@@jameshealy4594 ya but the conceal carry advantages are just beyond compare. Heck you can just slip it into your jacket or pants pocket and no one would know!
I’d love to see more of this. I think Ian knows his stuff so well that breaking down what he thinks of various arms, in a top 5-10 format, would be extremely interesting and worthwhile to watch. And I will be there to cry foul the second he picks some other handgun over the 1911 😂
I have two Webley Self-Loading Pistol Mk. 1 both in .455 Webley Automatic. I learned to reload ammunition starting with this cartridge. This made reloading an even bigger challenge, but I eventually made rounds that functioned perfectly in the pistol. Much later I had a mould made to approximate the original bullet once I learned to cast bullets (about 10 years later).
@@ForgottenWeapons And a Mannlicher, except it is a sketchy knock off named Manlicker. A seven times out of ten chance the gun blows up and "Licks" the man using it.
As an owner of a 1911 & Luger, yes they are indeed the kings of WWI handguns. I would put the one of the early model Nambu pistols in my top 5 personally, maybe even in spot #3. They had some issues, but they were mostly minor, and were very reliable compared to other contemporary pistols. Also if we're doing blowback handgun honorable mentions, I nominate the Mauser Model 1914 as mine!
Much respect for giving the Ruby some love. I’ve collected a few of them and they may be my favorite ww1 self loader just because of the unique history behind them. Thanks for that Ian
Excellent video, both views! Love both channels, and the reviews. I cannot say either review/choice is wrong on the opinions given, as the subject matter is so vast and the age of the weapons gives ones views the ability to be skewed by so many ways.
This is a great, and well reasoned, video (I'm about to watch the C&Rsenal one)! There are a few points regarding the majority of WWI combat that many people don't take into account when formulating opinions on this subject. Important examples among them would be that the person firing their pistol/revolver would almost always be doing so one-handed because they were holding something in their other hand [the lock of their abandoned MG, a marching compass, a roll of signal wire, a flare pistol, etc. or, in an enemy trench, their primary weapon for the task at hand: a grenade or a trench club]; additionally, at pistol engagement range, trench warfare is confined yet almost completely three-dimensional [the enemy can appear from above, below, left, right, to your front or rear in very quick succession and you may not be able to change your stance to engage it]. I'm not going to pretend that I could pick a good pistol to use in WW, however, my criteria would definitely include 'easy to shoot one-handed', 'instinctive to point when used on targets not to my front', 'reliably incapacitates an enemy at 10-12 yards', and 'light and compact enough that it doesn't get in the way of doing my primary job'.
This was very well done, as was C&Rsenals, which I loved. And 10 is not too many, would have very much enjoyed seeing your 6-10 choices. But now we need from Jonathon at Royal Armouries, Rob at British Muzzle Loaders and Bloke on the Range to all do their lists please. And maybe 9 Hole Reviews too. And it would be extra cool if Mark Novak would throw his well thought out opinion in too.
"Othais and I see eye to eye on many things, ... but there are some things that Othais does or says that I profoundly don't understand". Well said Ian, well said indeed.
I have owned many M1911A1's, one Luger several Star in 9mm and .45 (Star PD) and a lot of other pistols from Thompson Center Contenders to Remington Fireball to little twist barrel Derringers and of course the tip barrel Derringers in .38 Spcl and .32ACP as well as a few FEG in .32, 380 and 9MM Mak. I always thought a Styer Han would be a nice gun to have but never got one simply because I stopped handloading and where I live I would have to mail order ammo for it. After I became disabled I sold off my rather extensive gun collection (This before the increase in value damn it!). I kept my old duty gun an Astar 100 in .45 and a M1911A1 in the short barrel version (Citadel). Picked up a Taurus .22LR clone of the old Smith and Wesson 22/32 kit gun which I love dearly, dad had one of those that he used to carry when he was walking his trap lines up on our old farm in the 50's Mom made him sell it after we kids got old enough to want to play with guns.
Interesting point about the 1911 and "learning to shoot it'. Sergeant York seemed to have the ides. A point with the Webley: Semi-rimmed cartridges are not much of an issue with a well-designed (and made) magazine. .38 Super packs quite a wallop downrange, but is somewhere between 9mm Para and .45 ACP for "shootability". Hence the popularity of .38 Super on "Race-Guns". Major power factor and more rounds in the mag than .45. This really became obvious when Para Ordnance introduced the double-stack frame a few decades ago. Ergonomically, the 1911 is the best thought-out of the bunch. The Luger wins the "aesthetics" points. If we include revolvers, the Colt and S&W revolvers set up for .45ACP in "half-moon" clips are worth considering.
I think the C96 with a stock was probably the best weapon for trench warfare. Small compact with 10 round magazine capacity and with a powerful 30 caliber cartridge.
I was always reserved over how good the 1911 is, especially as a german. But I recently had the chance to shoot one in .45 ACP and it was great! Ok, it was a sporting pistol, probably a bit heavier than the original, but it shot great. But I am probably still more of a 9mm fan
Nice video, however I have to take exception with the supposed kick that you get firing a 1911. Frankly I’ve been shooting one since I was 11, and I never really had issues with it. My Dad, who carried one when he was in the Air Corps in WW2, taught me how to properly grip it, and back in those days I was taught to fire the pistol one handed the same way be did. I have always loved shooting it !
I would have thought you would have placed the P-38 in second place over the Luger. The Luger seems more likely to Stovepipe with the toggle action. I for one would like to see those two compared in a video.
I prefer your list over C&R, they included the nambu which I would not put on a list, I do not know much about WW1 nambu but in the 30s and WW2 Japanese officers had to buy there own pistols, they tended to buy European or American pistols. They put the 04 over the 08 Luger, I would put the 08 as number 1 Luger. They preferred the 04 because of the longer barrel and the detachable stock which increased the range, my view is that a pistol is not a long range weapon they had rifles for that. Having the Nambu on the list really threw me.
@@Armored_Muskrat Yeah, ok, guess that is fair. I wasn't really role playing so to speak. But yeah, if you are talking about actually using it in a trench, sure, i can go with that. And, have to say, I don't disagree at all, i would probably pick the Luger, even without the mud tests. I just like it a hell of a lot more. But my point was that mud tests are not the be all and end all. (but yeah, if we are strictly talking about trenches, it probably is a good indication)
Please release more opinion videos Ian. Mainly because your expertise is vastly different than most other gun channels. I mean, even I have a channel. Lol. It just doesn’t compare. Keep up the great content.
Hi Ian, I find your choices and C&Rsenal's choices both very sound, yet I wonder what a top five handguns list would be, if revolvers and semiautos were to compete in the open division. I think I'd prefer the 1917 S&W for safety and ease of use reasons.
Interesting video. I attended a collectors shoot once and I noted not one P08 emptied a magazine without a jam. Every 1911 fired without a jam. Maybe I'm not entirely normal because I don't have an issue with the recoil at all and frankly find 9mmP pistols a bit whippy...
The 7,63mm Mauser is very powerful. With adding the stock holster, you get a very accurate mini-carbine. This gun was loved by the Russians and by Winston Churchill…
@@methodeetrigueur1164 Russians loving something isn't a high praise... It's solid in the carbine form, but not a good pistol. And even in the carbine job a Navy or artillery luger is just as good and much better as a pistol.
