THE ACCURATERELOADING.COM MILITARY FORUM

Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Follow up re the Mauser Article Hi Jacked
 Login/Join
 
one of us
Picture of TrapperP
posted
I recently read an article re development of the machine gun and the author [sorry I cannot recall name or find the article again] stated an opinion I had not heard before, namely, the successful machine gun was around in theory for several years before it could be made to work and the [French] invention of the smokeless powder cartridge was the impetus for the actual success of the full auto weapon due to different characteristics of breech pressures, power curve decline, etc as well as the inherent fouling of black powder. Often more technical than I was able to follow. Has anyone else heard this theory or has it been further developed and explained?
He also “explained†another theory bordering on heresy to many that the great John M. Browning actually was inspired by and finalized many ideas and designs first thought out by von Mannlicher – any detail work ever been done on this subject? I do recall no less an authority than WHB Smith credits von Mannlicher’s 1885 design as the inspiration for the M1 Garand and the Mannlicher 1900 with the 'short-stroke piston' which evolved over time into the basis for the M1 Carbine action.
Really, this is an area that I think has been sorely negllected and much more should be written about the subject.


Lord, give me patience 'cuz if you give me strength I'll need bail money!!
'TrapperP'
 
Posts: 3742 | Location: Moving on - Again! | Registered: 25 December 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
2 brothers, Clair , in Saint Etienne built a semi auto pistol and a semi auto rifle in 1888, using the smokeless powder invented by Paul Vieille in 1886.

Many designs were around at the end of the 19th century when famous inventors put them together or had ideas of their own.

Some breakthrough were unknown, especially all those designs by the French that were not made public. The Rossignol direct impigement system was reliable in 1901 but until recently so called famous writers credited the Lungmann AG 42 for it and wrote that the French copied in in the MAS 49.
There are 17 000 meters of racks filled with archives at the National Center for Armament Archives. That's what is left despite WW2 destructions. it is a gold mine.
Until now, when one patents something in France, it is examined by the Ministry of Defense before publication. The MoD can preempt the patent. Between 1880 and 1940, most of the important discoveries were not published.
The MAS 36 steel formula is still classified, it incorporates some rare earth material and its tempering explain such a resistance for a small light receiver.
I have made some destructive experiments with Berthier and MAS, I just could not believe what I saw when compared to a Mauser.
 
Posts: 157610 | Location: Ukraine, Europe. | Registered: 12 October 2002Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Edmond:
2 brothers, Clair , in Saint Etienne built a semi auto pistol and a semi auto rifle in 1888, using the smokeless powder invented by Paul Vieille in 1886.

Many designs were around at the end of the 19th century when famous inventors put them together or had ideas of their own.

Some breakthrough were unknown, especially all those designs by the French that were not made public. The Rossignol direct impigement system was reliable in 1901 but until recently so called famous writers credited the Lungmann AG 42 for it and wrote that the French copied in in the MAS 49.
There are 17 000 meters of racks filled with archives at the National Center for Armament Archives. That's what is left despite WW2 destructions. it is a gold mine.
Until now, when one patents something in France, it is examined by the Ministry of Defense before publication. The MoD can preempt the patent. Between 1880 and 1940, most of the important discoveries were not published.
The MAS 36 steel formula is still classified, it incorporates some rare earth material and its tempering explain such a resistance for a small light receiver.
I have made some destructive experiments with Berthier and MAS, I just could not believe what I saw when compared to a Mauser.


One of my friends did a blow up test of a 1944 round receiver Mosin Nagant. He couldn't do it even with Bullseye powder. All he managed to do was bulge the chamber and jame the bolt. He screwed the barrel out and the action and bolt were fine. He came to the conclusion, with that rifle, that you could merely dip the case full of any rifle powder and shoot it with no harm. He tried a whole list of rifle powders first before I told him to quit fooling around and use Bullseye like the NRA did wit the Jap.
 
Posts: 2864 | Registered: 23 August 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
I filled the 8x50 R 1886 Lebel case with BA 10, a powder that has a faster burning rate than 700 X, hard crimped an heavy bullet, 10" of barrel obstructed by soil, the rifle planted in the ground like a pole, it jumped 3 feet high, the case head was vaporized, I opened the bolt normally, there was no damaged to the rifle.
I had to find another way to quickly destroy a bunch of rifle. Big Grin

PS: the M16 that exploded in my hands was not that strong, it turned instantly into a piece of junk but I was sound and safe.
 
