Best Military Bolt action of all time?

Discussion in 'General Military Arms & History Forum' started by ysacres, Mar 7, 2003.

  1. ysacres

    ysacres Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2001
    Messages:
    2,871
    Location:
    Wazzu WA
    jonkx
    Member
    Posts: 6
    (2/3/02 3:21:08 pm)
    Reply Best military bolt action of all time?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    What do you all think? Consider battlefield usefulness, historical impact, ease of operation, accuracy, etc., etc.

    Personally I gotta go with the Enfield.
    K98
    1903 Springfield
    Lee-Enfield
    Mosin-Nagant
    Other- specify

    Show results


    Xracer
    Senior Chief Moderator Staff
    Posts: 1582
    (2/3/02 10:43:37 pm)
    Reply Re: Best military bolt action of all time?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Not a fair vote.

    The K98 is only one model of Mauser used primarily in one war. Lee-Enfield encompasses many varied models, used in many wars, over a much longer period of time.

    WyomingSwede
    Senior Chief Moderator Staff
    Posts: 195
    (2/3/02 11:34:17 pm)
    Reply Re: Best military bolt action of all time?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Agree with the x-man. Mightiest military must make Mauser monumental....swede
    Wyoming Swede

    warpig883
    Moderator
    Posts: 2253
    (2/3/02 11:55:57 pm)
    Reply Re: Best military bolt action of all time?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    There are alot of variables left to question. But taking the topic with the constraints given I am voting for the Lee-Enfield because of the far reaching influence of the Brits resulting in the use of this rifle.



    Otherwise I would say the Mauser. Thae grand daddy of bolt action.


    If Mauser and JMB were locked in a room together would would win the bout of fisticuffs?
    We can't be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans... -- Bill Clinton, US President (USA Today, 11 Mar 1993, page 2a)

    jonkx
    Member
    Posts: 8
    (2/4/02 1:13:41 pm)
    Reply I realize...
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    That there were umpteen bazillion variations of the K-98, Lee-Metford/Enfield, Mosin, Springfield, etc. If I had had 50 slots open I would have included them all. That is why I left the last slot open as "Other, please specify" so feel free to do just that- if you think the most historically important gun was the K98k as opposed to the Gew. 98, or if you think the Lee-Enfield Mk IV No.X was more important than some other number or mark, go ahead and say so!

    warpig883
    Moderator
    Posts: 2269
    (2/4/02 1:33:29 pm)
    Reply Re: I realize...
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    so
    We can't be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans... -- Bill Clinton, US President (USA Today, 11 Mar 1993, page 2a)

    polishshooter
    Senior Chief Moderator Staff
    Posts: 2709
    (2/4/02 9:45:45 pm)
    Reply Re: Best military bolt action of all time?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Didn't we do this already?

    Easy...the Lee Enfield MKIII....

    Easiest, fastest, shortest bolt throw of any, makes it the fastest to shoot rapid fire...what OTHER bolt action rifle had a page in the manual on "rapid fire" technique?

    Only one of the bunch with a 10 round mag, that still could use strippers...

    Pre-WWI, ALL British troops were trained at 1000yds...(When they USED to know how to shoot...)

    As accurate as any battle rifle mentioned above, and out performed the Mauser everywhere it faced it...

    AND, the kicker is, it is the ONLY bolt action rifle that EVER stopped not one but TWO major German OFFENSIVES, by ITSELF, in 1914, and again in 1917, where the advance elements of the German army reported they were pinned down at the point of the attack by "machine guns," when the only thing in front of them were trained Tommies with MkIIIs, hurredly put in to plug the gaps...NO Vickers or Lewis guns for miles....

    That's in the history books boys...

    And as for the Mauser? Overrated...Paul Von was another salesman of the PT Barnum/Oliver Winchester mold...

    German nationalism got him exclusive military "no competition" contracts, so profit was never an issue, as it was with competing designs, then he gave sweetheart deals to ANYBODY in the world, to produce it in "their" caliber, and configuration, then waved that "German Mystique" in their faces...

    It took Springfield Armory to turn the 98 into a REAL rifle...

    Really, the Mauser IS historical, but as a battle weapon, would have to rate behind the Enfield, and the Mosin Nagant, at least....and the Springfield of course if you don't just consider it just an "Improved Mauser..." The bolt is pretty complicated, compared to others, the action is NOT that strong, compared to say, the Arisaka, the rifle is no more accurate than it's contemporaries...

    The Mosin Nagant actually as far as historically, and production numbers, and the number of countries that used it, and the foolproof ("Peasantproof?")design, and accuracy potential, and reliability, really does outshine the Mauser...the only reason it doesn't rate higher is the difficulty in mounting a scope, and the fact it is considered "ugly" with the protruding mag, which in turn means difficult or unsightly to "sporterize," there is little civilian knowledge of it's accuracy.

    It was in service, FRONTLINE from 1891 until the 1990s (Finland), still as a sniper rifle for lots of nations, and the round is still the issue Russian and former Soviet Bloc Armies MMG and sniper round...NOBODY uses the 8x57 any more...I'd have to say there are 100x more Mosin Nagants in use around the world in third world nations than ANY tyoe of Mauser...

    Sorry guys, but the Mauser was NOT that good of a Military weapon, just pretty "average..." It DID come into it's own as a Sporting Rifle/Action, I won't take anything away from it for that, but the reasons for that, have NO bearing on it's military effectiveness...

    And finally, it's a LOSER. How many nations actually WON a war, armed with the Mauser 98 style as it's primary Infantry Rifle? Damned few of them...and usually then only if BOTH sides had them...



    We must make war as we must; not as we would like. - Field Marshal Kitchener, 1915

    Edited by: polishshooter at: 2/5/02 10:58:21 am

    polishshooter
    Senior Chief Moderator Staff
    Posts: 2722
    (2/5/02 5:03:18 pm)
    Reply Re: Best military bolt action of all time?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Geez, I throwed down the gauntlet and NOT ONE Mauser man took me to task yet...HHhmmm...

    Don't tell me I convinced ALL of you...(Fat Chance! )

    C'mon Jonkx, I love a good argument! You sound like a real Mauser Man, take me on! I LOVE a good argument!

    (I also don't own any Mauser's yet...even though I just GOTTA get a Swede...but they don't count, they never saw action... )







    And oh yeah, the M4/M4A1 was the best Tank of WWII too...
    We must make war as we must; not as we would like. - Field Marshal Kitchener, 1915

    WyomingSwede
    Senior Chief Moderator Staff
    Posts: 202
    (2/5/02 5:54:25 pm)
    Reply Re: Best military bolt action of all time?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Im still at work...you'll get yours later tonight. swede
    Wyoming Swede

    WyomingSwede
    *TFF Senior Staff*
    Posts: 203
    (2/5/02 8:47:22 pm)
    Reply Re: Best military bolt action of all time?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I believe that there were some swedes and Finns armed with swede mausers during the winter war with Russia.
    The boers in South Africa pretty much educated the brits about the efficiency of the mauser product.
    The spaniards on San Juan hill educated the US so much the produced a mauser clone and called it a springfield. Paid Paul Mauser a royalty of $1.50 per rifle too.
    The brits themselves were planning on going to a smaller caliber ( .256 I believe and rimless based on a mauser action) until WWI broke out.
    Mausers are what every modern bolt action traces its lineage through.
    As to MN's hundreds of thousands of poorly made and cobbled together third world products are hardly any kind of record. The best MN's made were produced here in the USA.


