Side by side comparison, Mauser vs Shansei

alvin · 09-14-2015, 08:05 PM

A little bit background.

A Shansei collector bought a refurbished Year 19 Shansei, and did a side by side comparison of parts with a Mauser Model 1930.

After viewing these pictures, why do you think Mauser was better made than Shansei, or vice versa. Please don't tell me that's common sense, please raise your reasons, 1, 2, 3, etc... if you have energy

Please view them as two guns, and put those collector consideration aside, price/reblue/worn etc aside. Just two guns.

alvin · 09-14-2015, 08:07 PM

More pictures...

alvin · 09-14-2015, 08:10 PM

Picture 21 - 30

alvin · 09-14-2015, 08:12 PM

Final group, picture 31 - 38.

That's all. Please raise points objectively, not subjectively.

hayhugh · 09-14-2015, 09:25 PM

I also have a few Mausers and a Shansei and it just goes to show that men with like machines can produce similar products. Not sure of the metallurgy of the Chinese's pistols but hand fitting was, I am sure, done in both country's. Both shoot just fine in my estimation and are both guns of the times. No sign of the hammer and chisel that you hear about.

alvin · 09-15-2015, 04:26 AM

No more comments?

I copied four sets of 38 pictures from another site (lots of work), only hayhugh had one comment so far. Everyone else must be tired

alvin · 09-15-2015, 06:30 AM

Although this Shansei was heavily buffed, but no major milling was changed. Comparing Shansei (and other Chinese copies) with Mauser, actually reveals what's difficult to copy on this type of pistol at that time. Usually, Chinese copy had two issues from machining precision point of view. Magazine floor fitting quality varies big time. Mauser also varies in this area, but not on the degree of Chinese copies. On this particular one, looks it's good, but in general, quality varies. Another difficult area was the firing pin/bolt fitting. It's not obvious that firing pin fitting with bolt internal milling could be hard, but it was. Certain problem was hard to be resolved by hand polishing. This issue is more common.

Another weak area is metal quality. In theory, key components were made from imported steel. But there was still steel quality issue on key components, on bolt, on bolt stop, on extractor, etc. Heat treatment problem? Don't know. Tons of those poor Mauser imported after relining are still shootable working fine, but this is hard on Shansei. Give it a try.

All opinions were based on visual observation and actual trial.

John Sabato · 09-16-2015, 11:48 AM

I have no knowledge of the history or use of the C96 type pistols. Thanks so much for the lesson in the differences between these two pistols.

Olle · 09-16-2015, 11:57 AM

The Shansei looks just as good or better than the Mauser to me. I don't doubt that the Chinese could make quality firearms, so I'm wondering if the bad reputation comes from the guns that were produced by the Chinese cottage industry? For example: I have seen many Chinese copies of the Browning 1900, and the quality varies from great to downright laughable.

alvin · 09-16-2015, 01:08 PM

Those C96 copies made by a few big factories were serviceable. Those big factories hired some very well paid German engineers as consultants. But I am not sure they involved in pistol making or not. The higher priority for those factories were making rifles. I inspected a few 7.63mm copies (including Hanyang 7.63mm and Shansei 7.63mm and unknown 7.63). Visually, I would say the milling quality is roughly comparable to German late wartime production quality. One with bolt lock cracked (still on it, but broken), another one with bolt cracked, yet another one lock frame was movable due to latch wearing. So, none working now. ... Since I have never seen any youtube.com videos shooting those, statistically, I would say steel quality must have certain issues (although key components were supposed being made of expensive imported steel).

There were higher quality of FN 1900 copies too. Better than those frequently showing up in auction. But I only saw those in museums, not on market yet.

Sergio Natali · 09-16-2015, 01:15 PM

This thread is quite interesting, but to me it's difficult to make such a comparison, since we can find several different types of Shanxei; are we referring to the scarce Type 17 made in 1929 by Taiyuan Arsenal or to its modern clones? At least here in Europe it's fairly easy to find "modern copies" made in China in the Seventies like the one pictured below, so perhas it's a bit like comparing apples to oranges.
My 2 cents.

Sergio

DonVoigt · 09-16-2015, 01:19 PM

I would have to say the Shansei.

The construction has been simplified and the pressure bearing parts, i.e. the bolt and locking lug are larger, which is to stay more robust and thus potentially stronger and wearing longer.

