WW1 rifles

>M44
>WW1
son...

>>32041285
Fuck... lemme fix that...

File: WW1 rifles.png (744KB, 1513x600px) Image search: [Google]

744KB, 1513x600px

>>32041285
>>32041159
>>32041310
I fixed it.

>>32041159
>Kar 98K
>WW1
son...

>>32041318
>Ross mk2
Son...

>WW1
>no M1917/P14, Berthier, Styer M95, or Gew. 88
son...

>>32041318
>No M1917

>>32041318
>k98

>>32041420
I'm pretty sure that's a 98 and not a k98k. Unlike with the mosin I knew before hand that there was a difference between the ww1 and ww2 versions.

File: WW1 rifles.png (713KB, 1522x600px) Image search: [Google]

713KB, 1522x600px

>>32041420
>>32041482
Okay, this one is definitely a 98...

>>32041432
But wasn't that rifle shit?

File: WW1 rifles - Copy.png (616KB, 1522x600px) Image search: [Google]

616KB, 1522x600px

Okay, how about this:

>>32041531
The Mk2 was only used for training. The Mk3, after some...tweaking, was a good (if heavy) rifle.

File: 1296286470266.png (12KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 500x500px

>>32041600
>still squishing the images

>>32041600
You're forgetting the Carcano, the M95, and the P14/M1917.

And you still have the Ross mk2, which is wrong.

File: Gew98_8-28-2016_D_2.jpg (845KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

845KB, 1024x768px

>>32041159
>post your own

My 1914-dated Gew.98 made at Waffenfabrik Mauser. Almost all-matching except for the cleaning rod. Unfortunately Bubba partially stripped the stock at some point in the past, but I wouldn't rather have any other date or manufacturer.

File: WW1 rifles - Copy.png (504KB, 1522x600px) Image search: [Google]

504KB, 1522x600px

>>32041612
Better?

>>32041627
Okay fine. I'm going to feed the cat, feed myself, and the sit my ass back down and do this properly with Gimp instead of MS paint.

File: Le2GpLR.jpg (4MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4032x3024px

>>32041657
Yes, but you're still missing several. Also, you have shitty tastes even for a Teutonaboo.

>>32041657
What makes the Lebel so pleb?

File: 6MNZb4p.jpg (3MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4032x3024px

>>32041708
Tube magazine, no way to load more than 1 round at a time, longer than fuck, need a screw driver to remove the bolt.

It's a rifle from a bygone Era when the Great War starts.

I love mine though.

File: SMLE_9-19-2014_D.jpg (797KB, 1280x548px) Image search: [Google]

797KB, 1280x548px

My 1918-dated SMLE Mk.III* made at RSAF-Enfield. Also refinished by Bubba but the stock didn't match so no great loss. Bolt body and rear sight are matching. This is the best bolt rifle of the Great War hands down.

>>32042015
But you didn't post a picture of the M1917...

File: reSWBic.jpg (2MB, 4032x2269px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4032x2269px

Finally, my picture is small enough to post.

File: SMLE_P1907_1-23-2015_C.jpg (505KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

505KB, 1024x768px

>>32042041
Not everyone on the Western Front had the good fortune to plink away at the Boche from the comfortable rest of a concrete tree; some people actually had to carry their rifles while running through and over trenches.

>>32042058
Ill be trolling a gun show in vegas, ill be part of the frankaboo club soo.

Mas36 here I come.

Be searching for a gew. 98 too.

>>32041159
>>32041318
The Russian 1895 was more popular than the Mosin among their own troops.

>>32042063
>implying that a Lee is so much light it matters.

The 1917 p14 is far superiour to any SMLE.

File: jh3ycUX.jpg (2MB, 4032x2269px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4032x2269px

>>32042063
I don't know what sort of argument you're attempting to make here.
>>32042080
Here's hoping my friend.

File: 1366748611098.jpg (185KB, 1024x1280px) Image search: [Google]

185KB, 1024x1280px

>>32042098
It's lighter and shorter, which matter immensely when you're actually carrying a rifle on the move and must quickly aim at targets.