    Your serve, Polish....LOL....swede
    Wyoming Swede

    polishshooter
    *TFF Senior Staff*
    Posts: 2739
    (2/6/02 1:10:00 am)
    Reply Re: Best military bolt action of all time?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Every bolt action does NOT trace it's lineage to Mauser, I beg your pardon!

    Some people think the best bolt action MAY have been Von Mannlichers, but HE had to compete, the Austrians didn't guarantee contracts like the Wienie dudes did!

    The ONLY thing revolutionary is the intenal magazine...and even THAT is debatable whether it is any advantage on a MILITARY rifle, although granted, it looks "sexier" on a hunting rifle, for you guys that need that sort of thing...

    There WERE Swedish Volunteers that fought along side the Finns in the Winter War...and there IS evidence that the best Finnish snipers TRIED Mausers...and said no thanks, they wanted their REAL rifles, with a REAL military cartridge, that was MORE accurate...M28 Mosin Nagants, back...and BTW, most Finnish snipers that made all those ungodly numbers of kills at typical sniper ranges did NOT use scopes...and Simo Haya HATED the fact the bolt locked open on the Swedes after the last shot for some reason, as well as the fact "your head had to be too high on the stock to use the lousy sights..." (If the Finnish translation is correct... )

    After the war, when Sweden wanted to make a "presentation" rifle to Simo to recognize his accomplishments? It was a Swedish reworked MOSIN...

    The Swedish Rifle is SMOOTH, probably the smoothest Mauser...but SMOOTHNESS is not NECESSARILY something that translates into military effectiveness...I mean even the ITALIANS can make weapons SMOOTH....

    BUT, BUT, BUT...there's one other little problem with the Swede....

    NO country that ever actually USED a 6.5mm cartridge in BATTLE stuck with it...so it is automatically disqualified as a "battle rifle." It sucked in the real world. For an accurate hunting round with soft points? GREAT! For an accurate, hard hitting, military round at usable military ranges with 'stable' FMJs? They ALL sucked...they WERE accurate out to say 300m...but did not do the job ballistically, especially any farther out...

    And like I said, what war did the SWEDES ever win with the Mauser???? About the only thing that can be said is it helped keep them neutral...along with the fact they had all that iron ore the Nazis needed, and the fact their diplomats were so adept at playing both sides against the middle, just like the Swiss.... The "Porcupine?" Yeah, right. The "Porcupine" sitting on a "Gold Mine" willing to give it away, making it easier to get the "gold" by ASKING for it than taking it...

    Kinda like the Swiss...yeah they are tough, but it helps that the Nazis needed SOME international banks to deposit all that gold they got from those Jewish fillings...

    You are right...the Boer farmers DID teach the Brits a lesson, despite their "inferior" rifles, and it was about tactics, ...and Maxim MGs...BTW, the Brits used Mausers too...Broomhandles. Kinda like the way AMERICAN farmers taught the British a lesson DESPITE inferior Military weapons....

    The ONLY advantages the Spanish had with their mausers were the stripper clips, versus the side box of the Krag...coupled with their "smokeless" powder was more "smokeless" than our .30 Government. The Krag, by all contemporary accounts was just as if not more accurate, and "hit better." Plus AGAIN, the side using Mausers LOST.
    And again, the 7x57 is a GREAT sporting round...with SOFT POINTS.

    Yeah, I know all about the royalties paid to Mauser by the US...it's amazing, isn't it? For a mere $200,000, a crappy military design was improved to "usable" standards...

    And the differences were enough that serious thought was given to NOT paying, but it was the internal magazine patent that could not be fought...the '03 IS an almost totally different weapon...if you take it to the logical extreme, the Arisaka is also "based" on the Mauser, and even THAT was an improvement!

    But the Enfield? A contemporary design, with NOTHING in common, and it was better...

    The Mosin Nagant? Designed in BELGIUM by a great designer, that ALSO had to compete...and IT'S magazine design is pretty unique too, the "interrupter" that made the feeding of rimmed cartridges, arguably BETTER for BA rifles, foolproof, was revolutionary. Mosin Nagants to NOT have "failures to feed." And while the American rifles MAY have had "better workmanship," the American expedition to Archangel showed they DIDN'T work too well in the cold, until they switched the bolts to RUSSIAN ones...slop sometimes is a GOOD thing...and what OTHER "last ditch" BA rifle had a reputation of being BETTER than the "peacetime one?" Those "rough" 42-43-44 91/30s made GREAT sniper rifles....

    What rifle was the ONLY rifle to CONSISTENTLY beat the best USMC "professional" rifle team in International Competition since the early 1900s? The Mosin Nagants! The Soviets cleaned out CLOCKS in the 70s and 80s! While WE were shooting NM Garands and M14s, along with a smattering of NM '03a3s...

    Real simple...the answer as to why the Mauser hasn't been "exposed" is TACTICS...the K98 shined in German tactics, but HELL the Carcano would have shined in a system where aimed sustained rifle fire was minimized, the ONLY job of the rifleman was to "support" the MGs...the MG was the MAIN focus of German Infantry tactics since WWI to just about the end of WWII, or until they developed the "Sturmgewehr"...whereas the Enfield, the Sprinfield, the Mosin Nagant, were considered the backbone of Infantry firepower...AIMED rifle fire.

    And one of the reasons the Brits didn't feel the need to go to Semiauto like EVERYBODY else, was the fact that the Enfield was ALMOST as good as any Garand, Tokarev, or FN design until the FAL...for RAPID fire!

    And one other claim made by Jonkx is kind of neat...something about "longevity, and still being used by third world countries..." using that SAME criteria, you can show the Mauser was a FAILURE!

    Even in Yugoslavia, which adopted the Mauser as a POLITICAL statement to show they were NOT under the Soviet sphere, there was and IS arguably more Mosin Nagants in service than ANY Mauser 48s...and did you see the pictures from Bosnia last year? What rifles were the rebels trying to save from the embassies before the US got there?

    M44s...

    The point is, any country post war, (hell, since the age of rifles BEGAN!) that used Mausers did so for POLITICAL reasons, or because NOTHING better was available to them at the time, (not "not available, they WERE...)and they DITCHED them as soon as something better came available! BUT there was NO similar rush to ditch the Enfields or Mosin Nagants...India, Pakistan, China, Vietnam, Finland, Afghanistan, the Balkans, Greece, all over the Middle East, the South Pacific...or in OTHER words wherever REAL fighting actually HAPPENS a lot...

    If you see a BA rifle in use, you will see Enfields or Mosin Nagants 100 times more frequently than you will see ANY Mauser or Mauser variant, if you see a MAUSER at all.

    Case closed.

    The original question was "Best MILITARY Bolt Action Rifle of all time."

    Using THAT criteria, and that alone, the Mauser was junk. Yep, I didn't stutter, or use the word loosely. JUNK.

    As a piece to be sporterized? For hunting? Probably the best there is...BUT the criteria is different.

    Kinda like the various lever action Winchesters...actually FAILURES as Military Weapons with a very few exceptions, maybe in the Crimea...but who would argue they were NOT successful designs for Sporting or even Police work? Or maybe for scouts? But the fact is as General Issue MILITARY weapons they were failures, just like the Mauser...

    And there were OTHER designs at the time that were as good or maybe BETTER than any lever action Winchester...How did Oliver Winchester deal with the competition? If he couldn't BUY them out and put them out of business, he beat them with MARKETING, SWEETHEART DEALS, and PRICE. Kinda the WalMart of the firearms world, not on product "superiority."

    Just like "P.T." Paul von Mauser.....

    Your shot, Sir...


    We must make war as we must; not as we would like. - Field Marshal Kitchener, 1915

    Edited by: polishshooter at: 2/6/02 10:00:34 am

    WyomingSwede
    *TFF Senior Staff*
    Posts: 206
    (2/6/02 4:28:01 pm)
    Reply Re: Best military bolt action of all time?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Ouch...Ouch...Ouch. Never let facts get in the way of a good opinion. I defer the point to you sir...however I'll stand by my swede. LOL swede
    Wyoming Swede

    polishshooter
    *TFF Senior Staff*
    Posts: 2749
    (2/6/02 5:25:07 pm)
    Reply Re: Best military bolt action of all time?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    OH CRAP you can't give up THAT easy Swede!!!

    At LEAST say "Bite me" or something!!!


    And after taking that position about Mausers, which flies in the face of EVERY noted arms Historian (never let it be said I go along with the crowd, LOL) (It felt pretty good, actually, like I was doing a paper for a History Class, or maybe a pre-law course, LOL again)...

    ...I still need to buy a couple of Mausers, saw a couple of NICE 48s and Swedes at a show a couple of weeks ago that looked REALLY nice...

    ....and I like the 6.5mm cartridges like the x50 Jap and x55 Swede...they make GREAT deer round, and I can't believe they would be WORSE than a 7.62x39 or 5.56NATO FMJ, which is what the world Military standard is today...

    ...the BIG switch to the "full caliber" rounds was PROBABLY due to the fact they made lousy MG rounds, especially in aircraft, for penetration purposes, so when the same MMGs were used on the ground, you needed the two rounds to be supplied...just like we did in 'Nam with the .223 and .308! (and still do...)

    ...But I have to wait til I'm done with the Nagants, and get at least one Enfield though...

    And if I was GOING to build a nice sporter and couldn't get a 03 action, it would be a large-ring Mauser...

    They are NOT as bad as I said, actually were pretty much like any other BA issue rifle of the period, it did the job just fine.(The "junk" quote was just to get a rise out of people... )

    I just get fired up when everybody (the so-called "experts") say Mausers are BETTER, or the one by which all others should be measured, that's hogwash....but then you know that, the same way I get fired up by people who blindly believe German tanks were best in WWII...the facts don't bear that out.

    The "State of the Art" was such that they were as good as just about any other BA battle rifle of the time, EXCEPT the Enfield. The Enfield Mark III, and the No.4MKI, were in a class by themselves. THEY should be the standard for comparison. For STRICTLY military use.

    The next level, IMO which was pretty close to the top rung were the large-ring Mausers, SOME small ring ones, the Mosins, the Springfields, the P-14/P-17 Enfields, and the Arisaka. ALL first rate weapons. ("Experts" might question me putting the Arisaka here, but I think they're wrong about that too!)

    The next level, serviceable, but nothing to write home about, for various reasons, were the other small ring Mausers, Steyr/Budapest M95, and M95/34s, the MAS 36, MAYBE the Berthiers and Lebels...the various other Mannlicher designs...maybe the Krag-Jorgensens....some Siamese Mausers or other copies..

    And IMO the bottom of the barrel was the various Carcanos, and the Ross Straight-Pull....(and maybe the French BAs above if I'm in a "hate the $(#($&* French! mood ) And there might be some bias there too, the Carcanos were maybe NOT that bad...but then a lot of Italian soldiers wanted the antique 11.4mm Werndl BP Bolt action rifles the Austrian Landstrum used against them in WWI because they thought they were better than what they had, so even THEY thought the Carcanos stunk...

    The one I can't rate is the various Swiss Straight Pulls...they very well MAY have been the "state of the art..." Quicker than the Enfield, greater mag capacity than any but the Enfield, good cartridge, accurate, BUT....it never saw REAL action...so how would it stand up to "Field use???"

    So, now that my ENTIRE case is laid out....

    Anybody agree with me?

    Or think I'm full of doo doo...



    We must make war as we must; not as we would like. - Field Marshal Kitchener, 1915

    Edited by: polishshooter at: 2/6/02 6:13:04 pm

    WyomingSwede
    *TFF Senior Staff*
    Posts: 207
    (2/6/02 6:30:48 pm)
    Reply Re: Best military bolt action of all time?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "Bite me or something" I like enfields too, just not as much as mausers.

    Mausers are what the modern sporting rifle of today are based on. Ruger, winchester, remington, savage...you name it...its a mauser derivative. Blasers are the invention of some crazed Swede/Finn amalgamation.

    I dont see Dakota Arms, or Kimber machining out an enfield to make their custom rifles.
    I dont see D'arcy Echols or Rifles Inc plugging out their super lightweight rifles based on a Moisin/Nagant action.
    The .256 Rigby is still a 7x57 mauser...no matter how you anglosize it. ( remember "Liberty Cabbage vs Sauerkraut")

    But I will admit to an interest in the Quest Enfield Carbine in the 45-70 model...think it would be fun. And I own a couple enfields.
    That being said...I dont know if we settled anything....LOL...swede
    Wyoming Swede

    polishshooter
    *TFF Senior Staff*
    Posts: 2753
    (2/6/02 8:46:42 pm)
    Reply Re: Best military bolt action of all time?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    There it is...the Mauser IS a great action to sporterize, easy to work on, do trigger work too, and it IS smooth which means and available what with all the battlefield discards around, you know where the Kraut threw his away so he could pick up a Limeys MKIII and have a REAL military rifle...or in reality, probably he picked up a Garand...LOL

    You just made my point..what makes a good SPORTER does not necessarily make a good MILITArY rifle...

    And tons of Aussie 'roo and croc hunters would argue their .303s are plenty good "sporters..."

    But again, the Enfield is UGLY, as is the MOSIN...and the Enfield has the cock on closing which NO hunter or target shooter likes, but I don't really know why...and never REALLY made a difference in military service...plus that ugly two piece stock...hard to do any "bedding."

    And the Mosin's biggest drawback is no bridge to mount a scope, tough as heck to mount one actually...and if you work the actions side by side the Mosin seems rougher, which turns people towards the Mauser and makes people think "cheap," BUT it worked just as well, just as long, if not longer than the Mauser before it needed any work.

    BUT, again, too many people think because not too many SPORTERS are based on them, they are somehow "inferior" as WEAPONS because of it, and that simply isn't true, either practical accuracy wise in the case of the Enfield, or ease of operation in either.

    And the Mosin IS as or more accurate than the Mauser...ask ANY Finn or Soviet sniper....or better yet, ask any Soviet or Nazi that had to FACE them...

    Then again the OTHER reason they are so much better for sporterizing is the rimless round...not too many true "sporting" rounds are rimmed, you'd have to modify the bolt head too much to convert a Mosin or Enfield to say, '06 or .308 or .243...don't MOST rimless rounds with case diameter around the 8x57 work without problem with stock bolt heads? That's a BIG selection...but again, not anything necessary in a MILITARY rifle...

    And I'd LOVE to pick up an old sporterized 03 sometimes just for a shooter, one that was ALREADY butchered, you'd be stupid to cut up one now though....many I've seen and guys I know who had them think they are better than ANY Mauser...

    I need to get a MKIII soon (maybe one or two next week from SOG, I haven't decided yet) then a No.5 Jungle Carbine before they go away again, THEN I'll get some Mausers...And I REALLY need a Swede...

    ...in between some more Nagants of course!
    We must make war as we must; not as we would like. - Field Marshal Kitchener, 1915

    jonkx
    Member
    Posts: 10
    (2/7/02 12:26:49 am)
    Reply RE: military action
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    For historical importance, I still have to go with Mauser it did not win, but if not for the Mauser, Enfield and Mosin-Nagant would have never gained prominence.

    For battlefield use, I gotta go with the Enfield as used in WWII, as it was so much faster and had a higher capacity magazine. Plus it had been refined into a faster to make, if not quite as high of quality rifle, compared to its earlier brothers.

    For ease of operation, the Krag, AFTER it was loaded; otherwise, still the Enfield.

    polishshooter
    *TFF Senior Staff*
    Posts: 2758
    (2/7/02 9:36:42 am)
    Reply Re: RE: military action
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Jonkx, I guess I don't understand one thing you said, the part about if not for the mauser, the others would not have gained prominence.

    The 98 mauser, by definition, was a 1898 design. The Mosin Nagant was designed in 1891.

    While yes, the 98 and all the other Mausers derived from the 1888 "Commission" rifle, IT was not really any better, in fact worse, than a few other contemporary designs. And it derived from the M1871, which was developed in RESPONSE to other developments in military designs around Europe at the time. This era was WILD in design and development because of the switch from BP to smokeless, and metallic cartridge development.

    Von Mannlichers designs, if I remember right, at the time of the "Commission" rifle were on paper, better.

    And the Lee Metford progression is also well documented also...with little borrowed from any Mauser design. Yes, everybody was racing to develop a "modern" BA, but I don't think it was in RESPONSE to any one design.


    I will not argue it was an important historical development, and pretty indicative of the times, BUT don't you think if the Mauser was never developed, the others would STILL have developed?

    It was called "The age of Rifles..." Not "The age of Mauser..." (I wish Obelix would show up, he's a REAL expert on this era...)


    Hey, Jonkx, I'm a long winded, opinionated, stubborn Polak, History Major, don't be put off by either the LENGTH or TONE of my replies!

    I also am biased....maybe it's the heritage!

    I think Germany gets WAY too much credit for lots of things militarily, especially weaponry, that's unwarranted. There is a "mystique" about Prussian and German Military History that clouds a lot of discussion, where they and their stuff gets treated with almost reverence, when in reality, it was NO BETTER or even worse than what others had...it was just Prussian or German willingness to USE them, usually FIRST, that caught others off guard, and led to early successes, that made everyone think it was the WEAPONS that were superior.

    And after WWII, with the Soviet threat, we had an almost embarrassing rush to exonerate the German people and high command, and embrace German methods, by Generals and historians that should have known better.

    Their TACTICS with inferior tanks caught the world by surprise in 39-41, and when the rest of the world understood the TACTICS, they got their clocks cleaned...and they never understood, and reacted by building more and more bigger and bigger INFERIOR tanks, too complicated, too unreliable, too underpowered and slow, nothing but immobile pillboxes, BUT the whole world was and still is in awe of them.

    It extends to aircraft, naval ships, small arms, artillery, etc,etc,etc.

    I guess I see it as my personal campaign to put ALL German stuff in perspective, and eliminate that "mystique," and show that Germans put their pants on the same way we do, and more times than not, they look just as silly doing it as anyone else.

    IM admittedly biased O, German stuff is decent, but no better, and sometimes worse, than it's contemporaries...(OK,OK, French and Italian crap excepted... )



    IF you disagree with ANYTHING I say, I EXPECT you to put me in my place, that way we ALL learn...
    We must make war as we must; not as we would like. - Field Marshal Kitchener, 1915

    velvetnsteel
    Member
    Posts: 17
    (2/7/02 5:40:57 pm)
    Reply Re: RE: military action
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I must say, I have never been in battle, but I HAVE owned, and fired, the Mausers (6.5 x 55 - 7 X 57 - 8 X 57 - 7.65 X 53 ), a couple No. 4 Enfield, a Model 91 Nagant, a Model 44 Nagant, an 1903 Springfield. a 1917 Enfield and I can say I would choose the 6.5 X 55, with stripper clips, over ALL of the rest. The recoil is negligible ( a factor to be HIGH on the list of considerations if you fire the potlikker all day). The weight is manageable. The caliber is just as effective as the big boys ( else why is the .22 used by armed forces today). Dead is dead......wounded is wounded.......period.

    The only advantage the Enfield has is 10 rounds without reloading. All that I have ever fired were very inaccurate after 3 or 4 rounds anyway - barrels are too small and heat up too quickly. They may be fast, but if ya can't hit anything why hurry????

    The Nanagnts are too physically hard to use. My model 91 almost needed an extension wrench to open the bolt after firing. No way you could work that action for an hour of sustained battle.

    The bigger mausers have too much recoil for my taste. Especially if ya are gonna shoot 500 rounds.

    As for the 1903 Springfield?????? Way too much gun to use in battle all day long. Have to have physical therapy after 100 rounds; and the 1917 Enfield in .30-06 is even worse.

    LONG LIVE THE SMALL BORE SWEDE !!!!!!!

    polishshooter
    *TFF Senior Staff*
    Posts: 2772
    (2/7/02 10:43:18 pm)
    Reply Re: RE: military action
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Well, that WAS a problem, with the 6.5...too darn stable a bullet in FMJ, and velocities were just about what the "big bores" were...

    ANYBODY that used a 6.5 in actual war switched. to bigger bores..the Swedes were never in a war...SOOooo...if they ever WERE in a real war, we'd be talking about the 7.62 or 8x55 mm Swede today and the 6.5s would all be sporterized Reindeer rifles today, my guess...

    The ".22" today, and I don't want to debate it, (been there done that ) is at much higher velocity, unstable (but then they go to the SS109 for STABILITY!) which DOES supposedly give a better wounding potential with the FMJ...

    BUT, the idea is different...the current military rifles are NOT meant to be the main means to hurt the enemy like it was back then...

    Infantry now "finds and fixes," and calls in the support weapons to kill, so personal weapons are considered DEFENSIVE today...

    At 300+ meters, the .30 calibers WERE and ARE much better than lesser calibers....and that's what those old rifles were designed to do, place killing hits on humans out to 1000 yds.

    And I LIKE 6.5s, I could shoot my son's type 38 all day....if I could afford it.

    But I just got done reading John Batchelor again today...

    "Even though considered to be the best bolt action design ever, the Mauser bolt was too complicated and too difficult to clean under field conditions to be considered a GREAT "battle" rifle..." (emphasis mine...)

    It was merely "good."

    BTW, even if you had to use a "helper" pipe or hammer to open the Mosin you COULD, without breaking it... (And I think some in my collection had that done to them sometime in the past, too... )

    It WAS one tough cookie...drop it along with a mauser in the rubble of Stalingrad a few times and see which one comes up shooting.....that would make a great comparison test....

    We must make war as we must; not as we would like. - Field Marshal Kitchener, 1915

    17th FA Bn
    V.I.P. Member
    Posts: 70
    (2/8/02 8:14:08 am)
    Reply Polish sorry to hear you are ill ( joking)
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    You don't want to debate the effectiveness of the .223? I thought you loved to debate any and all points, the more obscure the better.

    Your comment that the purpose of the infantry is to fix the enemy and that is why they carry the .223 caliber weapons brings up an interesting point. The rangers, special forces, and s.e.a.l. teams carry these type weapons and they generally don't count on artillery or air support to do the actual killing. In Afghanistan that seams to have been the main role of the elite teams, finding the enemy and directing in attack air to do the killing, but I think this the exception to the rule.


    velvetnsteel
    Member
    Posts: 24
    (2/8/02 8:55:12 am)
    Reply Re: Polish sorry to hear you are ill ( joking)
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Oh...but the killing power of the 6.5 is real, I guarantee you. Did you ever do a raw tumble test on a 6.5 X 55 ? I did and they are deadly for sure. The FMJ tumbles almost immediately upon entry and rips a big hole...................

    As far as the Swedes never fighting in a real war goes........IMO if they would have, we all would be using .264 caliber as our battle weapons now......hehe.

    polishshooter
    *TFF Senior Staff*
    Posts: 2778
    (2/8/02 8:32:19 pm)
    Reply Re: Polish sorry to hear you are ill ( joking)
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I'm on thin ice here...I've always thought we'd have done better experimenting with "smaller" rounds for all the "advantages" we were looking for in adopting the M16, instead of stumbling on Stoner's existing design that "just happened" to already be chambered for the .223...I've always wondered what a AR style rifle chambered in .243 would have been like...but Kennedy's "whiz kids" knew better....

    The history of the AR-15/M16 is kinda screwy...who woulda thought a rifle first adopted ONLY for Air Police K9 units to fire one handed while handling a dog would have been adopted, MUCH LESS last longer in front-line US service than any rifle in US History?????

    And what is the State of the Art 1000yd rifle now at Perry that is now the undisputed King of the Hill?

    Not M14s, not M1As, not Garands, but AR-15s!!!!

    How did the SOFs that were compromised in Iraq that were outnumbered 50 or 100 to one, manage not only to fight long enough to get extracted, but not take any serious casualties? Using their M16s at 500m PLUS, where they tore hell out of the Iraquis who could NOT fire back at that range with their 47s and come anywhere near them...

    (Incidentally, the ONLY trouble the Green Grunts had in those firefights were from Bedouin Militia, who were using ENFIELDS, and made them duck...THERE, I tied it into the thread, COOL huh?" )


    Don't want to get into THAT again, LTS will jump in and say BITE ME in two posts cause he'll have to try and defend his dear old "not a pistol not a rifle" 7.62x39 as being superior to the 5.56...

    All I'm saying is CONTEMPORY accounts of ALL combatants who used 6.5s in battle are similar...too small, not enough long range power, too stable, could not be counted on to effectively put down a enemy at typical ranges. That is NOT my opinion, but from actual reports of the Japanese in China, (They went to a .303 type 7.7mm round in the 99) the Italians (Went to the 7.65 and 8mm) and the Dutch (Who lost before they could switch to anything).

    100% opinion is tough to argue against! The Swedes were happy with theirs, true, and they PROBABLY had the best round of them all, and the best 6.5 rifle...but STILL they never had to REALLY use them in a battle!

    And the other side, the MGs of the time, there were NO successful 6.5mm Medium or heavy MGs period...and the 6.5 WAS too light for use against vehicles or aircraft even if anybody could have designed one to work, so the other argument is if you are going to have a .30 cal or larger MG, you may as well have rifle that shoots the same round for logistics reasons, even though the Japs never managed and had to supply THREE rounds to the troops...(Because their 7.7 rifle round didn't work in their crappy MGs, so they used a DIFFERENT 7.7)

    There, I've managed to talk out of both sides of my mouth, and it HURTS...

    We must make war as we must; not as we would like. - Field Marshal Kitchener, 1915

    kdub01
    *TFF Senior Staff*
    Posts: 231
    (2/8/02 11:07:32 pm)
    Reply Re: Polish sorry to hear you are ill ( joking)
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Yup, Mike -

    You covered the bases well and your logic (?) is irrefutable.

    Never thought much of the "blackgun", remembered the early accounts of jammed rifles in firefights and having to disassemble them with buddits whizzin' overhead! After working on the gun range here for about 6 months now, gotta admit the old Mattel Toy has become of age, what with all the gizwhizzes and geegaws they have customized it with. Darn'd things ARE capable of MOA or less, and if the wind isn't too strong, do quite well out to 500 meters or so.

    The new rage in military dictum is to tear limbs or heads from torsos with the 'buzzsaw' effect of tumbling light weight bullets. Witness the 5.45mm round for the Russians developed with just such cases in mind. The old stabilized rounds of WWI and WWII, as well as Korea demonstrated that body hits could be absorbed to a degree with full metal jacketed bullets of those eras and life could be saved. Not so in today's battles - chances are, if the body isn't torn asunder, the massive loss of blood due to lost limbs or bones, plus induced trama, is gonna do a body in.

