Was the Mauser Broomhandle a reliable gun?

C

cz858lover

BANNED
BANNED
BANNED
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I'm not sure if I should be posting this here or in Antiques, but I was wondering if the Mauser C96 "Broomhandle" was a good pistol? I know that this gun helped pioneer the way for the mainstream success of the auto loading pistol and that it was at the time cutting edge, but was this gun reliable? Was it prone to jams, breaking parts, etc?


Was there much advancement or changes in the design since its initial introduction in the late 1800's compared to the later productions in the 1930's?
 
Everything I've ever read about the Broomhandle said it was a reliable handgun - IF the proper ammo was used. If it wasn't, the gun would be finicky.
 
Never really heard of any malfunctions with the pistol. Considering it was produced from the late 1890s to the 1930s if it wasn't reliable they would be idiots to make it that long. As I understand it there was some slight simplifications by Mauser but the design in general remained the same. The people who did some serious simplifications to the design were the Spanish and their copies.

Also if it wasn't reliable you wouldn't see so many shot out examples, as shooting a unreliable gun is just no fun.
 
I briefly had one in the 80's . It was a very reliable pistol , when I could find ammo for it ( not often ) and shot fairly accurate . As Lee Enfield points out , the only screw on the pistol was the grip screw , an amazing bit of engineering . I always meant to pick up another , but prices have climbed above my comfort level .
 
Mine is very reliable with fmj, pretty accurate with the wooden stock/holster.

Less accurate with cast and some feeding issues as well,but I still love her!
 
American Rifleman did a short piece on the pistol. Complimentary and mentioned they were a little complex (but then so is the P08) and a little unreliable. My father who was one of the first instructors (after OCTU) in the UK for the Canadian small arms training wing in the early '40's..brought back numerous items P38, P08 etc etc. After the wars end. He did not bring back a C96. When he was alive and I started to take an interest in this stuff I asked him about the C96. He briefly mentioned he had acquired one in Italy...but left it in a desk drawer for the next guy to occupy that chair. He was his regt's RQ at that time and they were 'on the move' frequently....anyway I asked why he would leave such a terrific pistol like that....he raised his eyebrows and said it wasnt very impressive and not very reliable. He didnt think it was worth carrying along. I have always thought they were a very 'neat' piece. But I guess not comparable to other sidearms for simplicity, reliability or practical use. I would still like to have one...and it appears so would a lot of people based on the prices today!
 
Weapon of choice of Winston Churchill and a must have for any number of exotic Hollywood baddies.
Fired flat sides made in 1900 with no problems.
IIRC German Army issued them with a spare mag spring.
 
Just to mention the biggest reasons the C96 fell out of favour are they are not what we now consider conventional (i.e. magazine in the grip, ergonomics are very poor, no detachable mags on the standard design) and most importantly cost (C96s involved a lot of fine fitting).

The main reason the Luger fell out of favour is because of cost.

Basically Brownings system (i.e. tilting barrel) is much easier to make and less expensive to make, well being about the same or slightly better in terms of reliability.

It is interesting though that the C96 only has about 30 pieces, the 1911 has roughly 52 pieces, and the Luger has roughly 40 pieces in their respective designs. Its just the 1911's pieces are easier to manufacture and as such are cheaper than the other two.
 
I'd trade every pristine rifle in my gun locker (save my Norwegian Mauser) for one! They are an incredible piece of engineering and design. Unfortunately, most examples I've come across have worn barrels. BTW, easy to reload for.
 
I want one in 22lr, now that would be a fun plinker. Even a carbine length. Red9 pistol would be my been knees
 
Back in the 1980s a number of them were imported in to the USA from Red China these were, as far as I know, rechambered/barreled for the 9mm Parabellum cartridge, or at least the one my father bought was/is so chambered. I have inherited the gun, along with its wooden holster/shoulder stock, I've not fired the gun since I inherited it and my memory of our outing with it is a bit fuzzy from the years pasting, but I recall us having, initially, failures for the bolt to fully close on chambered rounds. A slight shove would finish the bolt locking up and the gun firing and ejecting the fired rounds, as the magazine was emptied the problem would be less frequent, indicating to dad that the recoil spring was weak, dad obtained a replacement spring, it is with the gun or maybe it is the in the gun and the old spring is in the case with the pistol. In any case I have the gun and two springs. The other thing I recall is that the pistol hit about 6-8 inches high at 10 to 12 yards, now this could be due to the sights being originally set for the .30 Mauser/7.63 Mauser and the gun having be converted to 9mm, or possibly the result of someone reducing the height of the front sight blade. In any case at some point I will get a gunsmith to check out the springs and then figure out how to regulate the sights.

Otherwise I remember it was quite fun to shoot, when it was cycling, especially from the shoulder with the shoulder stock/holster. But with its bore axis running so high, compared to my Browning Hi-Power, the pistol bucked a bit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom