I have recruited some help from my C&Rsenal people to create an introductory graphic displaying the dominant rifle designs of the WWI battlefiels. Hopefully this will provide some warm up for conversation.

There are also some specifics for each of these rifles in this thread on r/guns.

The Villar-Perosa is generally accepted to be the first SMG - however, it was designed as an anti-aircraft gun. From what I understand, it was not a success in this role due to the weak cartridge. My questions:

1. What was the rationale behind the development of this weapon? Did the designer really imagine that it would have the range and power necessary to bring down an aircraft?
2. Were any planes shot down using the Villar-Perosa?
3. After it was discovered that it was completely inadequate for the anti-aircraft role, what happened to the weapons? Were they reassigned as infantry support weapons?

Do the difference between national small arms boil down to manufacturing differences? As in, Germany had Kruger weapons (making up the name) because they were German while the British would have Browning rifles because they were made in Britain.

Or, were there some sort of cultural difference behind the decision making process for which small arms to use? Did Germans prefer one gun over what the British or Russians preferred because of some set of cultural or technological characteristics for that weapon?

I can't quite phrase this question properly.. Not sure if Im making sense.

PS. I know nothing about small arms!

What were some of the small arms innovations of the First World War? How different would a rifle of 1914 be from the rifle of 1918?

Why did the Ross Rifle fail? And were there any attempts to make a new Canadian rifle or was the Lee Enfield to popular?

Why isn't that date (1936) entirely arbitrary?

And an actual question: What was the difference between the Vickers and Maxim machine gun? I understand the Vickers was more advanced, but when was it introduced, and how effective was it in comparison to the Maxim?

From everything I've read, it seems as if weaponry was far less standardized than in modern armies, at least in terms of sidearms. For example, I've read before that British officers would buy their own pistols. I have a few questions related to that and to WWI handguns in general.

1. How did quartermasters deal with the need to accommodate so many types of ammunition?

2. Was there ever a push to force every soldier in a unit to carry handguns chambered in the same caliber?

3. With the gradual shift towards the adoption of semi-automatic pistols over revolvers, was there any pushback from those who preferred revolvers?

4. Did handguns see any design evolution over the course of the war due to the pressures of trench warfare?

Question about 1903 Springfield rifles

I have a C&R license (for those who don't know what that is) and am very interested in purchasing an '03 Springfield. What I'm concerned with more than anything is the function and accuracy of the rifle as I plan to shoot it as much as possible and may very well decide to compete and hunt with it, then after that I really would like the parts to match and for it to look nice and be in decent shape. I'm not especially concerned with getting some sort of rare/special collectible nor am I concerned with getting a model or type that has special historical significance. I want a shooter, but a damned good one (with matching parts and in good aesthetic condition as well).

That said, I know almost nothing about these rifles in terms of which year(s) produced the best ones (I recall some of the very early ones were made from poor quality steel and so you're supposed to avoid those below X serial number), which models/types were the most accurate, or what to really look for at all. Nor do I know what I should be paying.

Help me out here: what should I look for when purchasing one and how much should I be willing to pay? Which years produced the best quality rifles? Are there certain models that are especially well made and accurate?

Separate question about 1911s

It's commonly said that the reason the 1911 has the poor reputation for reliability (at least compared to modern pistols like Glocks) that it does is because modern manufacturers screwed them up by changing the design and manufacturing them to be much 'tighter' than they were intended to be (by John Moses Browning, hallowed be thy name) and if you examine an old WWI-era 1911 you'll find that it tends to be much looser, just sort of 'clunky' all around, everything shakes and rattles, and that these 1911s were supremely reliable because of this, they were true battlefield sidearms. I've heard the counter-argument to this, that this isn't true and that the reason those WWI 1911s are loose is because the overwhelming majority still around have seen a lot of use and abuse at the hands of the military and that the original ones were actually quite tight (but still functioned properly and reliably).

What's the truth about this? Were the WWI-era 1911s manufactured to fairly loose tolerances so that they shook and rattled right off the assembly line or were they nice and tight? If they were fairly tight, were they still fairly reliable or not? Why?

Thank you in advance.

Can anyone of you comment on the small arms situation of the American military forces in the 1890s, especially during the Spanish-American and Philippine-American wars? How did it compare to other major powers during that time period? I have read before that the Spanish guns/rifles were superior to the American ones. Is that true and why? How much of a difference was there?

I have a question slightly related. Who here plays Verdun? Because I know what I'm doing after this.

How different was the M97 Trench Gun from its original issue in the American-Philippine War to the one used by American soldiers in WWI?