    Yet, I think one of the most effective close-in weapons still has to be your ol' Mod '97 takedown with cut down bbl and deep brown patina!!!!!

    polishshooter
    *TFF Senior Staff*
    Posts: 2792
    (2/9/02 12:03:48 am)
    Reply Re: Polish sorry to hear you are ill ( joking)
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Yep, and with that (Let's see, 1 MOA is 1"@100, right? So at 50 it would be 1/2"....Hmmm....) 8 (Or how big is a pie plate, anyway?) MOA I get with 1 0z sluggers at 50 yds, it's HELL on those little deer I shoot...

    Gimme a good Mosin Nagant on my back and the '97 in my hands and I'll be the meanest SOB in the valley...(or at least smiling alot...)
    We must make war as we must; not as we would like. - Field Marshal Kitchener, 1915

    MO JENKINS
    V.I.P. Member
    Posts: 121
    (2/16/02 9:30:43 pm)
    Reply What'dya do Polish bump yur head or somthin' ?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Enfield, man you GOTTA be jokin'!! I love 'em, owned a few and enjoyed the heck outta shootin' em. BUT that "JAM A MATIC" that passes for a magazine is INEXCUSABLE! It would be passable on a SPORTING arm, BUT if you had a reloading system on a combat handgun that required that much attention to complete correctly so as to result in ABSOLUTE RELIABILITY,I GUARRANTEE YOU NOBODY would be using it! Heck even if you do load the stripper clips correctly, just a decent bump and those rims interlock and you're toast, baby! Mauser, LOVE 'EM! K98 is a MASTERPIECE! It's what I keep beside my bed for home defense! But let's face it, you get a better sight picture on a Daisey BB gun! and let's face the music on this one too, that is an AUTOMATIC DISQUALIFICATION!!! I'll let Polish debate the finer points of these things as I am by no means an expert. But a magazine that is far from idiot proof or a set of sights that gives a terrible sight picture by any decent standard is automatic disqualification, period. I don't care about "interpreting history" or "feelings" or your "warm fuzzies" or your "romantic attachments". That leaves us with the guns that are idiot proof and have a good sight picture. HMM, let me see, 03'A3, M1917 and the venerable Nagant. Sorry, I agree with polish, got to be 30 cal., as we found out again in Somalia.
    Your ball, boys!
    MO JENKINS

    polishshooter
    *TFF Senior Staff*
    Posts: 2900
    (2/17/02 10:21:38 pm)
    Reply Re: What'dya do Polish bump yur head or somthin' ?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    What's funny, Mo, is that in my (granted) limited experience with an Enfield, I never had a problem, I never find a mention of unreliability of Enfields in two wars, in the mud of Flanders or the sand of North Africa...in fact I see references to RELIABILITY quite a bit...you MAY have had a bad one, they DO sell replacement mags, you know..

    I have had several bad mags and some GO bad on my .45, but I really don't think Brownings design is THAT bad, do you?

    And the fact you can REPLACE a bad mag and go on fighting is a plus too, what happens when a Mag spring or follower breaks on a mauser? Single Shot?

    And "10 rounds in 10 seconds" can be done with just a little practice with an Endfield, British RECRUITS were being taught that in '44 for house to house fighting, can you even ATTEMPT it with a Mauser? NOT...

    Granted, the Springfield is a HELLUVA weapon, BUT, it didn't see that much action to REALLY be compared in action...I mean, more 1917s saw action in WWI than 03s...but yeah, gimme an 03 over a Mauser any day...and ENOUGH about the "Mauser design..." the ONLY thing they didn't think they could beat in court covered by Mauser's patents which was why they paid the measly $200,000 license fee was the magazine design....

    As far as sighting systems, yeah the Springfield's, at least the later ones were good, but I still kinda like the "foolproof" Russian ones...

    Gotta love one where you can teach peasants to "keep the enemy inside the circle..." if you use it like that, that hooded front sight becomes a pretty quick "battle sight..." and makes them LOOK at the front sight at least....

    That's another misconception...I've read all kinds of gun writers liking the Mauser or even Finn "protected" front sights with the "wings," while calling the hooded Russians "clumsy,""too high," or "slow"...BUT I have shot rifles with wings and had to sometimes take time to make sure when acquiring them after recoil I wasn't using a WING instead of the blade for the front sight, where that "hood" made it pretty easy to pick up again....much less how the RUSSIANS used it in rapid fire....


    We must make war as we must; not as we would like. - Field Marshal Kitchener, 1915

    TallTLynn
    *TFF Senior Staff*
    Posts: 3216
    (2/17/02 11:00:00 pm)
    Reply
    Re: What'dya do Polish bump yur head or somthin' ?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I own two Enfields (one is admittedly been sporterized).

    Never yet had a problem with the magazine or feeding bullets - always did just fine.

    MO JENKINS
    V.I.P. Member
    Posts: 125
    (2/18/02 12:09:06 pm)
    Reply Re: What'dya do Polish bump yur head or somthin' ?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The magazine is not the problem, per say, it's the system that allows the problem of interlocking rims to go unaddressed. Don't get me wrong, I love the Enfield, but it is a very serious shortcoming! Hop on over to Parallax's C&R Forum and check out the Enfield section. Even the Enfield freaks will admit that when you start pumpin' alot of rounds thru them, under stress, it can begin to become a real issue. This is one of the real advantages of the Moiseeen Nahghaan design. That magazine interrupter is vital to it's reliability. NOW, a #4 MK 1 "style" Enfield in .308 could qualify as the ULTIMATE bolt action BATTLE RIFLE! Yup, rear mounted peep, idiot proof design, ultimately reliable, accurate, a full .30, HMM!
    Just my .02,
    Your Buddy,
    MO

    polishshooter
    *TFF Senior Staff*
    Posts: 2957
    (3/5/02 9:39:04 pm)
    Reply Re: What'dya do Polish bump yur head or somthin' ?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Yeah, I need to get an Ishapor in .308 before they go away for good...can't believe they are CR elible either...

    And they have 12 round mags, don't they?

    And yeah, you are right about the Mosin ejector spring/cartridge interrupter...he gets little credit for that, but that was pretty revolutionary in BA design. EVERY rimmed cartridge bolt gun has that problem if the cartridges are not carefully loaded so the rims below are behind those above...I've read where the Enfield stripper clips were "directional," you had to make sure they went in the right way...I never quite figured out why the Enfield had removable mags if you weren't supposed to use them that way, but use 5 round strippers instead...

    I do that when loading my Nagant strippers too, push up on the first round when pushing the next one into the clip so they are that way, but I HAVE put them in the mag backwards on purpose and accidentally, and they still feed...
    A tiger never changes his spots.

