m1 garand v.s. mauser

This seems really wierd. What kind of ammo were you shooting?

Actually it should be a pretty linear relationship. At least according to the physics I know.

What do you mean by a "huge difference"? The bit about the bullet is problematic. The amount of kick is going to be porportional to the momentum given the round. So depending on the loading there could be considerable difference between light and heavy bullets or no difference.[/quote]
Let's look at the momentum though that's what's conserved. The Mauser round comes up with 480,000 grain fps. The 30-06 with 420,750 grain fps. So in a rifle that was identical other than being chambered for the different rounds one would expect the German round to have about 15% more kick.

 

What OldSchoolr said is completely accurate. The standard M1 had no provision to mount a scope (ie: no rails or screw holes). For obvious reasons, the scope could not be located directly on top of the rifle because this would make it impossible to load. This complicated things. The fix for this was a factory modification to allow a scope. This was first done in early 1944 (producing the "M1C/M1D" Garands). A screw hole (2 on some models, mainly used by the USMC) was added to the left side of the reciver and a bracket was designed so that the scope could sit off-center on the left side of the rifle. To do this, the armory took back Garands that were already in service (preferably early serial number models with the thicker reciver wall), custom-fit a stock and made the neccessary modification for a scope mount. And by the way, I own an M1D.

The Garand was completely suitable as a sniper rifle. If it wasn't the War Department would not have deticated resources to finding a way to mount the scope on it.

And if I recall correctly, limited numbers of the M1C saw service at the end of WW2. Even if I'm wrong, the sniper variant was still "developed" during WW2.

 

The part about the steel tipped rounds for the 8mm Mauser is correct I think. Dad brought back a G41M and had some German army rounds for it that were steel. Even had a spent bullet that they dug out of a gravel bank he fired it into. Gun and ammo came from Greenland.

 

That's about the only nugget of truth to his post. And it was a steel CORED bullet, not steel tipped.

 

It could also be an armor piercing round. They had a steel core and some even had plated-steel jackets.

I don't know where he got the info on the M1 and M14 sights though. I have both rifles and the M14 sights are very close to the M1's, you can tell they are definately related. The M14 sights are not anything like the K98 as Jager wrote.

Your explaination about the 1903/1913 deal has got to be the most creative of all.

Now you do understand how the 30.06 got it's designation don't you? .30 caliber round adopted/standardized in 1906. The 1903 Springfield, was modified for the new bullet and was designated M1906, but where the hell did M1913 come from? The M1 round was adopted in 1926 (well after 1913) and the M2 round in 1938. Please clarify if you can.

 

Ok...I've taken a look at my Mauser (K98...8mm...1944) and My Springfield M1. I've talked to both of them, and they fully agree with everything stated here. Thank God for explanation of the no scope mounting rails, I thought I'd gone daffy. I only have boring old lead rounds for both. The M1 doesn't kick as hard, IMHO. And it's sexier.

 

Just to add some points from a hobbyist/reloader perspective...................depending on how I reload(I am a reloader) my rounds without getting too powerful for safety, one can make either the 30.06 or the 8mm kick harder but I would add that as you buy ammunition.....powerful ammunition is not available in the U.S. for 8mm, as most ammo companies load only for the weakest rifles out there which means older small ring 8mm are not safe to use with powerful ammo. That has led many U.S. shooters to underestimate the ability of the large ring mauser for many purposes....most of which today is hunting. If you doubt this, realize many here in the U.S. will re barrel a large ring mauser for magnum rifles because of the strength of the action. About the only hunters that use the 8mm are those that reload for themselves and understand that they must own a large ring mauser with good steel to take a pretty much equal pressure load as the 30.06. From my perspective many choose to own a 30.06 due to the extremely large choice of bullet/weight/powder combinations available in commercial ammunition in the U.S for that caliber. When using the 8mm one may need to have the gun checked out by a reputable gunsmith to verify it is made of quality steel and head spacing of the round is correct and has not been compromised with bolt swaps or wear. Such is the nature of shooting military surplus to maintain the safety margins in using these treasured old tools.There is also another confusing factor when people refer to 8mm.........are you referring to the 8mm large bore or the 8mm small bore......if you do not know the difference you must study mausers to understand how dangerous it would be to confuse the ammo of the larger bore in the smaller bore weapon-----often known by the same name by unaware users. Some 8mm are also a very rimmed cartridge which is yet a 3rd variation. Do you know which gun you have? Don't shoot until you understand these differences and mark the ammo you may keep, as you get it, so you never confuse the two(or three) if you happen to have both size of guns. I have seen a person purchase a rimmed cartridge type of gun and berate it for the problems he has trying to feed it non-rimmed ammo! I was too honest or I should have offered to buy the gun at reduced price.

