What's new
British Ordnance Collectors Network

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

20 x 105 British made Solothurn

SG500

SG500

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
I was lucky to pick this one up recently.

According to P Labbett "British Small Arms Ammunition 1864-1938" page 305:

"The 20mm Solothurn machine gun was first demonstrated in the UK in January 1931 and was stated to be a multi purpose gun although the Small Arms Committee were still mainly interested in it for anti tank use. In February 1931 it was decided to buy one gun with ammunition from Switzerland and in October 1932 a second gun was purchased. The Swiss ammunition supplied was of three types, practice, tracer and armour piercing. The guns behaved well under trial and aroused considerable interest. ICI Ltd at Witton had begun making this ammunition and in July 1934 supplied 200 rounds of AP ammunition to Woolwich, followed later in July 1934 by 3000 rounds of ball. As late as October 1935, Woolwich were ordering further quantities from ICI Ltd. The design reference for this ammunition, made in Birmingham being BK 119/167A.
In the event the British Army did not adopt any anti tank weapon within the 0.8 to 1 inch calibre bracket.
Case length 105.7mm
Belt diameter 26.2mm
Rim diameter 24.9mm
Overall cartridge length 169mm"

All INERT/Primer oiled etc.

Dave.

IMG_4062.jpgIMG_4066.jpg
 
What a great case!

I know I am boring people with this but it is Rheinmetall not Solothurn.
 
I have a photocopy of the Ordnance Board notes dated 12 April 1933 concerning this subject. The gun is referred to as a Solothurn throughout - there is no mention of Rheinmetall. The British team visited the Solothurn works in Switzerland where the gun was made in order to talk to the staff there. These anti-tank rifles have always been referred to as Solothurns from then till now. So while the name might have been technically incorrect in terms of the origin of the design, I wouldn't say that the use in this context is inaccurate.

It may be a bit like referring to the AK and AKM as the AK-47, or calling the Messerschmitt Bf 109 the Me 109 (it was popularly called that in the Luftwaffe at the time, as well as by the Allies). Both are technically inaccurate, but have come into popular acceptance through long usage.

Incidentally, the Oerlikon anti-tank rifle was evaluated by the British at the same time (the original SSG in 20x72RB rather than the later SSG-36 in 20x110RB).
 
Tony Williams said:
I have a photocopy of the Ordnance Board notes dated 12 April 1933 concerning this subject. The gun is referred to as a Solothurn throughout - there is no mention of Rheinmetall. The British team visited the Solothurn works in Switzerland where the gun was made in order to talk to the staff there. These anti-tank rifles have always been referred to as Solothurns from then till now. So while the name might have been technically incorrect in terms of the origin of the design, I wouldn't say that the use in this context is inaccurate.

It may be a bit like referring to the AK and AKM as the AK-47, or calling the Messerschmitt Bf 109 the Me 109 (it was popularly called that in the Luftwaffe at the time, as well as by the Allies). Both are technically inaccurate, but have come into popular acceptance through long usage.

Incidentally, the Oerlikon anti-tank rifle was evaluated by the British at the same time (the original SSG in 20x72RB rather than the later SSG-36 in 20x110RB).
Click to expand...


I refer to the development actually not the producer. Besides that Solothurn was the remote sales platform of Rheinmetall at that time (and the plant producing the AT rifles).
Further there are Rheinmetall patents showing the breech mechanism dating it to 1926 (a US pat from 1929 refering to the German patent in 1926). Well before Solothurn was founded.
 
EOD said:
I refer to the development actually not the producer. Besides that Solothurn was the remote sales platform of Rheinmetall at that time (and the plant producing the AT rifles).
Further there are Rheinmetall patents showing the breech mechanism dating it to 1926 (a US pat from 1929 refering to the German patent in 1926). Well before Solothurn was founded.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know. That's why I said "the name might have been technically incorrect in terms of the origin of the design". That doesn't alter the fact that these AT rifles have always been known as Solothurns, from when they were first offered to the present day, and were called that by the factory which made them, so to say that it's incorrect doesn't really make sense.
 
I referred to the cartridge designation of the initial posting. It was not about the weapon designation.

Even though there is lots of room for interpretation when we look at these Solothurn weapon descriptions which clearly advertise the Rheinmetall 37mm Pak and the 81mm mortar. Nobody will dispute that Solothurn never made these. Nevertheless it says Solothurn in there. Just food for thought...

RH002.jpg


RH001.jpg
 
As far as I am aware the 20x105B only ever saw service in the Solothurn anti-tank rifles (I don't think that any of the MGs designed in this calibre were sold, except perhaps in small numbers for evaluation), so it's not unreasonable for the cartridge to be popularly described as such.

Anyway, as Rheinmetall was the parent company I suppose it was up to them what to call them! It's a bit like the modern car industry. The Volkswagen group owns Audi, Skoda and SEAT among others, and in the case of the SEAT Exeo it's even an old-generation Audi A4 with some cosmetic changes - but if you own one, don't try selling it as an Audi...
 
EOD/Tony thanks for all the ongoing discussions, I hadn't quite appreciated the relationship between Solothurn and Rheinmetall.

Dave.
 
Tony Williams said:
As far as I am aware the 20x105B only ever saw service in the Solothurn anti-tank rifles (I don't think that any of the MGs designed in this calibre were sold, except perhaps in small numbers for evaluation), so it's not unreasonable for the cartridge to be popularly described as such.QUOTE]

Finland purchased for tests one S 18-1000 ATG ( serial # 4 ) in autumn 1939. In spring 1940 12 pcs S 18-154 ATG's ( serial # 1-12 ) were purchased and used during WW2. Obviously these guns originally were ordered for Bulgaria as the guns have Bulgarian coat of arms on receiver. In 1942 one S 18-1000 which fired also full automatic was purchased for test for AA- and aircraft use. This test did not lead to further orders.
Click to expand...
 
Tmine35 said:
Finland purchased for tests one S 18-1000 ATG ( serial # 4 ) in autumn 1939. In spring 1940 12 pcs S 18-154 ATG's ( serial # 1-12 ) were purchased and used during WW2. Obviously these guns originally were ordered for Bulgaria as the guns have Bulgarian coat of arms on receiver. In 1942 one S 18-1000 which fired also full automatic was purchased for test for AA- and aircraft use. This test did not lead to further orders.
Click to expand...

The S18-1000 series (which included the S18-1100 auto version) used the 20x138B ammo, not the 20x105B used by the S18-100 series. These two rounds are popularly (if inaccurately - pace EOD! :tinysmile_twink_t2:) known as the "Long Solothurn" and "Short Solothurn" respectively. The long round was of course widely used in automatic weapons like the Rheinmetall Flak 30 and Mauser Flak 38, Breda M35, Lahti L40 etc.

As I said, as far as I know only evaluation samples of automatic weapons chambered for 20x105B were sold. The best-known was the Lb 204, which did make it into limited German service (in seaplanes/flying boats) in modified form as the MG 204 - but with the cartridge changed to the rimless 20x105.

Curiously one of the S100 series in 20x105B (designated S18-350) was used as an aircraft gun - by the Dutch in their Fokker T.V. bomber. However, this remained semi-auto only and was manually aimed.
 
We shall not forget the MG204 then which was full auto and not a Solothurn weapon at all.
 
There was also a regular belted case for the MG 204, merely for tests but it existed in quite a number.
 
I know that the one designated Lb 204 used the 20x105B. What I am not certain of (although it seems likely) is whether the change to the MG 204 designation coincided with the change from 20x105B to 20x105.

EOD, is there any evidence concerning this? Any guns stamped MG 204 definitely in 20x105B?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top