Military junkers

Status
Not open for further replies.

WestKentucky

Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2014
Messages
13,055
Location
Western Kentucky
Lots of guns get used in military roles. Some of them are indestructible wonders that we end up hearing about for decades (m2 for example) others are just really nice guns that people enjoy (tokarev, 1903 Springfield) and some are just iconic guns that seem to define an era (Thompson subgun). Then there are some that are junk from the time the contract ink dries. Let's hear about those, and if you understand their weaknesses let's hear those too.
 
The M14 has a kind of spotty history. Over budget and behind in production when it was cancelled, difficult to accurize and stay that way. Shortest issue of any service rifle.
 
Chauchat comes to mind.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chauchat

The muddy trenches of northern France exposed a number of weaknesses in the Chauchat's design. Construction had been simplified to facilitate mass production, resulting in low quality of many metal parts. The magazines in particular were the cause of about 75% of the stoppages or cessations of fire; they were made of thin metal and open on one side, allowing for the entry of mud and dust. The weapon also ceased to function when overheated, the barrel sleeve remaining in the retracted position until the gun had cooled off.

Over time, the Chauchat machine rifle's just passable performance in its dominant version (the Mle 1915 in 8mm Lebel) and the failure of its limited version in U.S. 30-06 (the Mle 1918), have led some modern experts to assess it as the "worst machine gun" ever fielded in the history of warfare.
 
I've had two Italian Carcanos, both left a lot to be desired.

Of course there are exceptions, LHO used his mail order one pretty well. A significant number of them were still in use during the Libyan Civil War in 2011 giving the design a length of service of 120 years or so.


.
 
Lots of old bolt actions still being used. Lots of Mosins and some Mausers in Libya, Serbia, and the Ukraine conflicts in recent years.
 
I see no reason to reiterate all that has been written about hoe the Lebel rifles just never measured up after the world changed from black to smokeless powder.

Now, what could be interesting is discovering how the Army adopted the Krag in .30-40 but the Navy adopted the 6mm Lee, both of which passed into some amount of obscurity after the adoption of "M2 Ball" in 1906. (It was "Army" Model 1906 Cal..30 ball until 1934 when the Model designations were changed.)
 
"...The M14 has a kind of spotty history..." Selected for political reasons just like the M16 and Trap Door Springfield.
The STEN was sort of a piece of junk. Hastily designed and manufactured. Known to be loaded and tossed into a room where it would empty itself forthwith.
Our Ross Rifle, also adopted for political reasons(a corrupt Minister of Militia actually), was ok on a range, but far too closely toleranced for trench warfare.
The USN putting chamber inserts into M1 Rifles to convert 'em to 7.62NATO comes to mind too.
Not a firearm, but Patton saying the Allies didn't need the M48 tank when the Sherman was obsolete by 1944 was up there too. Lotta armoured guys died because of that decision.
 
The Reising needed to be barracks inspection clean with all its original hand fitted parts (no interchangeability). It worked fine for police departments. Did not work well for Marines who fought in nasty conditions: saltwater, sand, jungle. One of our worst military failures.


The British Mars pistols were super powerful, but rejected after military trials and never adopted: "The captain in charge of tests of the Mars at the Naval Gunnery School in 1902 observed, "No one who fired once with the pistol wished to shoot it again". Shooting the Mars pistol was described as "singularly unpleasant and alarming" ref: Geoffrey Boothroyd, The Handgun, Crown Publishers, 1970, pp.410–412."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Automatic_Pistol
 
The FG 42 comes to mind. Not the worst gun of its kind in history (the Chauchat took that spot in post three), just a fine example of extreme mediocrity. So simply lackluster when what was needed was something far better.

Too few bullets! Ten or twenty round magazines are really insufficient at 900 rpm.
Side loading. Unbalanced during firing. (Never experienced this myself, but that is what Wikipedia said...)
Too expensive to produce
Too heavy for a rifle, too light for a machine gun.
Not enough raw materials for the entirety of NAZI Germany... In any project.

A really cool answer to a perceived need, but not an actual need. Thus, it was produced in limited numbers for a short time and since has faded into near obscurity.
 
I keep thinking about the "liberator" or whatever it was called. The cheap single shot disposable pistol intended to ambush an enemy and get their gun. If I recall correctly there are exactly zero actual accounts of documented use. If I wasn't at work I would look up more info about it.
 
I like the SKS, the AK-47s brother. The SKS is a simple rifle that turned the Soviets from bolt guns. It was replaced by the AK-47 quickly but has since been used in a lot of major conflicts. I had an AK platform, sold it after about a year. I have a Chinese and Russian SKS that I will never part with. I absolutely love these rifles.
 
Johnson rifles, Reising subgens.

