Right? I got a tiny bit of metal shaving in my eye a few years ago. Had to go to the hospital to have it removed...It was one of the most painful things I’ve been through. Even after they took it out it still felt like it was still digging into my skull.
Damn... look at that joinery on the forend of the stock. Late 19th Century woodworkers were ridiculously skilled. So glad we live in the age of HD video so we can see those details in your videos, Ian.
@@joshuakarmann7488 no quite impressive really no doubt mass produced rifles wherent made by skilled artisans but smaller production scale rifles certainly where
@@JohnDoe-iw7zc just situational awareness in actual combat really, can see movement in peripheral vision and also I suppose you can use holdover at long range and see past the sights. If your gun has a lot of recoil you might find it easier to keep a target picture and see if what you shot at went down. Binocular vision could be useful within around 60 meters if your target is camouflaged but most soldiers would just be point shooting by then I'd think.
@@dentistguba well i always see double when ive tryed both open lol it seems to hurt my shooting on bow, gun, sligshot everything. Anything i might be doinf wrong
@@JohnDoe-iw7zc I'm a year late, but assuming you're right handed you want to aim with the left image. I can aim well enough with both eyes open unless I'm holding a small gun like a Beretta 950, but at the close ranges that would be used I figure I could still hit my target with both eyes open
@@dELTA13579111315 ok how in the fuck? How do you aim with your left image if that comes from your left eye which isn't lined up to the sights / optic. Having two eyes open is just distracting for me and it feels like all of you are skrewing with me to an extent lol
Did is the past participle of do. Since he already used a past participle he doesn't need to use past participle form of the main verb in the sentence. Hence 'He didn't (did not) see it coming is the correct form' (the person this was directed at has deleted the post)
I thought that "The System that Cost Paul Mauser an Eye" was a metaphor for something bad that happened because of the design for possible patent infringement or potential safety hazards for the buyers. But he actually, legit, lost his left eye from this rifle exploding.
It is really cool to see an early Mauser design. I had no idea they were tinkering with semiautomatic designs so early. I like the aesthetics of this rifle, the magazine and trigger guard remind me of the C96 Pistol. I wonder what about this rifle didn't work enough for Mauser to try offering it to the military.
I know I'm very late to this video, and Ian did a great overview of the mechanics, but why exactly was this never adopted? What were the weaknesses and failings of this particular flapper-delayed system?
It makes sense to me, considering that it is a very early self loading rifle and out of battery safeties are not nearly as relevant on manual repeating rifles. It is due to incident that out of battery safeties are pretty much universal today
It is very easy to believe that it's obvious in retrospect, but if you're that guy making one of the first of a new type, then there are some things which only become obvious after an accident.
Umm my grandfather was a machinist and he was working on a spring loaded system of some sort it broke and it had enough force to go through his safety glasses and he lost his right eye (well the vision in it)
Wonderful action. I suspect a small modification to the firing pin mechanism would have negated the misfire issue. We're there any other problems with the flapper action? I don't see why this could not be developed for modern usage otherwise.
It's interesting how Mauser chose the 6x57mm cartridge which is similar to more modern cartridges like the 6.5mm Remington Magnum which was from the 1960's. It seems like Mauser was looking for a high performance rifle with a flatter shooting trajectory.
It's not that the militaries of the times weren't thinking about it, it's just that shit kept coming up, and they _really_ didn't wanna have fork over the cash and effort required to change out their entire weapons stockpile just as a certain massive conflict seems likely.
Don't forget that military doctrine & strategy of the day that drove the way that rifles were used on the battlefield is often what directly influenced choices like ammunition specs - and this typically gets left out of the "...how dumb were they to not know that an intermediate is the ONLY right choice in all of rifle history ever!!!" 20/20 discussions. A complete & utter lack of perspective of historical happenings typically leads contemporary humans to believe that the previous generations were a bunch of "dumb dumbs" that couldn't see the obvious, and that each and every person today is just oh so much smarter than their forefathers. The actual legitimate instances of militaries royally fucking up such choices as cartridge type/power - such as the good ol' red, white, n' blue NATO 7.62 - are actually few & far between(and often quickly corrected within pretty short order - ala NATO 5.56...). Go watch some C&Rsenal for thoroughly explained examples of military doctrine driving what many today just assume is a "dumb" choice(and, mind you, I'm not claiming that of anyone in here in particular). For example, volley fire accuracy, what with targets placed hundreds of yards down range almost PARALLEL to the ground(yea, NO SHIT! LOL), was a very standard & important test within rifle trials of the mid-late 1800s. And, mind you, volley fire was a necessary doctrine because of, 1) literal fog of war caused by old school black powder, and, 2) the utter lack of direct fire accuracy of so many of those early(yet at the time 'cutting edge') rifles. And of course, if volley fire is a critical military doctrine, then you're going to want a big, powerful round - such as .50 caliber, propelled by a truck load of black powder out of a big ol' 24" barrel. Obviously this wasn't quite THAT dramatic by the very late 1800s/early 1900s, but it certainly demonstrates the way that one or two variables can knock over the dominoes that lead to what today often appears to be the "wrong" choice. So, while one might say that Paul Mauser's choice of a very modern appearing intermediate cartridge was 'ahead of its time', another might say that it's nothing more than one of many reasons why his auto loading rifle wasn't adopted.
Nice, just been watching C&Rsenals videos on the Mauser 71, and saw a comment on one of them that he built one in rage that cost him his eye, good timeing
It looks good how come it wasn't successful rifle? What did it flop? He should just make sure it wouldn't be able to shoot if it was not fully locked P.S support your favorite guns channels and try to post your comments on every video just to show UA-cam we matter and gun Community is strong
It flopped when it popped and spooked Paul about the dangers and possibilies of out of battery detonations in self loaders. If that happened to me back then, I'd go "fuck that" and do what he did and drop the short recoil try and do everything I can to prevent any more cartridges from popping out of battery and save many a trooper's finger and eyes.
Pop quiz. How many successful military rifles (rifles only, not pistols or heavy machine guns or what have you) can you name that were short recoil operated? Or flapper locked? There's your answer.
The problem was a cartridge detonating before being fully locked into the chamber, I imagine after that accident Mouser basically shelved the entire rifle and went straight to designing one which couldn't possibly do that again.
Interesting that the rear sight is located at the back of the receiver, providing a much longer sight radius than most military rifles of this era, perhaps one of the first to do so????? Beautiful piece of craftsmanship.
Does this remind anyone else of looking at a roller - delayed system in reverse a bit? With a little bit of reworking with that in mind, we might have a rifle here. Let's say inside the "barrel beach extension" the flappers, instead of adding a delay in a gas action like an H&K, act as a disconnector for a floating firing pin (think a 80 series 1911).
What I believe is the most incredible aspect of auto loader/semi-auto rifle design history & evolution is that, at the conceivable end/"ideal conclusion" of the concept(which is essentially the AR and, arguably, the AK platforms of today), the answer to the basic fundamentals was right in front of EVERYONE's face - an automation of the bolt action rifle. This is all that a modern rotating bolt gas operated rifle action is, it's a conventional box magazine fed bolt action(rotating bolt utilizing locking lugs with conventional extraction & ejection) that is operated by gas pressure instead of the human hand & arm - at its most basic fundamentals, it's nothing more than an automated bolt action, and no other system has yet proven superior. We essentially watched a half century of work on a specific type of machine just to see it come full circle. Now, with that said, perfection is boring, while imperfection is much more interesting - what we've become accustomed to naming "character" because many are seemingly uncomfortable admitting that they prefer the flawed rather than the flawless. Myself, while I LOVE the odd & unusual(AKA, the so horribly flawed that they're now considered "rare" today just because they were surpassed by the functionally superior opposition, like this rather spectacular Mauser), I absolutely ADORE the roller locks, what a beautiful mechanism! But, there's still a reason why repeating rifles ended up with rotating bolt actions, and not a manually operated roller locks(...but, HOW COOL!!!) - just as the auto-loaders also ended up with rotating bolt actions. Talk about "over thinking it" just a bit - only toolem' a half to two-thirds of a century to rediscover what the obvious(seriously, is there a manually operated mass produced rifle of the last 75 or so years that ISN'T a bolt action?)! And, all they had to do was go hunting...
That's a cool thing I never noticed before, flappers locks are really similar in operation to roller locks. Is there any benefit to flappers over rollers though?
Mauser's daughter: built a new locking system? mr. Mauser : Yes Mauser's daughter: What did it cost? mr. Mauser : Everything (i could see with my left eye)
That seems like it should be an *extremely* strong mechanism, better than many contemporary semi-automatic actions. Odd it should have failed so terribly, even if it was an exploding cartridge. Did the gun itself survive I wonder? Perhaps Mauser had it melted down!
Maybe the safety is like a Mauser 98k, where all the way right is fire, middle is disconnected trigger but bolt can still be operated, and all the way left is safe, no trigger connection and no bolt operation?
Ian, when are you making a documentary about the Mauser family? I would love to have a historical analysis of the origins of the little machine shop in Oberndorf!
Interesting design. Never knew about this one, or that PUl had lost an eye. I bet the 6x57 was a good cartridge- probably a 100-110 gr or so bullet at 2600 fps or so. Makes sense. Those ballistics would be pretty close to the experimental 6mm SAW cartridge of the 1970's. A lot less recoil than the big cartridges of the day. Too bad it didn't catch on. I can't remember- what was the first gas-operated autoloader? Anyone know? Great video as always. Thank you
For that era, 6mm was not usually a good idea since although it was flat shooting and low recoil, it lacked stopping power especially at range. Both the Italians and Japanese who used 6.5mm cartridges switched to a heavier caliber because of poor stopping power and performance in machineguns. 6.5mm is certainly a good round for today when used in a semi/full auto rifle and because stopping power is less of a concern.
Talking about safety on mauser, the mauser 91 can shoot without the bolt being locked and i don't think the thin spring metal that should be depressed for disassembly would stop the bolt
I see the flaw of the design. It relies on using the front of the receiver to fully lock the gun. The locking track should have been on the bolt instead. If the bolt isn't fully forward, the gun shouldn't lock or drop the firing pin. If you can see the wedges, it's not locked. But the front of the receiver obscures that.
Ian, if you could make the perfect gun, based on all of your experience, how would you do it? You have seen some of the most niche guns, as well as some of the most versatile guns. You have seen and researched the issues of a good bit of these, if not all, and dissasembled a decent amount of them. What features would you implement? Would you go with the bullpup, or the standard style, or a more unique variant? I dont expect you to make it, as you are not a firearms manufacturer. I (and probably many of your viewers) think it would just be interesting to see an expert's opinion on the matter. Try posting a poll regarding the idea if you're interested and see what others think.
he actually addressed this in a Q & A video. he has no interest in developing "the perfect gun", because he feels that firearms have pretty much already reached the pinnacle of development. barring some extreme new development (like laser weaponry), there's really no point. I kinda agree w/ you though, I'd love to see just a blueprint of what he'd come up w/
Hey Ian I might have asked this before, but similar thing to the m47 Medusa that was......it was a thing, Have you seen, or used the chiappa x-caliber? Its a m6 survival type setup but you can order with it the barrel inserts, so it goes from 12 gauge over 22lr to whatever insert you put in the top barrel, and those inserts come in 357mag/38spl, 9mm, .380, 40 s&w, 44mag, 45 acp, 410/45LC and 20 gauge. If you have not seen or used one, I would love to see you do a video one it, preferably with range testing included. Id love to see what you think after hands on experience. Thanks.
Interesting fact: Peter Paul Mauser's son-in-law just happened to be a surgeon of Opthalmology. His son-in-law removed the destroyed eye.
Thank goodness you didnt say "fun fact"
Right? I got a tiny bit of metal shaving in my eye a few years ago. Had to go to the hospital to have it removed...It was one of the most painful things I’ve been through. Even after they took it out it still felt like it was still digging into my skull.
Lux Libertas Eye injuries are no fun!
Mauser: I will just put some ice on it.
Son in law: No Dad, you need to have your eye removed.
Midnightspecia1, I know what you mean. Really sucks driving with and eye patch when you're not used to the difference in depth perception.
"...changed his view on rifle safety" pun intended?
Convinced him to take another _look_ at safety
He never looked safety with same eyes again.
Hindsight is always 20/20
You beat me to it, literally had this exact comment typed up hahaha
He clearly didn't have much of an eye for safety hazards
Paul Mauser's mother probably told him that would happen.
Gilmaris you are going to put you eye out kid
It's all flaps and gewehrs until someone loses an eye.
Lol. Nice!
@@JvS1711 haha that was pretty good
She probably did. But he didn’t listen.
Damn... look at that joinery on the forend of the stock. Late 19th Century woodworkers were ridiculously skilled. So glad we live in the age of HD video so we can see those details in your videos, Ian.
PristineTX The entire rifle has a nice, clean detail to it. You won't find that on today's guns that's for sure.
@@joshuakarmann7488 no quite impressive really no doubt mass produced rifles wherent made by skilled artisans but smaller production scale rifles certainly where
@@wizardofahhhs759 sorta a shame most nations have dropped wood for metal and plastic
ZIZEK FOR PRESIDENT Yep, there was a lot more "hands on" work to these guns 100+ years ago. This kind of work is considered custom today.
I wish we lived in the age of ridiculously skilled woodworkers so we wouldn’t have to watch it though HD video lol
"It had a serious impact on Mausers view" You don't say?
"It's all fun and games until someone looses an eye." -Paul Mauser
Everybody's gangster till the selbsladers start exploding
At least he no longer had to worry about the whole 'close one eye when aiming' debate.
Im still confused what the benefit is supposed to be from keeping both open.
@@JohnDoe-iw7zc just situational awareness in actual combat really, can see movement in peripheral vision and also I suppose you can use holdover at long range and see past the sights. If your gun has a lot of recoil you might find it easier to keep a target picture and see if what you shot at went down. Binocular vision could be useful within around 60 meters if your target is camouflaged but most soldiers would just be point shooting by then I'd think.
@@dentistguba well i always see double when ive tryed both open lol it seems to hurt my shooting on bow, gun, sligshot everything. Anything i might be doinf wrong
@@JohnDoe-iw7zc I'm a year late, but assuming you're right handed you want to aim with the left image. I can aim well enough with both eyes open unless I'm holding a small gun like a Beretta 950, but at the close ranges that would be used I figure I could still hit my target with both eyes open
@@dELTA13579111315 ok how in the fuck? How do you aim with your left image if that comes from your left eye which isn't lined up to the sights / optic. Having two eyes open is just distracting for me and it feels like all of you are skrewing with me to an extent lol
90%- jokes about Mauser loosing his eye
5%- nice looking rifle
5%- Ian is gun jesus
Which gun would Jesus use?
Philly Grea What mortar is Jesus preferred? British, American, Russian, or German?
Lost an eye?
Bet he didn't see that coming
Did is the past participle of do. Since he already used a past participle he doesn't need to use past participle form of the main verb in the sentence.
Hence 'He didn't (did not) see it coming is the correct form' (the person this was directed at has deleted the post)
I didn't see that pun incoming.
@@Moorcin r/wooosh
@Daniel, The person I was responding to deleted their comment it wasn't to the main poster mate
@@Moorcin Allow me to correct you now. After the word "comment" you need a semicolon. You also left a period off the end.
*Cue Music: "Don't go chasing self-loaders" by Paul 'Left-Eye' Mauser*
I know the gun's gonna be your way or nothing at all, but that bolt is moving too fast
“It affected his view of firearm safety” Nicely done. Also, my favorite rifle is the Gewehr 41(m) and it’s interesting to see some likeness.
I thought that "The System that Cost Paul Mauser an Eye" was a metaphor for something bad that happened because of the design for possible patent infringement or potential safety hazards for the buyers.
But he actually, legit, lost his left eye from this rifle exploding.
The machining and fit of that 'test' gun is better than some production guns - very cool. Thanks Ian :)
"You'll put your eye out!"
-Paul Mauser's Mom
It is really cool to see an early Mauser design. I had no idea they were tinkering with semiautomatic designs so early. I like the aesthetics of this rifle, the magazine and trigger guard remind me of the C96 Pistol. I wonder what about this rifle didn't work enough for Mauser to try offering it to the military.
The fit and finish is outstanding!!! That's a nice looking rifle
I know I'm very late to this video, and Ian did a great overview of the mechanics, but why exactly was this never adopted? What were the weaknesses and failings of this particular flapper-delayed system?
I like that rear sight. I have used tangent style square notch sights mounted to the rear like an aperture sight and found them quite usable.
Good grief, that is stunning. The workmanship.
Ian digresses, then; "Well, that's a digression we won't get into today"... Don't ever change, man.
This seems like a perfectly reasonable action I wonder why I've never seen anything else like it
I would bet this action in some way inspired the G3's roller delay system.
Sad it was lost to the time
It's so amazing to see such an old rifle in pretty much mint condition. Excellent!
Very elegant. Hard to believe an out of battery safety was not incorporated in the design.
It makes sense to me, considering that it is a very early self loading rifle and out of battery safeties are not nearly as relevant on manual repeating rifles.
It is due to incident that out of battery safeties are pretty much universal today
Touche Mon Friar.
It is very easy to believe that it's obvious in retrospect, but if you're that guy making one of the first of a new type, then there are some things which only become obvious after an accident.
It's not incorporate in the mauser 91 who can be shoot without the bolt locked, so that doesn't surprise me that much
Good to see you doing great, we love you
Wuh. What happened
Yeah I'm confused was he injuered?
Yeah same, what happened?
WEAR GOGGLES YOUR EYES ARE PRECIOUS. 30 SECONDS TO PUT ON GLASSES SAVES A LIFETIME OF NO DEPTH PERCEPTION.
In today’s world it is but back then it wasn’t
yup, that's true, i mean, now i always wear them after i lost my right eye (lukily i'm left dominant)
And hospital bills!
Umm my grandfather was a machinist and he was working on a spring loaded system of some sort it broke and it had enough force to go through his safety glasses and he lost his right eye (well the vision in it)
Sure.Back then :-)
“Hey fireplace guy, how many one of a kind guns do you own?” FPG “Yes.”
Ian are you trying to make bad puns. This type of rifle took Mauser his eye so it changed his view on gun safety.
Man, thats cool! I love seeing turn of the century designs. These men really were creative. I'm geeking out over this!
The cycling of the action is very aesthetically pleasing, very cool design.
Beautifully kept rifle, stunning.
"its because of that goddamn rotary phone of his"
its amazing that technology evolved so fast back then you could go from the mauaser '71 to this in less than 30 years.
Meanwhile, the US military went from the M1 Garand to an inferior M1 Gara... I mean, the "M14"... in the same time frame
I read somewhere that the accident was what made him design the large ring K98 with the beefed up action.
The gun that made paul mauser
ARRRRRRRR
"the last time i trusted someone i lost an eye"
Wonderful action. I suspect a small modification to the firing pin mechanism would have negated the misfire issue. We're there any other problems with the flapper action? I don't see why this could not be developed for modern usage otherwise.
And Now we know the origin of
"Hay kid you'll shoot your eye out "
😉
120+ years old and still beautiful.
Awesome Video! I never knew this gun existed. keep up the awesome work!
The built quality Looks absolutely amazing!
It's interesting how Mauser chose the 6x57mm cartridge which is similar to more modern cartridges like the 6.5mm Remington Magnum which was from the 1960's. It seems like Mauser was looking for a high performance rifle with a flatter shooting trajectory.
It's not that the militaries of the times weren't thinking about it, it's just that shit kept coming up, and they _really_ didn't wanna have fork over the cash and effort required to change out their entire weapons stockpile just as a certain massive conflict seems likely.
Don't forget that military doctrine & strategy of the day that drove the way that rifles were used on the battlefield is often what directly influenced choices like ammunition specs - and this typically gets left out of the "...how dumb were they to not know that an intermediate is the ONLY right choice in all of rifle history ever!!!" 20/20 discussions. A complete & utter lack of perspective of historical happenings typically leads contemporary humans to believe that the previous generations were a bunch of "dumb dumbs" that couldn't see the obvious, and that each and every person today is just oh so much smarter than their forefathers.
The actual legitimate instances of militaries royally fucking up such choices as cartridge type/power - such as the good ol' red, white, n' blue NATO 7.62 - are actually few & far between(and often quickly corrected within pretty short order - ala NATO 5.56...).
Go watch some C&Rsenal for thoroughly explained examples of military doctrine driving what many today just assume is a "dumb" choice(and, mind you, I'm not claiming that of anyone in here in particular). For example, volley fire accuracy, what with targets placed hundreds of yards down range almost PARALLEL to the ground(yea, NO SHIT! LOL), was a very standard & important test within rifle trials of the mid-late 1800s. And, mind you, volley fire was a necessary doctrine because of, 1) literal fog of war caused by old school black powder, and, 2) the utter lack of direct fire accuracy of so many of those early(yet at the time 'cutting edge') rifles.
And of course, if volley fire is a critical military doctrine, then you're going to want a big, powerful round - such as .50 caliber, propelled by a truck load of black powder out of a big ol' 24" barrel.
Obviously this wasn't quite THAT dramatic by the very late 1800s/early 1900s, but it certainly demonstrates the way that one or two variables can knock over the dominoes that lead to what today often appears to be the "wrong" choice.
So, while one might say that Paul Mauser's choice of a very modern appearing intermediate cartridge was 'ahead of its time', another might say that it's nothing more than one of many reasons why his auto loading rifle wasn't adopted.
Very true Ry, well pointed out & nicely paragraphed too.
Thanks for letting us know, good work!!!
Paul Mausarrrrr
Sorry, i'll see myself out xD
Interesting rifle though^^
Nice xD
Im pretty sure Paul wont be able to see himself out
This rifle looks absolutely gorgeous.
You should do a segment on Mauser rifles converted to shotguns
"You'll shoot your eye out, kid."
Superb condition rifle and so solid looking.
Nice, just been watching C&Rsenals videos on the Mauser 71, and saw a comment on one of them that he built one in rage that cost him his eye, good timeing
It looks good how come it wasn't successful rifle? What did it flop? He should just make sure it wouldn't be able to shoot if it was not fully locked
P.S support your favorite guns channels and try to post your comments on every video just to show UA-cam we matter and gun Community is strong
It flopped when it popped and spooked Paul about the dangers and possibilies of out of battery detonations in self loaders.
If that happened to me back then, I'd go "fuck that" and do what he did and drop the short recoil try and do everything I can to prevent any more cartridges from popping out of battery and save many a trooper's finger and eyes.
Pop quiz. How many successful military rifles (rifles only, not pistols or heavy machine guns or what have you) can you name that were short recoil operated? Or flapper locked? There's your answer.
The problem was a cartridge detonating before being fully locked into the chamber, I imagine after that accident Mouser basically shelved the entire rifle and went straight to designing one which couldn't possibly do that again.
Gwer 43 and the Johnson Rifle.
What an amazing gun it's so impressive
What a AWESOME,
rifle(firearm development history) to see....
Growing up as a lover of Mauser firearms. That is just,
AWESOME !
Interesting that the rear sight is located at the back of the receiver, providing a much longer sight radius than most military rifles of this era, perhaps one of the first to do so????? Beautiful piece of craftsmanship.
This rifle had a huge effect on how Mauser saw firearms design...and everything else in the world
1:42 "...serious impact on Mauser's view(...)" The pun! it hurts!
Does this remind anyone else of looking at a roller - delayed system in reverse a bit? With a little bit of reworking with that in mind, we might have a rifle here. Let's say inside the "barrel beach extension" the flappers, instead of adding a delay in a gas action like an H&K, act as a disconnector for a floating firing pin (think a 80 series 1911).
Or, alternatively: have the barrel fixed in position and the bolt carrier with flap-wedge actuated by a gas-piston.
Off topic but I bought my 1st garand today, very happy.
so, this is the german M1 Garand?
didn't thought the entire comment section turned in to pun-master Barbara Dunkelman.
Quite an eye opening system for a rifle
Fascinating mechanical design.
The engineering skill, the carpentry skill, outstanding craftsmanship
What I believe is the most incredible aspect of auto loader/semi-auto rifle design history & evolution is that, at the conceivable end/"ideal conclusion" of the concept(which is essentially the AR and, arguably, the AK platforms of today), the answer to the basic fundamentals was right in front of EVERYONE's face - an automation of the bolt action rifle. This is all that a modern rotating bolt gas operated rifle action is, it's a conventional box magazine fed bolt action(rotating bolt utilizing locking lugs with conventional extraction & ejection) that is operated by gas pressure instead of the human hand & arm - at its most basic fundamentals, it's nothing more than an automated bolt action, and no other system has yet proven superior.
We essentially watched a half century of work on a specific type of machine just to see it come full circle.
Now, with that said, perfection is boring, while imperfection is much more interesting - what we've become accustomed to naming "character" because many are seemingly uncomfortable admitting that they prefer the flawed rather than the flawless. Myself, while I LOVE the odd & unusual(AKA, the so horribly flawed that they're now considered "rare" today just because they were surpassed by the functionally superior opposition, like this rather spectacular Mauser), I absolutely ADORE the roller locks, what a beautiful mechanism! But, there's still a reason why repeating rifles ended up with rotating bolt actions, and not a manually operated roller locks(...but, HOW COOL!!!) - just as the auto-loaders also ended up with rotating bolt actions.
Talk about "over thinking it" just a bit - only toolem' a half to two-thirds of a century to rediscover what the obvious(seriously, is there a manually operated mass produced rifle of the last 75 or so years that ISN'T a bolt action?)! And, all they had to do was go hunting...
It sounds amazing when you cycle this rifle!
- now we talk perfection ... love it
That's a cool thing I never noticed before, flappers locks are really similar in operation to roller locks. Is there any benefit to flappers over rollers though?
Mauser's daughter: built a new locking system?
mr. Mauser : Yes
Mauser's daughter: What did it cost?
mr. Mauser : Everything (i could see with my left eye)
I didn't realize this was just put out today. I just watched the video on the sporter the other day.
The rifle that turned Mauser into Wotan
Effected his VIEW of rifle safety lol
For a Prototype this things quality is insane. It looks better than some production rifles
Germans.
“It’s all shits and giggles till someone looses an eye...” - Paul Mauser
Honestly if you squint, this thing looks like a Kammerlader
A camel ladder?
I have to agree. Magazine ruins it a bit
Magazine and trigger guard resemble the commission rifle
I was going to say you're crazy but then I squinted and it kinda does. Just a little
Interesting choice of words considering
Flapper rifle? Should have been designed in the 20s
I’ll see myself out
1:38 "(…) this had a serious impact on Mausers view (…)"
That seems like it should be an *extremely* strong mechanism, better than many contemporary semi-automatic actions. Odd it should have failed so terribly, even if it was an exploding cartridge. Did the gun itself survive I wonder? Perhaps Mauser had it melted down!
Maybe the safety is like a Mauser 98k, where all the way right is fire, middle is disconnected trigger but bolt can still be operated, and all the way left is safe, no trigger connection and no bolt operation?
Paul Mauser is my favorite cycloptic gun designer
Ian, when are you making a documentary about the Mauser family? I would love to have a historical analysis of the origins of the little machine shop in Oberndorf!
"We have our front trunnion encasement."
So it is written, so shall it be done.
Losing an eye must have been especially hard on a gunsmith. I hope he learned to shoot with his other one.
Ians COLD 🤣 the rifle blew up in Mausers face, costing him an eye and Ian says "it had a serious impact that effected the way he looked at rifles"
The craftsmanship is incredible. And on a prototype nonetheless!
Pirate gun man
This is a really cool gun hopefully we can get better ammo now that's less prone to detonations like that
So Mauser became a cyclops.
That's not how it works, I'm afraid.
@@Papperlapappmaul
That's exactly how it works.
You mean pirate, don't you?
Esteban Cinardi: whatever floats your boat
@@ADRay1999 Floats your pirate ship, after shooting your eye out with a C98
Interesting design. Never knew about this one, or that PUl had lost an eye. I bet the 6x57 was a good cartridge- probably a 100-110 gr or so bullet at 2600 fps or so. Makes sense. Those ballistics would be pretty close to the experimental 6mm SAW cartridge of the 1970's. A lot less recoil than the big cartridges of the day. Too bad it didn't catch on. I can't remember- what was the first gas-operated autoloader? Anyone know? Great video as always. Thank you
Physics don't change the performance of the rounds is the same whatever time period, just the metalurgy and tech to achive it develops.
For that era, 6mm was not usually a good idea since although it was flat shooting and low recoil, it lacked stopping power especially at range. Both the Italians and Japanese who used 6.5mm cartridges switched to a heavier caliber because of poor stopping power and performance in machineguns. 6.5mm is certainly a good round for today when used in a semi/full auto rifle and because stopping power is less of a concern.
I think its the Mondragon rifle from Mexico used by Germans, then RSC from France.
@@blackroberts6290 - Yeah that would make sense. 1908-ish, as i recall
Beautiful rifle.
I’ll bet he had one hell of a flinch after that accident!
Talking about safety on mauser, the mauser 91 can shoot without the bolt being locked and i don't think the thin spring metal that should be depressed for disassembly would stop the bolt
I've always wanted the rifle that took Mauser's eye.
Yeah, I think I better start wearing eye protection from now on whenever I go shooting.
At least he came away from the incident with a lesson in safety and still pursued self loading rifles.
I see the flaw of the design. It relies on using the front of the receiver to fully lock the gun.
The locking track should have been on the bolt instead. If the bolt isn't fully forward, the gun shouldn't lock or drop the firing pin.
If you can see the wedges, it's not locked. But the front of the receiver obscures that.
Don't know about anyone else, but I'd relish the opportunity to put that rifle through its paces. With proper eye protection, of course!
Misread the title as "the system that caught Paul Mauser's eye"... i think Ian missed a great pun opportunity.
as always, excellent video! but Ian, randomly could you toss the nostalgic into music back in! 😂
Ian, if you could make the perfect gun, based on all of your experience, how would you do it? You have seen some of the most niche guns, as well as some of the most versatile guns. You have seen and researched the issues of a good bit of these, if not all, and dissasembled a decent amount of them. What features would you implement? Would you go with the bullpup, or the standard style, or a more unique variant? I dont expect you to make it, as you are not a firearms manufacturer. I (and probably many of your viewers) think it would just be interesting to see an expert's opinion on the matter. Try posting a poll regarding the idea if you're interested and see what others think.
he actually addressed this in a Q & A video. he has no interest in developing "the perfect gun", because he feels that firearms have pretty much already reached the pinnacle of development. barring some extreme new development (like laser weaponry), there's really no point. I kinda agree w/ you though, I'd love to see just a blueprint of what he'd come up w/
How cool is that? 1 of only 4 known to exist!
“Changed his view on rifle safety” no Ian it just changed his view
What a nice riffle!
Hey Ian I might have asked this before, but similar thing to the m47 Medusa that was......it was a thing, Have you seen, or used the chiappa x-caliber? Its a m6 survival type setup but you can order with it the barrel inserts, so it goes from 12 gauge over 22lr to whatever insert you put in the top barrel, and those inserts come in 357mag/38spl, 9mm, .380, 40 s&w, 44mag, 45 acp, 410/45LC and 20 gauge. If you have not seen or used one, I would love to see you do a video one it, preferably with range testing included. Id love to see what you think after hands on experience.
Thanks.