>>32042100
That the SMLE is lighter, shorter, has a larger magazine capacity, and is more reliable than the P13 series. The SMLE's sight radius is shorter, which makes it less precise but quicker to align on target. What the P13s have going for them over the SMLE is accuracy, but this didn't matter for the infantryman because at the normal combat ranges of the First World War it doesn't matter where in the center-mass you hit Gerry as long as you hit him as quickly as possible. It was the best tool given the situation on the ground.

>>32042465
2 inches and 1/4 lbs. It's not noticeable. The Enfield is definitely not more reliable, nor can it even come close to matching the action strength of the Eddystone. The only place in which it is even slightly superior is the magazine capacity, and we don't need me to repeat my thoughts on the matter of how overblown that is.

File: WW1rifles.png (1MB, 2500x2500px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2500x2500px

>>32041627
>>32041627
>>32041677
>>32041657
>>32041159
>>32041318
Okay, let's try this again.

>>32042063
>>32042015
>>32042465

Don't worry m8, I HATE the 1917. You aren't the only one that sees past it's awkward illusion.

>>32043494
You suck at this, man. Still no M95 or Carcano.

>>32043494
>M27 Lebel
OK at this point you're just trolling.

>>32042091
What if you were like me, and dislike lever guns?

>>32043562
I'll get there
>>32043568
Goddammit I could have sworn I got the right one!

File: WW1riflesupdateforproperlebel.png (1MB, 2500x2500px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2500x2500px

>>32043568
Is this the right one?

>>32043562
Where do you think I should put them?

>>32043676
also, your chart is fucking wrong 2 b h

>>32043676
M95
9
5

>>32043687
I'd put the M95 in the contrarian section. Carcano in the same spot probably.

>>32043676
Oh and ross rifles are a near copy of the m95 accept not a turd.

>>32043756
M95 isnt a turd, the ross is.

File: images (6).jpg (9KB, 243x173px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 243x173px

>>32043756
>Ross and m95 are near copies

File: WW1riflesupdateforkenndyremoverandaustroshit.png (2MB, 2500x2500px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2500x2500px

>>32043676
>>32043745
>>32043740
Better?

>>32043852
Yes.


Except your shit taste I mean.

>>32041159
Why is the lebel fucking retarded faggot shit? The frog rifles are the WWI rifles I'd like the most, after a 1914 enfield, if the ammo wasnt all gone. (The frog shit is also the WWII gun I'd want the most after a No 4 enfield )

>>32043916
Tube loading by 1914 was objectively shit-tier.

>>32043933
Yea, but it is fucking aesthetic

>>32043951
It not not a neat rifle, but if I were in WWI, I'd want something with a clip and a hand guard.

>>32043916
It's a design from 30 years prior to the war. Yeah, it's gonna be a little dated.

It's a good rifle though. You should get one.

>>32043967
>>32043996

If I was buying something now I'd want the frog shit. If I was in WWI I'd want a french or italian carbine for being light and handy. Failing that I'd want a german or American gun as they would be the most reliable.

>>32043805

Didn't the Ross basically steal it's straight-pull mechanism and a few other things from the M95? Except done in a shitty way?

>>32044452
No. Charles Ross did "borrow" some ideas for a theoretical rifle he had, but that was the 1890 Mannlicher I believe, and by the time the Ross rifle became a thing it was much, much different from the M95.

>>32043494
>M91/30
>WW1
Anon, I

>>32044762
Essentially ross just changed the magazine and bolt lugs.
They function identically.

>>32044811
That's not a 91/30, you philistine

>>32044826
>Essentially ross just changed the magazine and bolt lugs.
you say that like it's not a huge redesign
>oh, the action and the magazine is different
>pretty much the same though

>>32041159

No, it should be like this

>PATRICIAN
>mauser 98
>springfield 1903
>enfield

>SHIT-TIER
>everything else

>>32045500
>enfield
Which one?

>>32045229
Youre a retard.
The magazine was modified to use stripper clips and an internal magazine, the two lug bolt was replaced with artillery style 2 lug system.

So a more complicated but questionable improvement of the bolt face and an internal magazine that was alreadyn use on a multitude of rifles.