Talk:Mauser C96

Highest Velocity Pistol Cartridge

... What about 7.62x25? Did they not have an equivalent load? I realize that many different loads were made for 7.62x25, ranging from below those of 7.63 to those that rival those of magnum cartridges. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.121.190.151 (talk) 08:27, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Effective range

Effective Range 500m??? Sounds excessive for a handgun.

Pop culture trivia section

Isn't this the gun that Han Solo uses? Señor Cardgage

funny uou say that, i am watching Mail Call right now and they just said that. Heres John E 03:13, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

IIRC the Prop that he used was a model C96 painted black with a scope --Theredstarswl 19:33, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

Do we really need all of the movie references here? I highly doubt it's a good idea. - Cyberodin

I think it's interesting that you DON'T want to list the Cultural references. You are talking about one of the most recognizable and influential pieces made. I think it is doing a great diservice to edit/delete these references. Like it or not, these are the tools that changed the face of our world as we know it, however tragic that may or maynot be. This is an Encyclopedia for everyone and I think its kind of ridiculous for you "Cyberodin" to watch over this page like a crime is being committed. If you are worried about it clutering the page then move the references to a different page and create a link but don't delete it outright. - tmiller96

Because so-called "cultural references" are not cultural references at all. It is as if we'd write in the article devoted to 4th of July: "Background for first Chinese silent porn movie". Is it "culture" or is it "US culture"? What relevance holds the fact that a blaster in some 25-year-old movie happen to look like this gun? Should we list all the movies under Colt? I wouldn't oppose this "cultural reference" would it really be cultural, but so far it only states the fact that two weapons look somewhat similar. I wouldn't object to appearance of such fact would it be along the line "Lukas used to own a gun, so he specifically ordered blaster to be produced because he was impressed by C96 as a kid". Do you know in what number of movies appeared water, for example? Should we list them all as "cultural reference" for water?

Most people recognise the Broome handle mauser as han Solo's gun- and star wars is known world wide so I don't see why it shouldn't be listed. If starwars were some little odd ball film that only a handful of film nerds new about- I could see the point or if people new about the c96 from other sources I would understand but let's face the simple fact other then gun enthusiats- if you showedthe average person a photo or the pistol they will say Han SOlo's bloaster. The prop was a c96 with some atahements. It's not the same as a Colt pistol- which were used in evry western ever made - if it was not for star wars folks won't know the c96. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.108.138.35 (talk) 21:39, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

For one Star Wars is more than a "US Culture" movie. We are talking about a movie that was very ground breaking and changed the way movies were made in many countries. Secondly I would not have brought it up if it "Just happen to look like this gun" It was actually a C96 with a couple plastic pieces on it to make it look different. Your example for water is just silly and childish and I refuse to respond to that. If you look up the Walther PPK does it not link to James Bond? It would be silly not too. How about the S&W .44 Mag. wouldn't that be equally as silly to not at least mention Dirty Harry? If it wasn't for Dirty Harry the Ruger .44 Mag may have never been made. Other weapons pages have no trouble listing these references so why should you?

I would add that when people object to culture references because they are not fully inclusive of all cultures, they need to remember that this is an English language article. I am fully confident that the culture impact of Star Wars is universal in not only America, but the United Kingdom, South Africa, New Zealand, Australia, and any of the other countries were English is commonly spoken. While, let's say China, may feel that they have their own valid culture references not included here, these probably do exist in the Chinese version of this article. There is no greater culture insensitivity, then to think that English would be the only language that any subject is discussed in.

If those guns and those movies are that famous, why post it here? If not, why bother? Anyway, it's just silly to say that "something featured in a movie A"; I know much more movies where this gun featured (it was a gun of choise for German spies in pulp fiction novels), so should I write here a list? If you are so concerned about a cultural influence of this gun and think that the fact that something similar appeared in a famous (arguably) movie, just write a separate article and we'll link it from here.

OK, I like the "Fun fact" section as is. Just don't add anything trivial.

Regarding appearance in video games

I feel that the fact that trivia seciton holds a lot of "information" about the video games the gun appeared in sets a very bad precedent. Do you really want to see a list of 1000+ videogames in trivia section of Sword article that featured a sword? Even if those list would include games that had katanas, schimitars and laser blades? Do you really feel that the fact that a weapon that resembles (since even the editors admit that it isn't called "C96" in those games, and I find the information on "bandit shooting" in MGS 3 incorrect and misleading) the one in the article has any value to anyone but the army of game fans who know about it already? Do you really think that this is an important fact even when knowing that none of the pages of the games that supposedly feature the gun in question is actually linked to this article? Cyberodin

Cyberodin: Yes, they are properly linked. Use your eyess. Also, I edited it to read "References in popular culture". This is alright with Wikipedia re:Desert Eagle. So stop it. Grow up.

Another cultural reference. Mike Grell's comic book character Jon Sable uses a .45 caliber Mauser as his main handgun. He, in fact, specifically mentioned that the barrel is a .45 caliber chinese make, making it a .45 caliber Mauser. (believe rest of the gun was german made).

