An Old Man and His Mausers

Over on my Instagram page (@oldmauserman), I am sometimes asked why I have developed such an affinity for the Mauser line of rifles.  One might think that there is a simple answer to the question.  There isn’t.  It hasn’t always been that way.  I once preferred the M1903 rifles, and I always thought that the Lee-Enfield family of rifles looked like what military rifles should look like.  So, how did the Mauser (and specifically the German-built K98k) push aside all of those other outstanding rifles and end up being my favorite?

Frankly, this story goes back many years.  I was in the fifth grade when I started watching old World War II movies.  By the end of that school year, I had read whatever World War II books were in our modest school library.  I learned a lot about Eisenhower, Churchill, Iwo Jima, the Flying Tigers, and a little about the Sherman tank and the U.S.S. Arizona.  From what I can remember, there was not a lot of literature on World War II Germany in our little library.  My father, however, had a Reader’s Digest book on World War II that was packed with photographs.  I was hooked on any and all aspects of World War II, and I started looking for other information sources.

1935 S/42G (Oberndorf) and 1942 bcd (Gustloff Werke) Rifles

The high school I attended had a larger library, and it was from the books I found there that I started to learn more about equipment.  By the time I was a senior, I could differentiate several models of Messerschmitt 109s, knew the difference between the P-51B and P-51D, could point out differences on the various models of the B-17, and could identify most standard rifles and machine guns fielded by the major powers.  Of course, being an all-American youth, I wanted an M1 Rifle, an M1903 Rifle, and any other U.S. equipment that was available.

During college, I was a history major, and had access to a monstrous collection of books, microfilm, newspapers, and magazines.  Among the books were several on the history and function of small arms.  It was from these books that I learned that the M1903 is widely acknowledged to be the most “beautiful” military bolt action rifle ever produced.  It was also from those books that I started to appreciate the aesthetic qualities of the Mauser K98k.  When I learned that the M1903 largely copied the Mauser action, I found myself starting to lean towards the “original.”  Over time, and as I was able to see more photos of the Mausers in historic photos, the Mausers pushed the M1903 aside.

It was in the very early 1990s that I bought my first Mauser.  Certainly, once that rifle was in my hands, the bond was strong.  While the Mauser was not my first military surplus rifle (I bought a Kropatschek M1886 because it looked cool and was very inexpensive), it was certainly my favorite.  Unfortunately, I liquidated almost all of my very modest military surplus collection in 1992 so that I could pursue a career–including that first Mauser.

The easily-identifiable Mauser bolt assembly.

A few years ago, when it came time to rebuild (and expand) my earlier collection, the Mauser was the first rifle I went after.  I came across this 1942 bcd (Gustloff Werke) rifle being sold by a local gentleman on GunBroker.  I bid on it and won.  Since then, I’ve collected bolt action rifles from every other major power of World War II (though I sold the M1903 to buy the M1 Rifle), and added a couple more Mausers.  I’ve also completed a collection of pistols from the World War I and World War II eras.  Of all of the pieces currently in my collection, the Mausers are my favorite.  Thus, when it came time to choose a name for my Instagram page, I had to find a way to work it in.  Just about the time I started that page, I hit the half-century mark.  At that point, it made sense that “old” could be a part of the name.  As for “man,” well…you’ll just have to take my word for that one!

What is your favorite rifle?  Do you have one?  How did it come to be your favorite?  I’d love to hear the stories!

Bringing the Nambu Back to Life

Bringing the Nambu Back to Life

Of all the firearms I own, one has generated more comments and cautious advice than all of the rest of them put together. In itself, it might not have surprised me that one model drew such criticism, but the fact that all of that criticism has been concentrated into a two month period indicates that there is real concern about the old warhorse. The pistol in question? The Nambu Type 14.

You’ve all heard (or maybe even said) the following:  “Cases won’t eject.”  “The firing pin breaks.”  “You can fire it by putting it in a holster.”  “I can’t find ammunition for it.”  “It is a suicide machine.”  On and on, the complaints continue.  Every now and then, someone offers some useful criticism, and a few folks have even expressed satisfaction and even admiration for the old firearms, but the majority of the feedback I’ve seen has been markedly negative.  So, you can imagine that it was not with a lot of enthusiasm that I purchased this Nambu.