@@petrimakela5978 « Russians loving something isn’t a high praise » : value judgment… Yes, the Lugers could do the job. But there were not enough. That’s why the Mauser C96 was issued to the German military…
I've always liked the "steampunk" look of the Roth-Steyr, and it's cartridge was certainly more effective than the 32ACP, which was considered to be adequate by much of the world for decades to come. I don't know if it actually saw much use, but it was a well-designed high-quality pistol. The Luger is a have-to, seeing much use, it's one of the world's great pistols as is the Colt 1911. Both have drawbacks but up close and personal they will do the job. The Steyr-Hahn and the Webley seem to be odd choices; neither saw much actual use- most British preferred revolvers and the Steyr-Hahn really doesn't have anything special going for it. The Ruby, even as weak and crappy as many were, saw more actual use than both of these combined, and was very 'pocketable' in comparison to any of these others. That and their prolifity saw many of these being carried by soldiers who were not issued pistols on both sides, and many came home with those soldiers after the war ended. I can't at all see it being in a 'best' category, but it better than nothing. Haven't seen C&R's video but I have to now.
I find it hard to believe that .45 ACP is such a hard cartridge to handle. I shot my first one at 10 years old and could reliably hit a 3oz Dixie cup nailed to a tree (we were at my father's friend's old pig farm in Winchester, VA; long story) without any training. I am of decidedly medium build (height, weight and hand size). By the way, my father and his friend had both been soldiers in WWII. The friend's hobby was collecting and restoring old military arms, so I got to fire a bunch when I was a kid.
In my opinion officres pistols were not mannly porpused for fihgting the enemy, they were for holding the own soldiers in check. Shooting desertes on point and things like that. What do you think?
First world war Colt 1911 but with a 8 round magazine second world war Browning high power with a 15 round magazine if I remember correctly they came out with 13 round magazines that's ok
I noticed you mention the Steyr-Hahn was chambered in 9x23 Largo. I was under the impression that the Hahn was in 9x23 Steyr which was just different enough to cause feeding issues. Some of them are chambered in 9x19 parabellum but those have a 'B' stamped on the slide for identification purposes. Just wanted to verify if Steyr Hahn owners CAN run 9x23 Largo in their original 9x23 Steyr guns. Thanks
How do you square the "effectiveness" of the 1911 with the fact that almost no woundes from .45 ACP was recorded by German military doctors. The reason that the M1 Carbine was developed as PDW. I actually learned this from _your_ video, Ian!
It would be interesting to know, from those same German medical reports, if the Mle 1935 or the Webley were any more effective than the 1911. @@ForgottenWeapons
As an army brat I witnessed army officer pistol qualifications and training. Except for my dad the general level of marksmanship was hilarious. Not helped by the one handed bullseye technique. The grass in front of the targets took a beating.
I guessed number 1 right, and I thought number 2 would be in the top 5. Got the other three wrong, though.🤔. The "bonus extra" filled the obvious gap in the 1-5 selection. I do not want to be more specific than that - watch the video.
When you mentioned the economic advantages of the Ruby over the 1911 or Luger, I agreed in part and disagreed in part which prompted a question. It is easy to compare the costs of ONE pistol of any particular make and model to ONE different pistol. My question arises though when you look at your defense budget and the percentage of that budget that goes to pistols. If the cost of choosing a Ruby is .0001% of your defense budget and the cost of the same number of Luger or 1911 pistols is .0002%, is choosing the more expensive option really that significant? And going a bit deeper, while pistols during WW1 were mostly symbols of rank that were rarely used, that did change somewhat as the war dragged on. What is the cost of losing an officer, sergeant, etc. because their cheaper pistol didn't really function as a useful and reliable weapon instead of an ornament? Today, I think our evaluation is first reliability, durability, effectiveness and ergonomics, with cost being the last, but decisive factor, all others being equal. When you look at it this way, I'll argue that there are actually 2 or 3 lists of "Top 5 Pistols of World War One" that are legitimate. Which pistols were produced and carried/used in the greatest numbers? Which pistols cost the least? And finally, but in my opinion the best, which ones were the most effective, reliable, durable and ergonomic. Like a Venn diagram, there will/can be overlap and if so, that intersection is your "Goldilocks" choice. But I think it more likely that while there will be overlap between cost and numbers used, there won't be an intersection with category 3.
The Colt 1911 and Luger are pretty much the obvious 1 and 2, but I do like seeing the more obscure arms. You almost never see people talk about the Austro-Hungarian arms.
To @johnsanko3146. Nice comment and I think very fair Folk today, (probably most are less than fully captivated by european political history) don't seem to appreciate just HOW BIG a part of pre WW1 europe that sprawling empire was. It often provided monarchs or spouses to many of the other royal houses. Its banking sector was amazingly strong (also ancient - thinking medieval Fugger family whose representative image still feature on euro currency). They also held the Ottoman at bay, which the moderns seem incapable of doing. In short the vanished empire was in its day an absolute powerhouse. Disclaimer, I'm from another jurisdiction
@@wraithwyvern528 Lovely name. However you must agree that they had been there a very long time and i don't think the demise was really much to do with propellants.
@@wraithwyvern528but many of the weapons they build did. The m95 was a serious contender to the mausers, and it's operating system continued to be used way after the empire dissolved
Ditto, I love the Steyr Krinka Manlincher :) such a great gat. But seriously, there's something about those pistols. They're in your face yet subtle in detail.
I agree with you on the Ruby as the "badge of office" pistol for people who are highly unlikely to see combat, and who will probably only fire it once on the range just after it's issued. If they ever do have to use it, the light recoil and general ease of use will be helpful.
@Ni999 700,000 is a lot of pistols but the range they are used at would be under 50 yards. They are an emergency backup weapon and used far less than rifles.
13:21 Sergiusz Piasecki also appreciated it for its ease of shooting, but emphasized that it was difficult to find a well-made one. The guy was actually a professional assassin at one point, so he probably knew something about guns.
@@seriousmaran9414 From the U.S. Army’s Manual of the Automatic Pistol, Caliber .45, Model of 1911,” published in Nancy, France during February of 1918 - _"For the average man, 25 yards may be taken as the maximum range at which the pistol should be fired. To fire at longer ranges will usually result in no casualties for the enemy but only an empty pistol at the crucial moment. This does not apply to a very small percentage of expert shots, but a man should be quite sure that he can be classed as such before violating the general rule.”_ Thanks for explaining to me what the entire world has seemed to understand since the invention of the pistol. 👍 And don't forget - _"Too much stress cannot be laid on the fact the pistol is an emergency weapon. The man who wants a stock on his pistol so that he can shoot it at a distance of several hundred yards has no understanding of the function of the arm. It is solely for the personal protection of the bearer when the enemy is within very short range and there is no possibility of accomplishing more with the other weapons with which the soldier may happen to be armed."_ _“The member of an automatic rifle or machine gun squad who stops serving his rifle or machine gun to indulge in pistol practice at the enemy is wholly without a proper sense of his duty to his comrades. At the same time the stupid man who does not use his pistol when the enemy is on top of him and his gun is jammed or it is no longer possible to use it profitably, deserves no better fate than that which he will probably get, that is, immediate death."_
@@seriousmaran9414 World War I also involved fighting in trenches, and a long rifle that you had to manually reload after each shot was not very convenient in these circumstances. So suddenly everyone wanted a lot of one-hand guns. Besides, I suppose that even in a more open area, during an assault, I would prefer such a pistol. Funny, there's a movie on TV right now (it's about 1920, but a close period) where a group of soldiers are running through the forest with long guns in the fog and it looks like they're having a big problem. Such weapons are weak at short range. If an average guy shoots a rifle from that time, it takes a few seconds to get back to normal, such is the shock of the recoil. In the case of the pistol... I have seen that even a teenage girl without training can shoot a 9x19 without any problems, maybe not super accurate, but without any problems, which is important at short distances. So yes, you're right that rifles were used more intensively for shooting... somewhere towards the enemy... But when the threat was close, a pistol like this was cool.
