If you were to make a new bolt-action battle rifle...

[GarandOwner]

If you were to make a new bolt-action battle rifle... What would you use for a basis in design?

First off for a new battle rifle, I would not use a bolt action, but if we are talking about something such as a sniper rifle roll and not a main battle rifle, I would use the M24... it seems to be doing a fine job, if it works why fix it? As for a main battle rifle, I would use something based off of the M1 / M14 reciever.

Is not a "battle rifle", by definition, self-loading, e.g. the 2 generation self-loading weapons post-WWII?

No battle rifle, as its name states, just refers to a rifle used for battle. The 1903A3 is a battle rifle and it is bolt action, as is the K98, M91/30...... and so on.

This is from Wikipedia

Any self respecting person should never quote wikipedia. In college any professor I had would not accept wikipedia as a reference for papers due to too many inaccuracies in many definitions. Dont get me wrong some information is good, but it can be edited by anyone, and many "wiki definitions" are wrong.

 

[RancidSumo]

I'd base it off of the CZ 550 FS but mabey chambered in that 9X38 or whatever that russian caliber is. I'll go look it up and see if I can find out for sure. I like the curved European style but on the CZ 550 FS.

 

[RancidSumo]

Oh, I was close, it was a 9x39mm

 

[grimjaw]

Dont get me wrong some information is good, but it can be edited by anyone, and many "wiki definitions" are wrong.

The same could be said of any information posted on this forum. At least Wikipedia notes when sources are used and questions when they aren't, quite UNLIKE many of the posts here. Anyway . . .

I don't know that .30 caliber would be the best choice given today's choices. There are some questions I have before I can give a reply.

Does this rifle need to comply with NATO standards? If so, that seems to narrow down the design choices a little.

Given that so many individual conflicts seem to come at short range today, can I design my tactics (and thus the tools used) around that idea? I don't see these rifles be used for volley fire across a flat battlefield with no obstructions.

jm

 

[Timthinker]

I agree with Limeyfellow's position. My modified SMLE design would encompass detachable magazines. Why choose the SMLE? Look at the history of World War One, the last major war in which all combatants used bolt-action rifles. The SMLE not only held more rounds than Mauser designs, but it featured a fast and rugged action that held up well in the filthy trench conditions of Western Europe. SMLEs also performed well in the Middle East and Africa too. So, if I had to select an actual bolt-action battle rifle from the past, I would bet my backside on a SMLE and good training.

I realize that a bolt-action design is inferior to a modern assault rifle, but I wanted to play along with this fantasy. Heck, I ask some strange questions here as well.


Timthinker

 

[Nolo]

Let me make a clarification:
I am not suggesting that we design a bolt action weapon for today's battlefields. I am not asking for a modern sniper weapon. I am not asking for anything with a practical tacital application.
What I am basically asking is what parts of what old school bolt guns really make you excited?
Is it the wood on that Swede?
Is it the speed of action of that SMLE Mk. III?
Is it the satisfying "chunk-chunk" noise that your battle-torn Mosin-Nagant makes?
Is it the big ole butcher bayonet on your WWI Mauser 98?

 

[grimjaw]

Nolo, thanks for the clarification.

There's just a few things that excite me about bolt action rifles.

Accuracy.
Accuracy.
Simplicity.
Accuracy.

jm

 

[jpwilly]

I'm pretty sure the last word in bolt action battle rifles looks like this:



Although there are many that could try to keep up with it...most won't

 

[rangerruck]

nothing current; it would have to be tube let-front eject to reduce noise , no brass to slip on, and to fire from a portal with your face being able to get all the way up to the portal, because your face can sit right up on the receiver. Side eject stops all of this, bottom eject stops most of this. It would have to have part of it's feed assy, in the reciever, and part of the feed assy., in the disposable mag you feed into it, from the bottom. so as soon as you are empty , the old mag drops away, without you doing anything, and you just reach for a new mag, shove it in, and away you go. The bbl, would have to be a precise quick change, so that no head spacing is needed, nor would your zero ever change.

 

[1911 guy]

If I made a bolt gun.

.308
Controlled feed
Detachable mags
20 inch barrel
Synthetic pillar bedded stock
Aperature sights
Mil-Std 1913 rail integral to receiver

 

[asknight]

So ultimately the reason becomes one of aesthetics and "because I want to", so those are the primary factors that I'm considering.

Then buy/build the one you want "because you want to." Don't let us make your mind up for you.

 

[Funderb]

mosin nagant. when you shoot it, a nuclear bomb goes off.

 

[Quick Karl]

I've always wanted a true 98 Mauser with a few mods, most important of which would be relocating the ejector to below the left bolt-lug way and lengthening the action to provide more meat between the bottom bolt-lug-buttress and magazine opening. Caliber would, of course, be 30-06, and a 3-lb 2-stage trigger would finish things of nicely.

 

[Nolo]

Then buy/build the one you want "because you want to." Don't let us make your mind up for you.

No, it's not about that, I just wanted to know you guys' opinions and preferences.

 

[theotherwaldo]

Second the motion for the MAS 36 as the basis, something like a .260 Rem as the round (although the original 7.5 ain't bad).

Just simplify, modernize, and produce.

I love my SMLEs, but the MAS 36 is a better war gun (If a Frenchman isn't carrying it).

 

[EricTheBarbarian]

why not a stevens model 200, with peep sights, and takes stripper clips, in 6.5mm grendel. I would buy one

 

[EricTheBarbarian]

double tap

 

[leadcounsel]

All other things considered equal on the platform (length, caliber, capacity), I think that speed of operating the bolt is a primier consideration. To that end, I've always wondered why there weren't more straight pull (like the K31) rather than the Mauser or Mosin actions.

If I were to build a bolty, it would be straight pull for speed and ease.

 

[jrfoxx]

I'd like to see a strengthened version of the K31, maybe front and rear locking lugs. Plus a 10 round magazine.
I just love the speed of the straight pulls.

ETA: chambered in 30.06

Pretty much what I was thinking too. Maybe increase the magazine capacity somehow though. possibly make it a double stack kinda thing (if possible with the 30-06 case, and in a bolt gun,I dont know the details on how all that works), so you could get 15-20 rounds, without the magazine getting too long to make prone shooting difficult.keep it a detachable mag too.Maybe add a few inches of barrel length too to get all you can out of te 30-06 round velocity-wise, and to help with accuracy by increasing sight radius. also, give it aperature sights like the AR, where you have the 2 aperature sizes for speed, range, and versatility.Also, chrome line the bore, make it out of stainless steel to help with rust, and a snthetic stock for weit and protetion from the elements. Maybe even collapseable stock like the AR for versatility of peoples sizes, thickness of clothes, nd for a lttle more compactness when desired. You could even give hand guards with rails for scopes, lights, lasers, and/or whatever else kinda of is desired.

To that end, I've always wondered why there weren't more straight pull (like the K31) rather than the Mauser or Mosin actions.

I have alwas wondered that myself. Neve rbeen able to figure out why the vast majourity of bolt actions were "regular" bolts instead of straight pull. Always seemed wierd to me, as straight pull just seems to be way better for speed, if nothing else, and I cant see any reason it is inferior in any other aspect,so it should be the superior design IMHO. Just never "caught on" I guess.

 

[R.W.Dale]

The problem with a straight pull is that UNLIKE a turn bolt rifle with it's powerful camming action you're at a marked mechanical DISADVANTAGE with regards to chambering and extraction.

In other words you can FORCE the bolt closed on a chamber full of crud and fouling with little effort on a turn bolt rifle. Heck it's quite easy to rip the case head right off a really stuck case in a turnbolt that's how much leverage you have.

Try the same thing with a K-31 and you'll be kicking the bolt handle for half an hour trying to open the action.

This is the same reason you cannot reliably neck size cases for any straight pull rifle. No mechanical advantage.

A K31 is fine when shooting ammo produced to EXACT specs in the relativity surgical environment of the shooting range. But suitable for the trenches they ain't.

 

[Vaarok]

I have to say, I was pretty impressed by the suggestion of a MAS-36/51 with a MAS-49 box mag. Really, that was/is the ultimate bolt-action rifle. It's got all the features of the M1917 and the SMLE in a simpler and better package. Make it in 7.62x51 NATO and you've got pretty much the perfect martial bolt rifle.

 

[Nolo]

Vaarok, do you know who designed the MAS 36 rifle? All I can find out is that is was produced by the Manufacture d'Armes de Saint-Etienne.

 

[Funderb]

If I want a battle rifle, in bolt action, I want a max of six parts.
PARTS.

 

[dscottw88]

Keep the bolt handle as close to the trigger housing as possible, this allows for a faster ROF. Also, keep as long of a sight radius as possible unless ofcourse, adding a scope is the main idea, which also needs to be easy to mount!

 

[Owen]

MAS is a government arsenal. AFAIK, all of the MAS guns were designed by a comittee with constantly changing membership.