World War One Rifle Question

[mapsjanhere]

Most people don't realize that WWI didn't end due to a total military defeat per se but due to revolutions. Both Germany and Austria were in the grip of major socialist-style uprisings, and part of the reason for the armistice was to get "loyal" troops home to suppress the socialist movements. This backfired, and the resulting chaos was the main reason for Germany having to accept the Versailles treaty; it's military forces had basically melted away.

 

[James K]

In 1918, Germany was in a bad way. They had not planned for a long war, and the British blockade was taking its toll on civilian goods. With the massive burden of supporting a huge army, the German people were starving. There was a very real threat of Communist revolution, with Soviet agents promoting "peace at any price" and touting a communist takeover as the only means of attaining that peace.

Even after the armistice, the blockade continued and of course there was still the army to feed even though it was now doing nothing. The allies deliberately prolonged the "negotiations" to get better terms from Germany. The suffering in Germany was great, and it was the memory of that period that Hitler used to promote his program and to build hatred of the Jews, who were widely believed to have sent money to England (untrue, but many Germans believed it). The allies, naturally, felt that Germany started the war, which it did, and deserved what it got.

In any case, World War, Part II, got underway in 1939.

Jim

 

[muddinman_04]

WWI ended by armistice when the enemy could no longer support the war effort on a manpower and financial basis

So you would think that there would be some late war rifles that would be made with less quality control. This is sort of what I had in mind.

 

[Tamara]

So you would think that there would be some late war rifles that would be made with less quality control. This is sort of what I had in mind.

Yes, that's what I said above; comparing the "hurry-up" rifles of '17-'18 to the almost lavish prewar guns will show the difference. But it's nothing like the crude "last ditch" WWII rifles to which you refer.

Mostly, a late war Mauser from one of the military arsenals like Spandau is just ugly in terms of fit and finish.

 

[Moloch]

I have a few german Gewehr 98's from 1915 to 1917, compared to my pre-war export mauser 1908 (brasil) there is a difference in fit of parts, as example the safety level locks nice and tight and does not move at all in ''shoot'' position. The Gewehr 98 1917 ''Spandau'' as example has a very loose safety lever, there is als a noticeable difference in locking the bolt - the 1908's bolt will glide whereas the Spandau Gewehr 98's bolt will rumble a bit. Both are extremely accurate.

To me the differences between a pre-war G98 and a late-war G98 is not worth mentioning it.

This is my brasil 1908 G98 but re-bored to 8x57

 

[SigP6Carry]

well, you can always expect a difference from firearms assembled during peace-time compared to firearms built specifically for an on going conflict. Even if it's not a "last ditch" rifle. Generally, during war time, manufacturers have to up their quota for the government and won't produce weapons of quite the same caliber as peace-time. This is true of any military items. If Mauser was contracted to arm a standing military in peace time, they'd have to produce... say 200,000 rifles in a couple of years. But, then war breaks out and the nation needs more rifles to arm a growing military. Mauser would then have to produce another 300,000 rifles to arm new recruits in a matter of months, and the quality will suffer, but not by a ton. Last Ditch is where it gets down to "we have to arm EVERYSINGLE CITIZEN!" and they're running out of production members and materials, then the quality takes a pretty big dip.


This is going to be evident in any military and any weapon that you look into. Generally speaking: peace-time rifles will be better built.

 

[rbb50]

I believe you are right and when I go looking for a Mil rifle I do a lot of research just like that to find out exaclty when they were made.

An obvious case is the Ariska mod99s I have of which were made before the war started compared to ones made during or at the end of the war that were known to have a lot of dangerous defects only because production was speeded up so fast.

Not sure how that went but I can just imagine those japanese being told to speed up production with some workers being taken out back and shot for not meeting quotas

That would sure affect production standards over there and in the US I bet they had to meet a quota also where some standards suffered as a way to keep up.

Thing like, "But these recievers didn't get heat treated yet"?? with someone telling them put those damn things in the cart so our department can make the quota this week.

 

[TEDDY]

last ditch????

remember also that german WW1 rifles were used in WW2 and got alot of use.
there are no junk rifle issued to soldiers by any country. it seems for americans every thing is junk.the jap middle to end rifles were substitute standard as was out springfield with stamped trigger guard magazine.I had one traner the bore was from both ends and just barely met in center.the other was cast steel receiver with bolt locking into barrel.I have 5 arasakas in 7.7 and two in 6.5.couple have guards on front sight and couple dont.I would fire and do all.I know of no bad guns by any country except last of germany in WW2.I was in WW2 and was born in 1924.so I am aware of some. I had a ww1 mouser before ww2. I gave a dollar for it.guns were cheap lugers $20 in 1946 to 1950.smiths and colts were not common H&R and Ivers were.just because they are not up to your standards does not mean they are junk.I have most military arms or have had them.
the 1917 was used because we had nothing no MGs no rifles no army,no planes and were ill prepared most troops used 1917s.and we used french and british MG.and french planes.

 

[rbb50]

Sometimes I do wish I was born about 10 years earlier so I could have got some of those good deals right after WW2 in the fifties

Some buy them for the collector value but I always look at them as a new project to keep me busy with the hobby

This was the last Arasaka project I took on and it came out so nice I get a lot of compliments at the range on it.

I know some collectors would say I ruined that rifle

All I know it will shoot exactly where I want it to as in the example where I tried to get 4 shots lined up right across the bulls-eye at 100 yards