Before I took the Nambu plunge, I did do a little bit of research.  Generally, the Nambu

Nambu Type 14 produced in 1930 at Tokyo Arsenal

series of pistols dates back to 1902, when Lieutenant General Kijiro Nambu introduced the Type A, followed in 1909 by the Type B (the Baby Nambu).  The Type 14, on which this article focuses, was introduced in 1925, and adopted by the Imperial Japanese Army in 1927.  The Type 14 utilized an 8x22mm cartridge.  The 102gr bullet left the muzzle at around 950 feet per second, making it a weaker round than the 9mm Parabellum and somewhat equal to the 7.65 Browning Short (.32 ACP) rounds.  Using a recoil spring action, the Nambu operated very differently than the P-08 Luger, to which it is often mistakenly linked.  While outwardly the Nambu and the Luger appear similar, they are quite different designs.  Over the course of its production, approximately 400,000 Type 14 pistols were manufactured between 1925 and 1945.

Beyond some of the historical background, one of the first things I learned is that the Nambu Type 14 is not the dangerous and awkward pistol many claim it to be.  The Type 94, produced later, featured an exposed sear on the port side that, if pressed with enough pressure, can cause the pistol to fire unexpectedly.  The Type 14, however, would need a little more intricate pressure on the rear of the trigger bar to cause an unexpected discharge.  I also learned that the “exploding Nambu” is largely a myth.  As with any firearm, there are almost sure to be some mishaps–especially in hurriedly-produced pieces such as those produced by Japan in the later stages of the war and especially when

The Nambu Type 14 with the magazine empty and bolt open.

individuals unfamiliar with the operation of the firearm find themselves using it.  The Nambu Type 14, however, does not have a track record of catastrophic failure, especially if handled appropriately and when using correct ammunition.  Ammunition, of course, is a common theme among those who have chosen to own a Nambu.  Finding ammunition, in itself, is a challenge.  Finding the right bullet weight and combining it with the right propellant seems to have been a challenge for modern commercial ammunition makers and for reloaders alike.  My understanding is that the Japanese military ammunition used a 102gr bullet–something that is not widely available to reloaders.  One company, however, offers 8x22mm Nambu with a 100gr bullet, and several individuals who have used that ammunition have reported success.  Not so with the small variety of 83gr bullets that are available.  I would note, however, that just last week, Steinel Ammunition Co. (@steinel_ammo on Instagram) introduced a new version of the 8x22mm Nambu with an 83gr bullet that reportedly performs as well as the 100gr bullet.

My research also left me with the understanding that original springs on most Nambus have weakened over time and use.  Replacing the recoil springs with some modern springs has proven to be helpful to many Nambu owners.  Another helpful hint was that a light coating of gun oil on the magazine feed lips helps alleviate some of the feeding issues that many have experienced.

Historically, I learned that–like many Japanese weapons–the pre-war and early-war Nambu pistols were generally of a higher quality than their mid-war and late-war brethren.  The war took a particularly heavy toll on Japanese industry, and both production materials and quality control suffered as a result of bombings and resource shortages.

So, armed with all of this information, I set out to find the perfect Nambu.  During my search for the Nambu, I focused on just a few key elements:  1) it had to be of pre-war manufacture to ensure quality materials were used and production standards were high, 2) it had to be all-matching to minimize the chance that parts would not work together, and 3) the appearance of the pistol had to be acceptable and not indicate overuse.  Price, while certainly a factor, was not a driving concern.

In February, I found this Nambu.  It was produced in 1930 at the Tokyo Arsenal.  It bears all matching serial numbers, and while there is some wear, it is in very good condition for an eighty-nine year old pistol.  With the pistol in hand, I ordered a set (two) of recoil

Nambu Type 14

springs and a replacement firing pin.  While there is nothing wrong with the original firing pin, I did not want to take a chance on breaking it, especially as I would be firing it for the first time and I have heard many complaints about broken firing pins.  Springs and the firing pin were readily available from the good folks at Numrich Gun Parts (@numrichgunparts). I did have to grind the firing pin guide a bit to allow it to slide freely in the bolt body, but once smoothed out with some 000 steel wool and lightly oiled, it operated fine.

With new springs and a substitute firing pin in place, it was time to look for ammunition.  Fortunately, I have been following @forestfirearms on Instagram for some time, and he has been on a quest to bring his old Nambu to life.  I watched each of his videos and noted the challenges he faced.  I also noted his successes–namely the better performance of the 100gr bullets versus the 83gr.  So, I ordered up a small supply of 100gr ammunition.  When it arrived, I disassembled the Nambu and slipped a few rounds into the chamber and drove them home with the bolt by hand to check the extractor and ejector. Both seemed to be working just fine. While it was disassembled, I also gave it a very good cleaning from end to end and from top to bottom.  While the pistol appeared to be in pretty good shape, this exercise revealed some debris that might have dated back to the Sino-Japanese War.  Reassembly was relatively easy (you might want to keep a pair of tweezers and a watchmaker’s screwdriver handy), despite many of the accounts I’ve read.

Disassembled and ready for cleaning.  The Type 14 is not as difficult to reassemble as many believe.

So, with a clean and shiny Nambu and a degree of hope, but still with expectations of disappointment, I headed off to the range with fifty rounds to see if there was life in this old pistol.

Across the internet, I’ve seen videos and read accounts of Nambu owners experiencing all kinds of feed, cycle, and ejection problems with their pistols.  When someone was able to fire four or five shots in a row without incident, they mostly claimed victory.  I was hoping to get that kind of performance, but expecting problems.  Applying a very small amount of gun oil to the feed lips, and loading five rounds in the magazine, I chambered the first round and held my breath.  Bang!  I glanced at the top of the pistol.  It had fully cycled and chambered another round.  I repeated this four more times.  On

The first twenty shots with the Nambu Type 14 and 100gr ammunition.

the ejection of the last shot, the bolt remained open, just as it was supposed to.  I loaded five more shots and ran through them without incident…then five more…and five more.  I checked the target, hoping that at seven yards, I at least managed to hit the paper.  Not only were all shots on the paper, they were in a reasonably tight group for a first outing.  After fifty shots without any malfunctions, I contacted @forestfirearms to report my success.  I also relayed some information to the good folks at Steinel Ammunition hoping that it would help in development of their new 83gr rounds.

I am hopeful that my experiences, coupled with the input that @forestfirearms and others are providing to the Steinel Ammunition folks will result in a high-quality and reliable cartridge.  Used in a Type 14 that has sufficiently-strong springs and is otherwise in good working order, it is my hope that these cartridges will give Nambu owners good reason to look forward to taking their old pistol to the range.  If you have been inspired to pull that old Nambu out and take it to the range, let us know how it goes.  There is a small, but growing group of us who are rethinking our opinions of the Nambu, and finding that our appreciation for their simplicity is growing.  So, what do you think?


Bolt Action Rifles of World War II

I need to preface this post by saying that I am far from being an expert in World War II era small arms. That being said, I own a few of them and enjoy the history associated with them. I have tried to obtain a representative bolt action rifle from all major powers during the war, and have gotten seven-eights of the way there; I am still missing a decent quality Chiang Kai-Shek Mauser. Owning pieces of history, even when you don’t know the full story behind them, is interesting for old history majors like me. Being able to put those pieces of history to actual use, however, is nothing short of exciting. This evening, I offer a very unscientific ranking of bolt action rifles from World War II.

Representatives of the major nations that currently reside in my gun cabinet are: 1) an Italian Carcano 91/24, built in 1917 and refurbished in 1924; 2) for the United Kingdom, a Lee-Enfield No.4 Mk.1 rifle manufactured in 1942 by Royal Ordnance Factory Maltby; 3) a Japanese Arisaka Type 99 manufactured by Toyo Kogyo in 1944; 4) a Springfield M1903

Allied Rifles – Top to Bottom:  Lee Enfield No.4 Mk.1, MAS-36, Springfield M1903, Mosin 91/30.

