Go Back   CMP Forums > CMP Sales > CMP Bolt Action Rifles
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 02-12-2018, 12:07 AM
lapriester lapriester is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cobb, N California
Posts: 16,123
Exclamation

Quote:
Originally Posted by T38Carbine View Post
FYI-the rifle has no mechanical safety!!

This and you also have to remove the front sight cover/band to adjust windage and, often, you have to take a file to the dovetail after you drift the front sight in order to put the front cover/band back on. They are a pretty accurate rifle otherwise with the strangest bolt handle you ever saw. I read the French troops were taught to carry the rifle in the field with the bolt open because of the lack of a safety. The rifle was designed for the typical French volley fire technique rather than a carry around infantry rifle. I can imagine it would have been a bad experience when a German rose out of cover with his ready to fire K98 and you had to close your bolt before being able to take a shot.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 02-12-2018, 03:43 AM
moose moose is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 1,131
Default

The MAS-36 is an oddball. It wasn't actually intended to be the front line rifle.

The MAS-36 would be issued to truck drivers, cooks, whoever wasn't going to be on the front lines. (like our M1 carbine)

The MAS-40 (which eventually became the MAS-44, then the MAS-49, and then the MAS-49/56) was supposed to be front line rifle.

Both rifles shared the 7.5 French ammo.

Sadly the VERY STINKING DAY the MAS-40 was put into mass production the Germans invaded. So the MAS-36 was forced into a role it was never intended for. Front line use. And even then they only had 250,000 of those.

After the war, the French went back to the same concept, and there were many MAS-36 rifles made after WWII
__________________
US Nylon Field gear 1967 to 2005
http://inrd.gotdns.com/alice

Last edited by moose; 02-12-2018 at 03:50 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-12-2018, 04:01 PM
RC20 RC20 is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 492
Default

Quote:
Nothing would have prevented the disaster that destroyed the French ground troops... unless the British had sacrificed their men in a effort to hold the Germans while the French were rescued at Dunkirk. As it is ... the French were sacrificed. The British were rescued. Sincerely. bruce.
I hope the OP does not mind this going off topic.

While the Brits were intent on rescuing their troops, WC did ensure that French Troops were taken off as well. Something close to 50%. Most of Those same troops elected to go back to France (112,000) and then wound up in brutal prison camps after the surrender. It was a horribly hard time and hard decisions were made (including attacking the French Vichy fleet)

The British troops went on to fight in Greece, N. Africa, Asian theater.

It should be noted that it was the French leadership that put the debacle into motion not British. Britain sent a major part of their army to France (and a great many impossible to replace Hurricane fighters and pilots that were lost).

Failure of the French to fortify the Ardnesses allowed the German tank forces to run wild on the Allies South Flank. You can't hold a line when you are being flanked by major forces.

The French troops when properly led well fought well, but they were generally badly led the the upper command was a complete bolox up.

Removing troops from a fighting perimeter is an almost impossible job (which the remaining French troops did hold and did a stunningly heroic job under local French leaders)

It was British ships and personal that did the sea lift, and it was British fighter aircraft that covered the evacuation.

The British also subsequent sent another substantial force to France that fought and also was almost lost when the front once again collapsed. Those troops and Czech and Polish troops were also evacuated which went on to be the core of the British forces forward.

There was nothign simple blame or otherwise, but the underlying aspect was that the French leadership was inept, corrupt and simply did not care and they were totally deficient in modern aircraft and modern armor formation operations despite what they saw occur in Poland.

Last edited by RC20; 02-12-2018 at 07:08 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 02-12-2018, 04:05 PM
RC20 RC20 is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 492
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lapriester View Post
This and you also have to remove the front sight cover/band to adjust windage and, often, you have to take a file to the dovetail after you drift the front sight in order to put the front cover/band back on. They are a pretty accurate rifle otherwise with the strangest bolt handle you ever saw. I read the French troops were taught to carry the rifle in the field with the bolt open because of the lack of a safety. The rifle was designed for the typical French volley fire technique rather than a carry around infantry rifle. I can imagine it would have been a bad experience when a German rose out of cover with his ready to fire K98 and you had to close your bolt before being able to take a shot.
You likely figured out to keep a round in it and your finger off the trigger!
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 02-12-2018, 06:34 PM
Oldvetteman Oldvetteman is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Larkspur, Colorado
Posts: 990
Default

Calvary: The Bible, Jesus
Cavalry: Soldiers on horses

Now we all know the difference. Sorry, pet peeve of mine.
__________________
Everything I own needs fixin'
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 02-13-2018, 07:48 AM
hebes405 hebes405 is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Barberton, OH
Posts: 203
Default

The MAS 36 is very underated. It has a smaller build, really narrow, would make a handy brush gun. I love mine. As far as accuracy is, a decent rifle could clear an SR target. The faults of the rifle for target shooting IMO are the front sight, which is like 15 MOA , the awful trigger and some what lack of spare parts.
If you are looking to pick up one, the are tons of parts that are numbered. Lots of places to check. The most collectable ones are letter L and lower, should have a black laquor finish. A really nice prewar one goes for about $6. The more common post war, parkarized finish, likely import marked, can be had for under 4.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 02-14-2018, 10:15 AM
lapriester lapriester is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cobb, N California
Posts: 16,123
Exclamation

Quote:
Originally Posted by hebes405 View Post
The MAS 36 is very underated. It has a smaller build, really narrow, would make a handy brush gun. I love mine. As far as accuracy is, a decent rifle could clear an SR target. The faults of the rifle for target shooting IMO are the front sight, which is like 15 MOA , the awful trigger and some what lack of spare parts.
If you are looking to pick up one, the are tons of parts that are numbered. Lots of places to check. The most collectable ones are letter L and lower, should have a black laquor finish. A really nice prewar one goes for about $6. The more common post war, parkarized finish, likely import marked, can be had for under 4.
Since it has no mechanical safety it would actually make a It's pretty hazardous "brush gun." It certainly wouldn't be my first choice. It's such a clunky, ugly sort of rifle it probably wouldn't be even in my radar as a hunting rifle. Besides, as odd as they are, they keep going up in value and are harder to find any more. I virtually never see them in Gunshows any more and they used to be very common.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:16 AM.