Steyr M95 carbine >straight pull >Mannlicher clips >pretty light and handy
I love mine and wouldn't hesitate to fight with it if I had to. Mannlicher clips really are a game changer imo. I will admit that 8x56 is kinda shitty compared to things like 8mm Mauser and .30-06, but .303 served the Brits well enough and it was just as shitty.
Compare the ballistics of it to the 8mm Mauser and .30-06. Sure it's a bit lighter shooting, but that's all it has going for it. The other 2 cartridges completely outclass it. 7.62x54 is a shitty round too for much the same reasons.
Now that said, they'll all kill a man if you do your part.
It's like 308, so I wouldn't call it shitty. Sure, it's not as powerful as 8x57 or 30-06 but it's not that far off. 7.35 Carcano is shitty; 7.62x39 performance in a .308 package.
>It's like 308 >so I wouldn't call it shitty
.308 isn't good either man. It does the job, but there are far better cartridges out there. Hell, there are better cartridges that use the same case. .338 Federal is one that springs to mind. .30 caliber tends to be the compromise caliber and I'm generally not a fan.
Now again, this is me being very nitpicky and I'm well aware that they'll all do the job well enough.
.303 Mk.VII is better ballistically than .30 M1906 ball tho. If you're arguing WW1 rifles you have to stick to what ammunition was available at the time.
This is a fair point, but OP did say WW1 and 2 and to my knowledge WW2 .30-06 is better than the .303 of the same era.
>WW2 .30-06 is better than the .303 of the same era.
Nope, because we Nerf’ed the excellent interwar M1 ball for M2, which is a ballistic clone of M1906. Brits are still using Mk.VII.
.303 Mk.VII is better ballistically than .30 M1906 ball tho. If you're arguing WW1 rifles you have to stick to what ammunition was available at the time.
The MAS-36 just feels nice. It's light and handy. The SMLE is probably the most fun to shoot though. The Type 99 is about the most robust. The nugget is crude but effective.
>What was the best bolt action rifle of ww1 and/or ww2? >WW1
M1917 Enfield >WW2
Despite not being made in adequate numbers, MAS-36
Have to second that, the MAS-36 is a surprisingly compact, handy rifle, easy to carry and difficult to fuck up. Disassembly super easy, I'd say on par with Arisaka. I would prefer user-zeroable sights, but I'm not equipping a military here...
>Mauser 98 >Carcano/Arisaka 6.5
Gucci development apex vs. quasi-intermediate round and simplified & handy form factor for realistic engagement ranges, extra sturdy in Jap iteration
Carcanos have the reversible en-bloc clips going for them (even better than the austrian one-way-only), are slim and quitelight and the carbines are super handy, but they don't "feel nice" imo. Still wouldn't complain having a short Carcano if I had to patrol the Austrian-Italian border.
Arisakas I have handled felt very solid and I generally like the idea of a 6.5 cartridge.
Swedish Mausers are turbo nice and among my top contenders - all that's good about Mausers plus a nice mild recoiling cartridge.
>Mauser 98 >Carcano/Arisaka 6.5
Gucci development apex vs. quasi-intermediate round and simplified & handy form factor for realistic engagement ranges, extra sturdy in Jap iteration
I went with the one Nambu designed because of how easy it is to take apart and its strength (Which comes at the price of being complex to machine.) Though the Enfield's sights are nice.
Because the action is strong. Nearly every modern bolt gun is a Mauser derivative, but you'll never see an Enfield clone anywhere because they're weak.
They're dipping the rifles in warm grease before packing them in crates. Cosmoline isn't going to hurt you.
better not see one single american gun ITT
>t.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
yo i got fuckin ptsd from that anime fr
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>Cosmoline doesn't hurt you
Well is that really true I've never read an MSDS for it but I'm sure long term exposure to it probably isn't ideal, especially with your hands getting saturated with it daily.
There really is no best. Every bolt action fielded by a major power was basically fine and some had advantages over the others in weight, capacity, cost, reliability, stopping power, portability, feeding, etc..
All except the French in WW1. The Lebel in WW1 was inarguably worse than anything else fielded by a major power. Saying "best" requires determining a ton of factors and can vary depending on opinion. We can identify the worst though, because it was obviously the Lebel.
>What was the best bolt action rifle of ww1
US M1917. Fast-cycling bolt, good cartridge, great practical sights, decent ergonomics. >and/or ww2?
French MAS-36. Stupid-simple and stupid strong, lightweight, short and handy, good cartridge, decent ergonomics.
They've already been posted, and variants of the Springfield 1903 ARE arguably the best rifles of the war.