manufactured in the United States in 1908 by the Springfield Armory; 5) a Soviet Russian Mosin 91/30 built in 1943 at the Izhevsk Mechanical Plant; 6) a Manufacture d’Armes de Saint-Étienne (MAS) 36, manufactured in 1938; and 7) the famous German Mauser Kar.98k, built in 1942 at the Mauser AG Oberndorf. I have fired rounds through all of these firearms (or in the case of the M1903, another rifle of the same model) over the course of the last year–but not all on the same day. The rifles were fired at different ranges, all indoors, at a range of fifty yards, while standing. Other variables that might affect pure ratings include the time of day and the amount of coffee I consumed before shooting, the quality and type of ammunition used, and how well I cleaned the rifle after the last time I shot it. In other words, this will not be a very objective ranking. With all of this out of the way, it is time to get on with the list.

Axis Rifles – Top to Bottom:  Carcano 91/24, Arisaka Type 99, Mauser Kar.98k.  Note the Walther P-38 I added just for the heck of it.

7. Carcano 91/24: It really isn’t fair to rate the little Carcano. It is the oldest rifle, has had extensive post World War I work done on it, and I do not have the correct round-nose ammunition to put through it. At fifty yards and with Spitzer bullets, I am able to put all of the shots on paper, but just where they passed through is…well…all over the place. The bullets key holed well over half the time and the sights seemed to be adjusting themselves between shots. Truth be known, I fired twenty shots through the Carcano after putting twenty through the Mosin and drinking a few cups of coffee, so fatigue or caffeine might have had some effect on my aim, but I don’t think I am that weak. While the performance of the Carcano leaves a lot to be desired, it is a delightful little weapon, being rather light for an early 20th Century firearm, with en-bloc loading, a very strong action, and a very interesting history. The rifle might well have served in two World Wars, and it has the scars to show it.

6. Arisaka Type 99: I really should have tried to get an early war Type 99. The example I have saw some service and was manufactured at a time when Japanese fortunes were fading and quality was being sacrificed for efficiency and volume. This is a very basic rifle, with some parts simply unfinished and others showing signs of the haste with which it was built. The rifle shoots straight enough; all twenty shots through this one were within about a ten-inch radius circle. The action is strong, but a little loose for my taste, and the whole unit just feels a little wonky. Another negative for me is that it just doesn’t look all that great. I suppose the Japanese designed the rifle for function and not for aesthetics, but next to a Mauser or an Enfield, this one pales in comparison. All-in-all, this rifle gets the job done, but it is not what I would pick up if I had to go to war with a bolt action rifle.

5. Mosin 91/30: Ok, there are thousands–maybe millions–of Mosin fans out there who may want to shoot me with a 7.62×54 round after ranking the venerable 91/30 as fifth out of seven rifles. In terms of accuracy, it is near the top. Twenty shots through my 91/30 landed (with one exception which was wildly off target) in a six-inch group. That is fine,

Mosin 91/30, along with a bag of my accuracy inhibitor.

except that the group was six inches above where I was aiming. Part of that, I am sure, is that I wasn’t properly accounting for the sights being calibrated to 100 meters. Part of it might be that I just can’t shoot. The main problem I have with the Mosin, though, has nothing to do with accuracy. The bolt on this monster is just too difficult to work. It is solid…very solid…probably the most solid of all of these rifles. In essence, it is a solid piece of hardened steel shaved down to serve as a bolt. It is heavy, resists rapid cycling, and sometimes picks up a cartridge more than it should. Another negative, for me, is that the rifle is just plain heavy. My admiration for the line rifleman of the Red Army has grown greatly since I started really playing with the Mosin. Imagine lugging this monster around over the Steppes of Europe and having to actually use it in combat. On the other hand, the Mosin is a very nice looking and imposing rifle, the history is wonderful, and it was one of the major contributors to winning the Great Patriotic War.

