During World War I the AEF used pump action shotguns in trench warfare - that is, as a tool used in close quarters to clear German trenches in an attack. I wish I knew to what front-line combat troops shotguns were issued, but I have found nothing beyond the fact of their being issued and the German government calling them a violation of existing rules of war. While Winchester's Model 1897 shotgun was not the only model issued, it is the one that interests me.

In photographs, moving picture film, and first-person written accounts of trench warfare, it was shown that warfare in the trenches was wet and filled with mud. Comparing the open and relatively unprotected 1897's action with, for example, Remington's Model 1910 (and its much more popular 25-years-later descendant, Ithaca's Model 37) or even Winchester's Model 12, how efficiently did the 1897 function?

A few months ago I bought my brother a 1897 12 gauge take down built in 1906. He cut the barrel down to 20” and had it threaded for screw-in chokes. He took it totally apart to clean it and got enough dirt out of the thing to equal the size of two sausage patties. It was working when I bought it; it works even better now.

Attached Images

A1B8A5C9-1BFC-45D3-A7A9-A4DE6D447D8D.jpg (24.3 KB, 135 views)

I'd guess nothing is safe from mud and water in that environment when you literally live in it 24hrs a day.
All the small arms from rifles to handguns to the shotguns were exposed to it and I assume some faired better than others.

The 97 is a fairly open design but can also be cleared easily of generous debris and fouling.
The Remington 10 seems like it would be an answer to the mud and dirt problem but in reality it's complex design and less than good leverage on the unique carrier makes it a bad candidate for getting it packed with dirt and expecting it to work well.

The 97 comes apart past the normal Take-Down procedure, ,,way easier than the Remington 10. At least taking the bolt and carrier out of the frame if needed to clear a badly fouled gun.
Either would have been an Armourers job I suspect in the field,,but the 97 is a simple one including reassembly.
The Remington 10 is a complex design, the side board carrier w/cam and complex bolt assembly are close fitting and not easy to dissassemble/re-assemble for a quick cleaning and clearing of mud/dirt.

I love both pump guns (pumps in general) and especially the Mod 10 Remington. But the simplicity award goes to Winchester when comparing the two in those conditions and working on them keeping them going.

Just my .02

and 2152hq:

Two interesting replies. What I think I read is that Mr. Browning designed the Model 1897 to be loose as a goose except for when locked. If my interpretation is accurate I typed the same design summary for the shotgun's action as I would for Mr. Browning's Model 1894 lever action. I wonder if a portion of design tolerances were used because at the time Winchester began production of the 1897, ammunition loaded with black powder was still generally available?

"ammunition loaded with black powder was still generally available?"

Indeed it was. Browning's predecessor to the M97 was the M93 which was very similar to it. It was a BP-designed shotgun, as in 1893, smokeless powder had not yet arrived in the USA. The first production of smokeless powder began in 1894 by duPont at Carney's Point NJ. From what I have heard, the M93 had some serious problems when smokeless loads were used in it. Exactly what the problems were I don't know, but they were bad enough that Browning made improvements in the M93 which resulted in the M97 (which was designed to use higher pressure smokeless shells), and Winchester did a recall of the M93 replacing any M93 sent in with a new M97. That's why Winchester M93s are very seldom encountered. I remember seeing only one of them.

One thing often is misunderstood is the cleaning of a mud soaked gun. These were usually just doused with water from a canteen and put back into service. When I was guiding elk and deer hunters I carried either a s&w model 19 or a Colt Woodsman. On one particular day we laid the jeep on its side. My model 19 was found buried in the mud and had been walked into the ground. Totally compacted with mud, I took it to town later that day, and went to the car wash and hosed it down. I then tied it to the roof rack and blow dried it on the road back to the mountain.

This and a few other instances lead me to the conclusion that any serious holster for me as an outdoorsman will have a closed toe and a full flap holster.

I'd guess it had it's problems, but Doughboys were used to many problems, from the soles falling off their shoes to bad fuses to borrowing equipment from the French and making do.

Early in their entry into combat, the AEF had no artillery, machine guns or aircraft of their own, so they used French stuff for the most part. Their light machine gun was a device called the Chauchat, a clumsy light machine gun which was used in the role taken on by the later appearing BAR.
Look at the magazine - it's not only open, but was so flimsy it would bend if you squeezed it hard loading it. That should make you feel pretty good about the 1897's functionality in trench warfare. The Doughboys didn't like a lot of things, but they had no other choice but to make do when the gray-clad waves of German infantry approached.