Of all my WWI sidearms, my ruby is my favorite - when I field strip it and see the various file and tool marks, the un-centered-ness of the grip screw slots, and just the overall crudeness of it, I’m shocked that it works at all. Yet, firing PPU .32 acp, it has never failed me. It’s reasonably accurate, soft-shooting, simple to maintain, and, for me at least, surprisingly ergonomic. Possibly my favorite handgun of all time…
A Ruby is one of those pistols you can legitimately claim as one of a kind because they all have a little difference between every single one. The guy assembling it might have been in a good mood or not it shows. The gambit runs from legitimately dodgy to safe to shoot,some are beautifully finished and some look like a monkey beat it into submission 😂
That seems to have a very short answer though. Not enough of their defence budget went to the army, because the sea was their best defensive fortification
If you mean a pistol, then I'd say that was almost certainly seen as an utterly unnecessary luxury we just didn't have the spare budget for and didn't particularly need (To this day primary and support weapons are FAR more important than sidearms, so they weren't entirely wrong). If you mean a semi-auto rifle, then I'd suggest it was probably the lack of spare budget combined with the resistance of the doddering old guard who are always stuck fighting the last war (Who also insisted we stay with rimmed .303), the lack of good options, and far higher priorities. We were still very much in empire mode unfortunately, which meant that the Royal Navy got priority because it was our wall as well as the glue that held it all together, and all the small arms we used HAD to work in almost every unpleasant climate, and given that bolt actions and revolvers struggle to go wrong in that regard, good luck convincing the entrenched, grumbling, interwar old guard of the need to move away from them in a time before certain, more forward thinking armies started using these things against us.
The best part is that they made a LOAD of them too, so it's iconic, exotic, AND you can find shooters easy enough without spending too much money at all. My nephew got into gun shows a few years back and ended up getting a good deal on one(luckily it was either 'original enough' or had the right 'mismatch recipe' to be a good functioning gun lol; shout out to early mass production). Well used, in OK shape, not 'numbers matching', not significant in any way - and she shot great! Lived up to the hype TBH. Everyone needs to go buy a cheap Luger!
I'd like to see a top 5 for an inexperienced shooter. I think that would favor the smaller cartridges and less complex firearms. As my FLETC firearm instructor said countless times, the first most accurate round wins. In a military application most people evaluating potential service weapons don't have the inexperience to appreciate that. Another evaluation point in that case would be ease of maintenance in the field.
The British actually embraced this line of logic postwar with their adoption of the No.2 in 38/200 as a replacement for revolvers in 455. It turns out the Webley had enough recoil that it made it less effective in the hands of inexperienced shooters.
@@rantanen1Not necessarily true. The average US Army recruit in WWI and WWII was very familiar with firearms and shooting as their was such a high percentage of them came from farms and rural living where firearms usage was commen. Not until the Vietnam war was the average US recruit unfamiliar with firearms.
In watching both videod, I find it odd that neither mention the most singificant action of the Great War period where a pistol was the featured weapon: 26 April 1916- The Battle of Mount Street Bridge. The execution visited upon two battalions of the Sherwood Foresters (27 and 2/8) by Lieut. Michael Malone by his C96 (with and without the holster stock) from his position in 25 Northumberland Road was horrific. His first clip...10 rounds, 10 hits and shattered the column vanguard. The for the house lasted almost 6 hours. Malone's C96 is a permanent exhibit at the National Museum of Ireland at Collins Barracks, Dublin. RTE recreated the Battle of Mount Street Bridge on its 1966 Miniseries "Insurrection"...Episode 4.
Assuming that the list is confined to handguns that were issued by governments to their armed forces, the C96 may be excluded simply in the grounds that it was vanishingly rare. Only a couple hundred thousand of them were issued between the German and Austrian armies--which sounds like a lot, but is little more than a rounding error when you consider that the Germans alone started the war with nearly four million men under arms.
Good, I was mildly upset about the ranking of the beretta 1915 and Nambu while the Roth Krnka missed the list with C&Rsenal, at least gun Jesus appreciates my favorite austro hungarian pistol
@@rustycann6887 A couple of points: 1) The Mauser Broomhandle was not officially adopted by any of the countries involved in WWI (I think) and 2) The Mauser has ergonomic problems as a handgun. It's more of a PDW, much like the Artillery Luger. With shoulder stock attached it's a great trench raid weapon, but it's kinda terrible as an everyday carry pistol.
Just a side note .......I ordered Ian's book on WW2 U.S. weapons on November 27th and it arrived at my door on December 2nd.......WHY DID IT TAKE SOOOOO LONG? Oh yeah, it's an outstanding read! I'm already looking forward to his next book.....Japanese? German?
Lucky you - I preordered mine months ago and still haven't even received a shipping notice. Edit: while I did indeed preorder my copy back in May, I see I opted for the signed copy. That could explain some further delay, as the books themselves have only recently arrived at the warehouse.
Stripper clip loading in combat conditions worries me because lining it up is a more fine-motor task, but I have to think that if the Steyr-Hahn is as good as they think, I tend to agree that, in theory, the Roth-Krnka can't be far behind.
Well, consider how the vast majority of rifles were loaded at the time. It is more of a fine motor skill, but very much a standard practice for the vast majority of people serving.
Sidearms for most were for dealing with immediate threat and then get out of dodge. If an officer is engaged in cqb, something has gone horribly wrong.
I might have missed something here but. If the Steyer hahn was a further development of the Krnka pistol and the Krnka pistol was designed for the cavalry, then perhaps it was not intended to be a backup weapon for infantry or a trench raid weapon but an offensive fighting weapon for the cavalry. As such you could expect to reload it many times during combat and stripper clip reloading might make a bit more sense maybe?
I liked this version...and opinions will vary. As mentioned below. EDC for the common man - the Ruby. Trench fighting for my life - 1911 and a lot of spare mags
Even Ian could not put a French pistol in his top 5. Though a lot of French pistols weren't actually French. . .oh he just mentioned the Ruby, there we go.
This is a really good video, and I hope you'll go back to this style of content more frequently. Modern stuff is cool and all, but at the end of the day there's other people covering that stuff, and videos like this are why I come to FW.