Best service rifles of WWII were hands down the Garand and M1 Carbine, although not bolt action. The 1903 saw plenty of use in WWII and was still a quality rifle then too.
I'd say kar98ks are the nicest rifles & I suppose have an edge in durability over the SMLE but they can't hold 10 rounds or fire as fast so as an infantry rifle I'd say the lee Enfield wins but still sucks balls compared to any semi auto really. I think a better debate would be which is the better accurized bolt action marksman rifle from ww2
Short, light, handy, good bolt throw for a Mauser. Decent cartridge. Could use better ergonomics (C-stock fixed that). Rear sight unnecessarily complicated (A3 fixed that). One of the better WW1 infantry rifles; by WW2 only the A3 was competitive.
Also I always wondered, there's obviously a market out there for WWI-WWII rifles, so why haven't any companies tried to carve out a niche and make modern reproductions?
>What was the best bolt action rifle of ww1 and/or ww2?
Construction-wise? Gewehr 98 and its derivatives: Arisaka type 38, Kar98, Winchester Model 70 (used by USMC), M1903, Enfield P14, vz.24, etc.
Aesthetically? I love Finnish and soviet Mosins, in particular M39.
If I had a Bond Villain army to arm with military leftovers, I'd arm it with sporter Mausers 98.
Mechanically, the Mauser 98, but the pattern build around the action on the No4 Enfields (sights, magazine, etc) was best for fighting.
Who couldda guessed the rifle that holds more rounds and can fire faster would do better
Steyr M95 carbine
>straight pull
>Mannlicher clips
>pretty light and handy
I love mine and wouldn't hesitate to fight with it if I had to. Mannlicher clips really are a game changer imo. I will admit that 8x56 is kinda shitty compared to things like 8mm Mauser and .30-06, but .303 served the Brits well enough and it was just as shitty.
>.303
>shitty
Bold opinion. What makes you think so?
Compare the ballistics of it to the 8mm Mauser and .30-06. Sure it's a bit lighter shooting, but that's all it has going for it. The other 2 cartridges completely outclass it. 7.62x54 is a shitty round too for much the same reasons.
Now that said, they'll all kill a man if you do your part.
It's like 308, so I wouldn't call it shitty. Sure, it's not as powerful as 8x57 or 30-06 but it's not that far off. 7.35 Carcano is shitty; 7.62x39 performance in a .308 package.
>It's like 308
>so I wouldn't call it shitty
.308 isn't good either man. It does the job, but there are far better cartridges out there. Hell, there are better cartridges that use the same case. .338 Federal is one that springs to mind. .30 caliber tends to be the compromise caliber and I'm generally not a fan.
Now again, this is me being very nitpicky and I'm well aware that they'll all do the job well enough.
This is a fair point, but OP did say WW1 and 2 and to my knowledge WW2 .30-06 is better than the .303 of the same era.
>WW2 .30-06 is better than the .303 of the same era.
Nope, because we Nerf’ed the excellent interwar M1 ball for M2, which is a ballistic clone of M1906. Brits are still using Mk.VII.
.303 Mk.VII is better ballistically than .30 M1906 ball tho. If you're arguing WW1 rifles you have to stick to what ammunition was available at the time.
smelly obviously its a bolt action semi auto
The MAS-36 just feels nice. It's light and handy. The SMLE is probably the most fun to shoot though. The Type 99 is about the most robust. The nugget is crude but effective.
Have to second that, the MAS-36 is a surprisingly compact, handy rifle, easy to carry and difficult to fuck up. Disassembly super easy, I'd say on par with Arisaka. I would prefer user-zeroable sights, but I'm not equipping a military here...
Carcanos have the reversible en-bloc clips going for them (even better than the austrian one-way-only), are slim and quitelight and the carbines are super handy, but they don't "feel nice" imo. Still wouldn't complain having a short Carcano if I had to patrol the Austrian-Italian border.
Arisakas I have handled felt very solid and I generally like the idea of a 6.5 cartridge.
Swedish Mausers are turbo nice and among my top contenders - all that's good about Mausers plus a nice mild recoiling cartridge.
>Mauser 98
>Carcano/Arisaka 6.5
Gucci development apex vs. quasi-intermediate round and simplified & handy form factor for realistic engagement ranges, extra sturdy in Jap iteration
Imagine: Mag capacity of the SMLE, bolt of the Arisaka, bolt handle of the MAS-36, stock of the Mauser, chambered in .30-06
I’d still prefer a SMLE bolt tbh. Lets you keep your sight picture while cranking it.
