Jump to content

Talk:Mauser C96: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Rezin (talk | contribs)
Argentina: new section
Line 69: Line 69:


"The C96 frequently appears as a "foreign" or "exotic" pistol in a number of films and TV shows, owing to its distinctive and instantly recognisable shape, and, for the same reasons and in the same tradition, a C96 was modified to form Han Solo's prop blaster pistol for the Star Wars films." I'm not questioning the veracity of the actual claim being made, but the C96 being used as some sort of generic foreign- or exotic-looking pistol is incompatible with it being "instantly recognizable". It is distinctive looking, to be sure, but recognition implies that people know what it is they're looking at, which would largely defeat the purpose of using the Mauser for, say, Han Solo's blaster. You or I might have watched ''Star Wars'' and wondered why Han was carrying a broom handle Mauser, but most people found it odd looking enough to pass for a suitably sci-fi-ish weapon, which means it isn't instantly recognizable at all.--[[Special:Contributions/172.190.185.26|172.190.185.26]] ([[User talk:172.190.185.26|talk]]) 05:04, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
"The C96 frequently appears as a "foreign" or "exotic" pistol in a number of films and TV shows, owing to its distinctive and instantly recognisable shape, and, for the same reasons and in the same tradition, a C96 was modified to form Han Solo's prop blaster pistol for the Star Wars films." I'm not questioning the veracity of the actual claim being made, but the C96 being used as some sort of generic foreign- or exotic-looking pistol is incompatible with it being "instantly recognizable". It is distinctive looking, to be sure, but recognition implies that people know what it is they're looking at, which would largely defeat the purpose of using the Mauser for, say, Han Solo's blaster. You or I might have watched ''Star Wars'' and wondered why Han was carrying a broom handle Mauser, but most people found it odd looking enough to pass for a suitably sci-fi-ish weapon, which means it isn't instantly recognizable at all.--[[Special:Contributions/172.190.185.26|172.190.185.26]] ([[User talk:172.190.185.26|talk]]) 05:04, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

== Argentina ==

Hello there!

I have been recently on Museo de Armas de La Nación Tte. Gral. Pablo Riccheri, Buenos Aires, Argentina. In which the weapons used by the three branches of the Armed Forces were displayed and I saw the Mauser C96 displayed too alongside several other german built pistols. Since I don't have any way to add a source I could leave the picture featuring the weapons I mentioned on the display case of the museum.

--[[Special:Contributions/190.175.40.6|190.175.40.6]] ([[User talk:190.175.40.6|talk]]) 01:17, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 01:17, 26 February 2015

Beginning a Re-Write

Given that the C96 is one of the most famous and influential handguns of all time, I think it deserves a better and more thorough article than the currently standing one. I've begun a re-write (with the addition of references) to try and expand it and get the article up to FA class; I'm open to suggestions or ideas on how we can improve the article! Commander Zulu (talk) 05:36, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good on you! The gun is certainly notable, and I would like to help though I don't have expertise on the history. One distinction worth making is the large ring vs small ring hammer distinction, which is the first descriptor in many collector articles.
I am removing the PDW bit, because I feel it is ahistoric. If detachable-stock pistol carbines were suitable in this role the originators of the term would have classified them in. There were many well known types in the 1970s and 1980s including the C96, Artillery/Navy Luger, Inglis P35, Makarov and H&K P70(?). The concept actually has more in common with the reasons for development of short rifle carbines. ChrisPer (talk) 02:11, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent move, and you're absolutely right re: PDW. The Schnellfeuer C96s were intended to be machine-carbines, but AFAIK the only people who ever found any use for them in that role were the Chinese and, to a lesser extent, the Spanish. They certainly weren't intended as PDWs in the modern sense- they (and the semi-auto C96s with detachable stocks) are more closely related to the M1 Carbine than the FN P90c, IMHO. As for the "Small Ring/Large Ring" distinction, I've avoided it for now as, from a "General Readership" point of view there's no difference between a Small Ring and Large Ring C96 in 7.63x25mm. They're both the same "model", for all intents and purposes, IMHO. Having said that, I've got no problems with making the distinction if someone can suggest a way that won't confuse readers unfamiliar with the gun. Commander Zulu (talk) 04:29, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
PDW (Personal Defense Weapon) is a term introduced long after the last manufacture of the C96. PDW might refer back to C96 as an implementation of the concept before it had a name, but in the C96 article referring to it as a PDW is anachronistic. Naaman Brown (talk) 03:11, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good points about not confusing readers. I might take some photos to illustrate differences but you are right, its probably a bit esoteric for general encyclopedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChrisPer (talkcontribs) 08:51, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have to say I think I'm running into a blank here- I'm really not sure what else can be added to the article, but it still looks unfinished and lacking something IMHO. Commander Zulu (talk) 05:37, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Non-historical Movies

Is it at all relevant that Han Solo's blaster in the original Star Wars was a '96 with plastic fins on the barrel, and that Broomhandles have appeared in the hands of baddies in at least two Eastwood westerns (the names of which for the moment escape me)? Should this distinctive pistol get some sort of film credit? -- Craig Goodrich 68.58.115.151 (talk) 02:47, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, see WP:GUNS#Pop culture. — DP5 03:38, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is a (properly referenced) mention of the C96 as Han Solo's pistol, but otherwise DanMP5 is right; "Pop Culture" sections are generally to be avoided. Commander Zulu (talk) 09:11, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've expanded and re-cited this appearance, as it does have cultural significance. At the same time I deleted the rest of the list of "pop culture" entries. Some of those may be sourceable too, so I'll post the list below. Rezin (talk) 19:12, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't the 7.62 x 25 mm Tokarev more powerful

And developed in 1930, before the .357 magnum, there fore making it the most powerful handgun round until the 7.62 tokarev? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.56.134.222 (talk) 21:44, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Velocity and power. The 7.63 Mauser and 7.62 Tokarev are higher velocity rounds, but they also use light bullets. Power may be measured by momentum (push, mass times velocity) or kinetic energy (impact, mass times velocity squared). A lower velocity round may have more power by using a heavier bullet, but 7.63 Mauser and 7.62 Tokarev are still among the highest velocity pistol rounds in commercial production today. Naaman Brown (talk) 12:35, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

            grain  ft/sec   ft/lb
cartridge   bullet velocity energy (maker)
7.63 Mauser   88     1425    396   (Fiocchi)
7.62x25mm     85     1656    517   (Sellier & Bellot)
.357 Mag     125     1450    580   (average)
.357 Mag     158     1235    535   (average)

Odd phrasing

"The C96 frequently appears as a "foreign" or "exotic" pistol in a number of films and TV shows, owing to its distinctive and instantly recognisable shape, and, for the same reasons and in the same tradition, a C96 was modified to form Han Solo's prop blaster pistol for the Star Wars films." I'm not questioning the veracity of the actual claim being made, but the C96 being used as some sort of generic foreign- or exotic-looking pistol is incompatible with it being "instantly recognizable". It is distinctive looking, to be sure, but recognition implies that people know what it is they're looking at, which would largely defeat the purpose of using the Mauser for, say, Han Solo's blaster. You or I might have watched Star Wars and wondered why Han was carrying a broom handle Mauser, but most people found it odd looking enough to pass for a suitably sci-fi-ish weapon, which means it isn't instantly recognizable at all.--172.190.185.26 (talk) 05:04, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Argentina

Hello there!

I have been recently on Museo de Armas de La Nación Tte. Gral. Pablo Riccheri, Buenos Aires, Argentina. In which the weapons used by the three branches of the Armed Forces were displayed and I saw the Mauser C96 displayed too alongside several other german built pistols. Since I don't have any way to add a source I could leave the picture featuring the weapons I mentioned on the display case of the museum.

--190.175.40.6 (talk) 01:17, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]