I'm assuming both are .30 Mauser.

If the Shansei is in .45 of course it is larger in size, but still simplified in construction.

09-15-2015, 06:30 AM	#7
alvin User Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: US Posts: 3,843 Thanks: 132 Thanked 729 Times in 438 Posts	Although this Shansei was heavily buffed, but no major milling was changed. Comparing Shansei (and other Chinese copies) with Mauser, actually reveals what's difficult to copy on this type of pistol at that time. Usually, Chinese copy had two issues from machining precision point of view. Magazine floor fitting quality varies big time. Mauser also varies in this area, but not on the degree of Chinese copies. On this particular one, looks it's good, but in general, quality varies. Another difficult area was the firing pin/bolt fitting. It's not obvious that firing pin fitting with bolt internal milling could be hard, but it was. Certain problem was hard to be resolved by hand polishing. This issue is more common. Another weak area is metal quality. In theory, key components were made from imported steel. But there was still steel quality issue on key components, on bolt, on bolt stop, on extractor, etc. Heat treatment problem? Don't know. Tons of those poor Mauser imported after relining are still shootable working fine, but this is hard on Shansei. Give it a try. All opinions were based on visual observation and actual trial. Last edited by alvin; 09-15-2015 at 07:42 AM.

09-16-2015, 11:48 AM	#8
John Sabato Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The Capital of the Free World Posts: 10,156 Thanks: 3,003 Thanked 2,309 Times in 1,098 Posts	I have no knowledge of the history or use of the C96 type pistols. Thanks so much for the lesson in the differences between these two pistols. __________________ regards, -John S "...We hold these truths to be self-evident that ALL men are created EQUAL *and are endowed by their Creator* with certain UNALIENABLE* rights, and among these are life, LIBERTY, and the pursuit of happiness..."*

09-14-2015, 09:25 PM	#5
hayhugh User Join Date: Oct 2013 Location: Florida/Penna Posts: 898 Thanks: 893 Thanked 514 Times in 276 Posts	I also have a few Mausers and a Shansei and it just goes to show that men with like machines can produce similar products. Not sure of the metallurgy of the Chinese's pistols but hand fitting was, I am sure, done in both country's. Both shoot just fine in my estimation and are both guns of the times. No sign of the hammer and chisel that you hear about.

09-15-2015, 04:26 AM	#6
alvin User Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: US Posts: 3,843 Thanks: 132 Thanked 729 Times in 438 Posts	No more comments? I copied four sets of 38 pictures from another site (lots of work), only hayhugh had one comment so far. Everyone else must be tired

09-16-2015, 11:57 AM	#9
Olle User Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 1,149 Thanks: 159 Thanked 664 Times in 318 Posts	The Shansei looks just as good or better than the Mauser to me. I don't doubt that the Chinese could make quality firearms, so I'm wondering if the bad reputation comes from the guns that were produced by the Chinese cottage industry? For example: I have seen many Chinese copies of the Browning 1900, and the quality varies from great to downright laughable.

09-16-2015, 01:08 PM	#10
alvin User Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: US Posts: 3,843 Thanks: 132 Thanked 729 Times in 438 Posts	Those C96 copies made by a few big factories were serviceable. Those big factories hired some very well paid German engineers as consultants. But I am not sure they involved in pistol making or not. The higher priority for those factories were making rifles. I inspected a few 7.63mm copies (including Hanyang 7.63mm and Shansei 7.63mm and unknown 7.63). Visually, I would say the milling quality is roughly comparable to German late wartime production quality. One with bolt lock cracked (still on it, but broken), another one with bolt cracked, yet another one lock frame was movable due to latch wearing. So, none working now. ... Since I have never seen any youtube.com videos shooting those, statistically, I would say steel quality must have certain issues (although key components were supposed being made of expensive imported steel). There were higher quality of FN 1900 copies too. Better than those frequently showing up in auction. But I only saw those in museums, not on market yet.

09-16-2015, 01:19 PM	#12
DonVoigt User Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: near Charlotte NC Posts: 4,681 Thanks: 1,443 Thanked 4,356 Times in 2,041 Posts	I would have to say the Shansei. The construction has been simplified and the pressure bearing parts, i.e. the bolt and locking lug are larger, which is to stay more robust and thus potentially stronger and wearing longer. I'm assuming both are .30 Mauser. If the Shansei is in .45 of course it is larger in size, but still simplified in construction.