I went with the one Nambu designed because of how easy it is to take apart and its strength (Which comes at the price of being complex to machine.) Though the Enfield's sights are nice.
Rimlock is the hot gay. If people still fuck up with it at the range, think of how Griswold grunt had it under fire.
Mauser, there's a reason why half of the world used Mausers.
>inb4 Lee Enfield gay
>muh 10 rounds
>muh fast bolt action
>Mauser, there's a reason why half of the world used Mausers
Why's that?
cheap, good and available.
Because the action is strong. Nearly every modern bolt gun is a Mauser derivative, but you'll never see an Enfield clone anywhere because they're weak.
>all these weak, coping, inferior weapons
Neither world war was won until this bad boy stepped on stage. Everything else was filler.
Does that look bolt action to you?
They've already said Mauser more than once.
are you dumb? The M1917 rifle is not a Mauser, just because it uses the mauser action means it's the same rifle.
*doesn't. Fuck I'm too whiskeyed for proofreading
Back then they were expected to splash wood stain with their bare hands and they were pussies if they didn't I guess
They're dipping the rifles in warm grease before packing them in crates. Cosmoline isn't going to hurt you.
>t.
yo i got fuckin ptsd from that anime fr
>Cosmoline doesn't hurt you
Well is that really true I've never read an MSDS for it but I'm sure long term exposure to it probably isn't ideal, especially with your hands getting saturated with it daily.
I'm afraid you'll quickly find that it's Mausers all the way down my friend.
all these replies and no M1917, or even the P14. You people disappoint me.
There really is no best. Every bolt action fielded by a major power was basically fine and some had advantages over the others in weight, capacity, cost, reliability, stopping power, portability, feeding, etc..
All except the French in WW1. The Lebel in WW1 was inarguably worse than anything else fielded by a major power. Saying "best" requires determining a ton of factors and can vary depending on opinion. We can identify the worst though, because it was obviously the Lebel.
I kinda want one now
its probably more accurate to compare the berthier considering production numbers but it doesn't fare much better tbqh
>What was the best bolt action rifle of ww1
US M1917. Fast-cycling bolt, good cartridge, great practical sights, decent ergonomics.
>and/or ww2?
French MAS-36. Stupid-simple and stupid strong, lightweight, short and handy, good cartridge, decent ergonomics.
better not see one single american gun ITT
They've already been posted, and variants of the Springfield 1903 ARE arguably the best rifles of the war.
Best service rifles of WWII were hands down the Garand and M1 Carbine, although not bolt action. The 1903 saw plenty of use in WWII and was still a quality rifle then too.
OH YA'LL moronS ARE FUCKING CRAZY
I'd say kar98ks are the nicest rifles & I suppose have an edge in durability over the SMLE but they can't hold 10 rounds or fire as fast so as an infantry rifle I'd say the lee Enfield wins but still sucks balls compared to any semi auto really. I think a better debate would be which is the better accurized bolt action marksman rifle from ww2
>but they can't hold 10 rounds
Trench magazines.
Enfield, comprehensively
>Enfield, comprehensively
It's not my subjective viewpoint but it's objectively true.
7mm Mauser Brand Mauser
K31
3
1
What do you experts think of the M1903?
Short, light, handy, good bolt throw for a Mauser. Decent cartridge. Could use better ergonomics (C-stock fixed that). Rear sight unnecessarily complicated (A3 fixed that). One of the better WW1 infantry rifles; by WW2 only the A3 was competitive.
Man I'd love to get my hands on an A3.
Also I always wondered, there's obviously a market out there for WWI-WWII rifles, so why haven't any companies tried to carve out a niche and make modern reproductions?
They'd cost as much or more than originals which is why they make unobtainable guns like the STG or FG42 instead of 03A3s.
>What was the best bolt action rifle of ww1 and/or ww2?
Construction-wise? Gewehr 98 and its derivatives: Arisaka type 38, Kar98, Winchester Model 70 (used by USMC), M1903, Enfield P14, vz.24, etc.
Aesthetically? I love Finnish and soviet Mosins, in particular M39.
If I had a Bond Villain army to arm with military leftovers, I'd arm it with sporter Mausers 98.
Oh, forgot an honourable mention: Ross rifle. Not good for trench warfare, but would make a great sniper-only tool
>What was the best bolt action rifle of ww1 and/or ww2?
>WW1
M1917 Enfield
>WW2
Despite not being made in adequate numbers, MAS-36
Mosin 1907
M1917 Enfield in ww1, M1903A3 in ww2, which is a bit lighter and has cock on open.
M1917.