Bolt actions from WWII

[kragluver]

For that matter, the Japanese used captured Enfields, '03s, Krags and M1917s against us throughout the war (see Shots Fired in Anger).

 

[plexreticle]

I like the rifles with the original marking on them be it Nazi or the chrysanthemum. Not too long ago all that stuff was ground off before being imported to the US.

 

[PaulV]

I like the rifles with the original marking on them be it Nazi or the chrysanthemum. Not too long ago all that stuff was ground off before being imported to the US.

It actually depends on what your definition of not too long is.

The Japanese were allowed to remove the mums from their weapons as part of the surrender conditions. I believe this was allowed to make surrender more palatable as the chrysanthemum was the symbol of the emperor and considered sacred. Any Japanese rifles you see that still have an undefaced mum are probably battlefield pickups.

Any German weapon you see with pinged out waffenampts was probably captured by the Russians. The Russians stored and refurbished many captured arms for their own emergency use. Many times rifles going through the process had the nazi marks removed. They did the same to their own Mosin Nagant rifles that had the Czarist crest on them post the 1917 revolution.

 

[Afy]

Also try and get some WWII ammo... I think there is some still floating around.

 

[WinkingTiger]

WWII Bolt Actions for Deer Hunting

Does anyone use a WWII type bolt action for deer hunting?

I was thinking of getting a Garand or springfield for this but since this thread is so information filled I think I may go the Mosin-Nagant route because of cost.

What do you guys think?

Can these WWII bolt actions take a Deer from 200+ yards?

 

[JesseL]

Does anyone use a WWII type bolt action for deer hunting?

I haven't actually gotten a deer yet , but all my rifles that would qualify as deer guns are sporterized WWI/WWII type bolt actions.

One Swedish Mauser in 6.5x55; Mauser 98s in 6mm Rem, 22-250, and .30-06; and 03 Springfields in .30-06 and .308 Norma Magnum. My Mosin M44 (unmodified) would probably serve just fine as well.

Can these WWII bolt actions take a Deer from 200+ yards?

With absolutely no doubt.

 

[tiders]

Float Pilot.
As a Norwegian I just can’t let that one slide on by. Sweden was not neutral, more like non-belligerent. Like the US vs UK and the lend-lease deal before Perl Harbour. Pretty much the same idea, except they sided with the Germans. They let the Germans transport artillery and fresh elite troops on Swedish state rail to the front in Narvik, Norway. (a map may help at his point if your WWII geography skills are a bit rusty). The net of it is that they helped the Germans fight British, French, free Polish and Norwegian troops, and securing this northern front.

They turned back a lot of refugees on the border between Sweden and Norway. Quite a few Jews were turned back at the border and ended up in Gestapo's hands before being sent to Germany and the camps. Of course all that changed after Stalingrad. The police troops stared recruiting among the Norwegian refugees in the summer of 43.

There is more than one reason for most Norwegians being enthusiastic about membership in NATO after the war. If you can’t trust your bigger neighbour; you’d better have a friend with the biggest stick around…

I forgot to reply to the topic, I’ve got a k98 for taking deer and it does a decent job…

 

[mr.trooper]

Japanese Arisaka 38 or 44 in 6.5x50 are good choices. Be wary of the 7mm ones as they often have weaker recievers.

BS!

I recall a magazine article where the writers took an Arisaka and TRIED to blow it up with intentionally over-charged hand loads, and pulled the trigger with a string. multiple shots of the hottest load they could come up with failed to do any damage to the action.

Many of these Arisakas were re-barreled to 30-06. part of the receiver had to be milled away to facilitate the significantly longer cartridge. Even those can still handle full power 30-06 loads.

the Arisaka is by FAR the strongest bolt action used by any major power.

 

[MachIVshooter]

BS!

I recall a magazine article where the writers took an Arisaka and TRIED to blow it up with intentionally over-charged hand loads, and pulled the trigger with a string. multiple shots of the hottest load they could come up with failed to do any damage to the action.

Many of these Arisakas were re-barreled to 30-06. part of the receiver had to be milled away to facilitate the significantly longer cartridge. Even those can still handle full power 30-06 loads.

the Arisaka is by FAR the strongest bolt action used by any major power.