I agree on the 1 and 2 but I don't know much about the others so I will defer to your expertise. My personal opinion I think the modern 1911 in 9mm is a much better choice, and also, having too much ammo is like having too much money- impossible!
If I couldn't have had a 1911 as a sidearm for WW1 I would have taken a Webley revolver all day every day. I haven't watched the C&R video but presumably they explicitly exluded revolvers?
I have both a WWI Webley revolver and a US Army M1917 WWI Smith & Wesson. The S&W is chambered in .45 ACP using full moon clips, and is little different from modern S&W revolvers. (The Smith will also accept .45 ACP without the full or half moon clips, but the clips amounted to a speed loader) I'd take it all day long over the Webley. It's a much better pistol.
@@vertigo4236 perhaps. Anecdotally it is frequently claimed that the Webley's reliability in the trenches was in fact superior to that of the various "automatic" pistols. I know not what the "real" truth of the matter was but I do know that it was highly regarded by those who carried them for raiding, wiring parties, tunneling etc. I think it's probably the last time the revolver was used in a war where it had not become obsolete.
I came here to see anything but the 1911, but I gotta admit that it was far ahead of anything else at the time and the fact that it is still relevant today over 100 years later is insane. The FN 1903, Mk IV revolver and the C96 are way cooler though. If I was fighting in WW1 I would snatch a C96 off a body the first chance I got.
Just for the record: The P08 (Luger) as issued to the German Army did not have, at any time, a grip safety. That negates one point made in its favour and shown with the example during your discussion. The Swiss variation and Navy P.04/06 did as also the P.06 and earlier commercials. P.S. I generally agree with your selection but, if the Webley had been available in greater numbers and therefore been issued generally within the Army it would, in my opinion, have performed better in the conditions of the Great War then the P.08.
All 150mm barrel German Navy Lugers are P.04s. There was a 1913 Navy contract for 150 100mm barrel ones and some additional commercial ones bought in 1913.
I really enjoyed this Ian, very interesting. After watching c&rsenal and comparing their list. I agree with yours over there's. I will say, I learned about the designation of all three branch Lugers and the Nambu was an interesting choice. The Webley pistol I first saw in a movie about the British in India in 1920 called Rise, Roar, Revolt.
Good list. I could only rate the ones I have used IRL; 1. P.08 2. 1911 3. FN 1903 4. Mauser C96 5. It is technically disqualified but it is nice, FN 1900.
As much as I love the C96, it can't really compete. Stripped clip loaded, not very safe, and with older sights. It's not a bad gun, nor unreliable, but there are better options.
6:45 Man that Webley pistol sure had some flex to it. I'm sure it was a very practical and useful firearm. Heck it looks like it was light as paper.
fully modular too , you cann add what ever you want to it with sccisors and transparent tape
@@NikoMoraKamu man those manufacturing costs must be low also. Surprised more people didn’t invest into this thing!
I think the poor showing in the overheating & saltwater immersion tests really hampered it.
@@jameshealy4594 ya but the conceal carry advantages are just beyond compare. Heck you can just slip it into your jacket or pants pocket and no one would know!
@@robosoldier11 the metal mafia mate , they control the gun bussines
I would love to see some more content like this on occasion. Even if it's a little less academic than what the channel usually is.
Absolutely. WW1 was wild.
I like when he mirrors or works with c&r. it really blends well with a near contrary perspective to mae, and a more practical view than othias
Agreed. Sometimes, you want academic history lessons, and sometimes you want friend simulator casual funtime content.
I’d love to see more of this. I think Ian knows his stuff so well that breaking down what he thinks of various arms, in a top 5-10 format, would be extremely interesting and worthwhile to watch. And I will be there to cry foul the second he picks some other handgun over the 1911 😂
@@Shadow962775
I like the way you put it :)
I have two Webley Self-Loading Pistol Mk. 1 both in .455 Webley Automatic. I learned to reload ammunition starting with this cartridge. This made reloading an even bigger challenge, but I eventually made rounds that functioned perfectly in the pistol. Much later I had a mould made to approximate the original bullet once I learned to cast bullets (about 10 years later).
Next vid: top five pistols of elbonia
Just every Schwarzlose ever made, in chronological order.
@@ForgottenWeapons Ahem. Model 1950, a copy of the Dreyse 9x19 blowback, still in use with National Territorial Guard.
@@ForgottenWeapons And a Mannlicher, except it is a sketchy knock off named Manlicker.
A seven times out of ten chance the gun blows up and "Licks" the man using it.
@@ForgottenWeaponsNo Borchardt?
@@ForgottenWeapons I heard they intended to use the Webley Mars, but noone would sell it to them, and no ammo is available for it
As an owner of a 1911 & Luger, yes they are indeed the kings of WWI handguns. I would put the one of the early model Nambu pistols in my top 5 personally, maybe even in spot #3. They had some issues, but they were mostly minor, and were very reliable compared to other contemporary pistols.
Also if we're doing blowback handgun honorable mentions, I nominate the Mauser Model 1914 as mine!
Much respect for giving the Ruby some love. I’ve collected a few of them and they may be my favorite ww1 self loader just because of the unique history behind them. Thanks for that Ian
Excellent video, both views! Love both channels, and the reviews. I cannot say either review/choice is wrong on the opinions given, as the subject matter is so vast and the age of the weapons gives ones views the ability to be skewed by so many ways.
This is a great, and well reasoned, video (I'm about to watch the C&Rsenal one)! There are a few points regarding the majority of WWI combat that many people don't take into account when formulating opinions on this subject. Important examples among them would be that the person firing their pistol/revolver would almost always be doing so one-handed because they were holding something in their other hand [the lock of their abandoned MG, a marching compass, a roll of signal wire, a flare pistol, etc. or, in an enemy trench, their primary weapon for the task at hand: a grenade or a trench club]; additionally, at pistol engagement range, trench warfare is confined yet almost completely three-dimensional [the enemy can appear from above, below, left, right, to your front or rear in very quick succession and you may not be able to change your stance to engage it].
I'm not going to pretend that I could pick a good pistol to use in WW, however, my criteria would definitely include 'easy to shoot one-handed', 'instinctive to point when used on targets not to my front', 'reliably incapacitates an enemy at 10-12 yards', and 'light and compact enough that it doesn't get in the way of doing my primary job'.
This was very well done, as was C&Rsenals, which I loved. And 10 is not too many, would have very much enjoyed seeing your 6-10 choices. But now we need from Jonathon at Royal Armouries, Rob at British Muzzle Loaders and Bloke on the Range to all do their lists please. And maybe 9 Hole Reviews too. And it would be extra cool if Mark Novak would throw his well thought out opinion in too.
Didn't Johnathon leave that channel?
@@jagx234 as of 4 days ago he was still putting out content on their site.
Lucky I still have my great grandpa's 1911 from when he served. Still does a great job after all these decades.
One of my favorite videos of yours. Well done.
I love that you've explicitly said what assumptions you are making in terms of criteria. Thanks Ian.
"Othais and I see eye to eye on many things, ... but there are some things that Othais does or says that I profoundly don't understand". Well said Ian, well said indeed.
