The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The North Corral > Curios and Relics

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old July 14, 2017, 10:16 PM   #26
ibfestus
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 21, 2006
Location: Smack dab in the middle of it... The good ol' USA that is.
Posts: 124
The German Mauser's were designed to shoot war time produced ammunition from many different sources, including steel cased, corrosive, slave made, and other cobbled together non spec ammo.

On the eastern front in Russia. if it would chamber and go bang, they used it.

As to accuracy, that all depends on the particular rifle. What shoots accurately in gun A, may be worthless in gun B.

Bottom line, what is the best ammo for your Mauser... there ain't one.

Ah, BTW, the myth that Mausers have become some kind of collector prize is right for maybe 10% of the times. The other 90% are Bubbaized guns that make great shooters and will do everything a 30-06 or a .308 can do... and sometimes better.
__________________
It drives me nuts when people claim to know the unknowable.
ibfestus is offline  
Old July 15, 2017, 01:35 AM   #27
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 17,335
Quote:
The German Mauser's were designed to shoot war time produced ammunition from many different sources, including steel cased, corrosive, slave made, and other cobbled together non spec ammo.
No, actually they weren't designed for that. It was the excellence of the peacetime design that allowed the use of "ammo from different sources".

Everything was corrosive primed in those days. Slave labor in ammo plants didn't exist when the 98k was designed.

Certainly, soldiers on the sharp end will use (or make and use) anything that goes bang, but no guns are designed FOR that.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old July 16, 2017, 09:54 PM   #28
James K
Staff
 
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 24,189
German K.98k's weren't "designed to shoot" some kind of inferior wartime ammo any more than U.S. M1 rifles were. German wartime quality control on ammunition was excellent right to the end. This is especially remarkable because (contrary to most US practice), components were not always made in the same factory. German ammo box codes often show primers, powder and cases made in different factories with the ammunition loaded in yet another factory. Yet (local conditions always excepted), the German army never lacked for ammunition and many thousands of tons were left over when hostilities ceased.

Jim
__________________
Jim K
James K is offline  
Old July 17, 2017, 03:03 PM   #29
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 17,335
Despite the overwhelming intensity of the aerial campaign against Germany, the Allies were never able to "kill" German weapons production. Some systems (like heavy tanks) were seriously delayed and interrupted but never destroyed. We managed to virtually destroy FUEL production, and seriously damage the transportation system (and here, lack of fuel was also a huge effect), but the Germans became masters of dispersing production of many weapons systems.

its a little known fact, but it is a fact that German fighter plane production ROSE every nearly every month from the middle of the war on, and in the last few months, including the very last months, fighter plane production was higher than any other time in the war.

They couldn't USE those planes, due to lack of fuel, and lack of skilled pilots, but they did manage to build ever increasing numbers of them, in well dispersed locations.

Compared to that, small arms and ammunition for them was relatively simple.

Getting them to where they could be used was the difficult part.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old July 17, 2017, 10:01 PM   #30
James K
Staff
 
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 24,189
I once met a man who, as a U.S. Army Captain, had been in charge of inventorying a German small arms depot in France. I now forget the exact numbers, but in addition to millions of rounds of standard steel case 7.9 ammo, they had several million rounds of brass case ammo, which had been made for the Luftwaffe and turned back because it failed primer ignition tests and could have blown the propellers off German fighter planes.

There would have been no problems with rifles and ground MG's though.

Jim
__________________
Jim K
James K is offline  
Old July 19, 2017, 12:32 PM   #31
Mk VII
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 23, 2000
Location: England
Posts: 407
Phile Sharpe says something similar in The Rifle In America, IIRC - at RWS they found barrels full of perfectly serviceable brass cases that had been rejected by the Luftwaffe as not up to standard. He used them repeatedly.
Mk VII is offline  
Old July 19, 2017, 09:45 PM   #32
James K
Staff
 
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 24,189
I got a PM questioning the meaning of my remark about blowing off propellers, so here is a brief tutorial. One of the best places to put machine guns or cannon in a fighter plane is in the fuselage, but in most WWII fighters, that is also where the engine is. So the guns were sometimes arranged over/beside/under the engine. But that meant they had to fire through the propeller arc and careful timing was needed to make sure the bullets from the gun(s) did not strike the propeller, obviously an "ungood" situation. The usual arrangement was to cause the propeller blade to fire the gun, but even then, the ammunition had to function perfectly with no ignition delay or a bullet could strike the blade.

