|
Post by volkssturm on Jul 10, 2015 22:23:16 GMT -5
Here's an interesting (if you're a hardware nut like me) article on the French MAS 36 rifle. Had the timing been different, France hadn't fallen so quickly and production been faster it would have been a significant WWII weapon. As it was, it served the French well in the post-war years until it was replaced in first line service in the '50's by the MAS 49 and 49/56. Some were issued to German troops in occupied France and undoubtedly some made their way to the Resistance. www.virdea.net/french/36.htmlWhile the MAS 36 was a very solid, reliable and practical design, it was intended from the beginning as a stopgap weapon for first line troops that would relatively quickly be relegated to support troops. The French had begun working on self-loading rifles before the First World War and continued working through the interwar years, resulting in the MAS 40, which went into production a few months before the German invasion. Which leads me to wonder why they bothered. The French had captured large numbers of German Gew 98's during and at the end of the war. The French knew they were moving to a modern cartridge, and probably would have already if the first war had been delayed a few years. The cartridge they adopted in the 1920's, the 7.5x54mm, was based on the German 7.92x57mm. The Gew 98 could have been converted to the 7.5 by simply replacing the barrel and rear sight. And they'd probably have wanted to shorten it to produce something like a Kar98A. From comments I've run across it seems the French did in fact use some captured German rifles for training after both wars. So the question remains, why did they go to the expense of developing an entirely new rifle that was expected to have a relatively short first line service life when they could have economically adapted the most widely used and arguably best military bolt action of the time. I suppose national pride had a lot to do with it.
|
|
|
Post by destiny9 on Jul 31, 2015 6:59:08 GMT -5
The Mauser was never a really good choice for France. The stocks of rifles from WW2 needed to be arsenal refinished to make them ready for prime time. The Mauser action, while much lauded for its strength, was not as successful in the trenches due to its front locking lugs. and there was the practical requirement that once the Mauser was in action where would France get new copies? Weirdly enough Great Britain had paid the defeated Germany after the war a considerable sum for using Krupp patents, France had no desire to be supporting Ruhr industry in any way - they had fallen into the trap of relying on British manufacturing before the 1870 war and had choked off innovation in her own armory system.
The Mausers on hand were used for training and basically used up, while various efforts were made to get another decade or two out of the Berthier design - a 1927 update of this weapon and a later 1934 effort to produce the Berthier in 7.5 were successful. The MAS 1936 was the start of a two weapon system (similar to what would happen with the US M1 Carbine and M1 Garand) where second line troops got a bolt-action rifle and front-line troops would get the eventual MAS 1940 rifle.
|
|
|
Post by droopaille on Jul 31, 2015 11:03:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by volkssturm on Jul 31, 2015 12:11:03 GMT -5
Very interesting. What is the "receiver" made of? It looks like 3D printing. A RS MAS 36 is on my list of guns to add to my collection when I have the funds available.
As far as the French adopting the Mauser, if they'd really wanted to go that direction I would think that they might have demanded the Germans turn over enough tooling from Mauser or DWM to equip one of the French arms factories as part of war reparations. Arsenal refinishing of Mausers to fire a cartridge similar to the 7.92mm would have been much more cost effective than trying to rework Lebels and Berthiers to use the 7.5. But who knows what they were thinking. I suspect national pride was involved. The French had a good small arms development establishment, as evidenced by the MAS 40, 44, 49, 49/56 series. The MAS 40 arguably would have been superior to the M1, the Gew 43 and the SVT 40 if it had made it into volume production and widespread use. Given a choice of working on a new design or adapting a German design, no doubt the French designers would have opted for the first, just as the US Ordnance people favored the M14 (really just an optimized M1) over the FN FAL. My point is, I guess, that they spent a lot of time and money producing the best example of an obsolescent technology that was destined to have a relatively short service life. But that's what makes firearms so interesting.
|
|
|
Post by droopaille on Aug 1, 2015 2:06:54 GMT -5
|
|
shiftysgarand
Corporal
BangbangbangbangbangbangbangbangPING
Posts: 1,165
|
Post by shiftysgarand on Aug 1, 2015 11:32:11 GMT -5
Very interesting. So he made the magazine with parts from a VSR-10 mag and one from an M4? What base gun was he using? I didn't catch it. The magazine is in the right place, so maybe a TM L96? Very cool custom build.
|
|
|
Post by droopaille on Aug 1, 2015 15:48:00 GMT -5
home made gun, it's really weird ta understand, the piston is split and he use a very special joint. I don't know if it works
|
|
|
Post by droopaille on Aug 2, 2015 7:56:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by volkssturm on Aug 3, 2015 11:46:49 GMT -5
So, I downloaded "The Last Bolt Gun: The History of the MAS36 Bolt Action Rifle" by Steve Jackson from Kindle. Some interesting stuff. As Destiny9 said, they went with the rear locking lugs of the Enfield because of mud jamming problems with the Mauser style front lugs. The firing pin design, interestingly, was adapted from the Arisaka. One kind of oddity is that there's no provision for windage adjustment. The front sight is fixed. The rear sight is an aperture on a leaf. There were 25 different leafs available, with the aperture centered or drilled progressively to left and right. Windage was set at the factory by installing the aperture that put the rifle on the bull. It's an interesting approach and practical for a service rifle, where the typical soldier is going to use "Kentucky windage" if he even bothers to worry about it. Overall, the MAS 36 is impressive, very strong, reliable, with a fast action. If you had to go to war with and the only option was a bolt action, it would be a very good choice.
According to Jackson, by the time of the German invasion about 250,000 MAS 36 had been produced. The Germans used thousands of them for second echelon troops and equipped entire divisions on the Atlantic Wall with them. Given the number of different weapons the Germans put to use from occupied countries you have to marvel at the ability of the German supply chain to get the right ammunition to the right people.
|
|
|
Post by volkssturm on Dec 8, 2015 15:04:43 GMT -5
Look what I found at the local gun store. It followed me home. Haven't fired it yet. My initial impression is that it's a very convenient length, heavier than expected, the stock is kind of thick. A person with small hands might have a little trouble with it. It seems well balanced. It could make an interesting project.
|
|
|
Post by droopaille on Feb 26, 2016 14:34:22 GMT -5
So this a real one ? how much ?
|
|
|
Post by volkssturm on Feb 26, 2016 23:37:14 GMT -5
450.00 USD.
|
|
|
Post by droopaille on Feb 27, 2016 5:44:09 GMT -5
very good deal
|
|