During the phases of Trench Warfare, would soldiers ever fire their rifles at opposing trenches from their own trenches?

What has been the importance of Belgian arms producer FN in the development of small arms in this period and how damaging was it to the Allied cause that it fell into the hands of the Germans in WWI?

I own a 1917 Enfield and 1903 Springfield and have always heard that the Enfield's were strictly US Army and 03's were for Marines. How accurate is that?

BTW /r/wwi is an awesome sub and you should visit it.

I know there were some snipers in World War I, but I haven't really ever seen that many photos of them, regardless of nationality. As /u/Othais can confirm, I have a bit of an interest in Russian/Soviet firearms, and that has gotten me thinking: to what extent did the Russians employ snipers (if at all), for the brief time they were involved? I don't think I've ever seen any photos of M91 sniper rifles, nor have I heard of anyone ever finding an "ex-sniper" M91 in civilian purchases. Did the Russians not have snipers, or did they set the standard for Simo Häyhä a few years later by simply sniping with iron sights?

Was there any drive among countries that still issued revolvers for side arms to replace them with automatic pistols like the M1911? Did some view revolvers as superior or was this seen as a lower priority to developing other weapons?

Why is the M2HB so mean to me?

Serious question: what made the .50 caliber machine gun so impressive that it hasn't been improved upon until recently?

The rifles at the start of WWI were very long, and I've read somewhere that this was partially due to an arms race in length of rifle + bayonet.

Can you shed some more light on this? Were soldiers really expected to get into bayonet-spearfights where this would matter?

Why was the Thompson Submachine Gun not brought into service during WWI? Also, how successful was the BAR when it was introduced in 1918?

How often did soldiers use captured weaponry? Was the practice accepted by high ranking officers?

And how effective were small arms, especially massed rifles, at engaging aircraft?

I once saw a bayonet (British, I believe) that were more like scissors and designed to cut barbed wire. How common were these? What else was used to break through barbed wire thickets?

What changes were made to the Mosin-Nagant in 1930? Has it been using the same ammo since 1891?

Given that the Colt had debuted a long time before, why was most if not all the infantry soldiers still not using at least semi automatic rifles? Other than for snipers were there any great advantage to bolt rifles?

What kind of firearms would an officer in the British military carry? I often see interpretations of officers and they often only carry a revolver of some kind. What kind of revolver is this? And did they ever carry a rifle of some kind?

What was the BAR's status during WWI? I heard somewhere (can't remember specifically) that the BAR was pretty much ready for usage by the time the US got involved, but there were concerns about it falling into enemy hands and being reverse engineered.

More a picture request than a question, but I think this might be the correct forum to ask in:

I once had a photo of an Italian soldier running across no-mans-land with a Villar Perosa. The VP had a single point sling mounted at the front of the barrels,the soldier held the gun in front of him with the standard spade grips (non of the later improvised stocks) supported by the sling from behind his neck.

The soldier was running toward the left side of the photo.

Does any one of you know what photo I'm talking about? I've been trying hard to find it again.

(Or any other photo of the Villar Perosa being used in that fashion)

Were there any light machine guns fielded other than the infamous Chauchat?

Did any single nation have more advanced smaller arms compared to other nations at the time?

Was the invention of the sub machine gun a mutually shared idea, or was it discovered and invented separately?

Is the Chauchat really as poor a weapon as claimed or were there other reasons for its performance such as manufacturing problems, ammunition problems, or poor training?

It seems to me that shotguns would have been an ideal weapon for clearing trenches. Pump-action shotguns weren't exactly revolutionary technology at the time, and at least one semiautomatic shotgun, the Browning Auto-5, was in production prior to the war, yet the only nation that seems to have made any use of shotguns was the United States. Why was this?

How did the primary rifle of each nation stack up to the others?

A general question to all panelists.

What kind of education (both formal and informal) do you have regarding firearms and where did you get it from?

As a budding firearms historian, what could I do about getting a formal education in this field? Informally, apart from camping out on here and /r/guns, can you suggest any additional resources?

Lastly can you recommend any good historical fiction books regarding this field?

Thanks in advance!

Being Irish, I always hear about the history of gun-running into the country in preparation for the 1916 rising, via ships like the Asgard, etc. But I've never been able to find out just what kind of weapons were being smuggled into the country.

Cool AMA, by the way! But you knew that already...

What are the best qualities of each major warring powers' bolt-action rifle, and which is your favourite and why?

I am looking for a sturdy, reliable rifle of some sort. I have been recommended a Mauser and a Mosin-Nagant in the past. I plan to use it for hunting, but possibly also for some sort of defense.

