Chauchat

Was it really THAT bad?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    the mag cut outs ruined the gun and the 30-06 version was dog shit.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    i dunno, ive always liked its looks

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      great, now you think like a french general

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    No. Mag redesigns and the addition of a dust cover solved 90% of the issues with the gun. The .30-06 rechambering was a failure to correctly perform a modification of the gun.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The barrel shroud and barrel are still a major issue. The gun sucks.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >No. Mag redesigns and the addition of a dust cover solved 90% of the issues with the gun.

      Such as tendency for barrel to get stuck when the gun heated up enough? Or the shitty ergonomics such as horrible excuse for a bipod and sights that cannot actually be used, since one cannot get a proper sight picture without surgically removing right cheek.

      Only saving grace of Chauchat was that it could be mass-produced in huge numbers during WW1, but as a gun it was pretty shitty design.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >barrel to get stuck when the gun heated up enough
        Usually it wasn't the barrel getting stuck, it was the cartridge getting stuck, locking the barrel and bolt together. This was caused by inadequate tolerances in the extractor cutout, and a chamber that was reamed too tight in the 30-06 version. While these manufacturing defects were not detected during the war, they were found shortly afterwards, and owners of 30-06 Chauchat's have reported that once these two issues are sorted out that they run as well as the french guns. i.e. the guns unreliability is not fundamental to the design but to manufacturing defects of those two parts.
        The ergonomics are not great, but then the Maxim sucks even harder as a shoulder-fired weapon, so one must keep a sense of perspective.

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Good enough to win the war

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Not really, the french version was fine other than the flimsy magazines, the 30-06 version jammed because the chamber was cut too tight; if you have one then run a chamber reamer in and it'll run fine.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    chiming in to concur with other anons. the chauchat also did what the 08/15 failed to do, and what the M1918 tried to do, which was prove the effectiveness of a mobile, rifle-caliber automatic weapon in an assault role. its the mag-fed grandfather to the SAW concept

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It was actually pretty good, you don't make a quarter million guns if they dont work.
    Suffered early AR-15 Syndrome, they fielded it before it was ready, but after the initial issue were fixed it was a rip-snorter.
    BAR is still better tho

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      More like the L85 problem because even after it got fixed people still think it's unreliable and shit. Granted the same was said of ARs up until about a decade ago when they became common

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >BAR is still better tho
      When you place them side by side, it's crazy how the primitive and unwieldy the Chauchat looks in comparison to the BAR despite being designed as almost the same time by two countries with comparable GDPs.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >place them side by side
        This is what genius looks like, seriously.
        the Chauchat is great, does its job and excels at every turn. Lots of competitors for it to beat: Lewis, Vickers, Maxim MG, Madsen. Chauchat arguably is near the top of that list
        Then you bring out something like the BAR and it's not that it raised the stakes, it's that Browning's design already won the race before anyone started betting. Or knew they were racing
        When merely excellent isn't good enough...

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        The Chauchat is actually a much older design. The BAR benefits from being developed late enough to know what not to do.

        With all of it's faults, the Chauchat is actually a good gun, not because the design is great but because it was what France needed at the right time and in large quantities. It was something that already was in production even before the war (pic related).

        Not really, the french version was fine other than the flimsy magazines, the 30-06 version jammed because the chamber was cut too tight; if you have one then run a chamber reamer in and it'll run fine.

        The US inspectors at Gladiator just weren't doing their jobs. Gladiator's own quality control wasn't that great either. Sidarme made Chauchats are known to be a much higher quality. In testing the Sidarme ones could fire more before the gun seized from being overheated.

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It's a piece of garbage don't worry about it

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Definitely better than the fricking 08/15, and anything else the Germans had that was comparable (which was practically nothing).
    It was good enough for the war. You won't be able to convince me that the combination of both long recoil and open bolt in an automatic rifle with a floppy bipod, foregrip that's still behind the center of gravity, and terrible sights to top it off can result in "actually a good gun". It's just not as bad as people say it is, and it was very easy to manufacture.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Definitely better than the fricking 08/15
      According Major General Julian S. Hatcher, Chief of Ordnance Field Service, the 08/15 was a very good gun, while all versions of the Chauchat were shit.
      I'll trust his judgement on this point.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Me too! None of the people in charge had agendas, they were all dedicated to finding and adopting the most effective weapon no matter what.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        German reports say that the Chauchat was a better gun. French reports state that the 08/15 was the better gun. Germans clearly didn't like having the lug their """""""LIGHT""""""""" machine gun around. The French didn't like the fact that their gun didn't run reliably and found that the Maxim's reliability would have been a godsend.

