With the M1841 revolving rear-pull bolt rifle equipped by Germany's predecessor Prussia, it shined in the Pudan War, and this design began to be widely equipped in international military equipment. With the advent of smokeless gunpowder, the power of bullets became more and more powerful, and the basic form of gun equipment was basically formed at the end of the 19th century. At that time, there were two ways of locking bolts. One was the traditional front-end locking. The most famous was the integrated bolt used on the Mauser 1898 rifle, and the other was the British Lee-Enfield rifle. The rear end is locked.
The biggest difference between the British Lee Enfield rifle and the Mauser rifle is the locking method of the gun, which creates a different performance between the two. The Mauser rifle uses a revolving back-pull bolt mechanism made by his own boss, and the front end of the bolt mechanism is locked. This structural design is adopted by rifles in most countries, and the difference between the bolt-action sniper rifle and the Mauser bolt-action design is not particularly big. And Lee Enfield's bolt locking device is at the rear. The gap between the locking design of the two bolts determines the performance difference between the two. As for who is better, you may have an answer after reading it. The advantage of
front-end locking of the gun is that the sealing performance of the gun barrel is good, the gunpowder gas can not leak, the gas can provide enough power for the projectile, and the gun has higher strength, can withstand higher chamber pressure, and can fire. A more powerful bullet. But the disadvantage is that it requires more force when pulling the gun, and the rotation of the gun needs to rotate 90 degrees, and the stroke of the gun needs to go longer (locking part + bullet length), so the rate of fire is relatively slow. The advantages of rear-end locking and Mauser are a bit reversed. The stroke of the bolt is short (only one bullet is enough), and the bolt can be unlocked as long as the bolt is rotated 60 degrees, so the rate of fire is faster, but The airtightness of the barrel is a little bit weaker, and the strength is lower, and the locking structure of the receiver is heavier than Mauser at high chamber pressure.
Generally speaking, the Mauser rifle has a longer range, higher accuracy, and greater power, but the rate of fire is slower, while Lee Enfield's rate of fire is fast, but the range is closer, and the shooting accuracy is lower. So this is one of the reasons why this British rifle cannot be used as a sniper rifle. In contrast, the Mauser rifle and Mosinaghan rifle, which are also front-locked, can be used as sniper rifles. However, the Lee Enfield rifle has a rate of fire almost as fast as that of a semi-automatic rifle. It is still quite fierce in close combat. In order to meet its high rate of fire, it is equipped with a 10-round magazine.
In modern times, the design of the rear-locking rifle like the British Lee Enfield rifle has been abandoned, because due to the characteristics of this weapon's gun, its rate of fire is faster but the rate of fire is only higher than that of the bolt Move the rifle faster. Compared with the semi-automatic rifle, the rate of fire is still a lot lower, and because it can only fire low-pressure bullets, its shooting accuracy is not as high as that of the semi-automatic rifle. Modern single-shot bolt-action sniper rifles are all weapons pursuing high-precision, so the design of the front nose of the Mauser with good sealing performance has become the first choice. The M24 sniper rifle and M40 sniper rifle currently used by the US military all adopt this Mauser-like design.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-