Jump to content


Photo

Firearms of note and ridicule


  • Please log in to reply
4089 replies to this topic

#4081 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,268 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orkney, Scotland, UK
  • Interests:But it's got electrolytes! They're what plants crave!

Posted 16 February 2019 - 1212 PM

Here is one such claim: https://www.breachba...m95-mannlicher/

The myth that some historic rifles were exceptionally fast on actual use because they were straight pull is stubbornly persistent on the internet. Obviously technology has moved on and really fast straight pull bolt actions do exist. There's a reason why biathlon rifles are, for example, but you're dealing with minimal .22Rf extraction forces and locking requirements with those.
  • 0

#4082 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,268 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orkney, Scotland, UK
  • Interests:But it's got electrolytes! They're what plants crave!

Posted 16 February 2019 - 1227 PM

Sorry to torrent spam this thread, Bojan, but if you Google "Mannlicher M1895 30-35" a lot of such claims come up, including this one: https://ipfs.io/ipfs...cher_M1895.html
  • 0

#4083 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,996 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgrade, Serbia
  • Interests:Obscure tanks and guns.
    Obscure facts about well known tanks and guns.
    Obscure historical facts.

Posted 16 February 2019 - 1340 PM

Chris, as soon as you realize that 99% of the stuff written in the US about non-US firearms is a bull the better.

 

And just flat out ignore wikipedia, it is pointless trying to correct gazilion of the poo flinging monkeys anyway. At best you can make educational youtube channel, as Ian, Bloke, Othais and Mae did, but it is still very narrow segment, and they are not immune to being wrong, like whole cringeworthy inRange segment about "Winchester use in Plevna".


  • 0

#4084 rohala

rohala

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 496 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece

Posted 17 February 2019 - 0632 AM

like whole cringeworthy inRange segment about "Winchester use in Plevna".

What episode was that and why is it cringeworthy?
(I have been following inrange since forver but I don't remember watching that part)
  • 0

#4085 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,996 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgrade, Serbia
  • Interests:Obscure tanks and guns.
    Obscure facts about well known tanks and guns.
    Obscure historical facts.

Posted 17 February 2019 - 0851 AM

Because there was no large scale use of Winchesters at Plevna - whole thing was a myth that is repeated w/o critical thinking.

 

Whole thing was an invention of the French journalist who was not at Plevna at all. In his memoirs Osman Nuri Pasha, commander of the Plevna defense explicitly said so - there was no use of Winchesters among Turkish infantry at Plevna. Only people who used them were irregular cavalry (whose military utility was next to zero according to him) and in the last breakthrough attempt when it was used to arm non-combat personnel who did not have rifles.

There is also a myth about "Martini-Henry" (in fact Peabody Martini) that are hailed as some kind of super rifles and decisive at Plevna, while they were less than 10% of the Turkish rifle strength - majority were (pretty bad due the use of paper cartridge) Sniders and percussion rifled muskets (mostly US Springfields).

Heavy Russian and Romanian casualties was another myth, they were in line of what was expected from a siege force at that period. Vast majority of casualties was inflicted by excellent Turkish (Krupp breachloader) artillery.

 

His memoirs are translated to German, Russian, French, Bulgarian and English at least.


  • 0

#4086 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,153 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Teutonistan

Posted 18 February 2019 - 1234 PM

That artillery takes most lives on the modern battlefield, who would have thought? ;)

 

 

 

 

like whole cringeworthy inRange segment about "Winchester use in Plevna".

What episode was that and why is it cringeworthy?
(I have been following inrange since forver but I don't remember watching that part)

 

 

They certainly FUBARed their research there.

Though I'd expect them to make a correction vdeo, if they get around to it. 


  • 0

#4087 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,268 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orkney, Scotland, UK
  • Interests:But it's got electrolytes! They're what plants crave!

Posted 18 February 2019 - 1319 PM

Chris, as soon as you realize that 99% of the stuff written in the US about non-US firearms is a bull the better.

 

And just flat out ignore wikipedia, it is pointless trying to correct gazilion of the poo flinging monkeys anyway. At best you can make educational youtube channel, as Ian, Bloke, Othais and Mae did, but it is still very narrow segment, and they are not immune to being wrong, like whole cringeworthy inRange segment about "Winchester use in Plevna".

 

Yes, I totally get that. I'm really intrigued by what Simon's modification to the M1895 would achieve in improved rate of fire as bolt handle placement is obviously really important.  Whether ultra rapid bolt action rifle fire would be tactically useful or not is obviously debateable and I recall reading an account by one British Officer present in some of the early battles of WW1 who opined that his own unit, trained in slower more deliberate fire, had just as large a pile of bodies in front of it as adjacent units employing the "mad minute" technique. Reliable rapid operation is obviously desirable in a skirmish though. The M1895 is a wonderful example of mechanical design and production engineering and a thing of beauty and I hope to own one one day..

 

Personally, as someone who has never expressed a nationalistic preference for any platform or weapon I find the amount of mud-slinging at the Lee Enfield really annoying, particularly as someone who was issued one and who has read widely and extensively and met many WW2 veterans. Some of the problems pointed out are highly dubious - for example I can't find any evidence of the oft mooted rear locking headspace creep issue actually occurring, likewise the allegedly fragile magazine (which could have been replaced in around 10 seconds if was rendered unserviceable). The whole rim jam thing seems to be an artefact of modern ammunition with different rim dimensions/contours to the Mk7 it is meant to duplicate. Yes, the Lee Enfield and its chambering were outmoded in many ways even in 1914, but it wasn't delicate or unreliable. Bloke/Mike and Rowan have done a good video on this which you have probably already seen.


  • 0

#4088 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,996 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgrade, Serbia
  • Interests:Obscure tanks and guns.
    Obscure facts about well known tanks and guns.
    Obscure historical facts.

Posted 18 February 2019 - 1335 PM

I have written previously that basically all rifles used in WW2 were at least adequate. That includes Mosin and Carcano too.

So from that point L-E was perfectly fine.

Thing is that British Army wanted to replace it before WW1 by P1913. which was basically copied Mauser design. So w/o WW1 we would not have L-E myth, positive or negative, but a rifle that served Empire kinda OK, but not exceptional at all, kinda like Martini-Henry (whose reputation is mostly built on Zulu movie and contemporary reports about it were quite a mixed bag).

WW1 however prevented any kind of rearmament, and later UK kept with what was available, as did anyone else.

So, while there are no real complains about L-E from a today's perspective, it was perceived at a time as far from "optimal". WW1 showed that those "problems" were largely irrelevant, but you have to judge weapons from a perspective of the time and what military thought about them.

I have only handled L-E (SMLE in particular), and looking at it it was probably more complicated for a production than a Mauser design. Which is a logical since Mauser action had 10 years more of the development (1888 vs 1898). Which might have been main issue why British army wanted P1913 to replace L-E, not any actual fault of the rifle in use.

 

In a today's world L-E would be AKM, perfectly serviceable, but with "obsolescent" air about it, despite a fact that most other rifles will not have any meaningful advantages usable by a standard soldier.


Edited by bojan, 18 February 2019 - 1338 PM.

  • 0

#4089 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,153 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Teutonistan

Posted Yesterday, 01:20 PM

as did anyone else.

 

 

Au contraire, mon ami! Not the french, they had the MAS36 rifle for their new rimless cartridge together witht he planned self-loader. Or hungary who also introduce several new rifles, but in the end still had warehouses full of Mannlichers of course. :D

 

 

today's world L-E would be AKM, perfectly serviceable, but with "obsolescent" air about it, despite a fact that most other rifles will not have any meaningful advantages usable by a standard soldier.

 

 

Not everything that limps is a comparison. ;)

 

The British Army continually improved on the Lee action with the No.4 Mark x (*? no that can also be misunderstood) and the No.5. As well as the cartridge. And it proved to not be better or worse than others and was adapted for various uses. true is that it was more complicated to manufacture than other designs, but it was no Mosin-Nagant.

 

 

The AKM OTOH really runs unto trouble today, when you want to mount coffee makers and milk foamers. But then a basic M16 cannot mount that either.


  • 0

#4090 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,979 posts
  • Interests:tanks. More tanks. Guns. BIG GUNs!

Posted 26 minutes ago

Rubbish. Simply shop at CAA/FOBUS. 


  • 0




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users