Comments by "" (@neutronalchemist3241) on "Forgotten Weapons" channel.

  1. Had it been an Inertia failure, he would have had a failure to eject, but the ejection was very strong and consistent. Probably, due to the right-handed grips, he inadvertently hit the slide-stop lever during the recoil, infact the gun didn't fail to feed (like in the round hitting the ramp and being stuck there), but simply held open.
    4
  2.  @andyrihn1  Uh, no. In the service life test only the 92F and the H&K P7 reached the 7000 rounds threshold with all three pistols intact. The P226 cracked a frame at 6523 rounds fired, but was allowed to pass, since the requirement was just for a service life, on average, of over 5000 rounds. the P226 failed the dry mud test, with only 79% reliability in those conditions. Being that significantly lower than the 1911 control weapon, it should have been eliminated due to the rules of the competition (notice that instead, in the XM17 trials, there was conveniently not a M9 control weapon around to be seen). It was allowed to keep on competing, because the Army wanted at least two manufacturers to compete on price, so it was simply decided that the dry mud test result was "not so important" and the result was simply not considered. So, not counting the result of the tests were the 92F performed better than the P226, then the P226 performed better than the 92F.
    4
  3. It's quite a complex design.
    4
  4. It had more to do with costs. Several semiautos and semiauto conversions had been tested and deemed to be reliable already before WWI. Malfunctions happened on fairly old guns with worn-out springs, are not indicative of the performance of the weapon at the time.
    4
  5. The last burst of a magazine will always be a surprise, and you can't fix it by simply pulling the trigger again. However mind that this is a first. The subsequent implementations of the burst mechanism obviously improved it.
    4
  6. There is difference between disassembly and field strip. This rifle is very easily field strippable but, like almost every bolt action and semiauto rifle up to then, and several semiauto rifles after then, this rifle is not made to have the trigger group and the receiver removed often from the stock. You'll see the same screws in the Gewehr 43.
    4
  7. It's not locked by the finger. it's called an expander lock. Due to the direction of the respective inclined surfaces, when the bolt is pushed back by the recoil, it can only push the lever downward and not rearward, so the bolt is locked. https://patents.google.com/patent/US461968A/en
    4
  8. All the known pictures when the particular can be seen, all the surviving samples, and even some rusted sample found with a metal detector, show the safety still in place.
    3
  9. It's not even that lefties-unfriendly. They only have to operate the charging handle from above. The important part is to perform all the recharging operation with the firing hand.
    3
  10. +marvincz3 "While you hold the grip safety, you are covering the magazine release." Not really. You can see, IE at 4:51, that the magazine release is well below the position were the left hand's thumb will be. Moreover, the position of the left hand gives to the gunner the exact position of the magazine holder, so it's impossible to miss it, even reloading in the dark, or not looking to the gun at all.
    3
  11. No, first than the M1915 Beretta was a dedicated producer of shotguns. Being in the business since 16th century is well likely they made many flintlock pistols in the past centuries, but the M1915 was the first modern design.
    3
  12. Well, really not. The M1915 is a full size pistol, not a compact, but The 1911 is bigger in every dimension. The 1911 is 32mm tick, 210mm long, and 136mm high, and weights 1105g without cartridges. The Beretta M1915 is 29mm X 171mm X 131mm, and weights 850g. The 1911, thanks to a long refinement process started with the 1900, was ergonomically very comfortable for those days despite the dimensions. It would be interesting to hear a comparison with the Beretta 1915 in this respect.
    3
  13. Infact the P7A13 didn't even reach the cost comparison phase of the trial. It was eliminated because it fared atrociously in the reliability tests.
    3
  14.  @haviiithelegogunner907  I'm sorry to ruin the fairy tale you like to tell, but it's in an official document. The P7A13 tests had been "Terminated by the Army on September 18, 1984, for falling reliability and corrosion resistance requirements". In the 1984 trials the P7A13 had a failure every 158 rounds fired, the worst of any entrants (comparison Colt 1911 included, the second worst with a failure every 162 rounds) and a resistance to salt water corrosion of 86%, again the worst of any entrants. See NSIAD-86-122.
    3
  15.  @haviiithelegogunner907  What? Actually the price point didn't matter at all in the P7 not having been selected in the XM9 program. The P7A13 didn't even reach the cost comparison phase of the trial. It was eliminated because it fared ATROCIOUSLY in the reliability tests. The 92F was the only handgun that passed those tests. The minimum threshold had to be lowered for the SIG P226, the second best, to pass them, since the Army wanted to have at least two handguns to compete on price point.
    3
  16.  @randymagnum143  The 92F shown the longest service life of any entrants in the 1984 XM9 competition.
    3
  17. Actually the P7A13 didn't even reach the cost comparison phase of the trial. It was eliminated because it fared atrociously in the reliability tests.
    3
  18. It's the equivalent of the M1 carbine, but made mantaining the full blown cartridge. Something the US had been unable to do.
    3
  19. Bicycle troops were common in those years. They obviously didn't replace cavalry, but mounted infantry (troops that traveled by horse, but fought without them). A man on a bicycle can travel longer distances in shorter time than one on a horse actually.
    3
  20. Infact. Folded it becomes an utility knife.
    3
  21. More the higest number of tanks, ships, trucks and aircrafts. To have the best bolt action rifle in WWII was as important as to have the best shoelaces.
    3
  22. To load 7.35 ammos in 6.5 rifles s impossible (unless Pvt. Snuffy decides to hammer the bolt in battery). If you load a 6.5 cartridge in a 7.35 barrel you end with a pretty inaccurate shot.
    3
  23. Because at the time the rationale was declared even in newsreels.
    3
  24. No, it were the JFK conspiracy nuts that had to invent something to say the shot was "impossible". Italian riflemen teams were winning NATO competitions with Carcanos well into the '60s.
    3
  25. Only an inaccurate shot.
    3
  26.  @sandrodunatov485  Actually those things tended to be stupidly reliable. This, the Maxim, the MG08... Like the industrial tools of the time, they were so massively overbuilt that dirt, mud, ice, wear and so on, had little impact on them, and they went on firing thousands and thousands of rounds all day long. Those became problems when portability became a requirement, and so MGs had to be made lighter.
    3
  27. It's a short recoil weapon infact. Depending on the shape of the loking block, you an have the bolt recoiling exactly at the same speed of the barrel until they are unlocked, or the bolt recoiling at a slightly higher speed. That was useful to give a little primary extraction to the case, that avoided the need to oil the cartridge or flute the chamber.
    3
  28.  lass kinn  It's not like belts are closed to the elements.
    3
  29.  @rookpl7877  He's wrong. Here's a 3D animation of the MG. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2SwNqvUZSW8&t=7s George M. Chinn in "The machinegun" (1951) wrongly described the mechanism as delayed blowback. It's not it's only mistake (he described hundreds of machineguns in that book, and of most of them he could not have seen a single sample), but, since is't practically impossible to examine a FIAT Revelli 1914 outside italy, all the English literature about this MG in the last 70 years simply repeated Chinn's article, so it became "the truth" that a working principle no really different from that of a Browning 1917-1919 becomes a delayed blowback when it's into a FIAT Revelli 1914. Notice that this action is a scaled-up version of that of the Glisenti 1910 pistol, that's always described as short recoil locked breech (IE by McNab, Chris, The Great Book of Guns 2004).
    3
  30. Really not. You can very well open the inspection window and throw a handful of mud directly into it. It will probably keep on going like never happened. WWI HMGs were like the heavy industrial tools of the time. Massively overbuilt and stupidly reliable. There was very little than dirt, mud, ice or wear could do to them. dirt had all the space of the world to go without locking the surfaces, and the inertia of the parts was so big that they were self-cleaning in their movement.
    3
  31. Actually there was no real problem with the 100 rds magazines. They were not used on the field because they had no real advantages (while a damaged magazine meant to discard 100 rounds instead of only 50). Even a 200 rds circular magazine was experimented for aerial use. https://i1.wp.com/www.forgottenweapons.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Fiat-magazine.jpg?resize=1024%2C567&ssl=1
    3
  32. The designer is the same infact.
    3
  33. Actually this one was of a pretty simple design and worked pretty well.
    3
  34. Actually that action is simple even by modern standards (it's a scaled up pistol action, still used in the FN Fiftyseven and Ruger 57). In WWI only the Hotchkiss was simpler. The magazine is actually cleaner than a cloth belt and, as any magazine, it doesn't actually enter into the gun. The bolt only picks up the top cartridge.
    3
  35. 9x21 has the same OAL than 9x19. The case is 2mm longer, but the bullet seats 2mm deeper.
    3
  36. No, you only have to break the action open, like in a double barrel.
    3
  37. Italians could have done so directly in 1891, Mauser was one of the designers who participated in the selection of the rifle at the time, and various style of stripper-clip-fed fifles were tested. They chose to use the en-block clip instead, cause the loading was faster this way. And that was still the case in the '30s.
    3
  38.  @johncarl5505  There are plenty of semiautos used for hunting in Erope. AR15 are not popular for huting because it's a poor hunting rifle, starting with the caliber.
    3
  39. It's available with standard rifle stock: https://www.benelli.it/sites/default/files/styles/canna_img_arma_teaser/public/contenuti/canna/immagine_montata/Italian/1-3%28mm%29.png?itok=L9l6rtxA There is a version with a telescopic stock, but it's not available in the USA due to the assault weapon ban: https://www.benelli.it/sites/default/files/styles/arma_full_zoom/public/contenuti/arma/immagine_arma/foto-mr1.png?itok=u1LfN1oO
    3
  40. When talking about a semiauto shotgun action borrowed to a carbine, it has to be taken in account that the semiauto shotguns' gas actions are the most "battle proven" actions existing. The shotguns rented by the Argentine outfitters, for example, fire thousands of rounds a day every day, with sketchy manteinance at best, and using cartridges that are far "dirtier" (it's inevitable, due to the rapid loss of pressure in the shotguns' barrels) than any commercial bottleneck round. All that ridges on the piston and the guide rod are not there for show. They are meant to keep the metallic surfaces clean from the debris of combustion in conditions where a typical "tactical carbine" action will get stuck every few hundreds rounds. To use that action to fire .223 Rem rounds is even an overkill.
    3
  41. The limit is 5 rounds for hunting rifles and 29 rounds for sporting rifles, regardless of the caliber. IE the Nuova Jager LT12 is an AR15 in .223 Rem, with a 12" barrel, classified as a sport weapon, and so sold with a 29 round magazine. ;)
    3
  42. Just to be clear. The AR10 / AR15 system is as much as a “real direct gas impingment system” as this one. Only the point of application of the pressure of the gas changes (from the top of the bolt carrier to directly behind the chamber), not, in any way, the way the gas is used, pushing directly the bolt carrier. In the AR, like here, in the bolt carrier, there is a cup, a “blind hole” where the gas ends and the pressure applies. If you call the one of the AR “a cylinder”, then that “cup” of the Rasheed is a cylinder as well and, if you call the back of the bolt head of an AR a “piston” (that is not) then what you call in the Rasheed an “open gas tube” is a piston as well.
    3
  43.  @jamesmitchell1471  The lightness came at a cost. The MG is flimsy. The same receiver has a short lifespan and, for the time it lasts, it takes a lot of armourer's work to keep it running.
    3
  44. It occurred pretty often back then, IE for aerial torpedoes.
    3
  45. You can walk around it being rimmed and too much tapered, but why chose it over ammos that have the same power whithout being rimmed or too tapered?
    3
  46.  @justindunlap1235  The spitzer 6.5X55 had been adopted by the Swedes only in 1941. Had they been invaded like the Norwegians, they would have used round nose bullets in WWII exactly like the italians and the Norwegians.
    3
  47. It uses regular Carcano clips. They are not that hard to find. ;)
    3
  48.  @LilSwinney  Canada is not exactly surrounded by the United Kingdom, and the Brits desperately needed the Canadian support, not the contrary. UK was not in position to impose anything, nor taxes, nor conscription, nor tariffs (they needed any ounce of materials from abroad, and they would have imposed tariffs? LOL!) nor they could intern some hundred of thousands of Canadian soldiers depriving the front of them (during WWI? Please...). Had the Canadians tought their ammos were useful to keep their rifles working, they could have easily kept them. Unfortunately they didn't "Canadian experts said the chamber of the Ross was already large enough to take the new British ammunition in a pinch, and the tighter fit could only increase accuracy anyway".
    3
  49.  @LilSwinney  The Canadians could have required to use their own ammos, had they thought they were necessary for their rifles to work. It was not like they had no say in the matter, but, as already said, "Canadian experts said the chamber of the Ross was already large enough to take the new British ammunition in a pinch, and the tighter fit could only increase accuracy anyway". If they didn't tell the Brits their rifles were useless without their ammunitions, are them the idiots, not the Brits.
    3
  50. It has to be said that, in the '70s, many decocker-less DA/SA designs appeared. CZ75, the original Beretta 92, Bernardelli P018... In all those designs, like in the B76, the half-cock position was intended to be the "safe" option for decocking, since you could hold the hammer (or put a finger in front of it), pull the trigger, allow the hammer to move only slightly, and at that point, releasing the trigger, the hammer would have seated safely on half-cock position. Only later it appeared to be clear that, for a service SA/DA pistol, a decocker was almost mandatory (It's revealing that, while the original CZ75 retained the 1911/style safety, the "clone" Tanfoglio TZ75 of the early '80s already had a Beretta-style slide mounted decocker).
    3