    MO JENKINS
    V.I.P. Member
    Posts: 141
    (3/5/02 9:53:59 pm)
    Reply Re: What'dya do Polish bump yur head or somthin' ?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Yeah, It's amazing that they just didn't make the strippers "directional" like the ones for the M-95 Steyr. The 1)angling of the steyr clips and the 2)ridges on the TOP of it 1)prevent interlocking rims and 2) facilitate proper loading by "feel" even when there can be no visual recognition. This said I still love the enfield and am very tempted to get one of those Gibbs .308 Ishapore carbine jobs. I looked one over at a shop and although it was a pretty crude job, I could probably rig up an old M1 carbine or 03'A3 sight on it. I think I have one of each kicking around somewhere. Unfortunately, I've found a new addiction, I bought a Colt Commando revolver the other day, and sure as hell, I've been bitten by a new bug! It's gonna be a while before I spend any money on anything else!
    Your Buddy,
    MO

    walter in florida
    Member
    Posts: 5
    (3/8/02 5:11:45 pm)
    Reply best bolt action rifle, WWI
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The lee Enfield, The Germans thought the British had some new simi-auto because of the rapid-fire of the Enfields. In WWII, the M-1 Garand became the best because of the rapid-fire.

    Go Get Beer
    Member
    Posts: 27
    (9/18/02 3:01:27 am)
    Reply Re: best bolt action rifle, WWI
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I can answer that for you, polishshooter
    AFAIK Every rifleman in the British squad carried a spare magazine or two for his Enfield, two magazines for the squad Bren gun and the rest of the ammo in 5-round stripper clips. In that way every soldier could act as support for the Bren gunner without throwing magazines to each other in battle. When the Bren used up one of its magazines the support rifleman took the mag and refilled it from the stripper clips. If any rifleman ran out of mags for his Enfield he could reload it from the same clips. If you put more ammo into magazines you probably would have to unload them to load the Bren mags, besides even the empty mags weigh something.
    If a Bren gun got jammed due to the cartridge rims overlocking the standart procedure was to remove the mag, grab it by the top (where the lips are), slam the back of the magazine against your hip, reinsert, cock the gun and resume firing. I have no idea how well it worked, but the method must have some merit since it was adopted.

    Edited by: Go Get Beer at: 9/18/02 6:18:29 am

    Tac401
    Administrator
    Posts: 6391
    (11/20/02 10:54:53 pm)
    Reply
    Re: best bolt action rifle, WWI
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Excellent info GGB!

    Good to hear from you!

    Tac
    TFF VMBB Email Tac

    Mauser45
    Member
    Posts: 8
    (11/24/02 12:08:37 am)
    Reply
    Re: Best military bolt action of all time?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    This is a great topic ! Of course all of these rifles have their strengths and weaknesses. I would be inclined to pick the Lee Enfield as first choice due to its greater magazine capacity and slick working action. As mentioned in one of the posts the thin barrel may overheat and cause accuracy problems but I think that this is a problem with any of the rifles. Those barrels are gonna sizzle in combat! I do love the Mausers for sporting purposes but of the rifles listed I would rate the 98 as dead last. The Springfield is comparable in every way to the 98 but is more accurate. The Lee Enfield has a greater magazine capacity and is faster to manipulate. The Mosin Nagent is as accurate and if we are talking about the Finnish models that have heavier barrels and are "fixed up" then there is no comparison for accuracy. I apologize to you 98 fans out there but I have never read any articles or any information to indicate that the 98 mauser is particularly accurate. I am sure that some of you out there have some really good shooters, and, they did have their sniper versions. I just can't see anything about the 98 Mauser that is superior to the other rifles.
    My favorite military rifle is the 96 Swede and while it never saw as much action as the other rifles, it is possibly the most accurate military rifle, on the average, of all of them. It offers exceptional accuracy, mild recoil and is plenty powerful. I also think that the 6.5x55 cartridge is the best military cartridge ever made. If it were adopted today with a 100 - 120 grain bullet it would be a serious cartridge for combat, unlike the "woodchuck" class .223 ! The person that designed the stocks on the Enfields should be shot! Those buttstocks with their low combs are murder on your jaw! This includes the P14 and the 1917 Enfields. Recoil has to be a real problem when you are shooting hundreds of rounds. All of these rifles shot "serious" ammo and they all came equipped with steel buttplates. Luckily, they all were fairly heavy which helped to tame the recoil. The only exception that I can think of was the #5 Enfield carbine. I believe it had a rubber pad. I had a 98 Mauser years ago and I bought a batch of military 196 Grain ammo. I can still remember the pain in my shoulder from that steel buttplate! I wonder how many people developed a serious flinch during the war? I don't really see where any of these rifles had enough of an advantage over the others to influence the outcome of any battle. I believe that it was superiority in tactics, the number of troops, logistics and guts that made the difference in who won or lost.
    Too bad there wasn't a heavy barreled Lee Enfield in 6.5x55 or that .280 cartridge that they almost adopted in the P14! That combo would have kicked butt!

    GUN CONTROL IS HITTING THE TARGET!

    sig230
    Member
    Posts: 7
    (11/27/02 9:50:59 pm)
    Reply Re: Polish sorry to hear you are ill ( joking)
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Does anyone think there might be someone here with a strongly held position?

    polishshooter
    *TFF Senior Staff*
    Posts: 3732
    (12/1/02 11:20:00 pm)
    Reply Re: Polish sorry to hear you are ill ( joking)
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    That's the whole reason for this EXERCISE! (AND others, you should check out the Tank thread!)

    You're entitled to ANY opinion as long as you can defend it! That's how we all learn.

    Heck, sometimes I feel very strongly BOTH ways!

    And no matter what I THOUGHT I knew, I learned a lot from this thread...like GGBeer's answer on the way British soldiers carried ammo and why makes a lot of sense, and I never heard that before. But then I have to compare that with the way the Japs supported their MGs...their soldiers were supposed to carry extra ammo to feed the Nambus, some Nambus were even designed with "hopper feeds" so soldiers could just dump loose rounds in it to keep it fed. Not only didn't that work that well, the Japs had to develop a "semi-rimless" 7.7 round to work in the MG, which DIDN'T work in the Arisaka, so that shot THAT whole theory to hell ANYWAYS!

    Back a ways somebody mentioned about greasy surplus Carcano ammo...I wonder if that had anything to do with the oilers the Italians developed to oil the ammo BEFORE loading into their Berretta MGs...because they had so many feed/extraction problems??

    "Don't hear him call you an ---hole, hear WHY he's calling you an ---hole." -------- From "A Season on the Brink"

    TallTLynn
    *TFF Senior Staff*
    Posts: 5112
    (12/8/02 8:41:04 pm)
    Reply
    Re: Polish sorry to hear you are ill ( joking)
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I hereby want to change my vote (though it's still really, really close).

    I have shot mausers and while they are nice I'm not what you would call impressed with them. Probably never will be.

    I had voted for Enfield and in a way I stand behind my vote. Never had one damn bit of trouble shooting any of the ones I've owned (and now I can say I own more than 2 again - though since my first post I did sell one and then replace it). They're a great battle rifle and in the hands of someone who can shoot - deadly accurate. Still many a sporterized version floating around this part of the country - used to shoot both deer and elk.