Sunray, the Ross Mk III did not fail in the trenches from tight tolerances, it failed because the left rear lug deformed when it hit the bolt stop. this made it bind up when it tried to rotate to the locked position. This made the soldier yank the bolt that much harder. This made things worse. Snowball effect.
I have a mark III with an undamaged bolt which I have "mud tested". It passed with flying colors. It ate just as much mud as my 98 Mauser, but neither could come close to my Arisaka 7.7
 
The Reising SMG had maintenance problems, from what I've heard about it. Too closely fitted, and needed some hand fitting in manufacture, leading to parts interchangeability issues. It was not universally disliked, but pretty nearly, and was soon abandoned.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M50_Reising#Withdrawal_from_the_Fleet_Marine_Force
My Dad told me the Army Air Corp tried sticking Reisings on combat bomber aircraft in late '43-early '44 after the Marines in the Pacific decided the guns were worthless junk.
The guns had a habit of falling out of the aircraft while crossing over the English Channel.
Lots of turbulence over the channel he tells me,,,,
 
Weapon selection boards should be composed of a whole bunch of grunts and a couple of engineers.
 
Colt potato digger M1895. Terrible design but it was the first real gas-operated machine gun used by the military.
 
My 1916 Spanish GC Mauser rebarreled fits the bill...although it was not problematic in service, it's issues came later with hot 7.62 NATO and .308 win rounds.

And the 1927a1 was problematic with drums but worked well with stick mags. I need to add a Thompson to the collection...too bad they are all .45acp.
 
Tark,
Mud tests on collectible milsurps? Yeek!!!! I am sure that you would be excommunicated from Gunboards for such heresy.

I agree that the Chauchat was apparently an awful rifle. The short lived S&W 9mm submachine gun in WWII was another and I am not sure that had the Pedersen device been employed in WWI that it would have been successful.

The Benét–Mercié M1909 machine gun was problematic for the U.S. Army more so than the potato digger.

Leaving aside last ditch sort of rifles such as the Type 99 or Volks rifles or weird kludges such as the 8mm Carcano conversion or that of the Vetterli, most of the bolt type rifles, more or less, did what they were supposed to do.

Some firearms became outmoded such as the Krag or the Japanese Type 30, some were poorly constructed such as the Nambu or the various pocket pistols of WWI and WWII--Rubys etc., and too complicated--the 6mm Lee for example, and some were simply maltreated like a lot of Mausers in South America or Spain.

BTW, Carcano reputation suffered because of its association with Italians in WWII, the assassination, and because a lot of the barrels were chopped to convert the long rifles to carbines. The long rifles have gain twist which means the twist rate goes from slow to fast at the bore. I have one built in the 1930's peacetime and it is very accurate with light recoil and the safety is easier to use than the Mosin's. Feeds well too with true Mannlicher clip system.
 
I haven't seen a nagant revolver yet. Suppressors weren't issued for it making the gas seal useless. Trigger pull in single action was terrible, in double action it's useless. The round was very underpowered.

I've never heard this complaint in general, but the one I have has a cylinder so tight that half the casings won't fall out when you tip it backwards. The ejection rod is too short to be useful, so you have to use a long, slender object in its place.
 
I haven't seen a nagant revolver yet. Suppressors weren't issued for it making the gas seal useless. Trigger pull in single action was terrible, in double action it's useless. The round was very underpowered.

I've never heard this complaint in general, but the one I have has a cylinder so tight that half the casings won't fall out when you tip it backwards. The ejection rod is too short to be useful, so you have to use a long, slender object in its place.
I hear this a lot, at least the trigger pull and ejector part. Seems like it's an over engineered piece. I'm somewhat surprised nobody has tried it since, but everybody swapped to autos as sidearms so I guess there hasn't been a reason to make the new and improved version.
 
I hear this a lot, at least the trigger pull and ejector part. Seems like it's an over engineered piece. I'm somewhat surprised nobody has tried it since, but everybody swapped to autos as sidearms so I guess there hasn't been a reason to make the new and improved version.
From what I understand Nagant revolvers are still used by security guards in Russia.

I don't envy them!
 
Weapon selection boards should be composed of a whole bunch of grunts and a couple of engineers.

It would be nice if either got onto the "boards" that actually selected the weapons.
 
Rest easy, Boom Boom, it was a parts gun and FAR from collectible ! It had no finish left, except under the wood, which was dented, dinged, gouged and cracked. After I finished abusing it, I cleaned it up, re-finished the stock polished the rust off the metal and left it in the white. It is a rather nice looking rifle now.

And it is the most accurate rifle I have ever owned, milsurp or otherwise. It shoots one hole at 100 and M.O.A. at 200. Never tried it at longer ranges.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top