Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Swiss K31 vs. Mauser in Combat

Discussion in 'Rifle Country' started by Golden_006, Aug 27, 2010.

?

Which would fare better in a modern combat

  1. Swiss k31

    50 vote(s)
    42.0%
  2. Mauser

    39 vote(s)
    32.8%
  3. I'd take a hunting gun before either one/they both are too old

    2 vote(s)
    1.7%
  4. I wouldn't be caught dead facing a modern army with ancient weapons

    28 vote(s)
    23.5%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Golden_006

    Golden_006 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2009
    Messages:
    285
    Note:
    Choice 3 means you would take a Browning BAR or something like that before an old bolt gun
    Choice 4 means you would stay home unless you had a modern combat rifle.


    Which would you rather have (in modern combat)? Why?

    Seems like Mauser is still going strong on modern day cambat zones; even in industrialized countries i.e. Israel in 70s and former Yugoslavia in the 90's had wars where the mauser still was found on the battlefield. But is that because there were so many made and is the swiss just as good but not as readily available?

    Just as good would mean higher rate of fire that would be more desirable than the range that a mauser has which is so World War 1. Of course several other wild cards are in play here which I leave you to make the call on which would be better.
     
    Last edited: Aug 27, 2010
  2. Mp7

    Mp7 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2008
    Messages:
    2,148
    Location:
    Hamburg
    lol ... you´re gonna get some funny OT answers :_)


    in modern combat ur muzzleflash will have some
    heavy counterfire coming down on your position.

    Oppressive fire with a bolt action seems difficult.
     
  3. mongo4567

    mongo4567 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2008
    Messages:
    649
    I would rather have an AK for a personal defense weapon, but I would feel very safe with either choice. I picked a K31 because they seem to be more accurate on the whole and the action is faster to cycle.
     
  4. Slamfire

    Slamfire Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Messages:
    7,520
    Location:
    Alabama
    Guns are unreliable. True action heroes engage the enemy bare handed. Preferably wearing a torn tee shirt and red bandanna.

    While it is OK to shoot down helicopters with bows and arrows, guns are always a no-no.
     
  5. GRIZ22

    GRIZ22 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    4,908
    It's romantic to say you'd be willing to go into combat with a bolt action but I'd take an AR and a radio. Yes there are bolt actions in use all over the world but I can call in CAS and artillery with the radio.
     
  6. CHEVELLE427

    CHEVELLE427 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    1,022
    Location:
    NW FLORIDA
    with the choice listed

    i picked K31

    i have a K31 and 2 Mauser's

    i shoot better with the swiss at long distance open sights.

    and i can hunt with both.
     
  7. Golden_006

    Golden_006 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2009
    Messages:
    285
    actually it was a rock. Although in the book he shot it down. I actually saw an avant garde play based on this book/movie.

    Meanwhile armies still field it and have for the last couple of decades -- including industrialized countries -- so not sure what all the sarcasm is. Just because the US army has a gun with 50 doo dads doesn't mean they are going to win the war
     
  8. jaybirdjtski

    jaybirdjtski Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2009
    Messages:
    35
    A modern army is going to come to you at night. They'll have the eyes and you'll be out in the dark without NV. Good luck! Better add a flash suppressor to whatever you are shooting.
     
  9. amd6547

    amd6547 Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    Messages:
    1,769
    Location:
    North Coast of OHIO
    Yeah, jaybird...I guess that is why we are just kicking Taliban butt over in Afghanistan...Im surprised there are any left to shoot.
     
  10. tinygnat219

    tinygnat219 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2006
    Messages:
    2,939
    Location:
    The Land of Northern Hospitality and Southern Effi
    I'll take the one that's actually BEEN in battle: The Mauser. It's proven. The K-31? It's big claim to fame is accuracy and never having been in battle.
     
  11. Jimfern

    Jimfern Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2008
    Messages:
    473
    Location:
    North Texas
    I believe the 4th option should read, "I would be caught dead facing a modern army with ancient weapons."
     
  12. ScratchnDent

    ScratchnDent Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2008
    Messages:
    546
    Location:
    Tampa Bay area
    I much prefer the sights on the K31.
     
  13. BushyGuy

    BushyGuy Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2009
    Messages:
    634
    Location:
    at the end of the world..
    i rather have the .300 Winchester magnum in a Remington 700 bolt action, its way more accurate and at least has a recoil pad on the stock!:neener:
     
  14. Palehorseman

    Palehorseman Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    737
    Well, the Mauser has been proven in mud and blood battle for decades around the world. What is the proven combat record of the K-31? Answer, nada, as in "ZERO."
     
  15. ForumSurfer

    ForumSurfer Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2010
    Messages:
    3,057
    Location:
    NC
    If all I had available were a mauser and a k31, I'd take the mauser. (Edit:: Only because I know how to strip it and I am far more familiar with it.)