Today's jets don't have propellers so the guns (or equivalent weapons) can be put about anywhere convenient. .

Jim
__________________
Jim K
James K is offline  
Old July 19, 2017, 10:14 PM   #33
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 17,335
It was during WW I that mounting the armament on the center line of the aircraft was discovered to increase the ease of aiming. The British mounted a Lewis gun on the top wing of some planes, but that had its own issues.

One of the French aces (Roland Garros) mounted a machinegun on the engine cowling, to fire through the propeller arc. He fitted steel "deflector" plates on the wooden propeller, and this did work, sort of, though he still "shot himself down" on occasion.

It was Antony Fokker who developed the "interrupter gear", a linkage system that interrupted the machinegun's "trigger pull" at the right time so the propeller blade could pass in front of the gun muzzle without getting shot. It was a huge advantage, for a time, but after a few of the Fokkers were shot down and the wrecks studied, the Allies quickly created their own version.

If you listen to any of the movies with biplanes firing cowl guns (AND the sound effects are done RIGHT) the guns don't sound like normal ground machineguns when they fire. Instead of continuous bursts like the ground gun, they "stutter", because the firing is interrupted for the propeller passage.

Cowl guns were a feature of many pre-WWII designs. Germany's ME-109 and FW-190 used them the entire war. Early war US fighters (the P-39, and early models of the P-40) had a pair of .50 cal cowl guns, and .30s in the wings. Later P-40s dispensed with the cowl guns and put .50s in the wings.

Most Japanese fighters had cowl guns, and so did those of many other nations, and all of them used some version of the interrupter gear, to keep from shooting their propellers off.

It is a matter of very precise timing, to interrupt the stream of bullets ONLY long enough for the propeller to pass in front of the muzzle, and ammo that MIGHT hang fire, even by just fractions of a second could be a rather bad thing indeed. The same ammo that didn't pass muster for a cowl mounted machinegun would be perfectly fine in a ground mount gun, or any other gun that didn't fire through the propeller arc.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old July 20, 2017, 01:03 PM   #34
James K
Staff
 
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 24,189
And the P-38 solved the problem in another way.

Jim
__________________
Jim K
James K is offline  
Old July 20, 2017, 04:47 PM   #35
carguychris
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 7,324
Quote:
Originally Posted by James K
Today's jets don't have propellers so the guns (or equivalent weapons) can be put about anywhere convenient.
Assuming of course that the ejected cases and propellant gases aren't ingested by the engines, which could cause catastrophic damage in the former case, and compressor stalls in the latter case. Just sayin'.

Of course, I guess this could be considered "convenient" placement, as flameouts tend to be inconvenient.
Quote:
Originally Posted by James K
...the P-38 solved the problem in another way.
And as it relates to 7.92x57mm ammo and Germany, so did the Messerschmitt Bf 110 and Me 410.

One wonders if the suspect brass-cased ammo could have been used in these aircraft and assorted bombers where propeller synchronization wasn't a factor, but this would require keeping it segregated, and establishing safeguards to keep it from being loaded into a Bf 109 by accident. Given that the Luftwaffe was known for being politically favored by Hitler, it was presumably more expedient to dump the "bad" ammo on the Wehrmacht.
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak
carguychris is offline  
Old July 26, 2017, 11:26 AM   #36
Archie
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 26, 2000
Location: Hastings, Nebrasksa - the Hear
Posts: 2,133
8x57mm - so called "Mauser" rifle ammunition

Get a copy of Cartridges of the World by Frank Barnes; published by Gun Digest Press.

The 8x57mm cartridge is discussed in reasonable detail in various incarnations, from the initial loading for the 1888 Infantry Rifle and following. Those being the 1898 Mauser rifle and the shortened K98 rifle.

I'm not going to reprint it here and the book is seriously useful to anyone interested in various cartridges for whatever reasons.

Short version, the K98 rifle was issued and intended for use with the 1905 version of the cartridge, a 154 grain Spitzer FMJ at about 2880 fps in the rifle length barrel (about 30 inches) and around 2750 fps in the K98 version (about 23.6 inches).

To my knowledge, no commercial concern manufactures the updated, 1905 "JS" loading. Most everything has a 196 to 200 grain spitzer bullet loaded rather soft. Except for a few residual cartridges with usually Berdan and corrosive primers, the only way to get actual "JS" loaded ammunition is to load it. Loading manuals are full of information.
__________________
There ain't no free lunch, except Jesus.
Archie

Check out updated journal at http://oldmanmontgomery.wordpress.com/
Archie is offline  
Old July 26, 2017, 10:24 PM   #37
James K
Staff
 
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 24,189
The Model 98 was originally made for the Model 1888 cartridge (the so-called 8x57J) with a bullet of .318" diameter. (It could not have been made for the JS bullet (.323" diameter), which was not adopted until 1905). When the new bullet was adopted, Model 98's already issued were recalled and rebarrelled for the new cartridge. The major concern was not the bullet diameter, but the chamber neck, which was too small to allow case neck expansion and bullet release, sending pressures sky high.

Some Model 1888 rifles were altered to take the new ammo and clips, they were altered by reaming the chamber neck and part of the leade, and by fitting a clip guide. Mostly, though, old ammunition was issued in en-bloc clips which would not fit the new rifles, while the new ammo was issued in "stripper" clips which would not work in the unaltered old rifles.

Added: US companies load the 8x57 with a .323" bullet but to a low (35-40k psi) pressure because there are still a lot of WWI souvenir M1888 rifles and carbines around. Most factories in Europe and elsewhere load ONLY the JS version (.323" bullet) to around 50k+ psi. A few do load the 8x57J, so it is a good idea to make sure what rifle and ammo is involved. (All WWII military rifles use the JS ammunition.)

Jim
__________________
Jim K
James K is offline  
Old July 27, 2017, 12:50 AM   #38
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 17,335
Quote:
Some Model 1888 rifles were altered to take the new ammo and clips, they were altered by reaming the chamber neck and part of the leade,
I have seen information stating that the 98 rifles were not actually rebarreled, but simply modified this way, by reaming the throat. No idea if it is correct, or not, but it would have been much cheaper than replacing the entire barrel, and it would have worked just fine.

One thing that I've consistently seen in all reports is that all the rifles in service when the new .323" bullet was adopted WERE modified to safely shoot it. Some say rebarreled, others say barrels reamed. Reality is probably a bit of both.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old July 27, 2017, 02:38 PM   #39
emcon5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 10, 1999
Location: High Desert NV
Posts: 2,588
Quote:
Short version, the K98 rifle was issued and intended for use with the 1905 version of the cartridge, a 154 grain Spitzer FMJ at about 2880 fps in the rifle length barrel (about 30 inches) and around 2750 fps in the K98 version (about 23.6 inches).
The 1903 S Patrone was used through WW1, and longer by some. Turkey used it into the 1950s, and Romania was making it into the early 1970s. Most everyone else followed Germany's lead from 1933 when they introduced the s.S. Patrone, a heavy ~198gr boat tail. When the OP's rifle was made in 1943 this was the standard.

Quote:
To my knowledge, no commercial concern manufactures the updated, 1905 "JS" loading. Most everything has a 196 to 200 grain spitzer bullet loaded rather soft. Except for a few residual cartridges with usually Berdan and corrosive primers, the only way to get actual "JS" loaded ammunition is to load it. Loading manuals are full of information.
Prvi does make ammo with a light hunting bullet at 139 grains. Well, they list it on their site anyway, both for 8X57IS and 8mm Mauser, but I have never actually seen it for sale anywhere. Nobody makes 1903 S Patrone that I am aware of, probably because for the most part the heavier bullet is better, particularly at longer ranges.

What you can get from US manufacturers is generally under-powered. Remington's and Winchester's only offerings is 170 gr @ 2360fps. Federal's only option is even wimpier 170gr @ 2250 FPS.
_______________
emcon5 is offline  
Old July 29, 2017, 09:39 PM   #40
James K
Staff
 
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 24,189
Hi, 44QAMP,

I have heard both ways, but have not seen any 98 rifles or carbines with markings indicating rechambering vs a new barrel. That does not mean they didn't simply rechamber, but I have not seen any real proof that that they did. I know the 88's were rechambered when they were converted to use 98 clips, but have seen no evidence that they were rebarrelled or rebored. It has been said that the Germans selected rifles that already had a larger bore for conversion; that is possible, but seems like a lot of trouble when it was not really necessary. I have slugged a couple of those converted barrels and they are right for .318" bullets.

Based on evidence from other work, I have become pretty well convinced that exact barrel (land/groove) diameter is not a big factor safety-wise (the effect on accuracy is another matter). The pressure is high in a smaller bore, but a .323 bullet fired through a .318 bore won't blow up a well made gun; the size of the chamber neck and the room to expand and release the bullet is a lot bigger safety factor and the new chambering took care of that.

Jim
__________________
Jim K
James K is offline  
Old July 30, 2017, 01:42 AM   #41
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 17,335
Quote:
the size of the chamber neck and the room to expand and release the bullet is a lot bigger safety factor
This is the key. People have been known to jam a .30-06 round into a .270 chamber and fire it without blowing up the gun. Pressure did go way up, naturally.

some years back I remember reading how one of the old time smiths (Ackley I think, but can't remember for certain) got interested in this kind of thing, and made a .270 barrel with enough chamber neck clearance to fire an 06. Turned out that squeezing a .30 bullet down the .27 bore really didn't raise the pressure much, IF there was enough clearance to allow the case to release the bullet normally.

It is possible 98s were rebarreled, not reamed, its also possible guns were reamed and not marked, or perhaps there was a shop mark that we simply don't know how to recognize, that indicates the rifle was converted. It might have been a standard, or it might have been something individual to each shop doing the work. In those days of cheap (compared to today) skilled labor costs, it would make sense that a reaming was cheaper than a rebarrel.

It's also possible that the guns weren't converted by the cheapest possible means, and were rebarreled instead. And remember that the conversion was a one time thing, and all the new rifles, and barrels were made with the new bore size.

Shooting the oversize bullet in a .318" bore probably meant less than match grade accuracy, but that kind of accuracy wasn't what the German Army needed those rifles to do. I believe all the converted rifles were intended for second line and rear area troops, guards, border police, etc.

(where any specific one ended up is, of course a more complicated matter)
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old July 30, 2017, 11:05 AM   #42
F. Guffey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 18, 2008
Posts: 5,615
Quote:
And the P-38 solved the problem in another way.
The P39 Air Cobra was a little different also, that was the plane with Hudson type car doors and the engine behind the pilot. To turn the prop they ran a drive shave forward to a gear system with a hollow center. The Russians loved the cannon that fired through the center of the hub. The ME109 was not a direct drive propeller, the center firing cannon on the 109 did not fire through the propeller, it fired through the hub.

And then there was the P39 counter rotating propeller with two drive shafts.

F. Guffey
F. Guffey is offline  
Old July 30, 2017, 07:24 PM   #43
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 17,335
Quote:
The ME109 was not a direct drive propeller, the center firing cannon on the 109 did not fire through the propeller
No, but the cowl guns (7.92mm, later 13mm) DID fire through the propeller blades arc, just as did the cowl guns on the P-39, P-40, and "chin" guns on the early A-36 (ground attack version P-51), and many other aircraft from different nations.

Interruptor gear basically "stops pulling the trigger" at just the right time to allow the propeller to pass in front of the muzzle without getting hit by a bullet, and starts pulling the trigger again when the blade passes.

