Boy, it'd be nice to be able to bid on American auctions...

French and US troops were able to make the rifle work under the conditions, in spite of its shortcomings. No US accounts at the time complain of unreliability. Ever compare a Lewis magazine with a CSRG magazine from the standpoint of mud infiltration?
There really weren't any alternatives for an automatic rifle. The Germans tried and rejected the Madsen. The Lewis is a better light machinegun, but it isn't an automatic rifle.
Here is an account from a CSRG rifleman, Pierre Trapenat:
"..Instruction was very severe at Grenoble. Functionning of the mechanism, qualities and weaknesses of the weapon, all were drilled into our heads. We had to take apart and reassemble the gun at great speed, after replacing a part, with a handkerchief over our eyes. We practiced a lot of firing...
...The machine rifle functionned well, but had to be carried in its cover, clean and oiled, particularly the magazines. Their insides had to be oiled so the cartridges would feed well. The magazines were thin and could not take shocks." He goes on to describe an assault, in which the gun worked as intended. The citation for his Croix de Guerre:
"Brave and courageous Fusillier-Mitrailleur. During the actions which took place between the 18th and 26th of September 1918, in front of St.Quentin, has, by his accurate and dense fire forced the enemy to cease resistance, and this permitted a successful assault on the enemy position".
The CSRG had numerous shortcomings, and France moved quickly to replace it after the war.
 
I've fired a Lewis, and a Sten. Only seen one privately owned CSRG, and that was a long time ago. The surviving specimens don't get fired very often, so there is not really much modern information about how they shoot. The Lewis is complicated, but shoots well when properly adjusted. I have no idea about how well one would work if contaminated with mud. Its dual safeties would help keep mud out of the mechanism, but the magazine would be very susceptible to being fouled. Have put about 1700 rounds through Stens, and my personal opinion is that they are reliable. I suspect that many of the early problems with them were ammunition and training related. The first large quantity of 9mm ball obtained was Winchester made, and while it was probably perfectly good pistol ammunition, it wasn't specifically designed for use in a smg like a Sten.
 
I like the Finnish property marks above the front hand-grip.

A friend has one. They are quite interesting. They are a "blow-back" open bolt sub-gun in a rifle calibre. I wonder if they weren't the first?

Apparently as the war pressure dropped, the quality went up.

He said that alot of them went to Greece after the "great war". They called them "Gladiators" after the bicycle manufacturer who made most of them IIRC.
 
They're open bolt, but locked breech, long recoil. In "Honour Bound" there is a series of photographs of the production line at the Gladiator factory, published for the first time. Sidarme was the second producer. The flash hider indicates fairly late production.
 
tiriaq said:
They're open bolt, but locked breech, long recoil. In "Honour Bound" there is a series of photographs of the production line at the Gladiator factory, published for the first time. Sidarme was the second producer. The flash hider indicates fairly late production.
Click to expand...

How does it lock? With a cammed block?

(As I'm typing this, my friend phoned & confirmed above, long recoil, bolt cams into barrel ext?)

After looking at the pics the bolt looks a little more complicated than a sten...
 
"Honour Bound - The Chauchat Machine Rifle" by Demaison and Buffetaut
Now I'm not in any way saying your source is out to lunch because I've never seen or read this book. All I want to point out is that I was immediately struck by two things, the title and the authors. It seems like an oddly over-heroic title for a machine rifle with such a bad reputation. It indicates to me that there is a matter of French pride at stake here somewhere. Taking into account the authors are Frenchmen it conveys that the book could be slightly biased. I know that's a lot to assume from the cover of a book, however in your opinion(s), why do you think the Chauchat has such a bad reputation if it is mostly unfounded?
 
Last edited:
The bolt rotates to lock. Camtrack. The barrel is screwed into an extension - an internal receiver. Mechanically it operates like the old Browning semiauto long recoil sporting rifles.
The gun is not elemental like a Sten. It has quite a number of parts, although compared to a Lewis, or any other machinegun of the day, the parts are rather straightforeward from the manufacturing standpoint.
Many of the major components are cylindrical, so turning operations could be used, rather than more complicated milling setups.
 
tiriaq said:
The bolt rotates to lock. Camtrack. The barrel is screwed into an extension - an internal receiver. Mechanically it operates like the old Browning semiauto long recoil sporting rifles.
The gun is not elemental like a Sten. It has quite a number of parts, although compared to a Lewis, or any other machinegun of the day, the parts are rather straightforeward from the manufacturing standpoint.
Many of the major components are cylindrical, so turning operations could be used, rather than more complicated milling setups.
Click to expand...

Was there a pre-cursor design to the m.1915?

It looks like it was definately the first MG designed for production purposes.

Yes I'm going to be borrowing the book from my friend. He has a couple of the French heavy MGs for sale right now (dewats).
 
Get a copy of the book and read it. It is not a whitewash of the design, but is a careful analysis of a rather historic firearm. The CSRG had warts; these are acknowledged and explained. The remarkable thing is that the French were able to make effective use of an imperfect automatic rifle. Assuming that the book is a whitewash because the author's names are French is inappropriate.
There are many legends, myths and stories which have been perpetuated. Everyone knows that Sten guns jam constantly, Ross rifles blow up if you turn your back on them, Carcanos and Arisakas are junk. Most of these are perpetuated by hearsay, and because most folks simply can't be bothered to find out what the situation actually is.
 
