When does a rifle become obsolete??? - Page 2
You are Unregistered, please register to use all of the features of FirearmsTalk.com!    
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > Long Guns > General Rifle Discussion > When does a rifle become obsolete???

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-07-2014, 12:22 AM   #11
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Mercator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 7,168
Liked 3280 Times on 2257 Posts
Likes Given: 1612

Default

I can see that, as long as you exclude historic replicas, such as the Springfield M1A.

So, to clarify. An M44 carbine, obsolete or obsolescent?

__________________
Mercator is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2014, 12:26 AM   #12
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
bluez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,352
Liked 419 Times on 273 Posts
Likes Given: 1570

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mercator View Post
I can see that, as long as you exclude historic replicas, such as the Springfield M1A.

So, to clarify. An M44 carbine, obsolete or obsolescent?

Thats a tough one,m it <is> a bolt action..
but it <is> very cheap and does have quite a bit of utility..

I'd say the proper classification might be obsolete for gov't but only obsolescent for civilians.
The fact that so many civilians use it proves it is not obsolete but only obsolescent.
__________________
https://www.numbersusa.com/content/

Primary Rifle:
LWRC M6A2 w/ Eotech512

EVERY DAY MEN WHO WILL FOLLOW ORDERS TO KILL YOU, EXERCISE. DO YOU?

Last edited by bluez; 02-07-2014 at 12:29 AM.
bluez is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2014, 12:47 AM   #13
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Mercator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 7,168
Liked 3280 Times on 2257 Posts
Likes Given: 1612

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jpattersonnh View Post
In 1891, The M91 was actually cutting edge. The cartridge was designed by... are you ready.... Remington. The Czar wanted a cartridge that no other rifle could be modified easily to chamber. Beveled rim, not easy. Spike bayonets have been around since the 1500's. The last service rifle to use one was the M44, the No4 Enfield is just behind. Strait bolts were the norm on Military rifles in 1891 and well afterwards, M93, M95, and M98 (or GEW98) Mauser were the 1st to copy it. The Last was the FR8 Spanish 7.62x51. You need to get your facts strait. BTW, ask anyone that served in the middle east if they have seen Enfields, 91/30, etc.
OK, from the bottom up. Straight bolt handles were not the norm; all three rifles I mentioned in comparison had curved ones. The straight bolt on the Mosin was also short by necessity, which made clearing a jam more difficult.

The Mosin bayonet made the rifle muzzle heavy and awkwardly long, but more importantly it was a separate unattached piece. The Mosins were sighted in mostly with the bayonets on, which complicated the accuracy with a "naked" muzzle. The spiked shape was not a big deal by itself. If i misled you to think so, my apologies.

You correctly credited the Imperial Government with the flawed concept of their next battle rifle. Several American gunmakers were contracted by the Tsar at one time or another. All that does nothing to change the fact that the Mosin design was outdated, by comparison.

About the Middle East. Yes, obsolete (or obsolescent?) weapons have been present there for a long time. I am not sure what else you want me to ask about.

Finally, on handling the facts. We are on my territory. I am a vicious personality, and you may not love me, but in this section of History, you can take the facts from me to your memory bank. Over.
__________________
Mercator is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2014, 12:51 AM   #14
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,698
Liked 2609 Times on 1483 Posts
Likes Given: 2004

Default

IMO, it depends on the use of, and the organization or person using

the rifle.

here's a tale of two rifles:

#1-An Izzy Mosin M44- in great shape, shiny barrel, great truck gun,

still in use, a go to rifle for chasing wild boar, or whenever I want a

tough carbine. It serves a purpose, is an important part of my system.

So, it's not obsolete, in my perception.

#2-A 1925 Hex Izzy 91/30- all matching serial #s, dark, but shoot-able bore,

great piece of military history. (my guess, due to condition, is it was a

guard's duty weapon, or it served on the Russian east coast during WWII)

But, in my eyes it's obsolete, because, cool as it is, it's four feet

long, I have no practical use for it. Hence, it's obsolete, in my view.


These are two very similar rifles, made by the same factory, with the same

design, materials, caliber, and overall type. One is "obsolete", one isn't,

the way I see things...

__________________

Last edited by therewolf; 02-07-2014 at 01:03 AM.
therewolf is offline  
Mercator Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2014, 12:56 AM   #15
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Mercator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 7,168
Liked 3280 Times on 2257 Posts
Likes Given: 1612

Default

Yep, it's all in the eyes of the shooter, in the end. But thanks, a good distinction to learn.

__________________
Mercator is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2014, 01:25 AM   #16
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
jpattersonnh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: South central,NH
Posts: 5,152
Liked 767 Times on 535 Posts
Likes Given: 826

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mercator View Post
OK, from the bottom up. Straight bolt handles were not the norm; all three rifles I mentioned in comparison had curved ones. The straight bolt on the Mosin was also short by necessity, which made clearing a jam more difficult.

The Mosin bayonet made the rifle muzzle heavy and awkwardly long, but more importantly it was a separate unattached piece. The Mosins were sighted in mostly with the bayonets on, which complicated the accuracy with a "naked" muzzle. The spiked shape was not a big deal by itself. If i misled you to think so, my apologies.

You correctly credited the Imperial Government with the flawed concept of their next battle rifle. Several American gunmakers were contracted by the Tsar at one time or another. All that does nothing to change the fact that the Mosin design was outdated, by comparison.



About the Middle East. Yes, obsolete (or obsolescent?) weapons have been present there for a long time. I am not sure what else you want me to ask about.

Finally, on handling the facts. We are on my territory. I am a vicious personality, and you may not love me, but in this section of History, you can take the facts from me to your memory bank. Over.

Bud, you are not misleading me. You are quite incorrect as far as the Mauser, The 1903 Springfield that came out 12 years later (M91 Mosin Nagant) was a copy of the Mauser, so I'm tossing Copies as they have no bearing on an original design. The .303 Enfield was one of your choices, also a rimmed cartridge and oddly enough both use a .311..312 bullet. The No4 enfield also use a spike bayonet that was not attached to the rifle, but was afixed in the same fashion as the M91. The Mauser had a strait bolt. It was not until the K98a that a curved bolt was used.
The M95's that were fielded in Cuba at San Juan hill had strait bolts, They all did. The M93, and M98 or as I stated GEW98 had strait bolts. The VZ24 Mauser was a strait bolt, M24 Yugo was a strait bolt, M24/47 was a strait bolt. Your reaching for something, but are wrong in every respect. Since this Rifle was fielded in 1891, it was cutting edge. By 1920, it was not the top of he heap, but still a dangerous weapon in the right hands. One reason accuracy s@cks is it was never designed for a 147gr bullet, but the Soviets chasing the Germans decided on that weight bullet because that is what the Germans used. It is a very accurate platform using 180gr and above. The cartridge is also tapered, so with brass ammo it is next to impossible to have a jam. While the Russians were shooting smokeless powder, the U.S. was using black powder. Look at Cuba again. Strait handled 1893 Mausers. When The Boers kicked the snot out of the Brits it was with strait bolt 7x57 M 1893 Mausers. They out ranged the Brits by 200 yards.
__________________

Freedom is not free. The best of us always leave too soon.

jpattersonnh is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2014, 01:45 AM   #17
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Mercator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 7,168
Liked 3280 Times on 2257 Posts
Likes Given: 1612

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jpattersonnh View Post
Bud, you are not misleading me. You are quite incorrect as far as the Mauser, The 1903 Springfield that came out 12 years later (M91 Mosin Nagant) was a copy of the Mauser, so I'm tossing Copies as they have no bearing on an original design. The .303 Enfield was one of your choices, also a rimmed cartridge and oddly enough both use a .311..312 bullet. The No4 enfield also use a spike bayonet that was not attached to the rifle, but was afixed in the same fashion as the M91. The Mauser had a strait bolt. It was not until the K98a that a curved bolt was used.
The M95's that were fielded in Cuba at San Juan hill had strait bolts, They all did. The M93, and M98 or as I stated GEW98 had strait bolts. The VZ24 Mauser was a strait bolt, M24 Yugo was a strait bolt, M24/47 was a strait bolt. Your reaching for something, but are wrong in every respect. Since this Rifle was fielded in 1891, it was cutting edge. By 1920, it was not the top of he heap, but still a dangerous weapon in the right hands. One reason accuracy s@cks is it was never designed for a 147gr bullet, but the Soviets chasing the Germans decided on that weight bullet because that is what the Germans used. It is a very accurate platform using 180gr and above. The cartridge is also tapered, so with brass ammo it is next to impossible to have a jam. While the Russians were shooting smokeless powder, the U.S. was using black powder. Look at Cuba again. Strait handled 1893 Mausers. When The Boers kicked the snot out of the Brits it was with strait bolt 7x57 M 1893 Mausers. They out ranged the Brits by 200 yards.
True about the rim on 303 but it didn't matter, because the Enfield did not need the interrupter. That part broke more often than anything except maybe the mag. The Chief dept of Artillery even blamed Remington for their poor quality.

