Happy Birthday Samuel Colt:

Today is the anniversary of the 1814 birth of Samuel Colt. Not only was Samuel Colt one of the greatest firearms designers of all time, he was also a brilliant industrialist, a philanthropist, and an outstanding pro-labor employer. In 2002, I wrote an article in support of making the Coltsville manufacturing area into a National Park. In 2008, the area became a National Historic Landmark; the campaign for National Park status continues.

AJK:
God made men; Sam Colt made them equal.
7.19.2009 5:35pm
PersonFromPorlock:
Industrialist, philanthropist and employer, yes. Even a feminist, for his time. "[O]ne of the greatest firearms designers of all time," weelll, maybe. I don't think he was nearly as creative as Mannlicher or Browning, though. More like Mauser, who basically did only one thing but did it very well.
7.19.2009 6:23pm
Sebastian (mail) (www):
I knew it wouldn't take long for someone to come on and suggest that you have defiled John Moses Browning by suggesting he may not have been the greatest firearms designers of all times.

I think it's arguable. Sam Colt was certainly a great firearms designer. But I think I would have to go with Browning too. He is basically the father of the modern semi-automatic pistol. There are a lot of semi-auto pistols out there, of course, almost all of them based off his designs.

I also think one has to recognize that the Army, with millions and million spent in research and engineering money, still can't find a better replacement for the M2 .50 Caliber Machine Gun, which by now has been in service for nearly 90 years.
7.19.2009 6:48pm
Anononymous314:
"In 2002, I wrote an article in support of making the Coltsville manufacturing area into a National Park. In 2008, the area became a National Historic Landmark; the campaign for National Park status continues."

And you're ok with this...? Agitating for a blatantly unconstitutional action by government to serve owns own private interests is morally repugnant.
7.19.2009 8:02pm
raven397 (mail):
Anononymous [sic] 314, what exactly is unconstitutional about agitating for National Park status? Sam Colt did a stupendous amount to liberate and protect the freedom of all men and women.
Your spelling and your legal analysis both are substandard.
7.19.2009 8:36pm
http://volokh.com/?exclude=davidb :
The nod clearly goes to Browning. But Colt was a great American genius.
7.19.2009 8:48pm
subpatre (mail):
PersonFromPorlock and Sebastian - The statement was "Not only was Samuel Colt one of the greatest firearms designers of all time"; there's not some problem with that, is there? Browning was great, as was Mauser, Kalashnikov, and many others. Colt was one of them —a great— not only for the design, but also his manufacturing.
7.19.2009 8:52pm
Cato The Elder (mail) (www):

God made men; Sam Colt made them equal.

Wow, I love this.
7.19.2009 9:13pm
mcbain:
Subpatre,

If this was a religious discussion, and it almost is, putting John Moses Browning PBUH on the same plane as Mauser and Kalashnikov would earn you a stoning.
7.19.2009 9:34pm
PersonFromPorlock:

The statement was "Not only was Samuel Colt one of the greatest firearms designers of all time"; there's not some problem with that, is there?

A little bit of one. IIRC (and it's been thirty years since I was really familiar with firearms history) Colt's real invention was the hand and bolt method of rotating and locking up a revolver's cylinder. Everything after that was an elaboration on the basic invention. Browning, on the other hand, invented many different firearms - most, brilliantly. And Mannlicher, who I considered the greatest gun designer of all, seems to have invented almost every modern type of firearm, at least on paper, by 1885.

Still, that's not to take away from Colt's excellence as an engineer and entrepreneur. But others did more innovating of firearms.
7.19.2009 9:39pm
flashman (mail):
William Hosley's book, Colt: The Making of an American Legend, is recommended reading.

In the Army I carried the Browning designed, Colt manufactured, 1911 before the transition to the Beretta, which I carried until my retirement.

As a police officer I've carried a 1911 (Kimber) and a variation with a larger capacity magazine (built by the Texas company STI). I now carry the Croatian-designed Springfield XD and a Heckler &Koch, neither of which are Browning designed.

I also love revolvers (I have several-all Smith &Wessons, the company that still makes great revolvers) and it was Colt that perfected the revolving cylinder that PersonFromProlock notes. However, I'd say it was his entrepreneurship and efforts to standardize firearms production (interchangeable parts) that made Colt a genius.

Browning, on the other hand, designed the 1911 and a large number of other firearms variations and cartridges (.32 ACP, .38 ACP, .380 ACP, .45 ACP, and .50 BMG), to include rifles, shotguns, and self-loading pistols, that to this day are rarely bettered. His start-up company, which produced a rolling-block rifle, began business in 1852 (as a gunsmith), 10 years before Colt's death.