I can't tell you how much I have enjoyed shooting both of my guns but must at the end confess I do not own a garand and so everything I say in the above is only referring to 30.06 rifles that I have, so if someone would want me to enjoy a garand get in touch as I would accept a gift of one immediately but I don't have the cash/wifely permission..........as my gun acquisitions of previous purchases has taken the wife to her ragged edge with my slim collection(batchelors need not rub it in either) and new permissions have all but disappeared for me.<-------------sad face would promise safe keeping and appreciation of a fine rifle as I have seen how well they do perform. If the internet is so insecure.....I am probably counting on leak back to her to try to break down the barrier but don't tell that part.

 

Dad did refer to them as AP rounds. Some also had steel casings. So even the "steel tipped" part is not quite right. One would think he'd get something right just by chance occasionally.

 

Here is some light on that:
The M1903 30-03 round (.30 cal. 1903 M-1) was developed for the M1903 Springfield. Due to excessive wear, caused by the high chamber pressures and corrosiveness of the propellant, the round was "redeveloped" in 1906 and morphed into the M1906 (30 cal. 1906 M-2) 30-06. the M1903 round stayed in service, untill depleted, because of it's range and accuracey in the '03 Springfield rifle and later in the Browning M1913 Machinegun. I really wish Wikipededia was not blacked out right now. there is a thread regarding Machinegun barrel wear that has great deal of information about these rounds.

 

View attachment 15532 that would be my Mauser. So so much for your claim i dont own the gun. and dont worry I have the 8mm mauser bullet, my re-certification papers from the marines, and i even took a pic of the label info on the mauser and 30-06. which is not an AP but is a steel cored round. sorry if i gerneralize and say tip that wasnt even the point. the point was that it had an expanding round (yes i know of the fmj and other rounds but the most common is the steel cored rounds. visit any world war II battlefield and the guides will even tell you the way you can tell a german round from an allied round is that german rounds are steel.

 

<img style="margin: 1px;" src="attachment.php?attachmentid=24870&stc=1" attachmentid="24870" alt="" id="vbattach_24870" class="previewthumb"> that would be my Mauser. So so much for your claim i dont own the gun. and dont worry I have the 8mm mauser bullet, my re-certification papers from the marines, and i even took a pic of the label info on the mauser and 30-06. which is not an AP but is a steel cored round. sorry if i gerneralize and say tip that wasnt even the point. the point was that it had an expanding round (yes i know of the fmj and other rounds but the most common is the steel cored rounds. visit any world war II battlefield and the guides will even tell you the way you can tell a german round from an allied round is that german rounds are steel.

 

View attachment 15533 1943 stampiing on the gun. already gave the serial number to you in earlier posts.

 

View attachment 15534 ill just keep posting some more pics because i know all you anal pricks will try to dis credit it in some other way. prolly try to say i copy and pasted from another site or some bull crap.

 

View attachment 15535 there is section V of my original re-entry papers ay thank you so now so much for the claim. i never filed for re-enlistment and continue my career like i said. And as for the marja spelling. if you were over there sir you would know that there are like 31490358175894758917 ways to spell that crap out there every tribe or whatever you wanna call them has their own spelling. hell some of them still use pictures to spell. and as for it being in afghan yeah i know. unfortunately you dont know me because anybody who knows me knows i refer to the whole god damned middle east as iraq. so quit being anal. if you are truly smart you know how to understand generalization and when i registered to this site i dont recall there any part saying hey this is a college style forum and all posts must be in proper english at a college level. therefore i choose to talk how i want and if someone does not understand then ask and i will verify. you pricks.

 

View attachment 15537 the 30-06 165grain springfield is the proper round. unfortunately they didnt have info on the round. so i posted the 180 grain size one and it only has medium penetration. now when i post it. the mauser has higher penetration. hmmm... notice my point specifically said the mauser has more penetration.

 

okay nvm for some reason it won let me load my last 2 pics of the mauser round. i will get them up when it lets me.