A hangfire, of just the right duration COULD result in the propeller being hit, so reliable, CONSISTANT ignition was an important factor in the ammo, unlike ground guns, and guns that don't fire through a propeller arc, where a fraction of a second delay is no big deal.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old July 31, 2017, 03:23 PM   #44
F. Guffey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 18, 2008
Posts: 5,615
Quote:
The ME109 was not a direct drive propeller, the center firing cannon on the 109 did not fire through the propeller
And then the Germans installed the 109 engine upside down, and I have wondered if anyone ever thought about how difficult it would be to open the doors on a Hudson at 200 MPH

F. Guffey
F. Guffey is offline  
Old July 31, 2017, 06:22 PM   #45
bricz75
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2012
Posts: 284
Quote:
This is the key. People have been known to jam a .30-06 round into a .270 chamber and fire it without blowing up the gun. Pressure did go way up, naturally.
Oh gawd!

I knew some ninny who tried to either put 3.5" shells in a 3" 12 gauge or 3" shells in 2.75" 12 gauge.
bricz75 is offline  
Old July 31, 2017, 06:25 PM   #46
bricz75
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2012
Posts: 284
That PPU stuff is weak. Full power loads are expensive, whether factory new (I forget the company(s) that make it) or surplus.

Bummer that surplus 8mm Mauser ammo is no longer cheap.
bricz75 is offline  
Old July 31, 2017, 10:04 PM   #47
James K
Staff
 
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 24,189
On the 88/98 rifle question, I believe that the 98's, which by 1905 had been in service only a few years, were re-barreled, since new barrels were being made at the time and the new rifles would have a long life expectancy. There was plenty of the old ammo in inventory to allow use of the 88 by the reserves for a long time. It was only later, in the press of wartime need, that the 88's were converted, and then most of them seem to have gone to foreign countries, mainly Turkey.

Jim
__________________
Jim K
James K is offline  
Old August 1, 2017, 04:32 PM   #48
mapsjanhere
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 6, 2009
Location: Albuquerque
Posts: 2,778
None of the pre-Spitzer rifles were rebarreled. The only change was the cut-out for the longer rounds in the 88s and a longer lead in the early 98s.
__________________
I used to love being able to hit hard at 1000 yards. As I get older I find hitting a mini ram at 200 yards with the 22 oddly more satisfying.
mapsjanhere is offline  
Old August 2, 2017, 09:47 AM   #49
F. Guffey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 18, 2008
Posts: 5,615
Quote:
None of the pre-Spitzer rifles were rebarreled. The only change was the cut-out for the longer rounds in the 88s and a longer lead in the early 98s.
I could say something like; "What do I know?" but there was a collector/shooter/ going to be a reloader that got sideways with smiths in the Huntsville area of Alabama. He wanted to check the length of the chambers in all of his Mouser rifles. His collection included Commission rifles and rifles made after 1906. Smiths insisted one of the gages did not exist and it was impossible to check all of the rifles with one gage.

Long story short I could not convince him all of the chamber lengths could be checked with one gage so I made him one set of gages that would check all of the length from the shoulder to the bolt face. He removed three rifles from his collection as shooters because he found the chambers were at least .018" longer than a minimum length/full length sized case from the shoulder to the bolt face and he was impressed with the number of rifles he had that were .005" shorter than a go gage length chamber when measured from the shoulder to the bolt face.

F. Guffey
F. Guffey is offline  
Old August 2, 2017, 10:27 AM   #50
Jim567
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 4, 2014
Location: NE FL
Posts: 469
The Gewehr 88 (commonly called the Model 1888 commission rifle) were commonly available in Florida The early 1970s.
A lot of department stores had them in barrels for 30.00.
I owned one as did several of my young friends.
With Remington or other American made "8mm Mauser" rounds --
The cases would split almost every time.
We all dumped them.
There were many other 8mm variants also available for 30.00 in a barrel that were chambered for the newer 8mm round. Mostly WW1 era rifles.
Jim567 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2017 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.10587 seconds with 10 queries