Chauchat SMG Video, it's Alive!


PDA






barman
January 23, 2008, 05:11 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPFu_ZlQ6yg

Very cool because that's the first one I've ever seen.

If you enjoyed reading about "Chauchat SMG Video, it's Alive!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Firepower!
January 23, 2008, 06:04 AM
Nice vedio

MrAcheson
January 23, 2008, 11:37 AM
The chauchat isn't a submachine gun. It fires full rifle cartridges and is comparable to the BAR. Well it would be comparable to the BAR if the BAR was also a total piece of crap.

Vaarok
January 23, 2008, 11:52 AM
Chauchats are excellent LMGs, especially given they were in service five years before the BAR and more were made than any other autoloading anything in WW1.

Unfortunately, that's just a repost of BigMike's CSRG, the video's actually a couple years old.

Gunnerpalace
January 23, 2008, 12:04 PM
Chauchats are excellent LMGs

:scrutiny:

Huh? No their not.

Ash
January 23, 2008, 12:13 PM
Okay, we can admit they were pretty miserable in operation. Beyond what Ian Hogg says, there are many sources where soldiers hated them.

That said, was the DESIGN bad, or was it a combination of poor manufacturing causing parts interchangibility to be very difficult made much, much worse by a horrible magazine design? Had the Chauchat been supplied with closed-sided magazines, would reliability have jumped significantly? Had the assembly of the machine guns been more uniform, would that have improved things? Lastly, had they been chambered for a better round, say the 6.5 Carcano, would they have been much more successful?

Ash

Coronach
January 23, 2008, 12:16 PM
Chauchats are excellent LMGs Are you smoking crack? The Chauchat rivals the Type 94 for worst military small arm EVAR.

Mike :scrutiny:

Edited to add: the ones in US service, at least. Maybe the French made them work. Insert joke here.

mnw42
January 23, 2008, 12:19 PM
Excellent? How? A Colt vs a French bicycle maker doesn't seem like much of a comparison to me. The design *might* be good, but the execution was awful!

If I recall they bent easy and jam-o-matics; partially due to the open magazines in muddy trench war fair.

SDC
January 23, 2008, 12:20 PM
In its original 8mm Lebel, the CSRG is supposed to have been marginal, but when the US bought them chambered for .30-06, they went downhill fast, and there are plenty of stories of soldiers not being able to go through a complete magazine without a jam of one sort or another, and they were ditched as quickly as possible. Here's a picture showing an 8mm Chauchat (half-moon mag) with a .30-06 Chauchat (box mag):

http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p22/StaceyC123/Chauchat.jpg

barman
January 23, 2008, 12:33 PM
Actually, they were very successful as lots of soldiers were awarded medals for their efficiency with this weapon.
That it was a bad design or not, that's up to each one's opinion (I do think it was bad). They're still very relevant historically speaking.

armoredman
January 23, 2008, 12:36 PM
It was horrible - the extractor had a habit of snapping off at a 90 degree bend in it. Fifteen round mag, automatic rifle, and the Doughboys were stuck with them, as the BAR wouldn't show up until the very end of the war.

Mk VII
January 23, 2008, 03:53 PM
The long recoil design was an inherent limitation, and being tied to the 8mm rimmed cartridge didn't help. They couldn't produce sustained fire as the barrel would seize up after 350 or so, but then they were never intended to. It was a reasonable makeshift squad automatic in the middle of a war, but directly the war was over they started to look for a replacement.

Vaarok
January 23, 2008, 04:45 PM
The .30-06 rifles had rough chambers and failed because of that.

The CSRG went afield at a time when the opposition had the choice of an Artillery Luger or a Maxim 08/15. The French used it to great success as a suppressive-fire instrument when knocking out German Maxim nests.

I would recommend the book Honor Bound by Jean Huon, but it's easier to stick to legend, isn't it?

PercyShelley
January 23, 2008, 04:53 PM
Ian V. Hogg notes that there are some people who argue that the Chauchat wasn't really so bad. He notes also that there are people who think the earth is flat.

That said, all the flaws I've heard of surfacing in the weapon; wonky sears, broken extractors, crud in the magazines, et cetera, sound more like manufacturing oversights and defects than any insurmountable flaw in the weapon blueprints.

Gunnerpalace
January 23, 2008, 09:40 PM
The weapons coming out of the factory, one part would not match the next, look at the going price for surviving one -$8000. I have seen Mac's for more.

Double Naught Spy
January 23, 2008, 10:16 PM
Chauchats are excellent LMGs

Are you smoking crack? The Chauchat rivals the Type 94 for worst military small arm EVAR.

Well of course they were (not "are" as they are no longer in service).

Insert joke here.
The Germans loved them!

Coronach
January 24, 2008, 12:03 AM
I would recommend the book Honor Bound by Jean Huon, but it's easier to stick to legend, isn't it?There are a huge number of credible resources saying that it was a terrible weapon as well. My authors can beat up your author? I dunno- I'll take it as a given that it can be made to work, and in the almost complete absence of comparable LMGs on either side, can be a useful weapon. In the land of the blind, the one-eyed are kings, I guess.

You'll note that it vanished from service as soon as other alternatives arrived. And no, that's not entirely fair...it was one of the first of its kind, after all.

Mike

If you enjoyed reading about "Chauchat SMG Video, it's Alive!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!