I've updated this page twice now with info on its usage in Resident Evil 4. The first time it was deleted by a non-admin. I'll continue to put it there until someone tells me why its being removed. (Map29673 (talk) 00:22, 25 September 2008 (UTC))

You don't have to be an administrator to remove content. Anyone can. Also, I have clearly stated why it was removed. Just read WP:GUNS#Pop culture. It's quite clear that certain standards of notability apply, and frankly, Resident Evil doesn't seem to meet these.--LWF (talk) 00:26, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree with the guidelines in WP:GUNS#Pop culture - I don't think it merits a mention. Its appearance in Resident Evil really has nothing to do with the firearm itself or its history. And I'm a big fan of it in that game! Twalls (talk) 16:52, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I say add some ting about its apperance escpialy how it wasu sed as Han Solo's pitol. what are you folks afraid of? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.108.138.35 (talk) 16:50, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

It just isn't an important enough fact to be included in this article.--Sus scrofa (talk) 14:17, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

I look at it as how relevant it is for the article. Since Star Wars was and still is a popular movie, it is probably the only context in which most people have seen the gun. It is the first thought that went through my head when I first saw it. it should be in, 67.173.1.71 (talk) 07:43, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

The question in all pop culture sections should be: is this reference notable enough for an encyclopedia entry? Mauser broomhandle was used in films like From Russia With Love, Ed Gein, The Second Best Secret Agent in the Whole Wide World and "Star Wars" just to name a few I remember. The fact that, like the Astra 400, its exotic look makes it a common movie prop is notable, but a list of all movies, TV shows and video games featuring the C96 is not. Naaman Brown (talk) 03:24, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

It's not what it should be, it's what it is. The WP:Firearms project is the place to bring this up. But... it's a long-standing standard for inclusion and, to be honest, I've never heard of two out of the four films you listed and one of the other two is already in the article. I'm unclear what you'd be asking for, but I'm clear that this is not the place to ask it. --Nukes4Tots (talk) 05:49, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

"Bandit shooting"

I removed that rubbish of

"Because of the machine pistol variants' difficult recoil, the Chinese invented a special way of using full-automatic models of this gun, by holding the gun sideways while clearing rooms during urban warfare which proved to be effective against the Japanese invaders. The Japanese called it "Bandit Shooting" due to bandits and warlords in China tending to own these types of guns."

because that's not true and it's from a VIDEO GAME. Metal Gear Solid 3

I removed yet ANOTHER baseless entry:

However, as war movies and spy movies became less popular, the gun phased out of the screen only to be rediscovered later due to its unusual look and unfamiliarity to many young people. It often serves as a "cool" weapon in the video games and anime, quite often out of context.

I wish these anime nerds would stop vandalizing these articles.

Unfortunately you are wrong. Ive read about "Bandit Shooting" from The World's Submachine Guns, Vol. 1: Developments from 1915-1963 by Thomas B. Nelson [1] which was written long time before any video games.--81.197.218.62 17:36, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

After little rethinking, it might be from WORLD'S MACHINE PISTOLS & SUBMACHINE GUNS, VOL. IIA

by Thomas B. Nelson & Daniel D. Musgrave [2]; borrowed books which I read over 20 years ago... --81.197.218.62 17:51, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Hey rubbish-boy, here's your link to prove bandit shooting is a real technique: http://www.iar-arms.com/mausereview1.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.148.237.44 (talk) 08:14, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

"Red 9" nickname

Does anyone have good info about the origin of the "Red 9" nickname?--SeanMon 04:11, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

The German Army commissioned 150,000 C96 Mausers during WWI, chambered for 9mm Parabellum (the standard German Military pistol cartridge). To avoid confusion with the existing 7.62 Mauser handguns, a large, red number 9 was engraved into the handles of the 9mm pistols, telling the user the gun was chambered for 9mm Parabellum and not 7.63 Mauser. Hence, "Red 9". --Commander Zulu 04:23, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

The name "Red9" is purely a creation by the Resident Evil 4 team. Playing the game you'll notice no weapon has it's proper name listed and the C-96s name is more of a trivia-related wink to people who know guns than anything else. This pistol has never been called the Red 9 by anyone who used them. The C-96s "nickname" is the Mauser Broomhandle, due to the shape of the grip. Atzel 14:18, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

• In the USA the term "Red 9" has been used to distinguish the WWI C96 Mausers made in 9mm from the C96 Mausers made in 7.63mm, long before the existence of videogames. The term is usually applied to the grips themselves. I own a C96 in 7.63mm and a friend at the gun club owned one in 9mm with "Red 9" grips, but we did not call the pistol itself a "Red 9." A good source would be older editions of W.H.B.Smith's Small Arms of the World. (The "Red 9" grips are required because the C96 Mauser pistol itself is not marked with caliber.)-- Naaman Brown (talk) 22:12, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

• Since posting above, I noticed a photograph in the NRA Firearms Museum collection of a Luger pistol with a red 9 carved in the grips; it was a model of the Luger normally found in 7.65mm (aka .30 Luger). So, apparently, when the Germans issued a pistol in 9mm and that pistol was normally available in other calibers (7.63x25mm or 7.65x23mm for instance) the grips of the 9mm version would be prominently marked to avoid the use of the wrong ammunition. Red 9 grips are not exclusive to the Mauser Broomhandle. Naaman Brown (talk) 03:06, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Specifications

I removed the reference to 7.62x25 ammo. 7.62x25 TT, while dimensionally nearly the same cartridge, is more powerful than the 7.63mm Mauser cartridge and should not be fired in these pistols.

True. Several accounts has it that the Finns ended up KBing a whole bunch of C96s by attempting to load captured 7.62x25 TT into them.

• Actually shooting various 7.63 Mauser and 7.62x25 Tokarev ammunitions in both a CZ52 and a C96 convinces me of this: The casings are near identical. Bullet weight and shape are near identical (~90gr). The Tokarev ammo is usually more powerful than the Mauser, just as the Mauser ammo is more powerful than the near-identical Borchardt ammo. Shooting Tokarev ammo in a Mauser pistol won't ka-boom it, but it runs the risk of battering, peening and ultimately breaking parts that retain the bolt in the receiver. Naaman Brown (talk) 22:54, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Recently manufactured Chinese copies?

I've read a rumor in several different places of a modern Norinco manufactured C/96. Is there any truth to the rumor? If it is true and has a source, we could add it to the article.

It seems most likely this not true and recently imported C/96 pistols were made in Nationalist China in 1930's. Standard 7.63 mm and .45 ACP C/96 pistols have come on to market in recent years for China. Some have claimed the PRC made some C/96 pistols as late as the 1970's. The gun is not cheap or easy manufacture and the recently imported C/96 pistols have 1930's proof marks. They likely came from military storage, it is possible they fake relics, but it sees unlikely. If Norinco was manufacturing new C/96 pistols they would likely do so openly just as the do with the Tokarev TT-33.- Doktor Faustus February 2007

I have seen recent Chinese imports both original German manufacture and new Chinese-made receivers for guns built up from parts kits. The new receivers were made to allow the manufacture of semi-automatic pistols out of parts sets from full-auto Mauser pistols (without the full-auto capability). This was a very small niche market product, just enough to start rumors. The new receivers were flat sided, without the milled panels, and definitely not the equal of the old German manufacture. The original Mausers are currently legal with the shoulder stock in USA since they are classed as curio and relic, but the "new" pistols require a $200 tax stamp if you own the shouldler stock since they are modern made pistols. My 7.63mm Mauser is serial range 107--- which dates it as 1912-1914 manufacture. It appears to be original Mauser make, exported to China and then imported from China as surplus by KFS Atlanta GA.-- Naaman Brown (talk) 22:32, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

effective range is not 200m

Come on peeps, a 9mm pistol being effective at 200 meters? You could probably hit a 10 story building at that distance, but is that considered effective? The effective range for a 9mm rifle wouldn't be close to 200 meters. A recent issue of Shotgun news puts the effective range of a broomhandle closer to 100meters. I'll see if I can dig up that article. Mr Christopher 22:53, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I believe the 7.63mm version was more common, and that has a rather higher muzzle velocity than 9mmx19. One of the pages linked from the article [3] claims that Chinese soldiers used them at up to 300m with the stock against troops moving in formation, though I'm not sure which version they're referring to. Obviously they'd be relying on concentration of targets to increase the chances of a hit at that range. Mark Grant 23:53, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

• 7.63 pistols in good condition with proper ammo are capable of surprising accuracy; most C96 pistols extant today are very worn and good ammo is hard to find. They are still capable of exceeding the accuracy of many current handguns. The Mauser adjustable sights were graduated up 1000 meters which I concede is very optimistic. I would back effective combat range of 50 yards for the Mauser versus 25 yards for most handguns.-- Naaman Brown (talk) 22:43, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I own a 7.63 which has a good bore, and it is quite accurate, i.e. easy to group a couple of inches on a 25m target using the shoulder stock offhand. The sights are set using the stock, and it shoots 2-3 inches above aim point at 25m if used one-handed without the stock. Provided the stock is attached, it may be considered effective to 50m for tactical purposes, but its still a pistol not a rifle.ChrisPer (talk) 04:37, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

8.15mm Mauser

I added the 8.15mm Mauser cartridge to the cartridge section of the article. I've seen numerous references to it in print and online. Here are a few in the event it is of some interest: [4] [5] [6] 75.142.145.210 (talk) 23:41, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

You are correct, sir. It's also mentioned in Belford and Dunlap's The Mauser Self-Loading Pistol, although I don't believe too many were manufactured in this caliber. I'd like to know how many were made in 9mm Mauser Export - apparently they were made in at least some quantity - [7] [8] [9][10] Twalls (talk) 02:27, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Type 17

Why didnt it mention the type 17 chinese variant or the Mauser Cannon Rifle? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.71.23.120 (talk) 18:45, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

It does mention it, although not by the name Type 17. There's also an external link. Its nickname was "box cannon", not "Mauser Cannon Rifle". Twalls (talk) 23:32, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

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 (talk • contribs) 08:51, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

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)

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)