        There were more than double the number of Chauchats made compared to the 08/15. Strategically, it was the better of the two. It's a gun that was good enough to get the job done.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      What about the Madsen?
      Those are so fantastic that people use them to this very day.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        BOPE running Madsens is aesthetic as frick

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Model 1915:
    Rushed into production before it was ready.
    Had issues which were fixed and other issues which were never fixed.
    It worked more or less, but it wasn't great.
    It was still better than a bolt action.

    Model 1918:
    Barrels were made by a subcontractor, the name of which has been lost to history.
    The barrels were made wrong and caused serious and frequent malfunctions.
    These issues were never fixed. Because of these issues these guns were mainly used for training and rarely saw real combat.
    Fixing these issues turned out to be really easy, it just involves running a chamber reamer into the barrel and cutting the chamber slight deeper, as well as filing the extractor groove in the barrel a bit deeper. Once fixed these guns run more reliably than the 8mm version. But they were never fixed during the war.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The original Chauchat was a success. The cartridge made for an awkward design but it was okay for its time and exported to 15 countries. When USA wanted their own version and design a new factory was built and there everything went fricked. THAT gun was abysmal.

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    > adequately working gun
    > 90% bicycle parts
    > costs as much as a German helmet
    >quarter a million made
    yeah

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    No, the French ones were perfectly fine in its intended caliber. The US ones were rechambered into .30-06 and made in Belgium with poor production quality

    Army should have just not been homosexuals and issued the BAR

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Army should have just not been homosexuals and issued the BAR

      This.

      >lol we have the best gun ever designed in history up to that point, but I'm not gonna let troops use it because they might die and let the Fritz use it against us

      Frick John "Black person Jack" Pershing. He made a ton of decisions that caused more deaths than needed, and he even wanted to keep the going.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Army should have just not been homosexuals and issued the BAR
      They did. They just didn't have that many of them.

      >barrel to get stuck when the gun heated up enough
      Usually it wasn't the barrel getting stuck, it was the cartridge getting stuck, locking the barrel and bolt together. This was caused by inadequate tolerances in the extractor cutout, and a chamber that was reamed too tight in the 30-06 version. While these manufacturing defects were not detected during the war, they were found shortly afterwards, and owners of 30-06 Chauchat's have reported that once these two issues are sorted out that they run as well as the french guns. i.e. the guns unreliability is not fundamental to the design but to manufacturing defects of those two parts.
      The ergonomics are not great, but then the Maxim sucks even harder as a shoulder-fired weapon, so one must keep a sense of perspective.

      He's referring to the fact that after sustained fire the barrel would get stuck in it's tube. It's just a quirk of it being long recoil.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        And being designed for portability instead of sustained fire. Want sustained fire? Bring a Maxim.

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The design of the magazine was terrible and the recoil was just ridiculous. But the problem is that hundreds of thousands of shitty automatic rifles that jam constantly are always better than a few hundred excellent ones

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Was it really THAT bad?
    No

    It was actually good

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >aluminum jacket
      couldn't you just put that on the outside and make the barrel sleeve steel, which won't expand as much?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        They wanted the vastly better heat transfer of the aluminum. It's an open question of whether they actually *needed* it, but that was the rationale behind the aluminum sleeve.

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The Chauchat is the STEN of WW1. It is as good as it needs to be.

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    In any case what were the French thinking with huge holes for the magazine? Surely someone should have known that large holes on guns = large entryways for dirt, dust etc?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The holes in the magazine let you see how many rounds were left, and reduced the magazine weight. Just keep the magazines in their pouches until you need them.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The holes in the magazine let you see how many rounds were left, and reduced the magazine weight. Just keep the magazines in their pouches until you need them.

      The holes also help you load the awkwardly shaped magazine.

  18. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It had some glaring design weaknesses which are attributable to the limited resources the French had to manufacture and roll out an LMG within the span of a few years. The fact that many armies hung onto their Chauchats for decades after some of those design issues were rectified shows the fundamentals of the Chauchat were decent over the course of its service life. It's worth pointing out that many other weapons which were used en masse were rendered inoperable by the muddy trench conditions (Ross rifle etc).

  19. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It wasn’t great but it was serviceable for what France needed, and it wasn’t much more quirky comparatively speaking to what else was out there outside of the crescent mag. The .30-06 version on the other hand was total dogshit and a rush job done simply because the BAR came in too late to be fielded in large numbers by the time the doughboys got to France. Obviously it aged like milk regardless, but so did most of the shit used at that time.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *