Allies Versus Axis: WWII Battle Rifle Shootout!

[Sentryduty]

This dovetails into the discussion about Lee Enfield Accuracy and is an article I transcribed back in 2009 for another Firearms Forum. With the procurement of modern technology I will attempt to scan and attach actual images from the article, but for now here is my original transcription.

Kicking around in my piles of literature I happened across an old Guns and Ammo from the mid 90’s. Predating mass use of the internet I did not find this reprinted in any of G&A’s website archives, so as a means of eating some of my spare time, I manually typed out the article for everyone to enjoy. I would suspect this article may draw a fair bit of discussion from each of the supporters and critics of the various WWII bolt guns, simply bear in mind the article is not mine so I can’t offer any accountability for the content.

Some members may be pleasantly surprised however to see how each rifle performed, my main consideration is that the ammunition used is of various and wide ranging sources, from China to modern Norma. I would actually have wished to see the performance measured on hand loads built to WWII military spec. It is a good read and does offer a fair bit of insight about some of the rifles not frequently handled in person.

Enjoy.



Allies Versus Axis:
WWII
BATTLE RIFLE
SHOOTOUT!

Guns and Ammo Magazine MARCH 1995

The Infantry Longarms used during the Second World War were an interesting combination of 19th-century and up-to-the minute designs. How do they stack up?

By Garry James

CAPTION: The battle rifles used in our evaluation were typical examples of their kind. From top: US M1 Garand; British No4, Mk 1 Enfield; Italian M38 Carcano; German Kar 98k Mauser; Soviet M91 Moisin-Nagant; Japanese Type 99 Arisaka. Guns and accessories courtesy of Red Star Militaria, Collector’s Armory and author.

The Second World War provided and interesting transition point in the history of military small arms. On one hand we have main battle rifles, such as the German K.98k Mauser and Britain’s No.4, Mk 1 Enfield, that were basically nothing more than variations of arms that appeared before the turn of the century. Elsewhere, though, there were sophisticated self-loaders, such as the US M1 Garand and German G43, that would be used well into the Col War era.

I have always been fascinated by the arms of the belligerents in both World Wars and have long wanted to conduct a side-by-side evaluation of the battle rifles used by the major players.

While many countries fielded several types of infantry arms, we have tried to pick the ones that were the latest and most common examples for each country. They include: USA—M1 Garand; Germany—Kar.98k; Great Britain—No.4 Mk1 Enfield; Japan—Type 99 Arisaka; USSR—Model 1891 Moison-Nagant; and Italy—Fucile Modello 38.

To save space and to give the viewer a better at-a-glance comparison, specs, accuracy, and chronographic data will be contained within a chart. We will cover the guns’ histories and general handling characteristics within the text. First the Allies will be dealt with, and then the Axis powers will be discussed.

UNITED STATES

CAPTION: The M1 Garand was a top notch semi-auto battle rifle. It featured a sophisticated dial type peep rear sight and responsive rotary bolt.

There seems to be little disagreement among experts that the M1 Garand was probably the finest infantry arm of World War 2. It was the only semi-automatic rifle to be generally issued, was rugged, reliable and fired the hard hitting.30-06 round.

The gun was devised by John C. Garand who worked at the design for some 20 years before the rifle was eventually accepted in the US Military in 1936. Of course the development of the gun is considerably simplified here, and for those who would like to learn more about this fascinating rifle. I heartily recommend Scott A. Duff’s book, The M1 Garand: World War II (available from the author at Dept. GA, PO Box 414, export, PA 15632, for $32.95 plus #3.05 postage and handling).

The Garand was gas operated and ammunition was loaded into the mag via an en-bloc sheet-metal eight-round clip. When all eight rounds had been expended, the clip was ejected and the action remained open for a reload. While this system worked quite well, it did have the drawback that the magazine couldn’t be “topped up” unless all eight cartridges had been expended.

The M1 Garand was rugged, reliable and accurate. It was no lightweight, coming in at 9 ½ pounds, but it’s balance was such that the gun was not onerous to tote for extended periods. The action employed a positive, responsive, rotating bolt (that was further used on the M14), the stock was full-length walnut and the sight could be sophisticated dial-type peep that could be adjusted for windage and elevation. Takedown of the piece was simple, and the trigger-guard mounted safety was easy to flick on or off with the trigger finger.

The M1 Garand fired the US M2 .30-06 ball round, which employed a 150-grain spitzer bullet. For our test, as in the past, we tried to duplicate the original period loads as much as possible so for the evaluation we chose mil-spec PMC M2 Ball.

The gun used was my trusty GI-issue Springfield Korean War rework, which has a World War II receiver and a 1950 dated barrel. Recoil was quite light and the gun fired as fast as I pulled the trigger with cases (and the clip) being ejected well clear of the gun. The two stage trigger came in at six pounds following a small amount of usual military takeup.

The M1 Garand is one heck of a rifle, and given the period in history when it was made, is a marvel of engineering.

GREAT BRITAIN

CAPTION: Like many of the guns in this evaluation, the No.4 MkI Enfield was modified for sniper use. The No.4 Mk I (T) may have been the best sniper rifle of World War II.

CAPTION: The No.4’s rear sight was a sophisticated ladder style with dial adjustment and peep aperture.

CAPTION: The Enfield gave us our best group of the day, coming in a 1 ¼ inches—not bad for open sights and a straight as-issued gun.

During the 1939-45 War, as the Brits are wont to call WWII, they were issued the No.4 Mk I Enfield, which was basically a sophisticated variant James Paris Lee designed that had been used by HM forces since the days of Fuzzy Wuzzy.

Actually, the No.4 was a follow-on of the Short Magazine Lee Enfield (SMLE) that had first appeared just after the turn of the century and had reached its prior apogee with the famed Mark III (which also continued to see service with Australian, colonial and some commonwealth forces).

The new gun, which began life as an experimental rifle termed the Mark VI and No.1 Mark VI, finally appeared in 1931 as the No.4 Mk I. As eventually approved the No. 4 Mk I measured 44 ½ inches overall with the barrel slightly larger than 25 inches. The action was heftier than that of the Mark III, and the screw-adjustable rear aperture sight was graduated from 200 to 1,300 yards. The barrel protruded from the fore-end three inches allowing a bayonet or grenade launcher to be attached.

In 1941 a No.4 Mk I* was devised which had a simpler bolt-head release system. As well, both Marks of a No.4 were later fitted with a simple flip type, two-aperture battle sight intended for ranges of 300- and 600- yards.

Like earlier Lees, the No.4 had a 10-shot box magazine that could be removed from the stock but was generally left in place. The gun could be charged via two five-round clips that fit into a bridge on the top of the receiver.

The gun’s safety involved a rocking style lever fitted on the rear left side of the receiver and a half-cock notch on the bolt striker. The bolt cocked on closing and had relatively short throw, allowing it to be worked very rapidly.

The rifle used for our evaluation was a standard No. 4 Mk I with the early style dial-adjustable rear sight. It was made in 1943 and returned for a thorough factory repair in 1947. Condition was quite good and the bore was perfect, though the piece had obviously seen some use.

Ammo used was Pakistani-made .303 Mark VII military-issue ball we obtained from SAMCO Global Arms inc. (Address) The ammo, though corrosive (just clean your bore with soap and water or some other aqueous solution) is just about as close to the original (WWII) fodder as you are going to get nowadays.

Enfields are among my favorite military bolt guns to shoot and this one was no exception. Trigger pull was very pleasant coming in at 4 ½ pounds. The gun shouldered well and recoil was among the lightest of the day. This is due, no doubt to the weight of the piece, refined stock design and relatively mild .303 characteristics. Ammo was loaded singly and with five-round stripper clips. We were able to operate the bolt extremely fast and feeding and ejection was flawless. Accuracy was excellent using the peep battlesight. In fact the Enfield gave us our best and most consistent groups of the day.

SOVIET UNION

CAPTION: The 91 Moisin-Nagant turned in respectable groups. It had a light, progressive trigger that broke at under three pounds. Recoil was sharp. The Model 1891 Moisin-Nagant had a sturdy, ladder style rear sight. This was changed throughout the gun’s variant history.

There is no question that large numbers (about five million) of the PPSh-41 submachine gun and quantise of semi-auto M1938 and M1940 Tokarevs were issued to Soviet troops, but it was an old Czarist hold-over bolt gun that was the main battle rifle of the Russian infantry.