Are there any other ones you would consider from this era? Of the two, which is the easier to maintain, acquire ammunition for, today? Which is sturdier?

Are there any models that are a particularly good value (bang for your buck).

EDIT: Reading some links from where you have responded elsewhere.

EDIT 2: Looks like the best choices are Mauser G.1898, Mosin-Nagant M1891, or the Arisaka 38 are the best choices. I know there are parts for Mausers and Mosin-Nagants about, what about the Arisaka 38?

To whoever might be most knowledgeable about it:

What were the historical reasons behind Russia's Fedorov Avtomat never catching on? Do you think it would have seen greater use if production had later continued with models chambered for the standardized 7.62x54R round?

Also, is there any specific, unique innovation amongst small arms of the time that really stands out to you as a major game-changer for 20th-century development trends?

What range did most fighting in WW1 happen at? I have read that the Germans comissioned the STG 44 because they realized the bolt actions of the period were overkill for the ranges fighting was taking place at.

Another question- Why is the American BAR not considered the first assault rifle?

In both America and Europe, what was private firearm ownership like at the time? How restrictive were laws? What was supply, quality and pricing like? How many owners were there? What was the policy if a lowly grunt wanted to being a privately owned pistol/rifle with him? Would he be able to dip into the supplies?

Apologies for formatting, I'm on a phone.

What can you tell me about the Nepalese Gahendra rifle that I just bought from International Military Antiques?

I inherited a 30-06 enfield from a relative who was a doughboy in WWI. Why the fuck did I inherit a British rifle in an American caliber from an American soldier.

I've been drawing on a great number of sources for the answers I've provided for this AMA.I haven't been providing individual citations, but for anyone who is interested in some quality sources, do consider these fine works!

Bibliography:

Bolt Action Military Rifles of the World by Stuart Mowbray - While not an in depth analysis of most rifles, it nevertheless should be the first book you buy if bolt-action rifles is your thing. Great, full-color photography of almost every notable gun out there!

To End All Wars by Adam Hochschild

Mauser Military Rifles of the World by Robert W.D. Ball

Collecting Classic Bolt Action Military Rifles by Paul S. Scalata

Standard Catalog of Military Fireasms, 7th Ed. by Phillip Peterson

British Enfield Rifles, Vol. 4, Pattern 1914 and US Model of 1917 by Charles R. Stratton

Browning Automatic Rifle by Robert R. Hodges, Jr.

M1903 Springfield by Leroy Thompson

The Thompson Submachine Gun by Martin Pegler

The Lee-Enfield Rifle by Martin Pegler

Military Rifle Disassembly and Reassembly by Stuart Mowbray

Additionally, back issues of Man at Arms Magazine from Mowbray Publishing

What advantages did different rifles have over one another? Feel free to pick one rifle from each side and just give a quick rundown if you want, because from what I can see there were a fair amount and going through all their differences might be a bit much.

Given the lack of advancement compared to, say, World War II, I don't imagine there was much variation in how they worked?

What was the major firearms innovation between the development of the bolt-action and 1914?

What would change in my expirience as a soldier in 1914-1918 from 2014 when we're talking about small arms? Did they need special conditions, were there trouble with maintainance and ammunition?

How prominent was the use of shotguns in trench warfare?

I've heard that the American Expeditionary Force used them to some extent, but the Germans considered them barbaric. Poison gas and flamethrowers, on the other hand... well, whatever.

Anyway, tell me about shotguns.

how reliable and widespread was the Mauser C96? it seems to me that it would be fairly innovative.

I can't believe I missed this thread for so long. Okay I'll just try and get all my questions out there.

• Why was the M1895 Colt Machine Gun so unpopular for ground use? It seems to be a very portable and maneuverable belt fed gun compared to the big water cooled guns.
• I've seen the ghastly process of loading a Lewis Gun pan. How many Pans would your average Lewis Gunner have fairly quick access too on an assault?
• How big was the actual battlefield effect of trench shotguns?
• Was the Chauchat really that bad? (.30cal and 8mm versions.) If the magazine holes were so bad why not tape it or some such?
• How widespread was the Gewehr 1888 Commission Rifle in comparison to the Mauser Gewehr 96? How did they stack against each other performance wise.
• Roughly half the Rifles used Bloc Clips the other Half Stripper Clips / Chargers. Any serious. advantages / disadvantages?
• How effective were bayonets in the war. Were they essential or did they not amount to much in the long haul?
• How wide spread was the light or portable machine gun in German Assaults. I understand they had nothing really as portable as the Lewis Guns / Auto Rifles?
• Was the Tube Magazine of the Lebel a serious hindrance compared to clips and chargers?
• Why did the US produce so many M1917 Enfield Rifles for their troops instead of expanding the production of their M1903 Springfield Rifles? Also did American Krag's see any meaningful service in the war?
• Was the Ross Rifle really such a dud. Was it so unsuitable as an Army Rifle?