Posts: 157610 | Location: Ukraine, Europe. | Registered: 12 October 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Edmond:
PS: the M16 that exploded in my hands was not that strong, it turned instantly into a piece of junk but I was sound and safe.


The M16 started as a piece of junk....

I found a new MAS 36/51 was easy to lock up with normal pressure loads due to the rear locking feature. Much easier than you would expect considering the massive bolt and receiver.
 
Posts: 9207 | Registered: 22 November 2002Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
The M16 (and AR15) weak link, still today, is the bolt. The combination of the deeply recessed bolt face and the small lugs....they break. There are two companies here in the states working on what we call a "super steel" to make the bolt and barrel extension from. One is made and testing and to give you an idea it's an AR15 size bolt (not AR10) and can easily handle 308 pressures. So we will see. The most common steel for M16/AR15 bolts is the same old carpenter tool steel.

Ireload2

I don't totally agree the M16 started out as a piece of junk. First the soldiers were told it was a wonder rifle that never needed cleaned. So it wasn't issued with cleaning instruction alone cleaning tools. Then to save money the chamber and bore weren't chromed. Couple this with the jungle climate of Nam we can see why casings stuck in the deep pocketed corroded chambers. The first brass wasn't annealed correctly and couple this with the corroded chambered, it's easy to see why the extractor ripped through the case rims leaving the case in the chamber. Add to this that the cartridge was designed to use extruded tubular powder and the military switched it to ball powder. On top of that Winchester put 10 times too much calcium in the powder to extend shelf storage life the rifle fouled more and plugged gas tubes. The other faults I will give you, like the whimpy thin barrels that bent easy, the slow to adjust sights, the triangular handguard, the three prong flash hider that snagged brush. The rifle was fielded too soon before final testing and like I mentioned with the cleaning issue, fielded incorrectly.
 
Posts: 2864 | Registered: 23 August 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of TrapperP
posted Hide Post
Always have a flash back to the story of "Do you recall this..." when we speak to blowing up a rifle action but have you ever heard the story of the imbecile that took a 6.5 Jap [Arisaka] and re-chambered it for 30-06, leaving the 25 caliber barrel intact, then proceeded to complain becuse of how it kicked when fired. Swaging down a thirty caliber bullet to twenty five and not blowing up the rifle! I have no way of knowing if this is true or not but I've heard it repeated many times.
Sort of makes you wonder how people can blow up rifles, doesn't it. "Case load of Bullseye" - I cannot even imagine the chamber pressure this would generate! And I would not wish to be in the same county when it was touched off, either!


Lord, give me patience 'cuz if you give me strength I'll need bail money!!
'TrapperP'
 
Posts: 3742 | Location: Moving on - Again! | Registered: 25 December 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by ireload2:
quote:
Originally posted by Edmond:
PS: the M16 that exploded in my hands was not that strong, it turned instantly into a piece of junk but I was sound and safe.


The M16 started as a piece of junk....

I found a new MAS 36/51 was easy to lock up with normal pressure loads due to the rear locking feature. Much easier than you would expect considering the massive bolt and receiver.


I don't own a MAS 36, but have a few friend that do. None of them had that problem and one even converts them to other calibers, like 45-70 which is going to have more back thrust then the original round. I wonder if you had a defective rifle that wasn't heat treated correctly?
 
Posts: 2864 | Registered: 23 August 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by TrapperP:
Always have a flash back to the story of "Do you recall this..." when we speak to blowing up a rifle action but have you ever heard the story of the imbecile that took a 6.5 Jap [Arisaka] and re-chambered it for 30-06, leaving the 25 caliber barrel intact, then proceeded to complain becuse of how it kicked when fired. Swaging down a thirty caliber bullet to twenty five and not blowing up the rifle! I have no way of knowing if this is true or not but I've heard it repeated many times.
Sort of makes you wonder how people can blow up rifles, doesn't it. "Case load of Bullseye" - I cannot even imagine the chamber pressure this would generate! And I would not wish to be in the same county when it was touched off, either!