 

maybe it is 1906. i thought it was 1913. my error. I knew there 2 weapons in that period that is characterized by the weapon being re-fitted to use the new type of ammo. Are you sure that 1913 was not the year the US army actually declared it as the standard rifle and round?

 

The standart rounds were lead filled and called "s S" which means schweres Spitzgeschoß.

The steal cored " SmK" Spitzgeschoß mit Kern was a special round for targets behind walls as a example. The SmK was in use as a AP-Round with a Tungsten core too.
Later in war the standart ball round was made of sintered iron for the lack of lead.

And to quote you: a M1 kicks more than a K98k, that is technically impossible for the reason that the semi auto´s are reducing the recoil for the moving mass of their recievers.And the M1 has a basic weight of 4500grams instead of the K98k with 4200grams. Your one isnt a K98k it is the Gewehr 98/29 aka Persian Mauser is around 5.5" longer than the K98k and a bit softer to shoot than the Karabiner but it kicks more than the M1 Garand. My personal experience.

 

OK, Section 5 of your supplied DD 1966 (Record of Military Processing) is where a correction is made to some earlier information on the form that was incorrectly entered and you are re-certifying the information contained on the form with the corrections listed in Section 34. What is this supposed to prove?

The change was to show infantry option, the last digits are the date 30 March 2009 (20090330). If we take this to be for re-enlistment (as you infer, and the form is used for both new enlistments and prior service enlistments) your service was prior to this date. You say you were in 2/6 but they didn't deploy to Marjah, Afghanistan until June 2010. Prior to that they hadn't deployed to Afghanistan.
Since the start of the GWOT through the June 2010 deployment to Afghanistan the battalions combat deployments had been to Iraq or as part of the 26th MEU that operated in Iraq and the Gulf of Aden.

-Feb to May 2003 Invasion of Iraq
-Sep 2005 to April 2006 Fallujah Iraq
-April 2007 to October 2007 Fallujah/Al Anbar Iraq
-August 2008 to March 2009 Ground Combat Element 26th MEU

I have never seen nor heard of anyone making Staff Sergeant in two years. Hell the recent MOH awardee Dakota Meyer didn't even get promoted to Sgt. until he came off of a 4 year active duty enlistment. You say you had two years of active duty. Well, three months go to bootcamp. You say you were an infantry man. I don't know your specific MOS (infantry machine gunner, infantry rifleman, infantry mortarman, infantry assualtman, etc.), so there you have at least another nine weeks (lets call it two months). Then two by middle east deployments. Combat deployments are, and have been 7 months for Marines, so add another 14 months. By my count we're up to 19+ months out of 24. So, did you have no dwell time between deployments? No leave time? No workup? No Mojave Viper? That's funny because it has been a requirement for deploying Marine Units for years. That must have been a busy 5 months.
What about the B.S. excuse that you call Afghanistan, Iraq because they're both in the middle east. Do you really expect anyone to buy that?
How did you manage to avoid the eight year obligation? It might be cut up between active/ready reserve/IRR but it has been since at least as far back as 2003 (it used to be six, I'm not sure the earliest date when it changed). It doesn't add up. I am always hesitant to question someone's veteran status, because I'd rather err on the side of caution than to ever deny someone the respect due them for their service. But unless you come up with some credible explaination, I'd say you're full of the brown smelly stuff that comes out the south end of a north bound bull.

I may be a prick, but at least I'm not a poser. So there is no mistake I am calling you a fraud. Someone that claims to have served when they haven't is stealing the honor of those that have. Many who paid a heavy price, their lives, their limbs, their mental health, their families. You are stealing from them, you are the lowest form of the low.

If you'd been to the middle-east I think you would know the difference between Afghanistan and Iraq. No college level education necessary, hell most third graders probably realize they are seperate places. If you'd been a Marine I know you would know the difference. I'd rather be an anal-prick than an a$$hole liar.

 

Easy there Tiger! The scan means nothing. You want to prove your service show me your DD214. Even in 1992 the only thing hand written were the signatures. As for every thing else: the only standard of conduct we ask is that members be honest and polite. This post especially shows your proclevity to be less than honest and rude in your dealings with other members of this board. I strongly encourage you to take the corrective action, which has been suggested, if you wish to contribute further to this, or any other, discussion.

That should actually read : Browning M1919 series Machineguns.

I could cut and paste a lot of info, again, but; I'll just give you the Wiki link instead: .30-06 Springfield - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And as as far as this goes:

What in the name of Christ and all the crippled children are "recertification papers" ?