What do you think was the worst small arm gun ever created. I kinda think the M50 Reising, but I have researched it yet so I can’t make that opinion.
Chauchat was worse, (French light machine gun) someone took the bad idea bin, and dumped it into the drawings for this turkey. First it had a long recoil system, that made it difficult to hold on target, could, and did cause injury to the shooter. Open magazine design was guaranteed to cause stoppages galore,and it was set in a caliber that was based on the very old Gras cartridge, an 11mm round originally, (probably black powder or semi smokeless) this case was mightily tapered, and necked in steps to hold an 8 m.m. bullet, which upon some thought would be the only feature likely to keep it firing in the trenches. I have fired the Chauchat, and the reising, disliked both.(but a poor weapon is better than no weapon,)
Nambu was pretty bad.
Unfortunately, the US Army withdrew their Lewis guns in order to issue the Chauchat. But I’ve heard at least one WWI vet speak well of it, as he thought most of the problems were resulting from the fact that most of the French guns issued were used and highly worn…
!Chauchat! That folks is not a small arm.
I second Major Walter Schmidt.
Paul
It was a broken arm. 
Well put, not to mention broken facial bones, and general mayhem to the body from the hammering the gunner got due to the long recoil action. Small arms, it fits in the category, as did the bren, and the BAR. maybe someone did like them, but they would be in the minority, and as I said, a poor weapon is better than no weapon, If anyone offers you a chance to shoot one, take a pass, they are just setting you up.
The bren? I dont believe you can say thats a bad weapon. Its perhaps one of the best LMGs ever made.
Both the Bren and BAR were excellent weapons…
As for the BAR, the notorious petite blond Bonnie, of the crime syndicate of Bonnie and Clyde (Barrow gang), handled the gun well, and she was barely 100 lbs.!
Now, now, I said the Bar, and Bren fit the definition of small arms. Neither was a bad weapon, The bad gun reference was toward the Chauchat alone. Sorry for the semantics error. I fired the BAR, but not a Bren though I would have liked to. the Bar was a very good time,and easily handled while firing, (perhaps thats why Ms. Bonnie favored it) and a superior weapon for its time, as was the Bren.
So the Ross Rifle deserves some mention here…it jammed when rapid firing enough to heat the barrel up (12-15 rounds) and would STAY jammed until the barrel cooled. It was also very prone to jamming if exposed to mud or dirt…which made it’s use in the trenches of WWI more than a little questionable.
And for worst to fire, I’d have to say the Mauser M1918 Tankgewehr. It was the first anti-tank rifle (small arm???) and fired a 13mmX92SR cartridge. The problem being, it was the first so springs to dampen the recoil, a reducer at the end of the barrel to push the gun forward instead of backwards and a spongy shoulder (all of these found on the Boys AT rifle has) just plain weren’t invented. The result, the shooter could only fire 2-3 shots without getting severe headaches and 4-5 shots would cause your eyes to bleed.
Note: British soldiers who captured these weapons and fired them without the proper training (I’m assuming they were able marksmen with standard rifles) often broke their shoulders firing this weapon.
Yeah but it could kill tanks very effectively, and if properly used, was very useful.
Well, seeing as we just acknowledged the anniversary of the assassination of John F. Kennedy, I’ve heard that the Italian Carcano rifle was thought to be a very deficient weapon in several respects. Most notably was its tendency to jam far more often than any bolt action rifle should…
While there is much false information repeated by conspiracy theorists regarding the various facts of the murder such as the “magic bullet” myth or Oswald’s sniper perch being very poor (actually, it was a perfect ambush spot), or the compressed time of 6._ seconds (actually, the shots took over 8 seconds from the time Oswald opened fire to the third round horrifically striking JFK). The one thing that still sticks --even during a recent Discovery Channel reenactment featuring an Australian mercenary/security guard reenacting Oswald’s probably actions during the assassination-- was that everything the Warren Report was pretty much accurate, or at least plausible. But the one thing stated in the Oliver Stone film rang true (among the many myths and falsehoods), the Carcano was one of the worst shoulder arms," in that the Aussie had trouble getting off three consecutive shots due to jamming/feed issues…
Nick,
One of the American shooting magazines many years ago set up the Kennedy assassination shot, complete with open top car being moved on a wire. The good marksmen made the shot straight off, and the average marksmen got it on the second attempt.
Having fired an iron sighted Carcano, I would agree with you that it is particularly awful, and failed to make contact with the 200 m targets we were using. Admittedly, the ammunition we were using had been loaded with bullets which were 1-2 thousandths of an inch too small, but that is really no excuse.
It’s hard to imagine two 13mm could disable a tank…but it’s true. It was very effective. But it’s also the worst weapon -for the user (by design, while working properly). So I thought it deserved a mention.
But the fact that it effectively killed tanks should easily disqualiffy it from the worst weapon ever list.
Inclined to agree.
My vote would be the Mars automatic pistol.
It is said those who fired it never wished to repeat the experience, recoil forces being such that a severely sprained wrist was the least of the misfortunes one could expect.
Regards, Uyraell.