The precursor was a light automatic intended for use as a flexible aircraft gun. Its performance was excellent. The adaptation of the design for ground use was rushed, and the design was never matured before being rushed into mass production. Once production was underway, there was great reluctance to change anything that would slow the flow of rifles, even though it was known that there were problems. Even though its a model of 1915, the rifles did not reach the troops until later.
From the manufacturing standpoint, it could be one of the first automatic weapons designed for mass production. The photographs of the Gladiator production line are very interesting. Many of the operations were done by women.
Incidentally, the CSRG was used in North Africa in the early 1920s. The problems experienced on the Western Front did not occur there.
 
Last edited:
All I meant by that comment about the authors, was simply to illustrate that you wouldn't see an American book, for instance, about the same subject giving it the same praise, therefore one has to wonder... I am quite interested in getting another perspective on the gun, I think I will track down a copy of the book. I do agree that the concept of the weapon was ahead of it's time, which is quite interesting in itself. I will look into it further, thanks for the insightful views.
 
nkdjames said:
All I meant by that comment about the authors, was simply to illustrate that you wouldn't see an American book, for instance, about the same subject giving it the same praise, therefore one has to wonder...
Click to expand...

So by that logic then, you should toss out your copy of Skennerton's Lee Enfield Story, since having an English name, he's obviously biased? Makes no sense to me.

And "Honor Bound" has nothing to do with the gun being honorable. The author is talking instead about French leadership being tied to the issue of that gun b/c their honor in selecting it was at stake.

I've not read the book, but several friends have and it's quite good, they tell me, at pointing out all the problems with the rifle. It's not a once sided song sheet singing the praises of the Chauchat like you presume.
 
NO, that's not the same logic at all.
The Lee Enfield does not have the same bad reputation at all, so why would Skennerton try to champion Enfields??? They are reputably among the best weapons in history. On the other hand, clearly, "Honor Bound" is out to set the record straight about the Chauchat. (which is fine) I didn't say we should have a "book burning" like you are implying, but rather I said I would track down a copy for myself. I did mention in my post that it was a lot to assume, so why would you feel the need to point that out again when I've already admitted it? And furthermore, I wanted to ensure that the book was not a one sided story, before I invested money in it.
 
Last edited:
That's YOUR bias. In the USA and much of Europe where nearly all their turnbolts during WW1 were of the basic Mauser action, the Enfield is/was widely regarded as inferior with a "springy" rear lock action, strange ####-on closing bolt, cursed rimed ammo, agravating to load, viewed as poorly and cheaply constructed, etc. Commonwealth people, generally, love them though. Norwegians loved the Krag long after most other ppl had cursed the design as obsolete.

If you were French, you would likely love to own an 1886/93 Lebel and use it regularly. I'd like one too, but only to collect an example - I think they are a piss poor rifle design.
 
To stay on topic, that auction is for a superb example of a rather rare historical artifact, that our government would not allow us to own, unless welded into a paperweight. But if paperweight status is good enough for the War Museum, then it must be good enough for citizens.
If I were a US citizen in one of the preferred states, I'd certainly be reviewing what I owned that could be converted to cash. Actually its just as well that I'm not; had a chance to get involved with the purchase of a little .45-70 Police Gatling, and that would have taken about as much money as a small house.
 
the_big_mike said:
maybe more portable then a lewis, but ww1 wasnt really about portability was it?
Click to expand...

Not if you were in the defensive trench, but the poor b@stards who had to charge accross no-man's land sure had portability in mind ;)
 
From the book Modern Small Arms, by Major Frederick Myatt M.C.

"....with what was undoubtedly the worst firearm to appear on either side in the whole course of a war..."

"In the first place it was extremely badly made, even alowing for the exigencies and shortcuts unavoidable in wartime..."

The US forces arrived in France with very little in the way of MG, so arragned to purchase some of these from France. After about 16,000 had been purchased in original 8mm Lebel, the US Army realized that they should have a standard calibre, that being the .30-06. So..

"The resulting conversion, which was known as the .30" Model 1918, was, incredibly enough an even worse weapon than its predecessor, chiefly because in addition to inheriting all its original faults,it also developed some new ones of its own."

On a contrary note, I read a little piece that said this gun was actually way ahead of its time, noting the free standing pistol grip, the inline stock design, the detachable box mags, etc.

As for the original post referring to how good the US has it, remember that no more full auto has been avialable in the US since May, 1986, so the stuff already in the system is skyrocketing in price.

Wouldn't it be a kick in the nuts to move to California with the intent of "gettin' me a legal machine gun" , only to find out that CA does not allow class 3 firearms, moving to Portland, OR, only to find out that you have to get permission from your local law enforcement guy, and he won't, so eventually moving to Armpit, Arizona, getting all your papers in order, only to find out that you cannot afford $30,000 for a working Bren gun:mad:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom