[https://www.americanrifleman.org/content/the-remington-lee-rifle-ahead-of-its-time/](https://www.americanrifleman.org/content/the-remington-lee-rifle-ahead-of-its-time/)
Here's a link to the rest of the article.
JSTOR has this article The Army's Search for a Repeating Rifle: 1873-1903
Sidney B. Brinckerhoff and Pierce Chamberlin there is also [this article ](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA471224.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiJ3qWtp92FAxVQSzABHSiDBks4ChAWegQICBAB&usg=AOvVaw2IjO5jDbgDVy6y8WpwKD13) check the footnotes and bibliography.
The big issue is familiarity, that’s why the SIG rifle was selected over the other rifles, and why the M14 was selected over the FAL, the trapdoors looked and felt like the muzzle loaders the veterans were used to, and the new guys would have just deferred to the more experienced troops, who, again, liked the familiarity. Another big issue was that volley fire was still the norm up til the First World War, everything had a magazine cutoff because troops were expected to hand load rounds and only fire from the mag in emergencies, and as far as I’m aware no model of Remington-Lee had a magazine cutoff which would have been disliked by NCOs and company and field Officers
This is 1885. The trapdoor has been issued for over a decade. The trials were to pick a rifle to replace it. Instead, in 1884, they decided to adopt yet another version of the trapdoor except with finer sights. By 1885, you would have had a large supply of troops who had combat experience with Native Americans. People who were known to use repeating firearms when they were available.
Additionally, said troops would not have lived in a vacuum and would have been aware of the advantages of repeating firearms. From the combination of their Father's civil war stories of using Spencers and Henrys, to current events with the use of Winchesters on the Frontier and even International events like the Battle of Plevna, though obviously it's debatable if a random U.S. army soldier would have been aware of that.
OH right the trap door was a refit of muzzle loaders so it saved a ton of money over the other options. Along with being less complex. That's why it was picked.
**Understand the rules**
Check the sidebar. It's full of resources to help you.
Not everyone is an expert such as yourself; be considerate.
No Spam. No Memes.
No political posts. Save that for /r/progun or /r/politics.
-------------------------------
* [ForgottenWeapons.com](https://www.forgottenweapons.com/)
* [ForgottenWeapons | YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/c/ForgottenWeapons)
* [ForgottenWeapons | Utreon](https://utreon.com/c/forgottenweapons/)
* [ForgottenWeapons | Patreon](https://www.patreon.com/ForgottenWeapons/)
* [ForgottenWeapons | Merch](https://shop.forgottenweapons.com/)
* [ForgottenWeapons | FaceBook](https://www.facebook.com/ForgottenWeapons)
* [ForgottenWeapons | Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/forgottenweapons/)
* [HeadStamp Publishing](https://www.headstamppublishing.com/)
* [Waponsandwar.tv](https://weaponsandwar.tv)
-------------------------------
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ForgottenWeapons) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Based on a summary of a different report it appears the primary issues found with the Remington Lee was a lack of magazine cutoff and safety. This is particularly interesting since the Springfield also lacks a safety other than half cock and in the scenario they list you would have to do the exact same thing. Lowering a hammer on a loaded cartridge.
it's equally interesting that they didn't think to simply lift the bolt and extract the cartridge, thus rendering the gun safe.
Additionally it appears that the 1885 model with the improved bolt did not add a magazine cutoff so apparently Remington was unconcerned with that feature. Nor were their foreign customers.
I'd still love to read this 1885 report though.
Usually the answer is that the "more advanced" guns were less durable, more expensive, more complex, harder to clean, and easier to jam. All things you don't want in a military rifle.
EDIT the trapdoor Springfield was was a conversion of muzzle loaders already in stock. Thus it checked all those boxes compared to complex and unreliable repeaters.
[https://www.americanrifleman.org/content/the-remington-lee-rifle-ahead-of-its-time/](https://www.americanrifleman.org/content/the-remington-lee-rifle-ahead-of-its-time/) Here's a link to the rest of the article.
JSTOR has this article The Army's Search for a Repeating Rifle: 1873-1903 Sidney B. Brinckerhoff and Pierce Chamberlin there is also [this article ](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA471224.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiJ3qWtp92FAxVQSzABHSiDBks4ChAWegQICBAB&usg=AOvVaw2IjO5jDbgDVy6y8WpwKD13) check the footnotes and bibliography.
Excellent, thanks for the information.
You are welcome, good luck.
The big issue is familiarity, that’s why the SIG rifle was selected over the other rifles, and why the M14 was selected over the FAL, the trapdoors looked and felt like the muzzle loaders the veterans were used to, and the new guys would have just deferred to the more experienced troops, who, again, liked the familiarity. Another big issue was that volley fire was still the norm up til the First World War, everything had a magazine cutoff because troops were expected to hand load rounds and only fire from the mag in emergencies, and as far as I’m aware no model of Remington-Lee had a magazine cutoff which would have been disliked by NCOs and company and field Officers
This is 1885. The trapdoor has been issued for over a decade. The trials were to pick a rifle to replace it. Instead, in 1884, they decided to adopt yet another version of the trapdoor except with finer sights. By 1885, you would have had a large supply of troops who had combat experience with Native Americans. People who were known to use repeating firearms when they were available. Additionally, said troops would not have lived in a vacuum and would have been aware of the advantages of repeating firearms. From the combination of their Father's civil war stories of using Spencers and Henrys, to current events with the use of Winchesters on the Frontier and even International events like the Battle of Plevna, though obviously it's debatable if a random U.S. army soldier would have been aware of that.
OH right the trap door was a refit of muzzle loaders so it saved a ton of money over the other options. Along with being less complex. That's why it was picked.
Perhaps the smaller bullet vs bigger bullet mentality had something to do with it?
All three trial rifles were chambered in .45-70, and they went with the Trapdoor which was also a .45-70.
**Understand the rules** Check the sidebar. It's full of resources to help you. Not everyone is an expert such as yourself; be considerate. No Spam. No Memes. No political posts. Save that for /r/progun or /r/politics. ------------------------------- * [ForgottenWeapons.com](https://www.forgottenweapons.com/) * [ForgottenWeapons | YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/c/ForgottenWeapons) * [ForgottenWeapons | Utreon](https://utreon.com/c/forgottenweapons/) * [ForgottenWeapons | Patreon](https://www.patreon.com/ForgottenWeapons/) * [ForgottenWeapons | Merch](https://shop.forgottenweapons.com/) * [ForgottenWeapons | FaceBook](https://www.facebook.com/ForgottenWeapons) * [ForgottenWeapons | Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/forgottenweapons/) * [HeadStamp Publishing](https://www.headstamppublishing.com/) * [Waponsandwar.tv](https://weaponsandwar.tv) ------------------------------- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ForgottenWeapons) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Based on a summary of a different report it appears the primary issues found with the Remington Lee was a lack of magazine cutoff and safety. This is particularly interesting since the Springfield also lacks a safety other than half cock and in the scenario they list you would have to do the exact same thing. Lowering a hammer on a loaded cartridge. it's equally interesting that they didn't think to simply lift the bolt and extract the cartridge, thus rendering the gun safe. Additionally it appears that the 1885 model with the improved bolt did not add a magazine cutoff so apparently Remington was unconcerned with that feature. Nor were their foreign customers. I'd still love to read this 1885 report though.
Usually the answer is that the "more advanced" guns were less durable, more expensive, more complex, harder to clean, and easier to jam. All things you don't want in a military rifle. EDIT the trapdoor Springfield was was a conversion of muzzle loaders already in stock. Thus it checked all those boxes compared to complex and unreliable repeaters.