But, why argue when you can have both? Colt died in 1862 and Browning in 1926. The Colt company and Browning collaborated on a gas-operated machine gun. The Browning firearms company wasn't established until after his death. Instead, Browning spent his life designing firearms mostly for other companies, to include Colt, Winchester, Remington, and FN.
7.20.2009 12:11am
subpatre (mail):
David - You referenced article makes a good case to recognize the Colts' manufacturing area. The buildings are now protected by National Historic Landmark status, a preservation designation. Landmark status allows private ownership and compatible usage, while protecting the property through zoning, incentives, and (relevant to Connecticut), protects it from the state.

A proposed Coltsville National Park would be different than its current Landmark status. Can you comment on how many Park employees, what facilities, tours, re-creations, re-enactments, etcetera you anticipate under federal Park ownership. In short, what would the Park be like?
7.20.2009 9:30am
subpatre (mail):
To the Browning worshippers - "His start-up company, which produced a rolling-block rifle, began business in 1852 (as a gunsmith), 10 years before Colt's death." -flashman

Browning was many things, but he was born in 1855.


PersonFromPorlock writes,"Colt's real invention was the hand and bolt method of rotating and locking up a revolver's cylinder. Everything after that ...

Colt's 'real invention' may have been firearms, but his genius was as a capitalist: assembling and creating a manufacturing environment of the highest skilled workers, the most capable equipment, making products in the most efficient way.

Ironically, Colt was not inclined toward capitalism, and achieved success accidentally. His company folded after lobbying the government to buy them, but war with Mexico and westward expansion revived demand for Colt's revolving breech pistols.

In making his 'real invention' Colt created the environment and machinery that produces accurate fitting parts; without which Browning's many inventions would have been paper dreams.
7.20.2009 10:28am
rosetta's stones:
Well, there can certainly be genius involved in machining and manufacturing, in many cases, but the Euros were doing what Colt was doing, weren't they?

Now, the moving assembly line, that was true manufacturing innovation... and arguably genius...
7.20.2009 11:33am
subpatre (mail):
rosetta's stones writes,"Now, the moving assembly line, that was true manufacturing innovation... and arguably genius..."

How utterly oblivious. Assembly lines are dependant on [Samuel Colt's] interchangeable parts.
7.20.2009 12:18pm
LarryA (mail) (www):
In 2002, I wrote an article in support of making the Coltsville manufacturing area into a National Park. In 2008, the area became a National Historic Landmark; the campaign for National Park status continues.
Hopefully before it becomes a National Park the rules allowing for NP concealed carry will take effect, thus avoiding the truly ironic situation of prohibiting firearms where the revolver was born.
How utterly oblivious. Assembly lines are dependant on [Samuel Colt's] interchangeable parts.
Actually it isn’t interchangeable parts that held up the assembly line so much as measuring/monitoring equipment and machine tools that stayed within close tolerance.
7.20.2009 2:14pm
rosetta's stones:
How utterly oblivious. Assembly lines are dependant on [Samuel Colt's] interchangeable parts.

How utterly oblivious of you to think that Colt invented part interchangeability, which at least as I learned in primary school, came about in this country at Eli Whitney's hand, although as I mentioned earlier, it likely came about in Europe in parallel with that, if not of even earlier Euro invention.

On the other hand, it does appear that real innovation came about in manufacturing in the US, with the concept of a moving assembly line.
7.20.2009 2:56pm
flashman (mail):
I stand corrected by "subpatre" and regret the error. I should have rightly said "Jonathan" Browning (John Browning's father), who had, in fact, established himself as a gunsmith as early as the 1840's. The father developed something referred to as a "Harmonica gun," which worked with a sliding breech.

Several years ago I read a biography of Thomas Edison and learned he was more of a "developer" than "inventor," which I guess is a nice way of saying that he exploited the ideas of others to enrich himself and, in the process, enriched US consumers as well. No doubt he was an aggressively licensed a number of products that were likely the ideas and inventions of others.

Maybe something similar can be said about Colt (more of a developer who applied the ideas of modern manufacturing to firearms) and, to a lesser extent, Browning. It just appears to be that Browning may have been more of "inventor."
7.20.2009 8:19pm
subpatre (mail):
rosetta's stones writes: "How utterly oblivious of you to think that Colt invented part interchangeability, which at least as I learned in primary school, came about in this country at Eli Whitney's hand, although as I mentioned earlier, it likely came about in Europe in parallel with that, if not of even earlier Euro invention."

Nobody invented —or could invent— interchangeable parts. It’s a concept, like ‘efficiency’. Factories in the 18th and 19th century saw part interchangeability as a manufacturing goal; accomplishing it was the problem.

It's worrisome you confuse Whitney’s scam with innovation and genuine accomplishment.
Eli Whitney entered the US musket bid with a 'demonstration' of ten muskets whose parts interchanged; muskets actually hand-made at enormous expense. The ruse secured the contract, one that did not require interchangeability, with delivery due in two years.