4. Lee Enfield No.4 Mk.1: I surprised myself ranking this rifle this low. I have spent hours looking over this piece from end to end. I have taken numerous photos of it and posted them on Instagram (look me up @oldmauserman). It is a nice looking and solid rifle. I love how the Enfield feels and I enjoy cycling the bolt. It is also a joy to shoot. I suppose this img_1114one fell to fourth because the remaining three rifles just perform better and have some other factors that make me prefer them. The Enfield is accurate. I can regularly hit the inner circles of a standard target at fifty yards. The weight balance is natural, and aiming is easy. The ten-round magazine means you don’t have to stop and reload as often as with any of the other rifles listed here. The history behind the Enfield family is interesting, and the potential for this rifle being a combat veteran is great. I really don’t have very much at all to say negatively about this rifle.

3. MAS-36: If ranking the Enfield at number four surprised me, ranking the MAS-36 at number three surprised me even more. I bought this unit, mostly, because I wanted to have a representative of France in my collection. When I picked her up, she needed a good cleaning, the barrel was dirty with grease and dust, and the action was sticky. I initially believed I made a mistake and that I should have waited for a better specimen. Once I got the rifle cleaned up, however, my opinion changed…quickly. The action, once free of years of grease and grime, is surprisingly smooth and easy to work. Still, it closes up tightly. Absent a safety, the rear end of this rifle is simple and surprisingly pleasant. The sights,


adjusted at the factory, are a little difficult to work for range (though that is not a problem at fifty yards), and the bolt handle is oddly bent forward. There is a story behind that, which I will share in a later post, but the forward-bent bolt is very functional and makes it very easy to cycle. I’ve heard the MAS-36 described as ugly and several other words that are even less complimentary. Having played around with her for a while, I don’t think the derogatory terms are fair. In terms of performance, the MAS-36 puts bullets right where you want them. Purely in terms of my non-scientific tests, this rifle shot the tightest group of all. As I explained in the intro, however, there may be circumstances that affected accuracy that cannot be attributed to the rifle. If I had to go to war tomorrow with a bolt action rifle, I would not be afraid to grab this one.

2. Mauser Kar.98k: Moving past the surprises, I was not in the least surprised that the Mauser ended up in the top two. If you are a rifle collector, a historian, a gun nut, an artist, an engineer, a soldier, or someone who just enjoys fine things, how can you not like the Mauser. The history behind this and all other wartime Mausers is the single negative factor that I could attach to this rifle. In terms of performance, it is hard to beat these old warhorses. The Mauser is, all at the same time, accurate, balanced, dependable, easy to

Mauser Kar.98k

maintain, a delight to shoot, deadly, and even aesthetically pleasing to look at and hold. I can regularly shoot tight groups with this rifle (when I use decent ammunition). The action is as smooth as silk and the sound of the bolt cycling is one of the greatest of manmade sounds. Even little details like the brass tear down disc on the butt add to the desirability of this piece. The rifle pictured above is the first World War II military surplus rifle I bought, and it is one that I’ll not part with.

1. Choosing between the Mauser and the Springfield M1903 was difficult. When applying the “what do I want to grab on my way out the house” test, I would be happy to have the Mauser and the Springfield next to the door. This rifle has, easily, the smoothest action of all of the rifles I own. It is solid, but not too heavy. Once you get used to the sights (for old folks like me, that means

Springfield M1903

being able to FIND the rear sight), it is dead-on accurate. If I had to find a negative with this rifle, it would be those sights. This rifle is the only one in this collection to feature a magazine cut-off switch, which is interesting if not exactly useful. I have heard and read, from several sources, that the M1903 is the most beautiful rifle ever produced. I’d be hard pressed to offer an argument against that, though the Mauser family would be a pretty close competitor in the firearm beauty pageant. With this rifle, and with a little practice with aiming, I can put twenty shots into a space not much bigger than an iPad. The 30-06 cartridge puts out a lot of bang at the range, and carrying an M1903 around in the local gun shows always invites favorable comments and several cash offers. I don’t think I’ll be parting with this old lady for a long, long time.

So, there you have it. I am thinking about covering each of these rifles in more detail in separate future posts if there is any interest. Each of them have unique and very interesting histories, both in terms of development and combat. I enjoy having these functional relics in my collection, and suggest to anyone who enjoys World War II history–or military history in general–to purchase an old military surplus rifle and take it to the range (following a good inspection to ensure safety). You’re sure to make new friends and you’re likely to end up in a great debate about how to rank bolt action rifles from World War II!Bol