Attached Images

chauchat light MG 8mm Lebel.jpg (193.0 KB, 64 views)

If I remember correctly during WWI the Germans put a bounty on any soldier carrying a shotgun. They really didn’t like the end results of a shotgun blast.
I really love those old Winchester 97’s and 12’s

While this video focuses on one type of trench shotgun, it talks of others and is very good.

To answer your question, in WWI, trench guns were allocated at 50 per Army Division. Most of these went to scout platoons, who often made initial contact with the enemy.

In WWII, most went to Marines in the Pacific theater. Each Marine regiment was allocated 100 of the Model '97s. Many photos exist of Marines on patrol, where the point man almost always had a Model '97 in his hands.

I just posted a future article on the '97 trench guns; it can be found here:

http://smith-wessonforum.com/firearm...#post139897323

John

__________________
- Cogito, ergo armatus sum -

The Remington Model 10 was designed by John D. Pedersen, of "Pedersen device" fame. While he was a talented guy, he had a penchant for making simple things more complex. Anyone who has ever taken a Remington Model 51 pocket pistol apart knows that.

John Browning, who was responsible for the '97 Winchester, had the opposite approach. For example, anyone can be taught to completely disassemble a 1911 pistol with no tools with about 15 minutes of instruction.

Browning was a genius; Pedersen was only a semi-genius.

John

__________________
- Cogito, ergo armatus sum -

Winchester 97s are the mainstay shotguns of "Wild Bunch" matches in the cowboy action game. My 97 in 16 gauge was my main stage rifle for most of the time I played in CAS and if I ever play again the 97 will be with me. Wonderful, fun shotgun.

In the Vietnam era, in Basic Training, I was issued an M-14 with a fiberglass stock. When it was muddy I took it into the shower and washed it, then easily oiled it and was finished cleaning it. Really annoyed my DI but I never failed an inspection!

"Their light machine gun was a device called the Chauchat, a clumsy light machine gun which was used in the role taken on by the later appearing BAR. Look at the magazine - it's not only open, but was so flimsy it would bend if you squeezed it hard loading it. That should make you feel pretty good about the 1897's functionality in trench warfare. The Doughboys didn't like a lot of things, but they had no other choice but to make do when the gray-clad waves of German infantry approached."

The Chauchat was not nearly as bad as much of the WWI lore suggests. It was originally designed and made for the 8mm Lebel round as used by the French forces. In that caliber it gave good service to the French Army. The real problem arose when it was modified to use the US .30-'06 cartridge. As it was somewhat more powerful and longer than the 8mm Lebel, the resulting gun was only marginally reliable in the US doughboys' hands. But it was all they had in the way of an LMG. Very few BARs made it into combat during WWI, partly because it took a while to manufacture them in quantity and few arrived in France prior to the Armistice and also because the senior staff of the U. S. Army feared that some BARs would be captured and copied by the Germans and used against the allied forces. So they held them back from issue, which is understandable under the circumstances. Most of the military planners felt the war would continue until well into 1919, and they did not want to face any Germans armed with 8mm Mauser BARs.

The model 1897 as well as model 1912 did not have a disconnector so that they could be rapidly fired by holding the trigger and pumping the action. This was a plus for a combat shotgun.

I thought it was this thread or maybe Johns article, but somewhere I saw mention of waterproof shot shells having been made for the military using solid brass cases.

Anyhow, here’s what they look like. I came across them at a North Texas flea market back in 1974, just too cool for a gun-crazy teenager to resist:

Far left for comparison is an old plastic Remington 00 round.

IMG_0126.jpg
IMG_0124.jpg

My grandfather served in the U.S. Army in WW1. I remember him telling that when the Germans came out of their trenches in those mass charges across no man's land,the Springfield 30-06's were laid down and the 1897's were picked up.
His recollection was that the 1897 with 7 rounds of 00' buckshot was the weapon of choice. In his words "it sent Fritz running back towards Berlin"
They worked them in pairs, one man shooting while the other reloaded.
His personal shot gun purchased after he returned from France was a 1897 and it's still in the family. One of those "it will never be sold" guns.

You will find many more 1897's in good working order vs. 1910's today over 100 years later.

That tells something about the two designs as to durability.

I think if you look closely there's some Model 12s mixed in there.

I'd say that has more to do with there having been about four times as many Model 97s produced as Model 10s.

Also Remington Mode 10 and Ithaca Mode 37

Were this valid, wouldn't currently manufactured pump shotguns that have been specifically intended for use by American military and paramilitary - that is, police, FBI, et al. - such as Mossberg's 590 [special] series have this feature? Or do they?

Sure did. Paper shells wouldn't hold up to life in the trenches. Way too much water. So they went with the old stand by - brass.