While I agree with you, one does have to watch out with "last ditch" rifles, as many were poorly manufactured and not heat treated. I've even heard that they were made with undersize bores or bores that were only partially drilled and deliberately left behind with the intention of injuring American soldiers who may try to fire the rifle.

I have a last ditch, and I have fired it with no problems. But you can bet I was a little nervous the first time out.

 

[mr.trooper]

Iv heard those rumors too, but frankly, WHY BOTHER?

If your loosing a war and hurting for resources, then why, WHY would you waste the time steel and hardwood to build a battle rifle that doesn't work? To play a practical joke, and MAYBE take a single soldier out of action?

Yes, they did let quality slip. ALL the powers did. American and Great Britain are included in that.

While many mid and near-end of war rifles are of poor build quality, they DO go bang instead of kaboom. Even Arisakas and "crap-canos".

 

[Ash]

The only ones to be wary of would be the training rifles. The last ditch were fine, very very rough, but fine. The training rifles, on the other hand, have cast-iron receivers, smooth bores (or two-piece barrels made from damaged or cast-offs), and were only designed for firing low-powered blanks. Firing full-power ammo is possible through them, but that makes them into grenades.

Ash

 

[Trebor]

If your loosing a war and hurting for resources, then why, WHY would you waste the time steel and hardwood to build a battle rifle that doesn't work? To play a practical joke, and MAYBE take a single soldier out of action?

By the end of the war the Japanese were hurting for rifles as most had been used up in "wastage" on the battlefield.

If you are losing a war, you need to get rifles out of the factory as quickly as possible. One of the time-consuming niceties that gets cut is "quality control." Instead of making sure that ABSOLUTELY EVERY rifle meets specs, you just make as many as you can, as fast as you can, so you have something to arm soldiers with. The odds are that most will work.

It's not that they were delibertrately trying to arm soldiers with a sub standard rifle, it's that they couldn't take the time to make sure the rifles were all made to spec.

A bunch of "so so" rifles available now, when you need them, is better then fewer rifles later, at least at that point in the war.

 

[Harley Quinn]

M1 Garand... It has a bolt too, doesn't it?

Yea it does, "M1 thumb" is a result of that bolt slamming forward and your thumb still in the hole.

 

[guninthewater]

Can these WWII bolt actions take a Deer from 200+ yards?

I'd say that most WW2 rifles can be used to hunt deer. I've never done it myself, but I've even heard of people using the relatively unpowerful .30 Carbine in this role. I doubt it was at 200 yards, though. (Please note that I'm not inviting a debate on hunting ethics here.) Other than the .30 Carbine, most of the WW2 cartridges seem to be similar to a .308 or .30-06 in terms of ballistics and energy. Some, like the 6.5 Jap and 6.5 Carcano, are a little less powerful, but they should still be OK for whitetail.

Personally, though, I'd be more concerned with accuracy potential than ballistics if I chose to use a WW2 rifle for hunting. Bore conditions on these old rifles can vary greatly, and even with good bores they will often not shoot to their point of aim. I guess what I'm saying is that you should know your rifle before taking it hunting. For me, I'd gladly take my Enfield, k98, or M39 into the field. I'd also not hesitate to use my Garand if I could find suitable ammo or use an adjustable gas plug (modern .30-06 has a bit too much pressure for the Garand's gas system). On the other hand, I don't think my Carcano, 91/30 or Type 99 have the requisite accuracy. Other rifles of these types, however, might perform very differently.

 

[Limeyfellow]

The P17 Enfeild was mentioned but that's the wrong war

Thats not quite true. Sure US troops didn't use them as their main service rifle anymore, but they were still issued to soldiers who were involved in mortar and artillery as well as being turned into US sniper rifles early in the war. A large number were also shipped to the UK and used by the homeguard, and then sent to be used by the Free French Army, French Resistance, Greek Resistance, Nationalist Chinese and a whole host of other military assets. In the end the number of military personal using the M1917 probrobly outnumbered all the M1903s.