WI: The United States adopts a Mauser Rifle instead of the Krag-Jorgensen

In 1892, Mauser had sold some of the Mauser Model 1892 to the US Army for testing, unfortunately, the Norwegian designed Krag-Jorgensen won as the US Army wanted a gun wanted a gun with a magazine cut-off and to use the 30-40 cartridge. But what if, the U.S. Army, seeing how superior the Mauser action is, instead adopt the Mauser for US Army service.

w9-vi.jpg

The Appearance of the Mauser Model 1892.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
In 1892, Mauser had sold some of the Mauser Model 1892 to the US Army for testing, unfortunately, the Norwegian designed Krag-Jorgensen won as the US Army wanted a gun wanted a gun with a magazine cut-off and to use the 30-40 cartridge. But what if, the U.S. Army, seeing how superior the Mauser action is, instead adopt the Mauser for US Army service.

w9-vi.jpg

The Appearance of the Mauser Model 1892.
There was and is nothing wrong with the action of the Krag, even today it is a very nice, smooth action in sporting use until the Army tried to wildcat the load. The magazine system was screwy as hell and clearly inferior when used in combat compared to the more conventional top loaded Mauser and Lee-Enfield, especially when used by inexperienced personnel.

The Army also screwed up when they set the particulars for the .30-40 military cartridge by specifying a 230 grain bullet (later dropped down to a 220 grain in hope of improving performance) the same mistake they made with the .30-03 with its 220 grain bullet. The bullet weight and shape were sub-optimal for the new powders, something that wasn't really fixed until the introduction of the much beloved .30-06 150 grain spitzer bullet. In the Army defense they were converting over from the 45-70 government with its 405 grain(!) bullet, but a 150 grain spitzer in a .30-40 Krag is a very nice cartridge. It isn't a .30-06, but it is still very nice.
 
After the Spanish American War the captured Mausers were evaluated. This was part of a general search for a better US Army rifle. The resulting M1903 rifle had significant features from the current German Mauser designs & the German firm won a patent dispute with a $250,000 award.

So I guess in a sense the US Army did adopt a 'Mauser'.
 
The best thing would have been to have adopted the Lee-Navy in .30-40 rather than 6mm

A lot of advantages:
Metford polygonal rifling
En-bloc loading, but can be topped off
straight pull operation

The 6mm failed from poor steels and early 'hot' smokeless powder. .30-40 wasn't loaded to the same pressures and velocities
 

longsword14

Banned
The best thing would have been to have adopted the Lee-Navy in .30-40 rather than 6mm

A lot of advantages:
Metford polygonal rifling
En-bloc loading, but can be topped off
straight pull operation

The 6mm failed from poor steels and early 'hot' smokeless powder. .30-40 wasn't loaded to the same pressures and velocities
If they don't adopt 6mm Lee-Navy, there is Mauser's in 7mm. That was one of the better ones cartridge wise. The Boers used some variant of it.
 
Operationally, there is limited effects. No battles fought with the Krag were lost because of the inferiority of the Krag magazine system or the poor performance of the .30-40.
 
Operationally, there is limited effects. No battles fought with the Krag were lost because of the inferiority of the Krag magazine system or the poor performance of the .30-40.

But some battles may have gone slightly better in Cuba and PI, so there is no rush to a new .30-03 caliber and a new rifle. So no change again in 1906, but likely the Mauser is updated with some of the features of the later 96 or 98 (shorter barrel,Double column magazine so does no protrude from the bottom of the stock, and 3rd locking lug) by time of the Great War, along with a better bullet for the cartridge itself, to a 150-170 grain Spitzer

More minor effects, no need to equip troops with the Savage P-17, since enough of the standard *Springfield have been made since 1892

So now it's 1918, and War is over. The urge for a newer flat shooting cartridge is even higher than OTL

Pedersen still develops his three cartridges. the .256, .276 and .30, all slightly more powerful that the modernized .30.40 Krag cartridge currently in service(but less than the OTL .30-06, that doesn't exist in this TL), so
it's a tossup over the .256 or .276, till something like the 1928 'Goat and Pig Board' finds the .256 far more lethal and this is adopted for rifles instead

Since it's less powerful than the .30-06, the new Rifles Trials go differently

You have the Danish 1934,M1922 and 1927 Bang Rifles
bang1-2.jpg

These were Gas Operated, with a cup on the muzzle, barrel not drilled. Didn't work well, despite several updates

Then the Thompson Autorifle of 1921, and Garand of 1921
Colt_M1921_w_Garand_M1923.jpg

The Thompson used the Blish Lock, per the SMG, and really didn't work well on .30-06 pressure(even had an oiled rounds), and the Garand still used his special primer actuated cartridges

The Pedersen Toggle Lock, and improved Garand
Pedersen_T1_vs_Garand_T3.jpg

Pedersen used hard wax coating, while the Garand, without the primer actuation but standard primer, did not. Both rifles used ten round clips

So in this TL, You get the earlier Garand or Hatcher-Bang in .256 before the Great Depression hits

Since the .30-06 never is used for infantry rifles, the US looks for a replacement for Machine Gun cartridge at the same time

The US would probably use the French 13.2x99 cartridge for Heavy Machine guns( no .30-06 to scale up) and a 30-32 caliber round for medium MGs, as the .25 can't carry enough compound for incendiary rounds.
It wouldn't be rimmed, but otherwise hard to say what this cartridge would be, but the 300 Savage(7.62x48mm) may get adopted, more powerful than the .30-40, less than what the .30-06 would have been, and around since 1920.

So the US had a 6.5mm class Intermediate Cartridge for Rifles, and the parent of what became 308 NATO for Medium Machine guns and BAR, and .52 caliber HMG in time for WWII
 
Top