    But when I originally voted I had never shot a '03 or 03A3 and so I could not base my vote on anything but what I knew. So I'm changing it to the '03 (or 03A3 - though the 03 still wins out as far as I'm concerned if for no other reason than I like the way it looks). I've got 2 Springfields and a Remington (okay I'm waiting on the 2nd Springfield - should arrive early this week). I've shot both the Springfield '03 and the Remington 03A3 - and for sheer enjoyment, smoothness of shooting and the way the gun feels and works I've got to say they had to be the best battle rifle out there in bolt action.

    And I ain't changing my mind again!!!!!

    Xracer
    *TFF Senior Staff*
    Posts: 3154
    (12/9/02 9:41:30 am)
    Reply Re: Polish sorry to hear you are ill ( joking)
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "And I ain't changing my mind again!!!!!"

    Yeah, "T".....until you get your next dozen or so Milsurps and try THEM out!

    "TLynn's home for orphan Milsurp Rifles....donations tax deductible"

    TallTLynn
    *TFF Senior Staff*
    Posts: 5121
    (12/9/02 8:12:43 pm)
    Reply
    Re: Polish sorry to hear you are ill ( joking)
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    lol XRacer, lol!!!

    Actually, I've started liquidating some of my rifles. Trading them away for Enfields and '03's.

    Fact is just traded away another one for a stock (hey what can I say I like working with wood).

    Trying to consolidate to just a few calibers so it's cheaper.


    Ballistic
    V.I.P. Member
    Posts: 60
    (12/19/02 5:49:19 pm)
    Reply Re: Polish sorry to hear you are ill ( joking)
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    i like the springfields...

    Celt
    Member
    Posts: 7
    (12/29/02 5:43:13 pm)
    Reply Re: Polish sorry to hear you are ill ( joking)
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Two come to mind.
    The USAR M-24 SWS and the USMC M-40A1 SWS

    Celt
    H.D. Rifles


    Poley
    Member
    Posts: 1
    (2/15/03 10:32:37 pm)
    Reply Re: Best bolt action
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Now let's see, We are looking for a bolt gun that is accurate like a Springfield, Speed of a SMLE, build quality of a Swede, and firing a full size round like the K98 and Mosin. Sounds like a K31 Schmidt- Rubin to me! Poley

    Xracer
    *TFF Senior Staff*
    Posts: 3740
    (2/16/03 8:37:36 am)
    Reply Re: Best bolt action
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Hi Poley......welcome to TFF!

    Are you a HistoryNut.....or do you just like strange rifles?

    Poley
    Member
    Posts: 2
    (2/16/03 11:56:48 am)
    Reply Re: Best bolt action
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Thanks Xracer,
    Can I be both? I have learned a little on the subject of WWI and WWII when I was looking up information on the weapons of that era. I have to admit that I really enjoy shooting my K31 strange or not. Poley

    Edited by: Poley at: 2/16/03 11:57:44 am

    sgtfubar
    Member
    Posts: 3
    (2/27/03 10:39:13 pm)
    Reply Re: Best military bolt action of all time?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Mauser....cept that you did'nt list it as a choice.
    Last edited: Mar 7, 2003
  2. 303carbine

    303carbine New Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2003
    Messages:
    5
    Location:
    Vacouver Island BC
    It's a tie for the 7x57 and the 303:cool:
  3. AngelDeville

    AngelDeville New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2007
    Messages:
    673
    Location:
    ABQ
    Nagant's made it to the heart of K-98 country pretty well, even with their kick, and difficult bolts....:D
  4. krustymike

    krustymike New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2009
    Messages:
    2
    My vote is for the rifle of empire. The Lee Enfield No 4 made in Canada by Long Branch
  5. spectre14

    spectre14 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2009
    Messages:
    11
    Location:
    Ohio
    Have to say I'm partial to the K98 as I have a 98 and it is a beautiful weapon. Many bolt actions afterward copied the Mauser, such as the Springfield 1903 which testifies to its design. However the Lee-Enfield SMLE was also a beautiful weapon, but I have to stay with my Mauser.
  6. oscarmayer

    oscarmayer New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2008
    Messages:
    2,382
    hands down without a doubt the enfield.
  7. LeSabreUltra

    LeSabreUltra New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2007
    Messages:
    102
    Location:
    Alabama
    Mosin Nagant. Simply can't kill it.
    .
    .
    .
  8. islenos

    islenos New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2004
    Messages:
    1,244
    Location:
    West Texas
    As the story goes;

    Best hunting rifle 98K
    Best target rifle '03
    Best battle rifle SMLE
  9. Mr. Nameless

    Mr. Nameless New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2009
    Messages:
    1,264
    Location:
    Coast of N.C.
    Mosin Nagant, hands down.
  10. Teejay9

    Teejay9 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2008
    Messages:
    1,257
    Location:
    Southwest Corner of the US, "Where no stinking fen
    Mauser K98k, Springfield '03, SMLE. Never fired the Nagant. TJ
  11. bcj1755

    bcj1755 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    4,357
    Location:
    A wretched hive of scum and villiany
    K98k and SMLE No4 Mk1*, both damn fine rifles. I love them both:D
  12. M249SAWZALL

    M249SAWZALL New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2009
    Messages:
    1
    You guys are all on crack! Swiss Karbiner Model 1931 (K-31) Faster cycle due to straight pull back bolt, more accurate than any one mentioned here, and it has the best compliment of all, it scared the crap out of hitler, and kept Switzerland out of the war. I watched a guy on youtube plink an 8in. target at 1,000 yds. with open sights. he only hit 2 of 6 but I'd like to see a mouser do that.
  13. oscarmayer

    oscarmayer New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2008
    Messages:
    2,382
    :eek: crack ? seems to me the swiss rifle you consider the best hasn't had the test the others had. no doubt it's well made it's swiss. but lets get real what do the swiss know about fighting a war. the others guns in question on this post are tried and true have seen years of service under every condition on the planet can the swiss k31 make that same claim ? NO
  14. oscarmayer

    oscarmayer New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2008
    Messages:
    2,382
    oh and hilter afraid of a rifle ? he wasnt normal enough to be afraid of anything. he wasn't afraid of being out numbered while invading russia he didnt fear the b-17's and lancasters that pounded his cities back to the stone age but he feared a rifle made in a nuetral country by a peace loving non combatant people :confused::confused::confused:and we're on crack ?
  15. Charlie the sniper

    Charlie the sniper New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2008
    Messages:
    751
    Location:
    England, thats the USN aircraft carrier near europ
    Hitler, was not going to attack the nation looking after all his Gold, Money and Art (all stolen). And there still holding on to it.
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
General Military Arms & History Forum "Best" Bolt-Action Military Rifle? Jan 12, 2006
General Military Arms & History Forum What assault rifle has the best ergonomics? Aug 23, 2014
General Military Arms & History Forum What's the best SKS of these 3? Yugo Albanian or Romanian Jul 9, 2014
General Military Arms & History Forum Looking for best M1 Garand sling Oct 18, 2012
General Military Arms & History Forum WWII and historys best sniper. Jul 15, 2012

Share This Page