No, but one of my close high school friend's son shot a nice buck one year with a 98 Mauser. He complained of how it kicked really bad. My best friend asked to see what ammo he was using. He pulls out some 35 Remingtons from his pocket. Dang if the 35 Rem isn't just short enough to chamber in the 8x57 chamber. That's a pretty nice swage down to. He got a deer to boot.
 
Posts: 2864 | Registered: 23 August 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by starmetal:
quote:
Originally posted by ireload2:
quote:
Originally posted by Edmond:
PS: the M16 that exploded in my hands was not that strong, it turned instantly into a piece of junk but I was sound and safe.


The M16 started as a piece of junk....

I found a new MAS 36/51 was easy to lock up with normal pressure loads due to the rear locking feature. Much easier than you would expect considering the massive bolt and receiver.


I don't own a MAS 36, but have a few friend that do. None of them had that problem and one even converts them to other calibers, like 45-70 which is going to have more back thrust then the original round. I wonder if you had a defective rifle that wasn't heat treated correctly?


My rifle was new and unfired when I got it.
I never did shoot it much but it took really light loads to prevent extraction from being sticky. At that time there was no brass readily available for it so I had to make it from 7.5X55 Schmidt Rubin brass. A real pain. It would be interesting to shoot it now that there is factory ammo to try in it.
 
Posts: 9207 | Registered: 22 November 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by starmetal:
The M16 (and AR15) weak link, still today, is the bolt. The combination of the deeply recessed bolt face and the small lugs....they break. There are two companies here in the states working on what we call a "super steel" to make the bolt and barrel extension from. One is made and testing and to give you an idea it's an AR15 size bolt (not AR10) and can easily handle 308 pressures. So we will see. The most common steel for M16/AR15 bolts is the same old carpenter tool steel.

Ireload2

I don't totally agree the M16 started out as a piece of junk. First the soldiers were told it was a wonder rifle that never needed cleaned. So it wasn't issued with cleaning instruction alone cleaning tools. Then to save money the chamber and bore weren't chromed. Couple this with the jungle climate of Nam we can see why casings stuck in the deep pocketed corroded chambers. The first brass wasn't annealed correctly and couple this with the corroded chambered, it's easy to see why the extractor ripped through the case rims leaving the case in the chamber. Add to this that the cartridge was designed to use extruded tubular powder and the military switched it to ball powder. On top of that Winchester put 10 times too much calcium in the powder to extend shelf storage life the rifle fouled more and plugged gas tubes. The other faults I will give you, like the whimpy thin barrels that bent easy, the slow to adjust sights, the triangular handguard, the three prong flash hider that snagged brush. The rifle was fielded too soon before final testing and like I mentioned with the cleaning issue, fielded incorrectly.


Starmetal,
My dislike for the rifle is based on some of the things that you mention above but it also includes the cartridge. I just never thought the round was powerful enough for it's intended purpose. For the last 25 years they have been morphing the thing trying to get it to penetrate a helmet at 300 meters. Heavy fast twist barrels and long heavy bullets. Silly in a .22 center fire. Pretty soon they are going to be back to the ballistics of the 6.5 Arisaka or something similar. With widespread use of body armor I think the 5.56 will be a dead dog.

The original story that I read about the calcium carbonate was to reduce the flash of the ball powder.
Try some Hodgdon BLC-2 and you will get a lot of fouling and with light loads a lot of flash. The ball powder was used because the case was too small to get the ballistics they wanted with extruded powders. They were right but they should have use a bigger case and bullet.
 
Posts: 9207 | Registered: 22 November 2002Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
My one friend bought one that was pretty minty. I swear it was 6.5 Swede that he made his brass from. You sure on that 7.5 Swiss?
 
Posts: 2864 | Registered: 23 August 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
If someone makes 7.5 Mas brass from 7.5 Swiss, that's a chore and it explains why the bolt binds.
6.5 Swede is the way to go ( Lapua, no US made stuff that is wrongly dimensioned in the head area) or simply buying 7.5 French from Graf or other shops.
 