I have owned many M1911A1's, one Luger several Star in 9mm and .45 (Star PD) and a lot of other pistols from Thompson Center Contenders to Remington Fireball to little twist barrel Derringers and of course the tip barrel Derringers in .38 Spcl and .32ACP as well as a few FEG in .32, 380 and 9MM Mak. I always thought a Styer Han would be a nice gun to have but never got one simply because I stopped handloading and where I live I would have to mail order ammo for it. After I became disabled I sold off my rather extensive gun collection (This before the increase in value damn it!). I kept my old duty gun an Astar 100 in .45 and a M1911A1 in the short barrel version (Citadel). Picked up a Taurus .22LR clone of the old Smith and Wesson 22/32 kit gun which I love dearly, dad had one of those that he used to carry when he was walking his trap lines up on our old farm in the 50's Mom made him sell it after we kids got old enough to want to play with guns.
Interesting point about the 1911 and "learning to shoot it'. Sergeant York seemed to have the ides.
A point with the Webley: Semi-rimmed cartridges are not much of an issue with a well-designed (and made) magazine.
.38 Super packs quite a wallop downrange, but is somewhere between 9mm Para and .45 ACP for "shootability". Hence the popularity of .38 Super on "Race-Guns". Major power factor and more rounds in the mag than .45. This really became obvious when Para Ordnance introduced the double-stack frame a few decades ago.
Ergonomically, the 1911 is the best thought-out of the bunch. The Luger wins the "aesthetics" points.
If we include revolvers, the Colt and S&W revolvers set up for .45ACP in "half-moon" clips are worth considering.
I think the C96 with a stock was probably the best weapon for trench warfare. Small compact with 10 round magazine capacity and with a powerful 30 caliber cartridge.
I was always reserved over how good the 1911 is, especially as a german. But I recently had the chance to shoot one in .45 ACP and it was great! Ok, it was a sporting pistol, probably a bit heavier than the original, but it shot great. But I am probably still more of a 9mm fan
Nice video, however I have to take exception with the supposed kick that you get firing a 1911. Frankly I’ve been shooting one since I was 11, and I never really had issues with it. My Dad, who carried one when he was in the Air Corps in WW2, taught me how to properly grip it, and back in those days I was taught to fire the pistol one handed the same way be did. I have always loved shooting it !
The Luger's magazine release sticks out a bit there, spoiling its spot.
I would have thought you would have placed the P-38 in second place over the Luger. The Luger seems more likely to Stovepipe with the toggle action. I for one would like to see those two compared in a video.
this is a discussion of WWI pistols, WWI was just slightly over when the P38 was introduced
Ian I have to agree with you. Good choices!
I'd look at some of the revolvers used as well, still a great idea.
Interesting.. good explanations regarding the few differences between your picks and C@Rsenal’s picks..
The Luger also looks gorgeous!
I prefer your list over C&R, they included the nambu which I would not put on a list, I do not know much about WW1 nambu but in the 30s and WW2 Japanese officers had to buy there own pistols, they tended to buy European or American pistols. They put the 04 over the 08 Luger, I would put the 08 as number 1 Luger. They preferred the 04 because of the longer barrel and the detachable stock which increased the range, my view is that a pistol is not a long range weapon they had rifles for that. Having the Nambu on the list really threw me.
The 1911 is a skill cannon. The Roth-Krnka is a spamfire gun. He said it, not me!
I agree for the most part, and i get your logic. It just makes me sad that no C96s where included (on a purely emotional basis).
can you make a video on the pros and cons of strips, belts and magazines
I knew the cult and the Luger was going to be in there but I completely forgot about the Weebly I don't think I've ever seen one except in books 👍🍀🍀🍀
The cult. 😉
The Colt cult
From your mud testing I would go with the Luger instead of the 1911.
Saint Browning would revoke his library card :D
The mud testing is a fun experiment, but not something you should base your purchase/choice on. They have said this themselves.
@@ErwinHolland. Until you fall down in your muddy trench and have a mud coated gun!!
@@ErwinHolland. Follow up shots are quicker also.
@@Armored_Muskrat Yeah, ok, guess that is fair. I wasn't really role playing so to speak. But yeah, if you are talking about actually using it in a trench, sure, i can go with that.
And, have to say, I don't disagree at all, i would probably pick the Luger, even without the mud tests. I just like it a hell of a lot more. But my point was that mud tests are not the be all and end all. (but yeah, if we are strictly talking about trenches, it probably is a good indication)
Please release more opinion videos Ian. Mainly because your expertise is vastly different than most other gun channels. I mean, even I have a channel. Lol. It just doesn’t compare. Keep up the great content.
Tbh, the Ruby or Colt 1908 are my top picks.
Hi Ian, I find your choices and C&Rsenal's choices both very sound, yet I wonder what a top five handguns list would be, if revolvers and semiautos were to compete in the open division. I think I'd prefer the 1917 S&W for safety and ease of use reasons.
Well C&R uploaded their top 10 revolvers of WW1 Today, so i would suspect Ian doing a follow up to this video on revolvers
Interesting video. I attended a collectors shoot once and I noted not one P08 emptied a magazine without a jam. Every 1911 fired without a jam. Maybe I'm not entirely normal because I don't have an issue with the recoil at all and frankly find 9mmP pistols a bit whippy...
Why no Mauser C96 ?
Roth Steyr M1907 is a very underrated pistol ! Thanks for joining the Ruby (Spanish pistol but used by the French).
C96 is heavy, bulky, ultra high boreaxis and in general a pain in the ass t
The 7,63mm Mauser is very powerful. With adding the stock holster, you get a very accurate mini-carbine. This gun was loved by the Russians and by Winston Churchill…
@@methodeetrigueur1164 Russians loving something isn't a high praise... It's solid in the carbine form, but not a good pistol. And even in the carbine job a Navy or artillery luger is just as good and much better as a pistol.
@@petrimakela5978 « Russians loving something isn’t a high praise » : value judgment…
Yes, the Lugers could do the job. But there were not enough. That’s why the Mauser C96 was issued to the German military…
@@methodeetrigueur1164very powerful compared to what? 9mm? Not really, they're damn near identical.
As an owner I’m disappointed the FN-1900 .32 didn’t show up in the honorable mentions.
I knew you'd find a way to shoehorn the Ruby in there somehow 😂
I've always liked the "steampunk" look of the Roth-Steyr, and it's cartridge was certainly more effective than the 32ACP, which was considered to be adequate by much of the world for decades to come. I don't know if it actually saw much use, but it was a well-designed high-quality pistol. The Luger is a have-to, seeing much use, it's one of the world's great pistols as is the Colt 1911. Both have drawbacks but up close and personal they will do the job. The Steyr-Hahn and the Webley seem to be odd choices; neither saw much actual use- most British preferred revolvers and the Steyr-Hahn really doesn't have anything special going for it. The Ruby, even as weak and crappy as many were, saw more actual use than both of these combined, and was very 'pocketable' in comparison to any of these others. That and their prolifity saw many of these being carried by soldiers who were not issued pistols on both sides, and many came home with those soldiers after the war ended. I can't at all see it being in a 'best' category, but it better than nothing. Haven't seen C&R's video but I have to now.