Whitney promoted the idea —like all manufacturers of the time— of interchangeable parts, and tried to make them, but never produced any. Whitney’s first non-interchangeable-part muskets were delivered 8 years past due.
The first interchangeable wooden parts were in Terry’s clocks about 1815, the first interchangeable metal parts were locks from North and Hall’s gunwork ~1832, and about ten years later Colt's factory revolvers.

Colt didn’t invent the revolver, was not the inventor of interchangeable parts, was not the first to dream of a repeating firearm, and didn’t come up with heavy mechanization in manufacturing; but Colt was the first among all these.

The revolver ‘invented’ previously didn’t work, interchangeable parts cost more than hand-made, previous repeating firearm schemes were expensive and impractical, and mechanized production exchanged quantity for quality.

Samuel Colt made the last tweaks to a revolving cylinder pistol design, and it worked. He slashed manufacturing expenses by using all interchangeable parts, effected by Colt’s decision to put highly skilled workers on the production machine tools. Colt was at the right place and time, but more important, Colt accomplished the right things to create the first practical repeating firearm.
7.20.2009 10:16pm
subpatre (mail):
John Browning was a giant, but a giant standing on the shoulders of giants. Browning developed cartridge firearms, and designed for tooling and manufacturing methods 50 years perfected since Colt's blackpowder days.

Re-reading Kopel's article, it urges recognition of Sam Colt as a responsible American manufacturer, the recognition of a good business owner.
"Yet the most important reason to begin considering Coltsville for a national park is not to recognize a great inventor and industrialist. It is to honor — and begin to recover for our nation's business culture — the values of a captain of industry who saw his workers as more than fungible units of production . . ."

Colt was no Browning, but Browning was no Colt either. Sam Colt's involvement with firearms was almost incidental, his accomplishments applying to many manufacturing processes.
7.20.2009 11:17pm
rosetta's stones:
Nobody invented —or could invent— interchangeable parts.

According to your first post, Colt did: How utterly oblivious. Assembly lines are dependant on [Samuel Colt's] interchangeable parts..

Now you're saying nobody did or could? Have you got your story straight this time?

And no, I didn't confuse Whitney with anything... as obviously, innovation, as always, occurs in parallel in multiple locations, as implied when I mentioned the Euros involvement in same. You appeared to be assigning part interchangeability to one innovator, Colt, and I merely pointed out your mistake.
7.21.2009 11:23am
subpatre (mail):
rosetta's stones wrote:"According to your first post, Colt did" [invent interchangeable parts]

No, Colt succeeded in producing interchangeable parts. ‘Invented’ is your term, not mine.

rosetta's stones writes:" And no, I didn't confuse Whitney with anything. . .

You claimed Whitney “invented part interchangeability” or at minimum it “came about in this country at Eli Whitney's hand”; both untrue. Confusion, typo or falsification; your choice.


rosetta's stones says, "You appeared to be assigning part interchangeability to one innovator, Colt, and I merely pointed out your mistake."

Colt succeeded in producing all interchangeable parts, the ‘holy grail’ of manufacturing for decades. Many tried and none succeeded until Colt. That achievement was Samuel Colt's, not anyone else's. The mistake was yours.
7.21.2009 3:59pm
subpatre (mail):
Assembly lines are dependent on [Samuel Colt's] interchangeable parts. Without the reproducible, repetitive fitting together from standardized, interchangeable parts, there can be no assembly line. For those who believe assembly lines are the epitome of innovation or ‘real genius’:
“The first workman”, Colt told his stockholders in the new company, “should receive two or three of the most important parts, and he affix them together and pass them on to the next who would add a part and pass the growing article to another who would do the same until the complete arm is put together.” All parts were to fit any Colt revolver. The completed guns were to be inspected by men who did nothing else. Here was the assembly line. — Stewart H. Holbrook; Lost Men of American History, p97
7.21.2009 4:24pm

Post as: [Register] [Log In]

Account:
Password:
Remember info?

If you have a comment about spelling, typos, or format errors, please e-mail the poster directly rather than posting a comment.

Comment Policy: We reserve the right to edit or delete comments, and in extreme cases to ban commenters, at our discretion. Comments must be relevant and civil (and, especially, free of name-calling). We think of comment threads like dinner parties at our homes. If you make the party unpleasant for us or for others, we'd rather you went elsewhere. We're happy to see a wide range of viewpoints, but we want all of them to be expressed as politely as possible.

We realize that such a comment policy can never be evenly enforced, because we can't possibly monitor every comment equally well. Hundreds of comments are posted every day here, and we don't read them all. Those we read, we read with different degrees of attention, and in different moods. We try to be fair, but we make no promises.

And remember, it's a big Internet. If you think we were mistaken in removing your post (or, in extreme cases, in removing you) -- or if you prefer a more free-for-all approach -- there are surely plenty of ways you can still get your views out.