When compared to the Lewis, the Huot was found to be very competitive. It was better at snap-shooting from a trench, and faster to bring into action. Except for overly-thick cartridge rims, the Huot was faster to clear all types of malfunction than the Lewis, and it was simpler to disassemble. Testing at Enfield in April and May went for 10,000 rounds (which thoroughly trashed the Huot’s barrel; it was found to be keyholing after 6,000 rounds). The Huot was found to be less accurate than the Lewis, although this is probably at least partly due to the sights being attached to the barrel shroud, which was found to have rattled its rivets loose over the course of testing. Lastly, the testers at Enfield complained about the shape of the butt making it difficult to get a good grip on the weapon (not surprising, given the bulk and location of the action cover).
Overall, the Huot had 33 parts directly interchangeable with the Ross M1910 rifle, plus 11 parts that had to be modified from the rifle and an additional 56 parts that had to be made from scratch.
So why was the weapon rejected despite such promising test results? Simple – it wasn’t sufficiently better than the Lewis to justify the expense of retooling production and retraining soldiers. And, of course, once the war ended the existing supply of Lewis guns was suddenly far more than would be needed by a peacetime Army, and there was no need to look for additional such arms.