    Given my choices, I'd rather take a hunting rifle (rugged, ammo availability) and sneak my family off into the woods.

    For anything else, we're talking mission specific stuff. A mauser would be awesome for defense at a distance. If I'm fighting indoors (as likely would be the case), that mauser is awfully long so I'd much rather bring an ar from home. Suppressive fire would necessitate a modern semiauto instead of a mauser....or at least a whole bunch of mausers and buddies.
     
  16. Robert

    Robert Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2006
    Messages:
    10,056
    Location:
    Texan by birth, in Colorado cause I hate humidity
    If I were to go into combat, and I am not going to, I would use what I was issued. Fantasy combat and eotw threads are pointless.
     
  17. Justin

    Justin Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    19,270
    Location:
    THE CHAIR IS AGAINST THE WALL
    If I was going into modern combat with a rifle like that, I think I'd defect and join the other side.

    Seriously, this is silly.
     
  18. fireside44

    fireside44 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    746
    I think in today's world of auto loaders people forget what a skilled rifleman can do with a bolt action weapon.

    Silly is assuming a bolt action can't be used to deadly effect on a battlefield. See Afghanistan.
     
  19. Robert

    Robert Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2006
    Messages:
    10,056
    Location:
    Texan by birth, in Colorado cause I hate humidity
    Silly is assuming that just because that one has a bolt action rifle and one has seen Red Dawn, that one would last more than 5 mins on a modern battlefield. I have several bolt action rifles and love them all. But they have not influenced the out come of a battle in almost 70 years. There are lots of internet commandos out there. These threads draw them like flies to a dead animal.
     
    Last edited: Aug 27, 2010
  20. Justin

    Justin Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    19,270
    Location:
    THE CHAIR IS AGAINST THE WALL
    Are you talking about the bolt action rifles issued to modern snipers who are able to deliver shots with pinpoint accuracy at ranges out to and beyond 1000 yards, or the ancient ones wielded by illiterate fourth world Talibanis?

    In the case of the first, I agree. In the case of the second, I suppose the occasional lucky shot is made, but it's a ridiculous stretch to assume that such engagements are an indication that old designs that were more or less obsolete in the 1930s, using inferior iron sights can hold a candle to a modern rifle sporting an ACOG.
     
  21. Shadow 7D

    Shadow 7D Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2008
    Messages:
    7,005
    Location:
    Frozen North
    Funny, seems the talibs have this funny habit, it involves heavy machine guns, AK's and IED, and goes something like an ambush, if they tried a stand up fight, they have this nasty habit of dying....

    SO
    the entire premise is SILLY

    Yeah, I'd take the (other) option, as number four should be phrased

     
  22. HexHead

    HexHead Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2008
    Messages:
    3,295
    Location:
    TN
    You use the Mauser to shoot the enemy and take his modern weapons. And use them to get the better ones. ;)
     
  23. Cosmoline

    Cosmoline Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    23,648
    Location:
    Los Anchorage
    The big advantage of a Mauser or K31 would be greater range than an AR type and better accuracy than an AK. Since the K31 shooting GP11 is considerably more accurate than a workaday Mauser, I'd say that would be the logical choice.

    And I'll add that it's a VERY GOOD THING the Taliban have worn out two bit Khyber pass rifles instead of nice Swiss clockwork death sticks. It's also very good that few if any of them are trained marksmen. Let's hope it stays that way. Because in full body armor, AR 15 and a tank behind me I STILL wouldn't want to be standing anywhere inside of 600 meters of a skilled rifleman with a K31.
     
    Last edited: Aug 27, 2010
  24. fireside44

    fireside44 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    746
    Hate to break it to you, but if you think your AR is going to make all the difference between living and dying as a civilian caught on a battlefield you are mistaken.

    Both. Even ancient ones wielded by illiterate fourth world Talibanis (why bring up their reading and writing skills?) have made the news. The distances involved are greater and so auto loading advantages are lessened, as aimed fire is more critical than volume/rate of fire.

    A modern 5.56 AR with ACOG is more or less worthless beyond about 600 yards, especially the carbines. That is a limitation of the cartridge. This is the reason the military is scrambling to get more 7.62 NATO weapons to the field, because they need more weapons that can engage at great distance.

    If someone is shooting at you, even inaccurately, from beyond 600 yards, most people want something that will allow them to effectively engage. A vintage military bolt gun, while inferior in terms of rate of fire is undoubtedly superior in terms of effective range.
     
  25. HexHead

    HexHead Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2008
    Messages:
    3,295
    Location:
    TN
    These guys have been living in caves and have probably been hunting all their lives and you question their marksmanship? Compared to many of the US troops that never even held a firearm until basic training? Hubris is one of the reasons we'll lose in Afghanistan.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page