About as many Steyr Hahns saw service as 1911s
I find it hard to believe that .45 ACP is such a hard cartridge to handle. I shot my first one at 10 years old and could reliably hit a 3oz Dixie cup nailed to a tree (we were at my father's friend's old pig farm in Winchester, VA; long story) without any training. I am of decidedly medium build (height, weight and hand size).
By the way, my father and his friend had both been soldiers in WWII. The friend's hobby was collecting and restoring old military arms, so I got to fire a bunch when I was a kid.
it should be, "Which gun would I want to carry regardless of cost"
I've never even touched numbers 3-5 but I agree with the top two.
In my opinion officres pistols were not mannly porpused for fihgting the enemy, they were for holding the own soldiers in check. Shooting desertes on point and things like that. What do you think?
I’d love to have a zoom in shot after the reveal, otherwise fun video
11:02 i'm making this my ringtone 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
Nice CCE fleece
First world war Colt 1911 but with a 8 round magazine second world war Browning high power with a 15 round magazine if I remember correctly they came out with 13 round magazines that's ok
#1 Has to be the Kolibri.
It was the weapon of choice for every alpha chad! 😂❤
I noticed you mention the Steyr-Hahn was chambered in 9x23 Largo. I was under the impression that the Hahn was in 9x23 Steyr which was just different enough to cause feeding issues. Some of them are chambered in 9x19 parabellum but those have a 'B' stamped on the slide for identification purposes. Just wanted to verify if Steyr Hahn owners CAN run 9x23 Largo in their original 9x23 Steyr guns. Thanks
No. Don’t run Largo in 9x23 Steyr guns. It is generally fine to run 9x23 Steyr in Largo guns, however
@TenaciousTrilobite thanks Trilobite, love your point of view videos on these guns as well.
The "RUBY" is a BROWNING BLOWBACK TYPE?
1911, and P08 are undisputed #1 and 2. No love for the S&W model 10 or M1917? Webley Mk V. also deserves mention.
How do you square the "effectiveness" of the 1911 with the fact that almost no woundes from .45 ACP was recorded by German military doctors. The reason that the M1 Carbine was developed as PDW. I actually learned this from _your_ video, Ian!
It's not because the .45 isn't effective, it's because handguns are very rarely used in military combat in the first place.
It would be interesting to know, from those same German medical reports, if the Mle 1935 or the Webley were any more effective than the 1911. @@ForgottenWeapons
Now I have to watch Othais's and Gun-Withces top ten.
Yay, Roth-Krnka!
Alternate title is Best Pistols of WW1 for Left Handers
Ian, you pretty much gave away your #2 choice at 6:43 because that pistol butt is unmistakable 😏
No LP08 with stock and 32 round snail mag?
As an army brat I witnessed army officer pistol qualifications and training. Except for my dad the general level of marksmanship was hilarious. Not helped by the one handed bullseye technique. The grass in front of the targets took a beating.
Are you considering the Colt and S&W 1917 revolvers when you say you would prefer the Ruby to any WWI revolver?
I find it interesting that both of you put styer Han so high
I laughed when he said the Ruby is Frankly.
Ian,
For some reason (not having seen C&Rsenal’s video)I expected the Mauser C96 to be on your list.
Am I way off base here?
Thx
Its an awful gun. Terrible ergos, front heavy etc. Its mentioned in C&Rsenals vid.
I guessed number 1 right, and I thought number 2 would be in the top 5. Got the other three wrong, though.🤔. The "bonus extra" filled the obvious gap in the 1-5 selection. I do not want to be more specific than that - watch the video.
When you mentioned the economic advantages of the Ruby over the 1911 or Luger, I agreed in part and disagreed in part which prompted a question. It is easy to compare the costs of ONE pistol of any particular make and model to ONE different pistol. My question arises though when you look at your defense budget and the percentage of that budget that goes to pistols. If the cost of choosing a Ruby is .0001% of your defense budget and the cost of the same number of Luger or 1911 pistols is .0002%, is choosing the more expensive option really that significant? And going a bit deeper, while pistols during WW1 were mostly symbols of rank that were rarely used, that did change somewhat as the war dragged on. What is the cost of losing an officer, sergeant, etc. because their cheaper pistol didn't really function as a useful and reliable weapon instead of an ornament? Today, I think our evaluation is first reliability, durability, effectiveness and ergonomics, with cost being the last, but decisive factor, all others being equal. When you look at it this way, I'll argue that there are actually 2 or 3 lists of "Top 5 Pistols of World War One" that are legitimate. Which pistols were produced and carried/used in the greatest numbers? Which pistols cost the least? And finally, but in my opinion the best, which ones were the most effective, reliable, durable and ergonomic. Like a Venn diagram, there will/can be overlap and if so, that intersection is your "Goldilocks" choice. But I think it more likely that while there will be overlap between cost and numbers used, there won't be an intersection with category 3.
I like that 1907.
My personal choice if I was going into WW1 would be an Uzi 😂
So is the the professional version of what the young ones call a "dis track"?
What about Mauser C96?
The Colt 1911 and Luger are pretty much the obvious 1 and 2, but I do like seeing the more obscure arms. You almost never see people talk about the Austro-Hungarian arms.
To @johnsanko3146. Nice comment and I think very fair
Folk today, (probably most are less than fully captivated by european political history) don't seem to appreciate just HOW BIG a part of pre WW1 europe that sprawling empire was. It often provided monarchs or spouses to many of the other royal houses. Its banking sector was amazingly strong (also ancient - thinking medieval Fugger family whose representative image still feature on euro currency). They also held the Ottoman at bay, which the moderns seem incapable of doing. In short the vanished empire was in its day an absolute powerhouse.
Disclaimer, I'm from another jurisdiction
Well to be fair, Austro-Hungary didn't last particularly long after the invention of smokeless powder.
@@wraithwyvern528 Lovely name.
However you must agree that they had been there a very long time and i don't think the demise was really much to do with propellants.
@@wraithwyvern528but many of the weapons they build did. The m95 was a serious contender to the mausers, and it's operating system continued to be used way after the empire dissolved
Ditto, I love the Steyr Krinka Manlincher :) such a great gat.
But seriously, there's something about those pistols. They're in your face yet subtle in detail.
I agree with you on the Ruby as the "badge of office" pistol for people who are highly unlikely to see combat, and who will probably only fire it once on the range just after it's issued. If they ever do have to use it, the light recoil and general ease of use will be helpful.
Didn't the French buy over 700,000 of them? I suspect they were used more often than you said. 🤷🏻♂️
@Ni999 700,000 is a lot of pistols but the range they are used at would be under 50 yards. They are an emergency backup weapon and used far less than rifles.
13:21 Sergiusz Piasecki also appreciated it for its ease of shooting, but emphasized that it was difficult to find a well-made one. The guy was actually a professional assassin at one point, so he probably knew something about guns.
@@seriousmaran9414 From the U.S. Army’s Manual of the Automatic Pistol, Caliber .45, Model of 1911,” published in Nancy, France during February of 1918 -
_"For the average man, 25 yards may be taken as the maximum range at which the pistol should be fired. To fire at longer ranges will usually result in no casualties for the enemy but only an empty pistol at the crucial moment. This does not apply to a very small percentage of expert shots, but a man should be quite sure that he can be classed as such before violating the general rule.”_
Thanks for explaining to me what the entire world has seemed to understand since the invention of the pistol. 👍
And don't forget -
_"Too much stress cannot be laid on the fact the pistol is an emergency weapon. The man who wants a stock on his pistol so that he can shoot it at a distance of several hundred yards has no understanding of the function of the arm. It is solely for the personal protection of the bearer when the enemy is within very short range and there is no possibility of accomplishing more with the other weapons with which the soldier may happen to be armed."_
_“The member of an automatic rifle or machine gun squad who stops serving his rifle or machine gun to indulge in pistol practice at the enemy is wholly without a proper sense of his duty to his comrades. At the same time the stupid man who does not use his pistol when the enemy is on top of him and his gun is jammed or it is no longer possible to use it profitably, deserves no better fate than that which he will probably get, that is, immediate death."_
@@seriousmaran9414 World War I also involved fighting in trenches, and a long rifle that you had to manually reload after each shot was not very convenient in these circumstances. So suddenly everyone wanted a lot of one-hand guns. Besides, I suppose that even in a more open area, during an assault, I would prefer such a pistol. Funny, there's a movie on TV right now (it's about 1920, but a close period) where a group of soldiers are running through the forest with long guns in the fog and it looks like they're having a big problem. Such weapons are weak at short range. If an average guy shoots a rifle from that time, it takes a few seconds to get back to normal, such is the shock of the recoil. In the case of the pistol... I have seen that even a teenage girl without training can shoot a 9x19 without any problems, maybe not super accurate, but without any problems, which is important at short distances. So yes, you're right that rifles were used more intensively for shooting... somewhere towards the enemy... But when the threat was close, a pistol like this was cool.
Of all my WWI sidearms, my ruby is my favorite - when I field strip it and see the various file and tool marks, the un-centered-ness of the grip screw slots, and just the overall crudeness of it, I’m shocked that it works at all. Yet, firing PPU .32 acp, it has never failed me. It’s reasonably accurate, soft-shooting, simple to maintain, and, for me at least, surprisingly ergonomic. Possibly my favorite handgun of all time…
A Ruby is one of those pistols you can legitimately claim as one of a kind because they all have a little difference between every single one. The guy assembling it might have been in a good mood or not it shows. The gambit runs from legitimately dodgy to safe to shoot,some are beautifully finished and some look like a monkey beat it into submission 😂
"Top 5 artillery pieces of WW1" but you reveal them by firing them.
Same thing but "Top 2 nuclear weapons of WW2."
I like it when you and C&Rsenal collaborate. How about a revolvers of WW1 top 5?
It would be good to have you and Bloke on the range talk about the UK's failure to move to an automatic before WWII.
That seems to have a very short answer though. Not enough of their defence budget went to the army, because the sea was their best defensive fortification
@thorodinson3597 and the Army was happy with SMLE/No.4 and felt the LMGs were where the changes needed to be. (Rightly or wrongly)
And besides, the old service revolver with a tether cord around your neck….so iconic!
revolvers in ww2 weren't that bad though and they had a bazillion ww1 revolvers kicking around
If you mean a pistol, then I'd say that was almost certainly seen as an utterly unnecessary luxury we just didn't have the spare budget for and didn't particularly need (To this day primary and support weapons are FAR more important than sidearms, so they weren't entirely wrong). If you mean a semi-auto rifle, then I'd suggest it was probably the lack of spare budget combined with the resistance of the doddering old guard who are always stuck fighting the last war (Who also insisted we stay with rimmed .303), the lack of good options, and far higher priorities.
We were still very much in empire mode unfortunately, which meant that the Royal Navy got priority because it was our wall as well as the glue that held it all together, and all the small arms we used HAD to work in almost every unpleasant climate, and given that bolt actions and revolvers struggle to go wrong in that regard, good luck convincing the entrenched, grumbling, interwar old guard of the need to move away from them in a time before certain, more forward thinking armies started using these things against us.
The Luger is iconic even people who know squat about handguns recognize the Luger
My PPK/S gets the same level of recognition though - "Oh, a James Bond gun!" 🤣
The best part is that they made a LOAD of them too, so it's iconic, exotic, AND you can find shooters easy enough without spending too much money at all. My nephew got into gun shows a few years back and ended up getting a good deal on one(luckily it was either 'original enough' or had the right 'mismatch recipe' to be a good functioning gun lol; shout out to early mass production). Well used, in OK shape, not 'numbers matching', not significant in any way - and she shot great! Lived up to the hype TBH.
Everyone needs to go buy a cheap Luger!
That's more from its WWII usage and subsequent appearance in WWII movies than WWI, though.
In Germany also known as "Zimmerflak".
@@thomashoppe893
'Room flak" ?
I'd like to see a top 5 for an inexperienced shooter. I think that would favor the smaller cartridges and less complex firearms. As my FLETC firearm instructor said countless times, the first most accurate round wins. In a military application most people evaluating potential service weapons don't have the inexperience to appreciate that. Another evaluation point in that case would be ease of maintenance in the field.
top5 for „average recruit“ would be interesting.
@@AgiHammerthief I think 'inexperienced shooter' and 'average recruit' is pretty much the same thing in this context
The British actually embraced this line of logic postwar with their adoption of the No.2 in 38/200 as a replacement for revolvers in 455. It turns out the Webley had enough recoil that it made it less effective in the hands of inexperienced shooters.
Excellent suggestion that I really haven't considered. I would enjoy a video on this topic.
@@rantanen1Not necessarily true. The average US Army recruit in WWI and WWII was very familiar with firearms and shooting as their was such a high percentage of them came from farms and rural living where firearms usage was commen. Not until the Vietnam war was the average US recruit unfamiliar with firearms.
Guns from this era are pure art!
Nobody needs to see parents argue 🥺
I think the c96 mauser should go on this list. Great gun for the time.
In watching both videod, I find it odd that neither mention the most singificant action of the Great War period where a pistol was the featured weapon: 26 April 1916- The Battle of Mount Street Bridge. The execution visited upon two battalions of the Sherwood Foresters (27 and 2/8) by Lieut. Michael Malone by his C96 (with and without the holster stock) from his position in 25 Northumberland Road was horrific. His first clip...10 rounds, 10 hits and shattered the column vanguard. The for the house lasted almost 6 hours. Malone's C96 is a permanent exhibit at the National Museum of Ireland at Collins Barracks, Dublin. RTE recreated the Battle of Mount Street Bridge on its 1966 Miniseries "Insurrection"...Episode 4.
Assuming that the list is confined to handguns that were issued by governments to their armed forces, the C96 may be excluded simply in the grounds that it was vanishingly rare. Only a couple hundred thousand of them were issued between the German and Austrian armies--which sounds like a lot, but is little more than a rounding error when you consider that the Germans alone started the war with nearly four million men under arms.
I still own the Webley mk VI my grandfather carried in WW1. 25th Batt. CEF.
