Mad Minute Series: Mauser Kar98k

Patreon: / blokeontherange
Moving onwards with the Mad Minute series, here's another one that went faster than the Bloke thought realistic, even though compared to the No.4 and the K31 it was quite a bit slower. It was effing hard work though working the bolt on that Mauser 98k that quickly, since it's not really optimised for "fast".
Also contains a little discussion about German doctrine compared to British and Swiss doctrine, and some ergonomic considerations with respect to the Lee-Enfield No.4 and the Swiss K31.
Facebook: / blokeontherange
GUNS IN THIS VIDEO:
Mauser Karabiner Kar98k 98k 8x57 / 7.92x57
Schmidt-Rubin K31 7.5x55
Lee-Enfield No.4 .303 (not SMLE)

[@RebSike]

You see bloke, the problem is that you were in an indoor range, if you were outside, like the rifle was built for, the wind would take care of the heat and mirage. thats why the engineers brilliantly left that area exposed. also the higher indoor air pressure put more pressure on the bolt, slowing it, as well as the bullet. if you had compensated for this you could've easily gotten 50 in a minute, like my great grandpa, Helmut Schnitzelnazi in the Battle of Berlin when he sniped 50 Russians with his last 10 clips from the top of the Brandenberg Gate, taking cover in the cart of the statue. ;) Jokes aside i'm enjoying the series

[@gabemando7823]

RebSike and the award for the best comment goes to.......

[@RebSike]

Gabemando thanks :)

[@JudahMaccabee_]

Schnizelnazi

[@skipmaloney178]

Let's see.... A hypothetical test standard to evaluate HIS rifles with HIS skills. Your mileage may vary. Everyone has biases (the old Ford/Chevy thing) and he's honest enough to show his. He's sharing his passion with us. It takes an incredible amount of effort to make these videos by himself and I, for one, am grateful the he and others like him share this with us. There are other places where they claim to be absolute authorities on a give subject, but not here. Thanks, Bloke. Oh, the Garand is by far my favorite battle rifle. You can pronounce it any way you wish.

[@Westwoodshadowgaming]

He should start calling the Garand "The pinger" Just so people quit bitching about it xD

[@simonferrer]

He could just say M1. In the context of the channel, no one's likely to confuse it with anything else. Unless of course, Bloke wears his M1 helmet while firing his M1 rifle at an M1 Abrams. ;-)

[@serioussoldier7977]

simonferrer there's an M1 carbine and there's also the M1A wich is the civilian version of the M14 also other firearms can fall under this classification as well so just calling it an M1 isn't adequate.

[@simonferrer]

Serious Soldier Make a joke on the internet and there's always someone who takes it literally. What other rifles can be called an M1? As for the M1A, those didn't come out until the '70s, and while both the M1A and the M14 owe their lineage to the M1, they look distinctly different and cannot be confused with the M1. If you want to be pedantic, you can always insist on the rifle's official nomenclature, ie "U.S. Rifle, Caliber .30, M1"

[@dchevron77]

I really love this series. It lets you visualize how an old gun like this would do when in combat!

[@merlemorrison482]

Last year I shot a mad minute with a Yugo M24/47. I only managed 17 shots & felt crappy about that, but now I feel better after watching your effort.

[@BlokeontheRange]

They're bloody hard work, aren't they?

[@merlemorrison482]

yes indeed !!!

[@BlokeontheRange]

Hang on REALLY tight with the left hand and make big movements with the right against a fair force :)

[@whitespacemarines4308]

And THIS is why I don't understand why a pump action rifle never really caught on. Both hands on action, rifle pushed toward shoulder, etc. I DO understand SOME issues shooting prone, but nothing a little practice cannot overcome. PLUS, they are fastest while running fire.

[@BlokeontheRange]

Think about the ergonomics of it for a moment and it should be entirely 100% obvious ;)

[@CarolusR3x]

From a doctrine standpoint, I don't think the early German WWII war-time doctrine, for better or worse, called for rapid rifle fire since they placed a boatload of emphasis of the squads core firepower on the GPMG. So much so that if the crew of the GPMG had been KIA, the squad would be forcibly disbanded and dispersed around the Platoon/Company/Regiment/Battalion, it was imperative that the squad members protected the machine gunners. Its also worth pointing out that German early war infantry doctrine may have been more orientated around the relative successes of the Spring Offensive of the Great War where the Stosstruppen hit allied positions using shortened and handier weapons such as the kar98a and b series, grenades, spades, bayonets and knives etc. Its safe to say that the Wehrmacht developed doctrine that abandoned much of their sharpshooter/rapid rifleman doctrine before the war in place of highly aggressive, rapid moving close battle with a smaller and more handier rifle that mirrors the kar98ab from WWI, hence the kar98k (9 Hole Reviews also mentions this too). I suspect the kar98k was developed for almost purely offensive warfare. A speculative guess, I suppose. Post 3 Year Addition: adding a sling and keeping it taught along the side of the rifle assists quite a bit in providing additional gripping purchase for your resting hand.

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

very interesting! In many aspects. Since you noted that you couldn't find anything about rapid fire in German doctrine, was the middle finger technique ever "codified" and if not, where do you got it from?

[@BlokeontheRange]

It's a British thing. Earliest written reference I've yet found is "All-In-Fighting 1942", for close-quarters, and it appears in the same role in the 1955 rifle pamphlet. It's also done by the Norwegian Stangskyting (sp?) competitors.

[@BlokeontheRange]

Also discovered last night in a Weapons Training Memorandum, number 7 (1944) to be specific: facebook.com/Blokeontherange/photos/pcb.561617307554435/561615637554602/?type=3&theater facebook.com/Blokeontherange/photos/pcb.561617307554435/561615827554583/?type=3&theater facebook.com/Blokeontherange/photos/pcb.561617307554435/561616030887896/?type=3&theater facebook.com/Blokeontherange/photos/pcb.561617307554435/561615637554602/?type=3&theater

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

thank you!!!

[@LavitosExodius]

I thought Rapid Fire in German doctrine was grab the MG42...etc lol.

[@JacobA6464]

@@LavitosExodius hans get ze mg42

[@kyleno4mk27]

I suppose it was probably a matter of budget and available tooling, but it seems like the Germans solved most of the problems you spoke of, with the K98az (or K98a or K98 or whatever you want to call the Karabiner from WWI); then stepped back from those improvements with later K98k. Of course there's a lot of intervening circumstances, but still the K98az seems like a little more advanced design, very in kind with the K11. Anyway, if you got a-hold of one it might improve your time a little, at least you wouldn't burn your fingers. Also, I find it very interesting that German doctrine trained for snap shooting over rapid fire. I've often wondered if this was the case. Of course one's own impressions of a rife are highly subjective; my impression has always been that K98's "come to the shoulder" much better than some of it's competitors. They're lots of fun for hunting flushed game in medium density woodlands, of course it's German so that kinda follows.

[@BlokeontheRange]

Not sure the flattened underside of the 98a bolt handle will help matters any, but if I ever get my hands on one of course we'll do it :)

[@makotoyuki2199]

KyleNo4Mk2 Didn’t they destroy all the K98’s from WWI? I haven’t seen a single one ever.

[@FLVCTVAT_NEC_MERGITVR]

@@makotoyuki2199 There are quite many around in collector's circles.

[@makotoyuki2199]

@@FLVCTVAT_NEC_MERGITVR Wow- my comment was 2 years old and I forgot I ever asked that.. Looking back at my question, it was a dumb one.

[@FLVCTVAT_NEC_MERGITVR]

@@makotoyuki2199 😂 don't sweat it my friend.

[@814790]

Hey bloke, interesting results. I've shot some mauser myself, and was very surprised on the K98k. While my shooting was not focused on accuracy like yours I did manage to get around 60 within minute of man on a pretty meh condition yugo capture. I also never experienced any issues you had with the handgaurd, there seemed to be plenty of room on the stock to hold easily. I was standing up when shooting to facilitate faster bolt work. I imagine if you timed me my reloads were a bit slower than yours however. Definitely not as good as a Lee rifle though, I'm excited to see results on the Mas 36!

[@BlokeontheRange]

You've got rather more choice of where to hold the rifle when standing - I presume you had your hand further forward.

[@BlokeontheRange]

MAS 36 is indeed very, very interesting :)

[@marinusjansen9139]

Do I see a MAS36 on that spreadsheet? Interesting :-)

[@BlokeontheRange]

Thought that would be a nice little teaser :)

[@SgtKOnyx]

Bloke on the Range Because of course someone will notice lol Also the p 14.

[@gabemando7823]

On Patreon he published a few little snippets of the series. Let's just say it's extremely interesting.

[@SgtKOnyx]

I recommend pronouncing "Garand" as "Timothy".

[@vaclav_fejt]

Just say it backwards, Dnarag.

[@keithplymale2374]

Mine is a not matching 1940 bys barrel with 1941 bcd receiver that does not have a grooved hand guard. I suspect it was restocked at one point. The point to remember is W W II German squad tactics were not built around rifle's but the MG34/42 or whatever was issued. The riflemen in the squad were basically meant to be ammo bearers and spare gunners for the MG. I have three of the four you are doing in this series.

[@BlokeontheRange]

"The point to remember is W W II German squad tactics were not built around rifle's but the MG34/42 or whatever was issued." Same as the British, contrary to popular belief. And with the British, everyone except the section commander carried ammo for the BREN, whereas in the German squad, only the No.2 and No.3 on the MG carried its ammo, to the point where the No.2 didn't even get a rifle, just a pistol and a ton of MG ammo.

[@keithplymale2374]

I actually knew that however the weapon being talked about was German. Been studying your country, and many others, for over 45 years.

[@doktormusmatta]

I've said it before - the K31 looks FECKIN HUGE next to the 98.

[@TheHaighus]

The differences in doctrine are very interesting. If you consider the pre-WWI situation, rapid-firing with rifles was the only suppressive fire that could be provided by an individual infantry squad, but then fire-and-manouvre tactics using sections were not really a thing at that stage, so I can see why some nations just didn't bother. After the evolution of small unit tactics during WWI, such an ability to suppress the opposition with an infantry section becomes paramount to the ability of a section to function in an offensive manner. At this stage the British have started using the Lewis gun as an LMG, so the role was largely fulfilled by the machine gun (and also rifle grenades), but then the machine gun needs reloading sometimes, especially with up to only 97 rounds in a Lewis gun. At this point having the rest of the section able to lay down effective suppressive fire with rifles is important. This continued in WWII for the British, with the BREN having just 30 rounds, so more frequent reloads. Having rifles capable of sustaining the suppression whilst the BREN is reloading to continue covering other advancing sections is clearly an advantage in small-unit tactics. The Germans also had a squad machine gun at this stage in the excellent MG34, which used belts when defending, but 50 or 75 round magazines in offensive operations. An allround more versatile weapon than the BREN and Lewis gun, as it was much better suited for defensive operations with the same offensive capability, but the same issue is present in offensive operations when having to reload the magazine whilst providing suppressive fire. In this situation the German squad is less able to maintain the covering fire previously provided by the machine-gun to suppress the enemy whilst other squads advance. Does anyone have any details on how the German military got around this situation on the tactical level, or did they just aim to complete any manouevres and reach cover before the machine gun expended a magazine?

[@Picolinni]

TheHaighus the biggest difference that I have found was from my digging through my families old manuals and talking to two of my great uncles, one was a Pioneer, and the other a Fallschirmjäger. Mind you this was from the time of the 42. Their recollections was that you had all of 7 seconds to charge if the machine gunners had to swap out barrels as well as reloading. They also spent more time filling ammo belts, ferrying belt to and from the MG's than firing their rifles. Add to that the extra MG in their squads to the allies they spent more time as ammo carriers. Then you have an old mentor of mine. He recounted to me that rapid fire was never really effective. Your MG was down for 8 to 12 seconds, and you had artillery, you had other MG's and you also had to cover 200-300 meters in those precious seconds. By the time rapid fire WOULD have been personally useful he had been equipped with a semi auto.

[@copuis]

very interesting regarding the rapid firing

[@MayerAudax]

5:20 Here you have it guys, bolt actions are not good for rapid fire!

[@MrSam1er]

Well, the two others are good, so your point is invalid

[@MayerAudax]

A bolt action was not made for rapid fire. It was made for easier reloading.

[@BlokeontheRange]

Erm, easier reloading = more rapid fire ;) Repeating rifles were indeed conceived to enable people to shoot more quickly.

[@MayerAudax]

It only had 5 rounds, why didn't they just storm into the war with Luger pistols if they wanted ''real'' rapid fire?

[@MrSam1er]

Range, beeing able to do more than just "rush in" with just one weapon ?

[@proudamericanrobman2829]

I think the mosin and the 1903 should be on here, then you would cover all major bolt gun you would see.

[@Dingus301]

the Springield 1903 is just another variation of the Mauser 98, you wouldn't notice any appreciable difference

[@VCBird6]

Did one of these last month against my cousin, me with my Yugo 24/47 and he with his K98. We landed a similar number of shots (I think he got 1 or 2 more than me because his K98 is just soooo much slicker), BUT like you, we found that my full handguard kept me from scorching my hand unlike his K98. So....he may have won the battle, but the blisters on his fingers proved I won the war (sort of)

[@BlokeontheRange]

How many shots did you each manage?

[@VCBird6]

Bloke on the Range If I remember right, something like 20 or so for him (about the same as you) and 18 or 19 for me. If we had more practice, we could have done better (I also feel of we'd been sitting instead of prone it could have been better since we don't have to move our heads to run the bolt). I may also do an M1 Garand mad minute just for the hell of it since I can't find any video on KZbin of anyone being that silly :P

[@BlokeontheRange]

Wait a couple of weeks and I'm being that silly, or become a $5 patron and you can already see it :) I'm sure if I practiced I could possibly get 1 more prone, and standing supported possibly more since it gets your head back and there's less rifle movement. But according to BotR doctrine: PRACTICE IS CHEATING :D :D :D

[@VCBird6]

Bloke on the Range Aha, good to know. Oh lord, what if you touch off something ridiculous, like people trying to Jerry Miculek a mad minute with an M1 to beat you, lol And does that mean cheating makes perfect? :P

[@BlokeontheRange]

Heh. Then I'll have to ... eugh... PRACTICE (aka "cheat") and do an even better one!

[@stemer1149]

It literally hurts seeing all that brass on the ground uncollected...

[@garyneilson1833]

As you are doing the Garand next would it be possible to do a mad minute on a Mosin Nagant ? This would then cover the 4 main rifles used during WWII. When you do the Garand watch out for the dreaded ping of the clip !!

[@gabemando7823]

Gary Neilson he is getting as many rifles for this as he can. I think he is doing a straight bolt mosin and a bent bolt one. Also working on Mas36, Lebel and others

[@BlokeontheRange]

The extractor on my bent bolt is weak - we'll probably use that bolt body with the rest of the bolt from The Chap's Finnish one so it'll be same rifle 2 different bolts.

[@gabemando7823]

Bloke on the Range ah yes, I remember when I was 15 I bought a 91/30 for $75. It was that cheap for a reason, it had a horrible extractor that was borderline useless, among other problems, even though the rifle is in great condition.

[@BlokeontheRange]

I'm kinda disappointed - I've had 2 back in the UK that were entirely problem free on the extractor front. But my 1952 Hungarian sniper one sometimes slips. I've got another one so I'll change it out and see if that improves things, otherwise Mr. File will become acquainted with Mr. Extractor.

[@gabemando7823]

Bloke on the Range I should try that, but honestly I don't care about my mosin anymore, there are other firearms that I prefer to shoot now. More accurate ones at that too.

[@F1nnyF6]

Thats an interesting set of tabs you have in that spreadsheet... :D

[@BlokeontheRange]

And there's some interesting stuff that's not yet in the spreadsheet but has been shot :D

[@siestatime4638]

Apparently, John Garand pronounced his name "GARE-und" (very similar to your second, Frenchified, pronunciation, without the Frenchification), but he did not seem to care how anybody else pronounced it, especially if they were buying rifles.

[@Deweyfd13]

Hey Bloke I am impressed with this series. Very interesting comparison and very cool approach. I noticed you have hinted at the P14 coming up. It makes me rather curious about the subject of chargers vs stripper clips, or rimmed vs rimless ammo. I have some experience with both (not near the same amount you do I am sure) and I've noticed rimless ammo being much easier to strip off the clips. I noticed how quickly you loaded this rifle. So I'm wondering how much of a difference do you think it would make, say P14 vs M1917 in .30-06? Do you think it would make any difference in the speed of the reloads?

[@BlokeontheRange]

You'll have to see. The No.4 reloads were quicker than the 98k reloads, but (spoiler alert) the P14 reloads with exactly the same clips (as in the very same ones in my shooting bag) suck completely and kill it. M17 won't have that issue.

[@Deweyfd13]

Bloke on the Range I'll be looking forward to it. My main curiosity is would Britain have been better off to have developed ammo without a rim (as I know they tried in 1913) during the interwar period, and would it have been an improvement to the reloadability of the No 4? My luck with chargers is not so good. Although it may be technique.

[@BlokeontheRange]

Wouldn't have been worth the cost. A trivial performance increase on charging (the issued ammo doesn't rimjam as I demonstrated) isn't worth the massive, massive cost of changing over ammo, having 2 incompatible cartridges in the system for decades, and all the other crap that goes with it when you're anticipating adopting a self-loader Any Moment Now When We Find One We Like And Are Prepared To Pay For and you'll change ammo when you do that.

[@BlokeontheRange]

Get your thumb right up against the charger so that it it was sharp it'd cut you, fingers under the wood, and push with your thumb. Watch the No.4 mad minute to see it done, or any of the other vids I've done on charger loading.

[@Deweyfd13]

Bloke on the Range ok thank you sir. Keep up the good work!

[@anthonyhayes1267]

I managed 17 on a greek "sticky out bolt" mauser. Do you find that the turned down bolt handle helps more bc of the middle finger technique or is the grabbability of the straight handle better?

[@BlokeontheRange]

Turned down bolt handle is superior in EVERY way for fast shooting.

[@ShaDOWDoG667]

I have that same sweater.

[@criticalcontainment]

this is off topic but does anyone know where I can get Swedish revolver ammo? if not can I use Swiss revolver ammo?

[@BlokeontheRange]

You are unlikely to be able to find either ;) Cut-down .32-20 cases are the way to go, and order an appropriate mould for your barrel diameter from www.accuratemolds.com

[@criticalcontainment]

thanks bloke i will try that.

[@BlokeontheRange]

Depending on how tight your revolver is, you might have to find someone with a lathe and thin the rims from the front.

[@criticalcontainment]

oh dear this sound like its going to be a rather involved processes.

[@tshaken]

Really enjoying this series, thanks!

[@hamm6035]

I am not seeing how the way you were manipulating the bolt on the 98K was any help at all. Did I miss something?

[@BlokeontheRange]

It's quicker to middle-finger it, which is part of the reason I got slower later when I couldn't do that any more and had to change my hand position to the wrist of the stock. Shooting fast is all about economy of movement and eliminating wasted movement.

[@minuteman4199]

Are those recycled stripper clips or new? Those were very slick reloads. In my army service I used FN C1A1s which, unlike the British version have an open body cover and a charger guide. We also had magazine charging tools so you could load a detatched magazine with stripper clips. The problem was that the rounds were so tight in the clips that it didn't actually work that well and most the time we just took the rds off the clip and loaded them one at a time.

[@BlokeontheRange]

They're probably post-war German production, and are certainly not new.

[@jodc2760]

Let me guess : the MAS 36 will have better split statistics than the Karabiner 98K but worst than the Mq 31 and the No4 . The 1914 Pattern will have better statistics than the Mauser but worst than the MAS. The Berthier and Lebel will have the worst statistics.

[@Luthtar]

The Yugoslav mausers WERE functionally different from German ones. Their receiver was a bit shorter than a K98s, so parts interchangability was limited. Very important for a German armourer after 1941 to know. Also the Yugoslav guns have a heavier barrel and a proper handguard, so there's that. Also, 8-10 rounds on a two-way range sounds fairly realistic for any bolt gun given that you won't have a target constantly, might be busy being shot at, etc.. Sort of like how we say an M16 can fire 60-90 rounds a minute instead of how many mag dumps you can do in a minute. Of course, a rapid fire drill couldn't hurt, but ze footzloggers are zere for carry rounds of the MG, not fight you silly Inselaffe!

[@TheHaighus]

I think the idea is that you do something like this when the rifle group of the squad/section needs to lay down covering fire for the machine gun group, for example if the machine gun group is reloading or needs to relocate to another position. It wouldn't be a typical occurence, but sometimes you need riflemen to suppress the enemy rather than the machine gunner. This is essentially why everybody has moved to fully automatic issue rifles, despite the fact every squad has one or two machine guns already- more ability to suppress the foe and engage in manouevres.

[@dhananjaychafale6545]

I can understand these flaws but why u.s and many armies adopted this rifle as their standard issued rifle can you explain.

[@BlokeontheRange]

The US did not adopt the Kar98k as a standard issue rifle. Other armies did because they were easily available and aggressively marketed.

[@dhananjaychafale6545]

@@BlokeontheRange they copied mauser98 in Springfield m1903.

[@BlokeontheRange]

@@dhananjaychafale6545 1903 Springfield is a heavily modified (and improved) Mauser type system, but it's not specifically a Mauser 98 copy. Plus, this video is specifically about the 98k, which came much later.

[@macy725]

Why do you think the Germans did not include rapid fire in their doctrine? I've heard in the past the riflemen supported the mg while in the US and UK doctrine it's reversed. Not sure if this is true though.

[@BlokeontheRange]

No idea why they didn't. But the UK doctrine is MG dominated in the same way as the German, and the US didn't have a proper LMG at squad level anyway.

[@nicholaspatton5590]

Are bolts on new-ish rifles usually "stiff?" I have an M48A and the bolt stiffs up sometimes right before I pull it back all the way. In that case I push it forward again then yank back hard. Sorry this is not very descriptive.

[@nicholaspatton5590]

Assuming the rifle has not been fired much as I heard many were stored and inspected every 5 years or so.

[@makotoyuki2199]

How much hotter is the barrel after literally only one round is fired?

[@kirkmooneyham]

I know this video is quite old now, but I do have one question: would the fuller handguard on a Yugoslavian M24/47 or M48 make a difference with the heat issue?

[@jmac5009]

My opinion would be yes. Except the rear sight and the exposed part of the receiver

[@CountArtha]

WELL, IT WAS GOOD ENOUGH TO WIN TWO WORLD WA-Oh, never mind.

[@Gungeek]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/jIKxgHtvfsSBarc you might like this :)

[@ThePlebicide]

Bloke, I'm wondering, how much experience do you have with the Mauser? I know you have shot a lot on No.4s and K31s, so do you think your experience level allows you to shot faster with them? Please keep the videos coming.

[@BlokeontheRange]

I think the ergonomics allows me to shoot faster with them ;) The trick with shooting fast is minimising wasted movement, and some designs allow far less wasted movement.

[@BlokeontheRange]

Further to last - I have far more 98k trigger time than either MAS36 or P14 trigger time, and you'll have to see how they went in future videos!

[@jancz357]

czech mausers vz.24 has extended handguard exactly where you had your fingers, maybe they thought about it? also wasn'T the reason germans didn't have their version of "mad minute" because they relied on machine guns to do the work?

[@BlokeontheRange]

The Spanish M43's also have a rearwardly-extended handguard, presumably for the same reasons. The "mad minute" thing dates from pre-WW1, where LMG's were not really a big thing, and certainly not at small-unit level. Also, the British WW2 doctrine was also based around the BREN doing the majority of the work, contrary to popular belief (a British infantryman carried more ammo intended for the BREN than for his own rifle - early war 2 BREN mags and 50 rounds for his rifle, late war 2 BREN mags + 50 intended for refilling BREN mags + 50 for his own rifle).

[@jancz357]

cool, didn't know that BREN was so essential (my patriotic senses are tingling - I'm czech) :D

[@SgtKOnyx]

bloodygentleman And it most certainly is not "too accurate"

[@jancz357]

too accurate - a good flaw to have :D

[@prinzeugenvansovoyen732]

well those germans were some ingenious people they take the gun thats suted for mowing down allied soldiers when a crowd comes running and one reliable for snapshots and "sniping"

[@MrJohnycomelately21]

Does the massive bolt and action not really hamper the mad minute with a K98?

[@BlokeontheRange]

Yes it does. It makes it a lot of hard work to cycle.

[@MrJohnycomelately21]

Bloke on the Range I can imagine, having to move your head out of the way with every shot!

[@KJ-tr6cn]

I apologize for the inconvienence, but can someone include a link to the spreadsheet?

[@wierdalien1]

Is this after you futzed the extractor claw or before? Plus the mauser really launches the brass clear

[@BlokeontheRange]

Given that it runs flawlessly, it's after filing the ever loving hell out of it. Couldn't have got 5 rounds out of it, let alone 20, with it in its previous state :)

[@wierdalien1]

Bloke on the Range right I didnt realise it was that bad pre-futzing.

[@roarkkaufman9339]

Do a mad minute on a m249. I bet the enfield still is faster

[@paladin50554]

Roark Kaufman I demand a minigun mad minute. Let's see if it actually lives up to the hype!

[@ГаврилоПринцип-и7ф]

I know that you hate Mosin but don't discriminate mate, include it in this series. Also I would like to see the stats about Madsen M47 if you can get one.

[@Stellar001100]

Have you done a mad minute with an Arisaka Type 99 yet?

[@BlokeontheRange]

Nope. Not seen a single one in Switzerland, nor the ammo for them...

[@Stellar001100]

Oh... er... how bout the Dutch Mannlicher?

[@zachariaszut]

Maybe you shouldn't give the Mauser the middle finger. You point technical aspects like distortion of the target and finger tip cooking which are associated with firing in rapid succession. Interesting points. I do not think the Mauser was conceived for that though. For rapid fire the Germans had the MG34 and then the MG42, the pistol calibre MP38 and then MP40 and finally the Sturmgewehr with its intermediate rifle calibre Kurzpatrone 43. In WWII they still had horses and bolt action rifles... In modern war times the bolt action rifle has a role in precision long range shooting. In Afghanistan local tribesmen nowadays use your rapid succession firing Lee Enfield for slow or single fire long range (400-500 yards and more) precision open sights shooting. Now, back to WWI, where the mad minute was born, I think. The issue here I believe may be summarized by the quote: '[...]Not so the German army which quickly produced a version of Maxim's invention (the Maschinengewehr 08) in large quantities at a Spandau arsenal; by the time war broke out in August 1914 the Germans had 12,000 at their disposal, a number which eventually ballooned to 100,000. In contrast the British and French had access to a mere few hundred equivalents when war began.' www.firstworldwar.com/weaponry/machineguns.htm Without the necessary amount of machine guns the British had to make do with what they had, and make do they did and along with their Allies they won. The 'make do' was the 'mad minute'.

[@thebotrchap]

I'm not aware of any period military bolt action rifle conceived for that party trick. It's just that some are more ergonomically amenable to it than others.

[@BlokeontheRange]

The rapid fire thing wasn't conceived due to disparity in MG's in 1914 - it's from the 1909 Musketry Regulations, born out of the lessons learned from the Boer War. The Boers were not exactly swimming in MG's ;) And by the start of WW2, the British were issuing 1 BREN per 8 men; the Germans one MG34 or other leMG per 10 men at full strength :)

[@zachariaszut]

Alright. And now for something completely different: an exercise in arithmetic. 1 BREN at best 520 rounds/min divided by 8 men equals 65 shots per head. 1 MG38 at best 900 rounds/min divided by 10 men equals 90 shots per head. A distinct kraut advantage I find...

[@thebotrchap]

Arithmetic ultimately didn't help with the final outcome though did it ;-D

[@BlokeontheRange]

You can't physically fire 520 rounds a minute out of a BREN or 900 rounds a minute out of an MG34.........

[@Lillvappe]

No mad minute mosin?

[@BlokeontheRange]

Not in a video about a 98k, no. Patience, one will come.

[@Lillvappe]

Love these series! You really put everything into thought. Ill be waiting patiently for the next episode!

[@BlokeontheRange]

Thanks.

[@VCBird6]

More like an Angry Hour if he has to beat the bolt open, lol

[@BlokeontheRange]

We'll be doing the Mosin with brass-cased ammo, just like we did the 98k. Might do steel cased ammo later to show the difference :D

[@MrPhil360]

Are you going to do this with any other rifles?

[@BlokeontheRange]

This is the third video in this series...

[@flolow6804]

Maybe your are right on the mad minute thing but guys! for real! There's a reason why the kar98k was the main german army rifle in the war 1.If you look at a german inanterie squad the guys with the karabiners were just there to support the MG-gunner. The mg gunner had a suppresing role and the rifel men had to pick of targets one by one or cover the mgs movment. You dont need to fire 20+ rounds per gun per minute its just dumb and a wast of ammo. If you do 5 well aimed shots it has the same effekt on the moral and you probably get more enemys. 2. The gun was cheaper to build 3. Due to it beeing lighter then the guns of there enemys the soldiers were more mobile and in general infanterie fomations could move faster from place to place. Maybe its the only reason why the blitzkrieg worked for so long. Hoe knows

[@BlokeontheRange]

1 is not fundamentally different to the UK section organisation, contrary to popular belief. 2 yeah, it was a bit cheaper than a No.4 (as far as you can compare prices), but it was still more expensive than a Stgw 44. Which means they were doing something very right with their state of the art assault rifle and something very wrong with their bolt actions 3 Not sure a couple of hundred grams on the rifle makes all that difference ;) Now we can always talk about the total loadout difference between DE and UK - on paper, all the MG ammo, aside from that loaded in the MG, is carried by 3 of 10 germans (one of whom had no hands free for his own rifle so didn't get one), whereas it's carried by 7 of 8 (or 9 of 10, depending on the period) Brits.

[@BlokeontheRange]

Further to last - re. your 20+ rounds point. Firstly, a late or post-war test showed that the high rates of fire were indeed effective. But in any case, and it's a point I make in the as-yet unpublished M1 Garand video, is that the less time you spend on "things other than aiming and firing" enables you to be more effective at a given rate of fire. At a given rate of say 15 rounds a minute, an M1 is far more accurate on target than a No.4, which is more effective than a 98k, which is more effective than a Berthier M16 since you're spending less and less of the minute on actually shooting as you go through that list. With the Berthier, it's literally all you can do to fire 15 rounds at all, and the spread on target reflects this. The 98k gives you about 5-potential-rounds-worth of margin which you can translate into better accuracy, the No.4 about 10, the M1 about 20.

[@flolow6804]

Bloke on the Range 1. y so what ? My point was that the rifleman just didnt have to fire 20 rounds because it wasnt their job to do it. Im mean i liked your video and the way you presented it but its not a valid point to say the gun is bad because it cant be used in rapid fire. 2. Y but still thats something different. A late war gun is nearly always better then an early war one. The fakt that its cheaper(=easier to produce) is a major point in modern war. 3. First of all the 200-300g and then the fakt that if you use more ammo due to rapid fire tactics you run out of it earlier or you have to carry more with you. I dont think that you can underastimate it But y i have to say im not an weapon specialist (as you've probably seen🤗) i just wanted to give my opinion because i think the video was a little bit onesided

[@febrian7242]

Nicee

[@fiasco7P]

link for standkyting guys please.

[@SoltyII]

How about Mosin Nagant 91/30? :)

[@sean_jackson314]

trash

[@Albert_lm]

what's that weird suit he's wearing?

[@BlokeontheRange]

we have a vid on this kzbin.info/www/bejne/qIa0fKZjbNCFbKM

[@Albert_lm]

Bloke on the Range ty for answering

[@pnutz_2]

of course there's no rapid fire training for the rifles - that's the mg's job

[@BlokeontheRange]

And if the MG needs to move or is knocked out?

[@pnutz_2]

I didn't say it was a good idea

[@Thomas62374]

I still find the maxim about bolt action rifles to be true, "The Germans brought a hunting rifle, the Americans brought a target rifle (the m1903), the British brought a battle rifle and the Russians brought a rifle." The problems Bloke pointed out with the k98 make sense if you think of it as a hunting rifle over a battle rifle.

[@sevenproxies4255]

The developers of PUBG need to look at this video. The cycling action of the kar98k in the game is slow as fuck.

[@onkelmicke9670]

Remington Rolling Block please!

[@thebotrchap]

Onkel Micke If I could find one of the 8mm Lebel ones I’d love to!

[@thebotrchap]

Simon Smith If we shoot outdoors it would be interesting to run some of my BP single shot rifles and a few repeaters like the Mannlicher 1886 and Vetterli

[@Westwoodshadowgaming]

You should just start flippantly calling the M1 Garand "The Pinger" So that people can't bitch about you mispronunciation Garand.

[@Treblaine]

It's interesting to see how the Mauser was held back more for the small details that weren't fundamental to the design like how much of the barrel was covered by wood and how high the sights are above the barrel. Almost everyone who copied the Mauser 98 didn't configure the "98 design" with those sort of problems. At least not to the same extent. I can finally see how this is a "hunting-rifle" it has far too many considerations for snap shooting and doesn't seem to care about rapid fire on the line at all. And it's not really for anything fundamental to the design, it's little detail that make a substantial difference. And Germans did this TWICE, they RE-ADOPTED the 98 in the K98k form in the 1930's, is this evidence of an endemic hole in German armed forces' approach to combat? Or does this corroborate their extreme focus on the machine gun as bearing most of the responsibility for achieving and maintaining fire supremacy and riflemen were there to carry ammo boxes for machine guns and "plug the gaps" that the machine gun couldn't fill. On the other hand, maybe they weren't that happy but what were they going to do? Re-quipping with something like an SMLE could hardly be justified for a 25% increase in initial rate of fire, which was mainly from the larger magazine which they had already tried before with extended base-plates. But the Germans DID adopt a new rifle, after many attempts they succeeded with the StG-43 and also many semi-automatic rifles in the same full-power service cartridge. They obviously weren't THAT satisfied with the Mauser and they made about half a dozen attempts to replace it, they just weren't going to replace it with ANOTHER bolt action rifle. The British and Commonwealth forces that used the .303 SMLE didn't make any real effort during the war to upgrade to any sort of faster firing rifle, either an improved bolt action or a semi-automatic rifle.

[@TheHaighus]

The British also built their WWII sections around light machine guns- riflemen carried more ammo for the squad BREN than for their own SMLE. No, I think the key reason is that the interwar Germans were forced to modernise their military massively in a short space of time. There was only so much funding and industrial capacity available for that rearmament, and when it comes down to it, building more aircraft and submarines and artillery and tanks and even machine guns is more important than overhauling the infantry rifle, which probably has the smallest impact of the lot. Although an argument could be made that the resources spent on battleships would be better spent on rifles. Having said that, you raise a good point that many of the issues with the K98 could've been sorted with a refurb without replacing the rifles, which wouldn't have been so expensive. I suppose they just prioritised other things.

[@Treblaine]

TheHaighus. Yeah, I don't think the OKW screwed up small arms that much considering they adopted the MG34 and MG42 in sufficient numbers. A belt fed machine gun for each squad made far more difference to firepower than each rifleman getting a semi auto rifle like a grand. A soldier armed with an MG34 or MG42 could quite easily achieve a 200 round "mad minute". Not as easily with a BREN, but still if you want to increase a squads firepower by 100% it makes far more sense than equip each squad with one machine gun than have to procure and maintain NINE semi auto rifles. Of course what would be ideal would be both a good squad machine gun AND semi auto rifles. But one is a lot easier to get than the other and should be a priority. Machine guns can also be set up to have a far longer effective range than any grouping of rifles, with an MG in a tripod and using binoculars to locate enemy forces and watch the fall of a concentrated regular cone of fire, and using the elevation and traversal mechanism of the tripod, then the full long range capability of "full power" cartridges can be very effectively utilised. PS: another aspect that won't be apparent on civilian gun ranges is grenades. They were the ultimate weapon for clearing out positions once you had closed on them. Suppress with machine guns to close with grenades was a brutally effective tactic.

[@TheHaighus]

Treblaine Exactly- more bang for your buck with a squad mg than 9 semi autos. The US kind of went the opposite route, but had the artillery support to overcome any short fall.

[@Emdee5632]

A bit far fetched maybe, but maybe the Germans didn't need a speed doctrine for the Kar98k - or at least not during WW2. They had the MG34 and later the MG42. I thought their doctrine was based on those

[@BlokeontheRange]

But by WW2 the UK doctrine was the same, based around the BREN as the section's main firepower.

[@Emdee5632]

I will never understand why Americans are so completely obsessed by owning all those guns. I like learning about the history and the mechanics of firearms but i don't love them. My time in the Royal Dutch Army (1986-1987, the FAL rifle) was enough for me.

[@sevenproxies4255]

Marc Dezaire: It's not just americans. I'm european and I love firearms. Probably a bit more than the average american. If I had the money, the guns in my house would probably be enough to outfit a small army.

[@Oldhogleg]

I guess being Europeans you guys weren't aware of the standard WWII military training that includes the use of the sling as a shooting sling on the M1 Garand? Had you did, and had you used it as such, I suspect your round count would have increased, and your group size would have shunk with the M1 Garand.

[@BlokeontheRange]

On the contrary. I'm totally aware of it. But since nobody's going to be tying themselves into a rifle like that on the battlefield, it's rather inappropriate for a test such as this (and is, indeed, forbidden by the "Mad Minute" competition rules in the UK). I believe I may have even mentioned something along those lines here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/aXrSaoqbaMShjJY

[@tuker0833]

IPSC in 1890's be like:

[@iandownman5119]

During WWII I believe the German military noticed these flaws which is why it was replaced by the gewehr 41 and 43. It still had a use though, as it was regularly fitted with a scope and was used primarily as a sniper weapon which would be fired slower at long distances.

[@BlokeontheRange]

Sorry, not really - it was the mainstay infantry rifle throughout the whole war, supplemented by small numbers of other things such as G43's, StG44's and so on. And it was also supplemented by a metric butt tonne of captured rifles, since they never had enough 98k's for their needs (I have the stats in a book on the topic). And only relatively small numbers were made up as sniper rifles.

[@ericmckinley7985]

I would be interested in the title of the book which is the source of the Germans using captured rifles. It'd be a nice afternoon skim.

[@Ben_not_10]

Of all the 98 Mauser short rifles I still think the Kar98k is by far the worst and most lazily set up of all the family.

[@robertstevens1782]

You should re-crown your rifles shown here.

[@BlokeontheRange]

We are not at home to Bubba.

[@stcredzero]

I hate to say it, but Iraqiveteran8888 had a Mosin he could shoot faster than you’re shooting the Mauser. (Apparently, he spent a lot of time doing some impressive gunsmithing on it.) Okay, in a bit you get a bit faster and hit about his speed.

[@BlokeontheRange]

link?

[@robertstevens1782]

Russian Mosin Mad Minute ?

[@Gungeek]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/jIKxgHtvfsSBarc

[@whitespacemarines4308]

M48!

[@whitespacemarines4308]

I LOVE All the rifles,.....but if I HAD to choose,...I would take the Mauser EVERY day of the week,...and twice on Sundays! They all have their strengths and weaknesses, but the Mauser is the Most dependable,..IMHO.

[@yhee1030]

Hmm so spread out...

[@SootHead]

Consider doing a 1903 Springfield. It was in common use early in the war and would be less "boring" than the Garand (which I won't find boring at all).

[@BlokeontheRange]

Trust me, we're going to do everything we can get our grubby mitts on.

[@MaxwellAerialPhotography]

Springfield are literally just American Mausers.

[@SnowyEvans]

Your face is looking a bit thin, too many mad minutes

[@markusery1312]

He's as slow a molasses. Wasted a lot of time trying to work the bolt.

[@BlokeontheRange]

Lol. I for one can't wait to see your vid doing it faster under the same conditions. And like me, you get exactly 1 attempt.

[@jarnorantanen8737]

Why not P14 or P17 in series?

[@smHttr]

P14 is hiding in the spreadsheet

[@BlokeontheRange]

This is the third video in the series... Patience! Ultimately it will include EVERYTHING manually-operated and military (or early semi-auto) that we can get our hands on.

[@azogtheeternallyunskilled9704]

Bloke on the Range So that means i’ll get a mosin mad minute one day?

The Garand is only going to be boring because you'll get 50 rounds off on target with almost no issues at all. Sometimes, boring is good.

[@BlokeontheRange]

50 is a little bit of an over-estimation ;)

[@BlokeontheRange]

Then you might be pleasantly surprised /teaser :)

[@Haaraff]

I'm curious what the Bloke has to say about mirage on the M1 Garand. Gave mine a try on our 300 meter range, and mirage became a problem right after the first clip.

[@Mildcat743]

Lol typical britboy bias against the best rifle ever *gargles about more Mausers being made than any other service rifle ever*

[@MaxwellAerialPhotography]

he's said very good things abouthte mauser before, all he's saying is that the design of the K98k is not as condisive to rapid fire as the design of the Lee Enfield. Listen to what he's actuallly saying instead of hearing what you want to hear.

[@BlokeontheRange]

(first poster was clearly being sarcastic ;) )

[@nikolai5884]

You should learn how to cycle the action without lifting your elbow, i shoot a sauer 200 str (5 round box magazine) and on good days i'm able to put 16 hits on a 30cmx25cm target in 25 seconds.