The Model 1891 Moison-Nagant was adopted before the turn of the century and saw service in, among other places, the Boxer rebellion, Russo-Japanese War, World War I, and the Russian Revolution. It was a coalition of designs by Belgians Leon and Emile Nagant and Artillery Captain Sergei Ivanovich Moisin.

The gun incorporated a somewhat complex (but serviceable) French-looking bolt-action and had a five round, clip-fed magazine. The magazine had and interesting control latch that held the first two cartridges in the magazine and lightened the pressure of the spring when load successive rounds.

Originally the Moisin-Nagant was called the “Three Line Rifle”, Model 1891” the ‘three-line” terminology being the Imperial Russian method of cailber designation wherein one “line” was equal to .10 US inch of measurement.

The gun chambered a .30-caliber rimmed cartridge. As it first appeared the load had a 200-grain round-nose bullet but this was changed to a 149-grain spitzer design in 1908. Early guns had their sights marked in “arshins” (about 7.8 yards) an old Russian unit of measure based on a pace, but this was later changed to accommodate the trajectory curve of the newer round, resulting in the sight’s slight dome.

The Moisin-Nagant safety is in the cocking piece and the gun is put “on safe” by simply pulling back on the cocking piece and rotating it to the left over a large projection on the wall of the receiver. This locks the bolt and removes the cocking piece from contact with the sear nose.

In 1910 a carbine version of the ’91 was introduced for use by dragoons, Cossacks and the like, and in 1930 the infantry rifle was gone over by the Soviets. Changes involved a simpler to manufacture round receiver ring, different rear sight and hooded post-style front sight (the earlier guns had unprotected blades). The rifle was termed the 91/30. Sniper models were made and in 1938 a carbine similar to the 91/30 was introduced.

Our evaluation Moisin-Nagant was an excellent condition (probably arsenal refinished) piece made by the Soviets at Tula Arsenal in 1921. it featured most of the pre-91/30 features including the old hexagonal receiver ring and early type sights. The bore was perfect, ad were all of the mechanicals.

Ammo used was Chinese berdan primed mil-spec ball. The 91 had one of the smoothest triggers of all the guns in the test and was almost too light at 2 ½ pounds. While it had take-up, it was progressive, allowing the shooter to fire some pretty good bench rested shots. Recoil was not insubstantial, but the gun was on the paper from the get-go and gave us some quite acceptable military-grade groupings. Later I did some potting at a 300-yard steel target (offhand) and hit many more times than I missed (I duplicated this with both the Enfield and the Mauser). My overall impression of the M91 was quite good, though its length (51.37 Inches) and almost 10 pound heft put it in the slightly archaic class, even by World War II standards. Still the gun was one of the more pleasurable to shoot of the whole group.

GERMANY

CAPTION: The Mauser’s magazine could be charged via five-round stripper clips.

CAPTION: The Kar.98k Mauser is regarded as one of the Second World War’s best battle rifles. Our CZ made variant reinforced this evaluation.

The Model 98 Mauser is one of the world’s great firearms. As well as being one of the most widespread of the military bolt actions, it has provided the basis of design of many of the best sporting arms ever produced.

Designed just before the turn of the 20th century, the ’98 actually borrowed many earlier features including a one-piece bolt with the firing pin cavity bored from the back; a duo of hefty, front mounted locking lugs; a staggered-row five round magazine; a very positive bolt mounted three position safety; a non-rotating extractor that eliminated double feeding by grabbing the case as soon as it cleared the magazine; and a mechanism that cocked on opening.

New features included a third “safety” lug, a special reinforcing collar that was machined into the receiver ring to enclose the case head completely, a larger gas shield and lock screws on the floor plate, among many others.

The standard infantry rifle was a longish affair in keeping with other infantry arms of the period. It chambered a very effective 7.92mm (8mm) round with a bullet diameter of 3.18, though this was changed to .328 in 1905.

The Gewehr 98 became German standard issue, though many variants were made for other countries and carbines and the like were devised for specialized German units.

After World War I production at Mauser-Werke was severely curtailed, though the gun continued to be manufactured at CZ in Czechoslovakia and Fabrique Nationale in Belgium.