What an heirloom, I hope Trudeau lets you keep it.
Cool
Was he an Officer, or a gunner or something?
I'd love to see a followup with the pocket pistols of WW1, there are some very fun little pieces there.
Then Ian can run a WW1 Bug match.
Yes! A top 5 small pistol list.
Good, I was mildly upset about the ranking of the beretta 1915 and Nambu while the Roth Krnka missed the list with C&Rsenal, at least gun Jesus appreciates my favorite austro hungarian pistol
I left out the Beretta because it's blowback, but that's the one or their picks that I haven't had a chance to fire...
@@ForgottenWeaponsdo you think it would be substantially different from a modern Beretta? At least outwardly they resemble eachother.
The 1915 is really a pretty handy .380. So I guess Luger owb, 1915 iwb is my choice lol
where is the mauser
@@rustycann6887 A couple of points: 1) The Mauser Broomhandle was not officially adopted by any of the countries involved in WWI (I think) and 2) The Mauser has ergonomic problems as a handgun. It's more of a PDW, much like the Artillery Luger. With shoulder stock attached it's a great trench raid weapon, but it's kinda terrible as an everyday carry pistol.
Just a side note .......I ordered Ian's book on WW2 U.S. weapons on November 27th and it arrived at my door on December 2nd.......WHY DID IT TAKE SOOOOO LONG? Oh yeah, it's an outstanding read! I'm already looking forward to his next book.....Japanese? German?
I hope he does the book on German small arms next in the series.
Lucky you - I preordered mine months ago and still haven't even received a shipping notice. Edit: while I did indeed preorder my copy back in May, I see I opted for the signed copy. That could explain some further delay, as the books themselves have only recently arrived at the warehouse.
5 day shipping isnt long at all
Oh no, 5 days! I'm still waiting on some shoes to *ship* to me for over a month now.
Stripper clip loading in combat conditions worries me because lining it up is a more fine-motor task, but I have to think that if the Steyr-Hahn is as good as they think, I tend to agree that, in theory, the Roth-Krnka can't be far behind.
Well, consider how the vast majority of rifles were loaded at the time. It is more of a fine motor skill, but very much a standard practice for the vast majority of people serving.
Sidearms for most were for dealing with immediate threat and then get out of dodge. If an officer is engaged in cqb, something has gone horribly wrong.
@@JD-tn5lz Exactly. If you were up against a dozen guys with any of those pistols you were probably done for anyway.
I might have missed something here but.
If the Steyer hahn was a further development of the Krnka pistol and the Krnka pistol was designed for the cavalry, then perhaps it was not intended to be a backup weapon for infantry or a trench raid weapon but an offensive fighting weapon for the cavalry.
As such you could expect to reload it many times during combat and stripper clip reloading might make a bit more sense maybe?
I liked this version...and opinions will vary. As mentioned below. EDC for the common man - the Ruby. Trench fighting for my life - 1911 and a lot of spare mags
Glad to see the shout out to my other favorite channel. C&RSENAL is criminally underrated imo.
No type A Nambu?
Even Ian could not put a French pistol in his top 5. Though a lot of French pistols weren't actually French. . .oh he just mentioned the Ruby, there we go.
His head couldn't let it in, but his heart had to say *something*...
🇺🇸
This was an awesome video! And could be a great series, like top 5 rifles, machines guns and so on, and even with WW2.
This is a really good video, and I hope you'll go back to this style of content more frequently. Modern stuff is cool and all, but at the end of the day there's other people covering that stuff, and videos like this are why I come to FW.
1911,Luger and Mauser C 96 …top 3 for me
I agree on the 1 and 2 but I don't know much about the others so I will defer to your expertise. My personal opinion I think the modern 1911 in 9mm is a much better choice, and also, having too much ammo is like having too much money- impossible!
FW and C&Rsenal have done the back & forth before and I love it every time it happens.
If I couldn't have had a 1911 as a sidearm for WW1 I would have taken a Webley revolver all day every day. I haven't watched the C&R video but presumably they explicitly exluded revolvers?
Revolver are bad in mud. Too many ingress places.
They did exclude revolvers. They’ll make a to 10 wheel guns video some day, I’m sure.
I have both a WWI Webley revolver and a US Army M1917 WWI Smith & Wesson. The S&W is chambered in .45 ACP using full moon clips, and is little different from modern S&W revolvers. (The Smith will also accept .45 ACP without the full or half moon clips, but the clips amounted to a speed loader) I'd take it all day long over the Webley. It's a much better pistol.
@@vertigo4236 perhaps. Anecdotally it is frequently claimed that the Webley's reliability in the trenches was in fact superior to that of the various "automatic" pistols. I know not what the "real" truth of the matter was but I do know that it was highly regarded by those who carried them for raiding, wiring parties, tunneling etc. I think it's probably the last time the revolver was used in a war where it had not become obsolete.
I THINK YOU BETTER JUST HAVE A BACK UP GUN MATCH WITH C R arsenal !!! EITHER THAT OR A DUEL!!
I came here to see anything but the 1911, but I gotta admit that it was far ahead of anything else at the time and the fact that it is still relevant today over 100 years later is insane.
The FN 1903, Mk IV revolver and the C96 are way cooler though. If I was fighting in WW1 I would snatch a C96 off a body the first chance I got.
Yeah, as a being back It'd be sweet
"relevant" The 1911 was a good pistol, but it's been overtaken by so many different pistols by now that it hasn't been relevant in over 40 years.
@@jojomaster7675Tell that to USPSA and IDPA competitors.
Just for the record: The P08 (Luger) as issued to the German Army did not have, at any time, a grip safety. That negates one point made in its favour and shown with the example during your discussion. The Swiss variation and Navy P.04/06 did as also the P.06 and earlier commercials. P.S. I generally agree with your selection but, if the Webley had been available in greater numbers and therefore been issued generally within the Army it would, in my opinion, have performed better in the conditions of the Great War then the P.08.
Yep, that one is an American commercial sale gun. I looked at the DWM toggle and the grip safety and my brain did an oops.
Corporal Hoobler (Easy Company, 501 PIR) agrees with this
506*@@penchanski673
All 150mm barrel German Navy Lugers are P.04s. There was a 1913 Navy contract for 150 100mm barrel ones and some additional commercial ones bought in 1913.
I really enjoyed this Ian, very interesting. After watching c&rsenal and comparing their list. I agree with yours over there's. I will say, I learned about the designation of all three branch Lugers and the Nambu was an interesting choice.
The Webley pistol I first saw in a movie about the British in India in 1920 called Rise, Roar, Revolt.
Ian has not done a mach with a Luger, because it is a too sensible choice!
Good list. I could only rate the ones I have used IRL;
1. P.08
2. 1911
3. FN 1903
4. Mauser C96
5. It is technically disqualified but it is nice, FN 1900.
As much as I love the C96, it can't really compete.
Stripped clip loaded, not very safe, and with older sights.
It's not a bad gun, nor unreliable, but there are better options.
I agree with your list, i dont know why the FN 1900 would be disqualified though
@@sinclair1392 no it's just that it has an unlocked breech and a weak caliber, thus not fulfilling Ian's criteria.