Talk:Huot Automatic Rifle

message: There is nothing known to have been called the "Huot light machine gun", but there was an experimental Canadian weapon called the "Huot Automatic Rifle."  A factual and well-documented article should be placed there. TeamZissou 22:28, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Do all three words need to be capitalized, or would it be "Huot automatic rifle"? -GTBacchus(talk) 01:17, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Moved. Even  says that "is commonly known as the Huot Automatic Rifle;", and that's the common name indeed. Per the WP:NC, it should not be capitalized. Duja► 11:02, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the capitalization should remain, actually.  Like, M1918 Browning Automatic Rifle--it is a proper name, I think. TeamZissou 19:35, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Moving article?

message: From the Talk:Ross rifle talk page:
Sir Charles Ross was working on, or did develop a light machine gun, but it wasn't based on his straight-bolt rifle design. Indeed, it would be absurdly difficult (though possible) to turn the action of his bolt rifle into a machine gun action. I'm not sure a Dominion Rifle Company existed -- there was a Canadian company called the Dominion Cartridge Company, but they were not in the business of developing firearms. I think that the reference might be referring to Ross' unproduced design, and this I believe demonstrates yet another reason there should be a separate article on the Ross Rifle Company, which could contain information on other Ross firearms and Ross automatic knives (among other things). There is much more to the Ross rifle than just the military variants, though that is with what this article seems most concerned. So, in this article the military version of the rifle gets a muddled presentation while the non-military variants and other products receive less-than-comprehensive encyclopedic coverage. I have some great source material if anyone wants to help in writing a Ross Rifle Company article. As for the claim of the existence of a Ross-action machine gun, I move for deletion of the section provided no supporting information becomes available. TeamZissou 16:53, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hate to break it to you, but I searched the Huot online & found pictures (Canadian War Museum, IIRC), & they match the description given. How much evidence did you want? Trekphiler 20:01, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a link? TeamZissou 21:30, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

text: There was a Candian weapon called the "Huot automatic rifle," but there is nothing to indicate a "light machine gun" of that name existed.  I still cannot find any connection between the Ross action and the Huot automatic rifle. TeamZissou 22:00, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Yes, it says an autoloading rifle and a light machine gun... So the LMG it refers to is the Huot Automatic Rifle?, and were there Ross bolts taken from surplus rifles, and were the bolts simply used as blanks to cut new bolts for the Huot (if that occurred), or was Ross involved in the design from the ground up? Was there a "Dominion Rifle Company" of any kind? TeamZissou 00:09, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ross was definitively involved.... As I say, I run out of time to look for it (but in the reference cited above, it is clear that Ross was directly involved)... I need some time to work it out... Later this week or next week... Ya know, it's all on paper.. so it need time to look at it...Kalashnikov 00:25, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, okay--you've done good work on here so I trust you. I just had an issue with "converting" a bolt rifle to a machine gun, since I hadn't found any information to support that. It sounds a bit far-fetched. I now accept Ross was involved with the development of a LMG, but turning the Ross rifle into a LMG (as the Huot light machine gun article, and as parts of the Ross rifle article suggest) sounds a little far fetched. TeamZissou 00:35, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Think you're right, regarding the Huot, but I think it's a good thing to at least cite it here, because it was based on the M10 design. They were very close to fabricate it on an industrial base. I'll add the references later, as per I already said. I just got involved with this article. I started to work on commercial rifles because it was less than imprecise. Then after I'll work on military models and later on side stuff.Kalashnikov 00:47, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Having found a copy of Ross Rifle, I added. I'm guessing this is where Fitzsimons (& his consultant, Ian Hogg, whose word I'd trust, since he's probably fired the thing!) got it.  Trekphiler (talk) 23:05, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Disputed information in article

message: The automatic rifle was a WW1 era project, it was not used in combat, not deployed in big numbers, to consider it a WW1 weapon is misleading.Mr.User200 (talk) 17:43, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for explaining in understandable English. Please use edit summaries in your initial edits, and spell your edits correctly and you'll save yourself some touble next time.- BilCat (talk) 17:59, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disruptive editing. 

message: In a 22 October 1917 letter to the British Minister of Munitions, Blair said tooling existed in Canada and the Dominion Factory was ready to begin manufacturing the Huot, using parts from Rosses scheduled for scrapping. After exposure to it in France, Lieutenant-General Arthur Currie, commanding the Canadian Corps, reported every soldier to come in contact with the Huot liked it, and on 1 October 1918 wrote requesting 5,000 be purchased, arguing casualties required increased firepower for each remaining man, as well as to allow his men to answer the growing number of German light machine guns. It was disliked for its physical appearance, but at C$50, it was considerably cheaper than the original C$1,000 cost of the Lewis.
>It was disliked for its physical appearance, but at C$50, it was considerably cheaper than the original C$1,000 cost of the Lewis.
Erm... how comes the Canadian gun was 1000/50 = 20 times cheaper than the Lewis gun? 81.89.66.133 (talk) 07:57, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: My guess is because the gun was created from the Ross Rifle, most of the production and associated costs would be cut out. That would mean the price would sharply increase the moment the Army runs out of Ross Rifles, however. 2A02:A420:21:6182:74A0:EA24:2AE:ECC8 (talk) 11:58, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  50 dollars versus a grand (1000$)? Possible typo