Thanks in advance to anyone that can answer these. Please did into just a few or even one if you can.

Was John Browning well-known as a weapon designer outside the United States (e.g. in Europe)?

Were there any successful attempts during The First World War to develop and field a fully automatic, shoulder fired rifle? I know that the M1918 tried to fill this role but ended up being used more in a support role very late during the war.

I heard a piece of trivia once about how British ammunition manufacturers were using some technology that was licensed from German arm industries before the war. During the war, the license fee was suspended but after the war they had to pay the German company the fees, and the trivia bit was calculating how much the German company was paid per German soldier killed.

I've been trying to find the original place I read it but have had no luck - but my general question is were patents / licenses respected with regards to arms manufacture, and if not how were they resolved post-war?

What was the design and use of bayonet like at this time? I see lots of different designs ranging from epee to sword to stubby? Were baynoets at the time sharp? Did anybody still have triangle baynets?

Okay I'll bite. What was the smallest armament used in the first world war? Size of the weapon, the caliber of the weapon, your choice.

The Germans were generally well-known for their technology that was brought upon the battlefield. What small arms that were made by the Germans appeared to be the "technology of the future", as well as any arms that were in development but never implemented in the Great War?

What were the absolute worst small arms widely used in the war? I've heard horror stories involving early flamethrowers and the much maligned Chauchat, but little else.

Alternatively, which small arms were most highly regarded and desired by the rank-and-file on both sides of the conflict?

Why did the Maxim Machine Gun become more popular than the original Gatling Gun? Why couldn't they just use the same gas powered mechanism to make the Gatling Gun automatic?

Hi, could you talk a bit about Romania's arsenal during this period? Thanks! :)

What were the most unique trench weapons? Which were most effective? Were ary commisioned into standard issue weapons? Are there any examples of trench projectiles? Were any known improvised guns used?

What was generally considered to be the worst rifle during the war?

I've heard that some countries had already developed semiautomatic rifles before or during the war. Why were they not implemented by any side? And round about how many were designed?

What were the differences between the small arms of Great Britain and the arms utilized by British colonial forces (Australian, Indian, etc.)? Was this a reflection of colonial hegemony?

Can you provide any information about the prototype German MG16 series of general purpose machine guns? How much influence did they play post war on designs like the MG34 and what were their roots pre-war? Also what work was done on light machine guns in Germany pre-war?

What common WW1 era rifle will be hard to find in ten years?

Why did the Ottomans use the Mauser rifle (which if I understand is German), while the Germans used another type of rifle the Gewehr rifle?

What can be said of small arms of Austria-Hungery? Did it have much of its own native designs(rifles) and factories that produced them? How did they compare to other nations? Same thing with the Ottomans.

Asking because I never hear much about A-H and Ottoman military from this time. Thanks.

How often were regular troops (soldiers and NCOs) issued pistols along with standard rifle? I guess they were much more effective for close-up fighting in the trenches.

Which rifle was the best all around battle rifle and why is the Mosin?

I have heard, that during he latter years of the war, Germans sometimes turned bullets around inside the cartridge to gain an armor piercing effect. Did this happen? Was it effective? Could this work even in theory?

Sorry if I'm late, but this is soething I've always wondered. Most rifles of the era were bolt action. My question is, what would a left handed shooter have been issued during this time? Did they have left handed rifles? Or were they simply given the right handed rifles and told to deal with it?

What can you tell me about the evolution of firearm furniture for this era? I assume much of the end result came down to ease of manufacture for military rifles, but what other influences did firearms have? What about hunting rifles?

How much did the ergonomics of the gun's action influence the grip and comb of stocks? What are some ways you can tell if a rifle of that time was a hunting or a military rifle? Does one style of stock favour an application more than another?

I apologize if this question is unclear. I'm just curious about how the philosophys of the time influenced the look and design.

The Wikipedia illustration for the the Parabellum MG14, a 7.92mm-calibre World War I machine gun mentions an "electromagnetic trigger". I have not been able to find any information about that device. Anyone knows its purpose ? Could it be fitted for remote control of the trigger through an electrical circuit ?

How did the Polish-Soviet War (of 1920, just to clarify) inform small arms development?