5 "Must Have" Military rifles

[MrMurphy]

Post WW2, most people adopted Soviet or US issue weaponry, or went the FAL route. So nobody aside from the French and their old colonies used the 49 or 49/56, and given the early French army performance in WW2, French weaponry was not in high regard at the time.

Foreign Legionnaires trusted them and loved them, going by the FFL troops who've written about the period and they served the French well.

I've handled several, never gotten a chance to shoot one. Handling-wise, it's balanced and easy to use. Shorter than an M14, similar to a FAL paratrooper carbine I'd say.

Personally i'd still pick the FAL as it's the best service rifle of it's time other than the AK, but anyone armed with either of the MAS rifles wouldn't be in a bad spot, they performed well. As it was backed up/supplemented by the excellent MAT-49 submachine gun, the French were armed as well as anyone else at the time.

[Mescalero]

They got a bad rep because century arms imported a bunch of them and did bad jobs rechambering them to .308
The rechamber job was ok if it was done with care, but they used worn tooling and get it done fast work methods.
The only real experience I have with them is mine and three others belonging to shooting buddies.
NO problems with ours.
Although it is shorter than the two you mentioned, I think it is just as heavy.
The action is a masssive amount of steel.
An out of print book, The Devil's Brigade, after WWII, the German soldiers that survived had no where to go, and nothing to do; so many of them joined the French Foriegn Legion.
These guys were good soldiers and gave the Viet Minh a run for thier money on thier own ground and terms.
They used 49/56 and thought highly of them.
The author of the book is Hans Wagemueller, but I think it is a physdenum.

[Mescalero]

If you are asking how I like them,
I have all the parts to build another one, only this one will be 6.5x55.
I have a lot of loaded ammo.

[getitdone1]

MrMurphy,

Yes, the poor performance by the French in WWII is something I never could understand. Didn't they even have a significant number who sympathized with the Germans?

I believe the Italians were also a "mixed lot" and also made a poor showing.

Leaving the subject here but as I've said, I've been reading about WWII history along with the guns. Lots of good WWII info on the internet.

A military gun I haven't mentioned yet is the 1895 Lee Navy. Say, from what I read that straight-pull 6mm gun seemed to get the job done. Very accurate they say and I'm sure some of that accuracy came from reduced recoil and flat trajectory. 112 gr bullet, final version. .236--real odd ball.

Also been watching videos about the straight-pull Canadian Ross. Appears it got an underserved reputation for being unsafe, of course more so with the hot 280 ctg. than the .303 British.

I'd like to have one of each of these military guns but I doubt I will. Still, it's possible. I'd want several to compare them side by side.

There must be a pretty good market for the little Browning 22 LR T-Bolt straight-pull rifle since they've made quite a few of them in recent years.

Don

[Mescalero]

Read H.W. McBrides book,
A Rifleman Went To War,
There is a chapter where they captured a German sniper,
and he is standing there comparing the germans mauser to his Ross,
and the german laughs at him.

[MrMurphy]

The Ross never truly worked as it should and they were replaced with SMLE's. The Ross more or less was adopted for Canadian pride. As a target gun, excellent, in the field under trench conditions, no. Snipers made good use of them as they could generally keep them cleaner.


As to the French in WW2.. everyone got overrun. Poland, Norway, etc. The French didn't give up right away, but you have to realize that WW1 obliterated huge chunks of the French countryside for five years or so. So many men were killed in WW1 that an entire generation of Frenchwomen weren't sure they'd ever marry. Not enough guys surviving to go around. The Maginot line came to be since it was obvious the 'always keep attacking' strategy wasn't working, and they had lost so many guys, fortresses to conserve their troops did make sense. And the line itself worked, Belgium fell so fast that the French basically got outmaneuvered. Germany didn't fight like the last war, and they overran 'everyone'. Even the Brits almost didn't make it out of Dunkirk, they basically did so because Hitler's orders caused the Germans to stop and give them time to get out (not intentionally). The French resistance and FFI troops fought hard against the Germans, but after a generation-killing war only 20 years before THEN the world's largest recession.......

Yeah, I can see why some of them just had had enough. I don't agree with it, but I didn't live through WW1, then the Spanish Flu killing more people than the war, THEN the Great Depression AND another war either......

Good friend of mine did a tour with the Foreign Legion, in Bosnia and Afghanistan and French forces aren't a pushover. Don't always agree with their gov't decisions, but I don't agree with ours either so no blame for them. They do very well with the limited budget they have available, and aren't afraid to get into the action. The French stay active in Africa, the current fighting in Mali, Chad, etc has French troops involved, and they stayed on the pointy end in Afghanistan as much as they could, unlike some countries with more restrictive ROE's.

As to straight-pulls.....

The only one which ever saw significant combat service was the Mannlichers, under the Austro-Hungarian empire, and later with others (Romania, etc who got them as war reparations). The 6mm Lee was an interesting rifle, the action wasn't as natural as the Mannlichers, but apparently it worked well enough. Dan Daly won his first Medal of Honor with one in China. The Mannlicher straight pulls have a healthy recoil (8X56mm) but during the Austrian/Italian campaign in WW1 they saw heavy use and apparently did just fine. The Austrians didn't change rifles till they were taken over by Germany and went to the Mauser. The old Mannlichers were used for reserve/rear area troops and things after that.

[firefuzz]

My love for military bolt actions started at the young age of 12. After watching Gary Cooper play Sgt. Alvin York in the same named movie I wanted an '03 Springfield rifle, not knowing until years later Sgt. York most likely was issued a 1917 Enfield. I managed to save up for one at 16 purchased, by my Dad for me, at a local pawn shop for the princely price of $65.00. I had that gun for years and wish I still owned it.

I've never cared for the Mosin's, 98 Mauser's, Enfield No 1's, (although I truly love the Model 96's and Enfield No 4's) Arisaka's or any of the French or Italian rifles, but just a matter of personal taste not that they're not serviceable weapons, I don't care for .243's, 270's or 8mms either.

Just drawing from my personal experience and preferences I would rate my top five WWI rifles and the reasons why:

Most accurate and least recognized: 1914 and 1917 Enfield's (P14 & P17)
Personal favorite: 1903 Springfield
Most copied: '98 Mauser
Most robust: Mosin-Nangant
Best all-around WWI bolt gun: Enfield No4 Mk?

I'm in the process of building a "jungle carbine" on a No4 Mk2 action. It's my understanding that this configuration eliminates the "bullet floating impact" that regular No5 Jungle Carbines have due to the lightning cuts on the No5 receiver.

Rob

[MrMurphy]

Except the No.4 Mk1 didn't come around till WW2....not WW1 (might have been a typo in your case).

I always thought the Springfield was overrated. Having carried one as a drill rifle, and having shot functioning ones, the original M1905 sight was an abomination on any combat rifle.

The SMLE and M1917 were far better for actual combat 'as is', as was the Mauser series rifles. I'd take any of them, any day, over the Springfield, which of course, was a Mauser copy.

[firefuzz]

Except the No.4 Mk1 didn't come around till WW2....not WW1 (might have been a typo in your case).

I always thought the Springfield was overrated. Having carried one as a drill rifle, and having shot functioning ones, the original M1905 sight was an abomination on any combat rifle.

The SMLE and M1917 were far better for actual combat 'as is', as was the Mauser series rifles. I'd take any of them, any day, over the Springfield, which of course, was a Mauser copy.

You're right, my bad. I agree with you about the '03's rear sight and much prefer the '03-A3 for shooting. My infatuation with the '03 over the '98 is founded in romance, not function. To me the original 1903 Springfield is the sexiest, most elegant military bolt action ever built.

Rob

[getitdone1]

firefuzz,

Mosin-Nagant is the most robust? How so? Do you also mean most reliable?


There's another straight-pull I haven't mentioned and it's the Blazer Tactical and sporting R8. The Tactical is a sniping rifle and over 4000 dollars. High-end and unique rather than reliable is my guess.

The military guns I'm most curious about now are the French MAS-36 and the semi-auto 49/56. Never knew they existed until a couple of days ago.

I like a larger, longer bolt handle than is on most bolt-action guns. Wish my Ruger Gunsite Scout had a larger bolt handle. Longer and larger "ball" on end.

I wonder what percent of proven reliable military rifles did not have the mauser "controlled round feed" that's supposed to be so important when hunting dangerous game? During a war MAN is about as dangerous an animal as I can think of. Also during a war the problem of dirt in action is much more prevalent. The Remington model 700 does not have controlled round feed and yet it has been our most important military sniper gun.

Don

[MrMurphy]

Snipers also tend to be able to pick 'when' they shoot, and they aren't usually in weird positions (shooting upwards behind them, etc) like potentially possible for dangerous game.

They're usually stalking and shooting prone or (these days) sitting or kneeling supported, pretty close to perfectly level.

For military bolt actions, most of the world was using Mausers during Big Mistake 1 and Big Mistake 2. The ones who weren't were using a copy (Springfield) or the Lee-Enfield or Lebel. Not a gunsmith, though I own a Mauser and a pair of L-Es but the Lee system is pretty controlled, it's not just spring pressure from what I remember feeding the round. The Lebel was kind of a makeshift setup but apparently very reliable in trench conditons, so I'd say they had no complaints except the magazine size.

The MAS 36 has always been described as a Mauser type action, so I guess it's controlled feeding. The only 36's I've seen in person were in displays at Les Invalides (the French Army museum in Paris) so I didn't get to handle them.

[firefuzz]

firefuzz,

Mosin-Nagant is the most robust? How so? Do you also mean most reliable?

Don

Probably the better description.

Rob