutoff makes sense saving the magazine for when you need the burst rate. But in general it is a product of an officer class that doubted that enlisted men could use a brothel properly without supervision.

At the time a complete change of about 500 years of thinking. I gun = 1 shot , reload, then after a dozen or so shots the barrel so fouled you can't load anyway. Enter smokeless , relitivley non fouling. Ye Gadzooks Sir! The common soldiery can now fire two or more shots one after another! What about the cost? Bean counting has been with us since the first person grew a bean.

The demand for a mag cut off in British service was a very sensible idea at the time. No one knew how reliable box magazines were or how feasible it would be to reload a mag under pressure. The British therefore stated, that they would not accept a box magazine fed gun, unless the gun is capable of being operated as efficiently as a martini henry even if the magazine is faulty, empty or lost. Once magazines proved reliable it was found that the cut off allowed the rifle to be easily closed on an empty chamber even if the mag is full which is how the British carried their rifles. That is why they kept the cut offs in later service. The idea that soldiers could be ordered to single load under directed fire from an officer is why we all think of this as dumb but that idea has been shown to not be part of actual military doctrine in British service. The British muzzle loaders channel did a through job disproving that one.

I'm not sure this does make sense, since it requires removing the magazine. Unless I'm missing something, if you have an empty magazine, it's no different to dropping a cartridge directly onto the follower. If you have a full magazine you have to remove it, giving an opportunity to lose or damage the magazine, and another route for dirt ingress. The only real advantage is that if you've outright lost or never had a magazine it makes single-loading easier, which is equally true of a conventional cutoff. There's probably a reason that this system wasn't used on any other designs (as far as I can tell).

@@kyphe. Yes, sensible points. But economy was still a strong point, still is.

Ian has some nice subscribers it’s nice to see

The third lug on a 98 Mauser is just in front of the bolt handle. There are a number of other rifles that use the bolt shank as a "safety" lug.

M1908 Mondragon Semi-Auto Rifle also did. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-DU6vWFXhwk4.html

Oh wow that’s awesome. I’d like one of those as someone from Michigan

@@sawyere2496 traverse city pawn shop. Will transfer to ffl

How much?

Patreon spill over.

Could you give me the address and alarm codes.

Failure is fascinating

The Manwell rifle has more in common with the Mosin-Nagant and Mondragon Rifle than an Lee action rifle.

@@Alexander_C69 the magazine looks like this Lee Enfield; maybe it’s a combination of all

U speak gun? We're no strangers to love You know the rules and so do I A full commitment's what I'm thinking of You wouldn't get this from any other guy I just wanna tell you how I'm feeling Gotta make you understand Never gonna give you up Never gonna let you down Never gonna run around and desert you Never gonna make you cry Never gonna say goodbye Never gonna tell a lie and hurt you We've known each other for so long Your heart's been aching, but You're too shy to say it Inside, we both know what's been going on We know the game and we're gonna play it And if you ask me how I'm feeling Don't tell me you're too blind to see Never gonna give you up Never gonna let you down Never gonna run around and desert you Never gonna make you cry Never gonna say goodbye Never gonna tell a lie and hurt you Never gonna give you up Never gonna let you down Never gonna run around and desert you Never gonna make you cry Never gonna say goodbye Never gonna tell a lie and hurt you (Ooh, give you up) (Ooh, give you up) Never gonna give, never gonna give (Give you up) Never gonna give, never gonna give (Give you up) We've known each other for so long Your heart's been aching, but You're too shy to say it Inside, we both know what's been going on We know the game and we're gonna play it I just wanna tell you how I'm feeling Gotta make you understand Never gonna give you up Never gonna let you down Never gonna run around and desert you Never gonna make you cry Never gonna say goodbye Never gonna tell a lie and hurt you Never gonna give you up Never gonna let you down Never gonna run around and desert you Never gonna make you cry Never gonna say goodbye Never gonna tell a lie and hurt you Never gonna give you up Never gonna let you down Never gonna run around and desert you Never gonna make you cry Never gonna say goodbye Never gonna tell a lie and hurt you

@@rempuia69 wtf

@@rempuia69 2009 wants their "joke" back.

