I congratulate you on the cool acquisitions/additions to your collection. ;o)
And thanks for the information.
I have never personally owned a Broomhandle Mauser '96 or '98, or even fired one, though I have handled a couple and looked through the sights. They are beautiful and elegant in their way, yet they feel a little ... *unbalanced* in my hand. I am more accustomed to Browning designs such as the Browning Hi-Power (a.k.a. the P-35, GP-35, Model of 1935, etc.).
The late, lamented Col. Jeff Cooper developed an interest in the Broomhandle Mauser toward the end of his life, and "blogged" a little about his general impressions of the weapon. IIRC, he seemed to feel that it must have usually served better as a carbine (with the optional shoulder stock attached), than as a pistol. I'll see if I can find a link to what he said.
Hm, well, here is one of his comments:
' We have had occasion to play around at some length with the Broomhandle Mauser during the last few months. We find this to be a curiously efficient instrument for its task, which is a very curious task.
It was never a GI sidearm, but it was available on private purchase by officers who were called upon to buy their own sidearms, and it worked pretty well for this, since it was never a proper defensive pistol, but served as a sort of "kit gun" for officers who packed it in its wooden shoulder stock and had available an emergency carbine for unusual situations.
Used this way, and fired normally from the carbine mode, it did a pretty good job for the junior infantry officer. You carried the weapon normally in your luggage in its wooden stock, but only went to war as the circumstance demanded. This was not the way it was employed by Churchill at Omdurman, but it did him well, nonetheless, on that occasion.
Of course the 30 caliber cartridge for the original Broomhandle is not much of a combat round, but neither is the 9mm Parabellum. They both go bang when you press the trigger, and you do have the carbine option available.'
As I have previously noted, I do not think that Fairbairn of Shanghai (who actually faced it there on several occasions) would have agreed with Cooper about the ineffectiveness of the .30 Mauser pistol round. On the contrary, he remarked that it was especially feared, and that the mere mention of it would send men in search of bullet-proof equipment.
Ozy
And I stood where I did be; for there was no more use to run; And again I lookt with my hope gone.
reply
share
dcmakm47
14 years ago
I have an argentine copy of te brownig Hi Power. it's previous owner did a bad trigger job on it. everytime you fired a round , the hammer would follow the slide to the half cock notch. it sat in my safe for 8 years till one day i figured "wtf". and got out my sharrpening stones. i stoned the sear a little at a time reasseming it, and taking it apart till i had a safe trigger . it is a little heavier, but breaksclean and is safe.
but i'll still grabb my .45 if given a choice.
I kept delaying my purchase of a shoulder stock for my broom. now they are 170 bucks. i paid that for my pistol.!!
asto the .30 mauser 7.62 tokarev round, it is reported to be able to punch body armor... but i use my pistols for paper punching only...
jeff cooper was a favorite of mine, i reallyy enjoyed his musings in g&a mag. i had an old link to his articles. i'll look it up, thanks for the heads up...
reply
share
ozymandias312
14 years ago
Indeed, trigger pulls have always been a problem with the Browning Hi-Power (a.k.a. P-35, GP-35, etc.). Relatively few professional gunsmiths have been successful at improving them without creating just the sort of hammer-follow problem you describe.
It sounds like you should go into business as a gunsmith yourself, if you could actually *fix* a badly botched trigger job. ;o) Really, good for you!
Col. Cooper was a great and good and generous man (he was gracious enough to answer several of my letters), even if a few of his opinions were debatable (as in this case). He was right at least 90-plus percent of the time.
"Armor-piercing" is a relative term. It depends on the armor, doesn't it? In fact, I do believe that the .30 Mauser/7.62 Tokarev cartridge may be able to pierce some modern light, "soft" (textile, e.g. Kevlar) body armor. "Hard" armor of metal or ceramic would be another matter, of course.
Ozy
And I stood where I did be; for there was no more use to run; And again I lookt with my hope gone.
reply
share
dcmakm47
14 years ago
i am a licensed firearms dealer. have been since 1989. i have been fixing guns all my life. but that mostly consited of replacing parts. i just didn't want to spend 20 bucks on a new sear... i like the browing, but i want a Inglis made copy. they made them in Canada during ww 2 , most went to china. many were made to use a holster/stock like the broomhandle pistol...
FN made a run of the tangent sight model ( adj to 500 meters i think) very cool, only 495 dealer. but couldn't justify it at the time..
more later..
reply
share
ozymandias312
14 years ago
Outstanding! ;o) Best of luck!
I may not have made it clear before, but I too prefer a 1911-type design in .45 ACP myself -- that is, when I can get a-hold of one that actually works, and which has decent sights and a decent trigger pull. Beyond that I am not very picky.
My impression is that it is a bit easier to get a good, crisp, "creep"-free trigger pull with a 1911 than with a Browning Hi-Power, on account of the latter having a more complicated "linkage," with more moving parts and articular/bearing surfaces involved.
But I admit I am no gunsmith. As "Oddball" said of his Sherman tank in_Kelly's Heroes_(1970?), "I just ride 'em, man; I dunno what makes 'em go." ;o)
Ozy
And I stood where I did be; for there was no more use to run; And again I lookt with my hope gone.
reply
share
dcmakm47
14 years ago
I pretty much like all guns. my favorit is my dad's m1911 ( colt frame made in 1917, and a remington-rand top). but it mean to much to risk as a carry piece. as are my lugers., I have 'cyq' p38 nearby when i need a pistol, and a rock-ola m1 carbine with a 30 rd mag loaded amd a stock pouch w/ 2 -15 rd mags ready to go, if i have more time.
and just in case a few 30 rd mags ready for my norinco ak. but i have to know the shtf before hand to get to it. ( all my stuff is locked up in a safe)...
i plan on getting Springfield armory's ww 2 model 1911a1. but i can't decide on blue or parkerized...
reply
share
ozymandias312
14 years ago
Personally, I prefer parkerized to blued, but that's just me.
Make sure you have plenty of magazines for all your guns. That's one of the first things they're going to go after, again, just like in '94. They're going to go after ammo and reloading components (especially primers) too. Stock up while you still can.
You seem like a good guy. Good luck, brother. We're in a world of $#i+ now.
"Courage and stout heart."
Ozy
And I stood where I did be; for there was no more use to run; And again I lookt with my hope gone.
reply
share
dcmakm47
14 years ago
i have a good mix of parkerized, and blued stuff. i just like the looks of a good blued .45. as to mags, i picked up a bunch of east german surplus ak 47 mags. paid 4 bucks a piece for used, i even bought a few niw at 6 bucks each. coulda aved the extra money as the used were in great shape. looked like they had never been loaded. gmags for my m1 carbine, and a whole mess of clips for my m1 Garand. i even have 3 mags for a BAR if i ever run across one. lol. only cost 1 dollar each, figured what the heck, annd got them.. later ..
reply
share
dcmakm47
14 years ago
i may go parked, as most all my us arms are parked. but then again there is something about blued handguns...
reply
share