By 1935 the Germans adopted a variant of a Model 1898 short Standard Modell that had appeared a few year earlier and titled it the Karabiner 98k (Kar.98K or K.98k for short).

The gun employed many of the earlier features, including the superlative bolt action. The length was standardized at 43.7 inches with a barrel of 23.6 inches and a heft of just over 8 ½ pounds. The rifle’s manual safety was located at the rear of the bolt. “Fire” position was to the left, When straight up the striker was locked, and when all the way to the right both bolt and striker were locked.

The gun could be charged by means of a five-round stripper clip. The ladder rear sight was graduated in meters. The front sight consisted of a blade with a removable cover. A side mounted rather intricate leather sling was also employed.

Our test piece was an excellent condition CZ rifle, manufactured for the Germans during WWII. It featured some of the later-stamped parts as well as the large “winter triggerguard” intended for Eastern Front use. These guns, as well as our fine Portuguese made 198-grain FMJ boattail military 8mm ammo, are now being imported by SAMCO Global Arms.

Our 98 was a natural right from the beginning, with little break in shooting needed. The trigger, while stagey, was crisp with a 6 ½ pound let-off. Recoil was not insubstantial, but the gun performed well from the bench and offhand.

Feeding, ejection and overall handling characteristics were impeccable. There was little to fault and even from this limited experience it’s easy to see why it was such a success.

JAPAN

CAPTION: The Type 99 Arisaka performed very well during the evaluation. Even the flimsy monopod provided an adequate rest.

CAPTION: The Arisaka’s rear sight had a pair of fold down leader bars for use against aircraft. Apparently it was not particularly effective.

CAPTION: The rear safety knob is very easy to engage and disengage

The progenitor of our evaluation Type 99 was the Type 30 Arisaka, introduced in 1897. The designation of “Arisaka” was taken from the name of Col. Noriaki Arisaka who was superintendant of the arsenal where the gun was devised, and the official designation of “Type 30” was derived from the 30th year of the reign of the Meiji Emperor.

The Type 30 was chambered for a 6.5mm cartridge. The safety was a curious hook on the rear of the bolt. The bolt itself was fitted with extractor and ejector, and the magazine held five rounds that could be loaded singly or from a stripper clip.

In 1905 the Type 30 was updated to a considerable degree, now employing a Mauser style bolt and eliminating the hook in favour of a large, knurled safety knob. The arm chambered the same 6.5mm round, and the length of the rifle was pretty much the same as the 30, coming in at some 50 inches with a 31.45-inch barrel. Weight was almost 10 pounds. As well as the standard infantry rifle, a couple of Type-38 inspired cavalry carbines were issued one in 1905 and the other in 1911.

The new bolt had a Mauser style design, sheet-metal bolt cover and a sturdy locking system; in fact, the Arisaka was reputed to have one of the strongest military bolt actions ever introduced.

In 1939 the Type 99 “short rifle” appeared. This gun, which never completely replaced the Type 38, was chambered for a new 7.7mm semi-rimmed round that had already been used in some Japanese machine guns. It had a 175 grain bullet and gave similar performance to that of the British .303.

The Type 99 rifle itself was actually little more than a cropped, re-chambered Type 38. total length was just under 44 inches, with a barrel of 25 ¾ inches. Despite the shortening, the 99 weighed only six ounces less than it’s predecessor.

While the new rifle was an eminently practical piece, it was fitted with a couple of curious features. A rather flimsy looking mono pod tucked beneath the fore-end, and the rear sight ladder was equipped with dual fold down “lead bars” for shooting aircraft!

Our test rifle was a fine “unground” example (after the war, capture regulations required that war trophies have the Imperial chrysanthemum removed from their receivers-these guns are generally not worth as much as original specimens). The bore was perfect, as were all the mechanicals. The safety operated easily by simply pushing in and turning it to the right.

Recoil was light and considering the average diminutiveness of the Japanese soldier, I was surprised the gun shouldered very naturally to a five-foot-10 Westerner. The trigger came in at 6 pounds.

Recoil was quite light and feeding and ejection were smooth, though the darned bolt cover rattled like the blazes. It’s easy to understand why many of them were discarded in the field. After a few get-acquainted shots, performance was excellent. While my groups came in at around three inches, my colleague Bob Forker, who put together the chronographic info for this piece, was able to shoot just over a minute of angle with the rifle.

