Myths, Old Wives Tales and Outright Lies...

[Eaglelord17]

The only old wives tales I used to really believe was that the AR-15 was insufficient as a service rifle. Over time, after handling many alternatives (M14s, Tavors, VZ58s, Type 81s, etc.), and realizing what capabilities it brings to the table (mainly quick repeatable shots, which is in a reliable, light weight, easy to maintain platform), that changed for me. Its going to suck when I have to turn mine in.

[Bruce McAskill]

The most persistent one I was told by many was the Japanese could use our ammo in their rifles but we could not use theirs. That was why we had to gather up all ammo laying around loose during a battle. Year after year after year I heard this from people who should have known better.

[Daan Kemp]

Some of the Japanese machine gun ammo was almost identical to 303 IIRC. They used lots of captured British stuff too.

[Bruce_in_Oz]

Not just "close": 7.7 x 56R WAS .303.

It was part of the package adopted by the Imperial Japanese Navy when they "adopted" most of their Naval technology, equipment, uniforms, and 'traditions" from the Royal Navy, WAY back in the late 19th century. It was used in "clones" of Vickers and Hotchkiss guns, the latter widely deployed by IJN "infantry", i.e., specialist landing parties. I have a couple of rounds here. A bit "crusty" but the marks from being in Hotchkiss strips while immersed in sea-water for years are quite evident.

There was, apparently a Japanese clone of the Lewis gun in the same round, as well.

Note that Italy also used their own "copy" of the .303 in at least one of their machine-guns.

The Britain / Japan "link" was two-way, as well. The RN acquired huge numbers of Type 30 rifles and bayonets, and some Type 38 rifles, for ship-board use. This helped to maintain supply of SMLE rifles and associated .303 ammo for "land' forces. The Type 30 bayonet, hooked quillon and all, was THE model for the Patt 1907 bayonet for the SMLE. This came about after "the system" decided that the Patt 1903 bayonet on a SMLE did not allow as much "reach" when bayonet fighting, compared to the "longer" Lee Enfield / Pat '88 combination and just about everybody else's rifle / bayonet rigs.

The Japanese Army seemed to prefer the Prussian "model", however.

The Russians, who were at war with the Japanese (1904/05), during which time they captured quite a few Arisakas, bought more before and during WW1. Thus the cartridge was well known in Russia. Hence its use in the Federov automatic rifle.

Kynoch in Britain manufactured a prodigious amount of 6.5 x 50 ammo both for the RN AND Russia.

Most of the RN rifles and ammo apparently ended up dumped in the Atlantic, post WW1.

[Surpmil]

"Ross rifles can always blow back"

"Ross rifles can never blow back"

Both myths.

[Bruce_in_Oz]

Or, as Mark Twain succinctly put it:

"It ain’t what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure, that just ain't so".

[old tanker]

Several of the ones mentioned before I have heard.

The two most prevalent: "they can use our ammo but we can't use theirs" and the Lee Enfield is "weak and inaccurate because of the rear locking lugs, two piece stock and inferior cartridge."

[Frederick303]

Lets see I can think of a bunch:

The M1 rifle had a defect as when it fired the last round the "ping" of the ejecting clip would cause 30 or 40 Germans/Japs to rush the chap with an empty rifle. as if you could hear that or anyone would not worry about the other 7 or 8 man in the squad whose rifles were not empty.

The MG42 fired too fast...not if you understood German doctrine it didn't, and the Germans were the ones that used it....pretty darned effectively, it is the only WWII design still seeing active service nearly 80 years later (with a caliber change)

6.5 Jap MGs used a weaker cartridge than the Type 38. False, only took 45 years for that to be shown to be untrue.

The AR cannot be a winning 600 yard service rifle. Got disproved in 1994.

You cannot win the Finals at Bisley with anything other than a rear locking Enfield, disproved in 1986 by Tucker and a rather ugly Swing action. Of course it did depend on RG getting an improvement on the priming consistency.

The Jap 6.5 type 38 rifles were weak: often said until the famous 6.5/30-06 wildcat 1959 squeeze-bore showed otherwise.

Low number M1903 rifles were time bombs waiting to explode at any minute with safe M2 ball ammo. Strangely that was not the case in the USMC, the US Army in WWII and indeed they supplied reworked rifles to Greece in 1948.

Firing a few rounds of non corrosive ammo after a range session of corrosive ammo will blow out the fouling.

The G36 is way better than the M16 series of weapons, all the experts said so in 1996~97. 23 years later the G36 is fading away and the M16 series seems to still be plodding along towards 60 years of active service.

The 300 Win mag is the unbeatable cartridge for the Wimbledon cup (any rifle/any sight)... was true for many years last century...Until it wasn't any more, now almost no one shoots one in serious 1000 yard competition.

The M1903 was the most accurate service rifle ever fielded...until the K31 came along.

The K98K was really a hunting rifle in a military disguise…..No, it was a service rifle optimized primarily for snap shooting. Pretty effective in its intended role.

I am sure there are many more, those just popped into my head.

[Daan Kemp]

The K98K was really a hunting rifle in a military disguise…..No, it was a service rifle optimized primarily for snap shooting

Could you post the basis for this please? I would love to know.

[Surpmil]

The MG42 fired too fast...not if you understood German doctrine it didn't, and the Germans were the ones that used it....pretty darned effectively, it is the only WWII design still seeing active service nearly 80 years later (with a caliber change).

As I just happened to see a photo of a Browning M2 in British first line use, can this really be true? And of course the M2 was practically a WWI design, was it not?

Anyway, you've clearly got more of this info to hand than the rest of us, but that jumped out at me.