Posts: 157610 | Location: Ukraine, Europe. | Registered: 12 October 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of TrapperP
posted Hide Post
I'm only posting this to prepare to ask a question:
"In 1886 the French Army introduced the Lebel Model 1886 using smokeless powder, allowing smaller diameter rounds to be propelled at higher velocities, with accuracy out to 1,000 yards; most other military rifles became obsolete. Its disadvantage was a tube magazine.

The German army introduced the best features of the Lebel in the Gewehr 88, also knowns as the Model 1888 Commission Rifle, along with a modified Mauser action and a Mannlicher style box magazine. This weapon was designed around the new "7.92 x 57" cartridge commonly known today as the 8mm Mauser; which incorporated the advantages of smokeless powder and high velocity. The cartride was rimless which allowed smoother feeding for both rifles and machine guns. The original bullet had a round head; several redesigns including the adoption of thespitzer bullet with a sharp point and boat-tail brought the cartridge to its current potency. Only later versions of Gewehr 98, or converted 88 and 98 rifles could fire the improved "S" cartridges."
<><><><><><><><><><><><>
"This weapon was designed around the new "7.92 x 57" cartridge commonly known today as the 8mm Mauser."
Now for the question: Was this the 'same' ass the 8x57 we see today except for the diameter of the bullet, .318 vs .323, "i" bore vs "j" bore?
I have been told there were not two but three different 8x57 [actually, 7,92x57mm] but have never been able to confirm this. I do know the Germans had a variety of different loadings for the 7.932x57 during WWII but the cartridge was the same dimensionally.
Just another bit of data I would like to know for certain.


Lord, give me patience 'cuz if you give me strength I'll need bail money!!
'TrapperP'
 
Posts: 3742 | Location: Moving on - Again! | Registered: 25 December 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Edmond:
If someone makes 7.5 Mas brass from 7.5 Swiss, that's a chore and it explains why the bolt binds.
6.5 Swede is the way to go ( Lapua, no US made stuff that is wrongly dimensioned in the head area) or simply buying 7.5 French from Graf or other shops.


I agree Edmond, I was pretty certain that it was made from 6.5 Swede.
 
Posts: 2864 | Registered: 23 August 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by TrapperP:
I'm only posting this to prepare to ask a question:
"In 1886 the French Army introduced the Lebel Model 1886 using smokeless powder, allowing smaller diameter rounds to be propelled at higher velocities, with accuracy out to 1,000 yards; most other military rifles became obsolete. Its disadvantage was a tube magazine.

The German army introduced the best features of the Lebel in the Gewehr 88, also knowns as the Model 1888 Commission Rifle, along with a modified Mauser action and a Mannlicher style box magazine. This weapon was designed around the new "7.92 x 57" cartridge commonly known today as the 8mm Mauser; which incorporated the advantages of smokeless powder and high velocity. The cartride was rimless which allowed smoother feeding for both rifles and machine guns. The original bullet had a round head; several redesigns including the adoption of thespitzer bullet with a sharp point and boat-tail brought the cartridge to its current potency. Only later versions of Gewehr 98, or converted 88 and 98 rifles could fire the improved "S" cartridges."
<><><><><><><><><><><><>
"This weapon was designed around the new "7.92 x 57" cartridge commonly known today as the 8mm Mauser."
Now for the question: Was this the 'same' ass the 8x57 we see today except for the diameter of the bullet, .318 vs .323, "i" bore vs "j" bore?
I have been told there were not two but three different 8x57 [actually, 7,92x57mm] but have never been able to confirm this. I do know the Germans had a variety of different loadings for the 7.932x57 during WWII but the cartridge was the same dimensionally.
Just another bit of data I would like to know for certain.


The way I heard it was when they made barrels for the first 8x57 the rifling wasn't deep. Thus the .318 groove to groove. I understand all they did to go to the .323 was deepen the grooves. The bores stayed the same. Is this correct anyone?
 
Posts: 2864 | Registered: 23 August 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Correct. and they adopted a ticker jacket for the new bullet. In fact, german technicains had a lot of problems with smokeless powder and jacketed bullets for more than 10 years.
 
Posts: 157610 | Location: Ukraine, Europe. | Registered: 12 October 2002Reply With Quote
  Powered by Social Strata  
 


Copyright December 1997-2023 Accuratereloading.com


Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia

 

image linking to 100 Top Hunting Sites