We also tried the monopod, and while it didn’t work nearly as well as our Hornady rest, it did provide enough stability for us to keep shots on the bull. Ammo used was Norma 180 grain soft-point sporting fodder, which, not surprisingly gave us the most consistent groups of the day.

ITALY

CAPTION: Despite the bad rap. The Model 38 Carcano performed admirably. Even using 50 year old ammo, accuracy was quite good.

CAPTION: The Italian 38 uses a Mannlicher setup, whereby an entire clip is loaded into the magazine and ejected through the bottom when the last round is chambered.

Our evaluation arm was a Fusilo Modello 38, which, like many of its counterparts in other lands, was built on an earlier system.

The Fusilo Modello 91, or, as it is commonly called, the 1891 Carcano, was originally built as Italy’s Turin arsenal and named after it’s principal designer Salvatore Carcano.

It featured a Mannlicher-style magazine, wherein the entire clip of ammo was loaded into the magazine, with the empty clip being ejected from the bottom of the mag when the last round was chambered. The bolt was similar to that used on the Model 1889 Belgian rifle, which in turn, was a Mauser design.

The caliber was 6.5mm Carcano, mag capacity was six rounds and overall length was some 50 inches. Weight was 8.6 pounds.

The gun served well from the time of its inception, and variants for specialized Italian troops were based on the 91. In 1938 a shortended version of the rifle chambering a new, more powerful 7.35mm cartridge appeared. It now measured 40.2 inches, including a 20.9-inch barrel. It too held six rounds but the rear sight, instead of being ladder style adjustable setup, was affixed 300 meter notch.

Our evaluation piece was a standard good-condition Model 38 borrowed from Red Star Military Museum and Sales. (Address) Ammo was original Italian military issue obtained from The Old Western Scrounger. (Address)

The Modello 38 probably had the grittiest trigger of the day and it broke at just five pound though, surprisingly enough, once we adjusted for the 300 meter sight at 100 yards, it produced some pretty reasonable groups considering the ammo was almost half a century old. Recoil was not unpleasant and overall functioning was quite good, if one discounts the couple of hangfires that were more than likely the result of the geriatric 7.35.

---------- Post added at 12:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:03 PM ----------

IMPRESSIONS

This test reinforced my preconceived notion that any one of these rifles would more than adequately fill its military role. As Bob Forker noted, all fired rounds of similar caliber at around 2,500 fps were as accurate and they need be for killing the enemy and rugged enough to undergo some pretty extreme conditions.

If I had to choose one, of course, it would be the Garand because of its semi-auto capability and fairly large capacity. Second would be the Enfield, closely followed by the Mauser. The Arisaka, Moisin-Nagant and Carcano would take the last three spots in that order, though none of them would rate as any kind of booby prize; all worked just fine.

There has been something of a lack of interest in the old bolt action military rifles among shooters and collectors of late no doubt due to the proliferation of inexpensive semi autos. I had a great time shooting this batch and plan to take them to the range more often. Why not give them a chance yourself? You might be as pleasantly surprised as I was, and given the good values on the market, it won’t set you back much either!

WORLD WAR II RIFLE PERFORMANCE

CHART:

Rifle – Load – Velocity (fps) – Accuracy (inches)

M1 Garand – PMC .30-06 150-grain M2 ball – 2,604 – 3 ½

No 4 Mk I Enfield – Military .303 174-grain ball – 2,493 – 1 ¼

M91 Moisin-Nagant – Military 7.62 X 54mm 147-grain ball – 2712 – 3 ¾

Kar.98k Mauser – Military 8mm Mauser 198-gr. Ball – 2,363 – 1 7/8

Type 99 Arisaka – Norma 7.7 Jap 180-grain SP – 2,303 – 1 ½

M38 Carcano – Military 7.35 Carc 128-gr ball. – 2,468 – 3 5/8

NOTE: All velocities represented average for three shots fired from 15 feet over Oehler 35 P/BNC chronograph and Model 55 photoscreen. Chronography was performed by G&A Technical editor Bob Forker. Groups were fired from a rest at 100 yard at Angeles Shooting Range, Tujunga, CA.

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.