In the latter stages of World War One, the German military was looking for new arms for its Sturmtruppen. Without a reliable self-loading rifle design to use, they instead focused on pistil caliber arms. The first to be used was the existing lP08 artillery Luger, fitted with a drum magazine. At the very end of the war, these were being replaced by Bergmann MP-18,I submachine guns. But there was another gun that was tested but not adopted – the 1917 trench carbine variation of Mauser’s C96 “Broomhandle” pistol. Only about 40 of these guns were made as prototypes and trials models, and they were not adopted for reasons that are not entirely clear (but cost is probably a significant element). Only a few examples survive, and they vary substantially in their details. In addition, they are substantially different from both standard C96 pistols and also the sporting carbines made before the war.
All the 1917 trench carbines used a magazine developed from the 1906/08 pistol; an excellent double-stack, double-feed type. Magazines of 10, 20, and 40-round capacity were made, although all known examples were only semiautomatic (the full-auto Schnellfeuer Mauser’s would not come until the early 1930s).
Seems tried to simplified without success. Wery well thought and made however. Thanks lan…
Had this been developed in a full-auto format and made simpler, we’d have seen a potential rival to the MP-18. But one problem is the amount of complicated forging/machining operations required for the recoil action on the Mauser design. Did I miss anything?
You are certainly correct in second part of your comment. The grandpa Mauser was not suitable for fully automatic weapon. Way too complicated.
As Strongarm already said, the design and conduct/ machining are exquisite.
“(…)Did I miss anything?(…)”
What would be Rate-of-Fire of “(…)developed in a full-auto format(…)”?
Note that MP.18,I has moderate 450 rpm.
Short-recoil seems to be uncommon in sub-machine guns of I generation and limited to small-series if not only prototypes, like is the case with experimental Токарев № 1 from 1931 years, see 9th image from top here: https://www.kalashnikov.ru/predostavit-k-pervomu-chislu/
It would’ve been a dirty damn shame to expose that beautiful steel and fine machining to the trenches and their dirt, water, mud, slime, and poisonous gasses. Issue ’em to the cavalry if you must; they tended to stay out of the way.
And don’t apologize for going into teeny tiny details about the magazines. That’s why we’re here!
I agree; this was not a weapon for military use, same some odd pistol. In fact it was historical artifact at time of start of WWI.
What could have been….
Fascinating – I never thought to see a detailed look at one of the very few surviving examples. Such Pistol Carbines an intriguing (if ultimately less than successful) branch of firearms – that virtually every arms manufacturer dabbled in and which there is very little information on.
Well, quite a number of Red-9 Broomhandles went to the front, with shoulder stocks, and must have had some good use amid dirt, mud etc. I have yet to find any good account of their reliability in the literature except hints — the Swiss army trials found C96s to be less reliable than the Parabellum, Hogg or Ezell claim C96s beat up the ammo in their magazines (!), Churchill’s worked fine in the desert atop a horse. I’m surprised there were so many changes made in this carbine from the pistol, especially the longer chamber. I would add that nice bluing was a feature of all military guns back then — built to last, built to look nice on parade as well. Cheaper finishes such as Parkerization were an economy feature from WWII. Thanks again to Mr. M for showing this to us.
I’m wondering if a secondary, or perhaps a better term would be “primary commercial” consideration was using the Trench Carbine to develop a simplified and cheaper to manufacture mechanism for the C/96 type pistol.
The TC mechanism has several points where changes seem to have been made for more rapid production. And even as early as 1917-18, Mauser was beginning to see signs of competition in making C/96 style pistols from the Spanish gunmakers. (Charola y Anitua, etc.)
They may have been intending to meet the potential (and in the end, quite real) influx of Royal and etc. “Broomhandle” clones in export markets such as China with a cheaper but no less reliable version of their own “Broomhandle”.
And even today, I look at the 9 x 25mm Mauser Export round and the 9mm Winchester Magnum cartridge and don’t see any significant difference between them, other than the 9mm WM having a 29.5mm case length. It really doesn’t do anything 9 x 25mm can’t do just as well, and in a “package” better suited to a magazine in the pistol grip, due to a more reasonable OAL.
cheers
eon
OK, I’ve never been a believer in stocked pistols (although I own a 1930’s vintage Browning High Power with the stock slot, I don’t own the stock and really have never made any effort to find one), especially holster stocks. Ian, could you do a comparison between stocked and regular versions of the same pistol? And how they compare with contemporary light rifles/carbines (all would be commercial products in the period in question)
Interesting comments…I happen to own (2) of the Chinese renditionS of the Carbine both in 9MM…I KNOW THEY ARE much SOUGHT AFTER WEAPONS..sexy little buggers they are.
I erred in stating 9mm..they are 30Mauser caliber
These are stupid. The Germans would have been better served to fire up their (for the time being) Liege factory and turn out a few thousand FN Autoloading carbines and shotguns.
I don’t have my ALFA catalogue right now, but I sispect they weren’t much more expensive than Mauser carbines.
All the 1917 trench carbines used a magazine developed from the 1906/08 pistol; an excellent double-stack, double-feed type. Magazines of 10, 20, and 40-round capacity were made, although all known examples were only semiautomatic (the full-auto Schnellfeuer Mauser’s would not come until the early 1930s).