@@LUR1FAX *OUR* joke We're no strangers to love You know the rules and so do I A full commitment's what I'm thinking of You wouldn't get this from any other guy I just wanna tell you how I'm feeling Gotta make you understand Never gonna give you up Never gonna let you down Never gonna run around and desert you Never gonna make you cry Never gonna say goodbye Never gonna tell a lie and hurt you We've known each other for so long Your heart's been aching, but You're too shy to say it Inside, we both know what's been going on We know the game and we're gonna play it And if you ask me how I'm feeling Don't tell me you're too blind to see Never gonna give you up Never gonna let you down Never gonna run around and desert you Never gonna make you cry Never gonna say goodbye Never gonna tell a lie and hurt you Never gonna give you up Never gonna let you down Never gonna run around and desert you Never gonna make you cry Never gonna say goodbye Never gonna tell a lie and hurt you (Ooh, give you up) (Ooh, give you up) Never gonna give, never gonna give (Give you up) Never gonna give, never gonna give (Give you up) We've known each other for so long Your heart's been aching, but You're too shy to say it Inside, we both know what's been going on We know the game and we're gonna play it I just wanna tell you how I'm feeling Gotta make you understand Never gonna give you up Never gonna let you down Never gonna run around and desert you Never gonna make you cry Never gonna say goodbye Never gonna tell a lie and hurt you Never gonna give you up Never gonna let you down Never gonna run around and desert you Never gonna make you cry Never gonna say goodbye Never gonna tell a lie and hurt you Never gonna give you up Never gonna let you down Never gonna run around and desert you Never gonna make you cry Never gonna say goodbye Never gonna tell a lie and hurt you

@NerfBeard ' Maybe he thinks it's old enough that it's now 'retro'?

haha it took seeing a 120 year old rifle to see that

Perfectly happy with mine.

Let us not forget that Remington gave us the 03-A3 Springfield.

@@0neDoomedSpaceMarine and how many have you invented ?

@@jerryguerra348 I have a two foot tall stack of firearm mechanisms I've designed. Remington has gone downhill.

And please don't forget the AR-18. The SLR / FAL appears to be an obvious exception, but isn't that similar in some respects to a BAR?

@Enwurd Looter nah

@Enwurd Looter Far from it. Nice try my man, wouldn't say the mormon John Browning counts as an englishman, or the designs by Smith and Wesson that the webley company copied. You could say every self loading pistol and revolver is just a copy of what Col. Colt and Browning designed.

Other way round.... Considering the british invented these bolt action rifles.

@@goforbroke4428 you are aware self loading pistols predate the colt right......

You must be on Pacific time. 6AM here.

You're correct, it seems. forum.pages14-18.com/viewtopic.php?t=59114 They would call it "Carabine Lee Remington modèle 1887", sometimes writing "Lée" instead of "Lee". I'm sure Google Trad will make light work of the page I just pointed you to. But in case you need anything translated from French, simply ask and I'll do it for you.

Also, this other page details the exact models and numbers imported in 1915 from Remington : lagrandeguerre.1fr1.net/t121840-quelques-raretes-de-l-armement-francais-de-la-grande-guerre

France in WW1 seems to have used every gun they could get if it: A, Worked B, Was not a musket

@ScorieDivine thank you so much for the links 👍

Even the P51 mustang was designed for the British...

The real irony was that P-12, 13, and 14 series were based on the Springfield 1903. Many of the changes Enfield made were to ease mass production. Which was why the AEF had more M1917s than M1903s.

The Moisin safety is bad because of how hard it is to move.

Mosin safety is so bad a lot of people don't even know it exists

@@0neDoomedSpaceMarine and the M1s are derived from the P13 Enfield, a pre ww1 British design

No, Lee Navy was a smokeless powder cartridge. The 1899 patterns were chambered in it, not the earlier black powder pattern ones.

@@Sephimius And the Lee Navy used a different action.

Yes

A spare magazine (s) is very important at any time. Provided the weapon is designed to take mags.

@@jerryguerra348 I know ha ha what I meant was a lot of military rifles of that time didn’t consider a detachable box magazine a useable option. So my in thinking wouldn’t that make this rifle a bit of a rarity ?????

@@Johnny-jr2lq In Navy service, a shore party would be badly outnumbered, so the additional firepower would be greatly appreciated. Compared to the cost and tonnage of a naval gun, an expensive cutting edge rifle and a lot (LOT) of ammunition is inconsequential, so the USN went with 6mm Lee - a flat shooting cartridge with excellent penetration, and spare magazines.

@@markbecht1420 Technically clips for the Lee Navy but the previous Remington Lee 1879s used had the bandolier with 4 magazines each so yes

@@rogerborg You can do that with a normal cuttoff, and you don't have to remove the magazine to do it. A design that forces you to remove the magazine is pointless.

He already did.

Years ago, actually.

Well, to be fair, it just took a little bit of product improvement by an experienced military design team, and it then went on to spawn about 20 million very successful Lee Enfields.

@@turbogerbil2935 No it didn't, since the Lee-Enfield had been in production for four years when the smokeless version of the Remington-Lee was introduced.

NZ?

@@georgefrancisyoung3702 close bro Hawaii

You gotta carry that luggage. ;w;

A recipe for disaster in the design of, well anything really.

No relation.