You are correct on the early Mauser straight bolt, and I was not. But this is a difference without distinction. the Mosin bolt was the hardest to operate, regardless. It was straight and short. The leverage was worse if a jam had to be cleared. The handle was inadequate for the bolt system. To lock a Mosin action, you have to slam the bolt handle. In a Mauser, straight or curved, not nearly as much effort.

You seem to be well read, and I just can't see how you stick to the cutting edge label on the Mosin. At least you don't contest the bolt safety. The long removable bayonet was practically impossible to holster, and awkward to haul around otherwise. The trigger was and remains the worst, with your eyes closed. The Russians themselves have long since admitted as much. At least we are clear on who says what.
__________________

Last edited by Mercator; 02-07-2014 at 02:11 AM. Reason: clarity, thumb typing
Mercator is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2014, 02:06 AM   #18
McCool@email.com
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
MisterMcCool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Bumfugg, Egypt
Posts: 9,294
Liked 8217 Times on 4433 Posts
Likes Given: 17438

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark_Van_Goth View Post
I have heard several time that a rifle is "obsolete".But in what occation it is really "too obsolete" to be used effectively on the field?
When it is damaged beyond repair.



no offense and none taken
__________________

No offense and none taken (̿▀̿ ̿Ĺ̯̿̿▀̿ ̿)̄

MisterMcCool is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2014, 02:24 AM   #19
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 6,624
Liked 2216 Times on 1523 Posts
Likes Given: 820

Default

In the US and other highly developed countries bolt action rifles are obsolete to the military. They have no illiterate soldiers that cannot be trained to service and shoot full auto rifles. Take Afghanistan, they have been at war for 25 years. The Afghan education system is for those who can afford to pay for a private education Soldiers are recruited as soon as they are able to tote a rifle. Bolt actions like the 91/30 that can be purchased at scrap metal prices are highly useful. The soldier carrying the 91/30 is of very little value. If he kills an enemy soldier with the 91/30 they have broke even. If he happens to kill several they hit the jackpot. If he does nothing but make the enemy waste ammo they still are ahead of the game. He doesn't have to be paid, fed or given medical attention.

__________________
John_Deer is offline  
MisterMcCool Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2014, 02:46 AM   #20
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
jpattersonnh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: South central,NH
Posts: 5,152
Liked 767 Times on 535 Posts
Likes Given: 826

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mercator View Post
True about the rim on 303 but it didn't matter, because the Enfield did not need the interrupter. That part broke more often than anything except maybe the mag. The Chief dept of Artillery even blamed Remington for their poor quality.

You are correct on the early Mauser straight bolt, and I was not. But this is a difference without distinction. the Mosin bolt was the hardest to operate, regardless. It was straight and short. The leverage was worse if a jam had to be cleared. The handle was inadequate for the bolt system. To lock a Mosin action, you have to slam the bolt handle. In a Mauser, straight or curved, not nearly as much effort.

You seem to be well read, and I just can't see how you stick to the cutting edge label on the Mosin. At least you don't contest the bolt safety. The long removable bayonet was practically impossible to holster, and awkward to haul around otherwise. The trigger was and remains the worst, with your eyes closed. The Russians themselves have long since admitted as much. At least we are clear on who says what.
OK, let me make it simple for you. The M91 is a strait stack loaded from above. You can not have lips on the mag well as you would not be able to load it. So what makes you an expert on any pre 1900 firearm? The case of a 7.62x54r was brass, tappered. No issue with extraction. I own both M93, M94, M95, M96, and M98 Mausers, but also own quite a few Mosin Nagants. I can't see how any Russian agency found Remington at fault since the design was not developed by them. I'm not well read, I own and shoot them. I realize your years maybe excede my limited 30 years with these firearms, but I'll still cal BS when I see it on the web. Here are a few, not all, but a few. All but two are either Mauser or Mosin Nagant.
__________________

Freedom is not free. The best of us always leave too soon.

jpattersonnh is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
Obsolete Ammo? Help Hathead9 Ammunition & Reloading 19 12-21-2013 01:23 PM
Help with old obsolete revolver kmglocks Revolver Handguns 18 09-06-2012 04:06 AM
Obsolete calibers MrWray General Handgun Discussion 121 01-24-2012 11:36 PM
Obsolete cartridges 1982flh80 Ammunition & Reloading 10 11-25-2011 04:24 AM
Obsolete or Underestimated? Bolt Action Auto & Semi-Auto Discussion 20 05-05-2008 03:14 AM