Talk:Maxim gun

message: SOme of the claims seem overblwown, cf Gatling gun, although it was clearly a marked improvement.  Rich Farmbrough 13:01, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd suggest that the minie type self-obturating ball did for massed infantry formations before fully automatic weapons did - viz the War Between the States (or whatever you call the American Civil War), wherein repeating firearms were latecomers and sustained fire weapons (specifically the Gatling Gun) virtually a no-show, and yet demonstrated that minie-type rifled muskets could very handily anihilate a massed infantry formation.  A lesson that was, arguably, not well learned in Europe, but there also small arms wreaked havoc in (for example) the Franco-Prussian war without the need for sustained fire weapons.  62.196.17.197 (talk) 17:04, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

text: In the cause of pedantry, I'd point out that the Gatling is not technically a machine gun (being driven rather than automatic) but your point is essentially correct. 62.196.17.197 (talk) 17:07, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

text: May be looking at sustained rate, which would allow for riflemen having to change magazines etc., but still needs citations. 62.196.17.197 (talk) 17:04, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Claims seem overblown

message: Maschinegewehr 08 article lists 1884 as the year of Maxim Gun's invention, Maxim Gun article lists 1885.  Also, MG 08 article references Maxim Gun as being water-cooled, but Maxim Gun article does not list such and there appears to be no water jacket on the Maxim Gun.
:Hiram Maxim demonstrated his first *perfect* prototype to the public in october 1884. He applied for the first patents related to the weapon already in June 1883 (McCallum, 1999, p.46). But the weapon was by no means "a final invention" by its first patent or first prototype. There were several prototypes, and many different designs. There were many patents, in 1883-1884 and during the following years, as Maxim was quite a keen patent applicant. For more, see McCallum, 1999 and Dolf F.Goldsmith's work. --MortenB 13:45, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: PS : The first Maxims were indeed water-cooled. See this image, which more clearly shows the water jackets around the barrel.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Morten Blaabjerg (talk • contribs) 13:47, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

text: [EDIT : Maxim applied for the first Maxim Gun-related patents already in 1883. --MortenB 12:40, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradictions within Maxim Gun and Maschinegewehr 08 (sp) articles 

message: The article states :
The weapon was finally adopted, under the guidance of Sir Garnet Wolseley, by the British Army in 1888 - using the same .577/450 ammunition as their Martini-Henry rifles.
Anyone got a source for the year 1888 and Wolseleys involvement? --MortenB 13:49, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind, figured it out. Turns out McCallum mentions this connection on p. 67 of his Maxim biography. --MortenB 15:14, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK, something's not quite right. This article cites Wolseley taking over as Army CinC in 1888, while this one has it as 1 November 1895 (para 3). --Mikepeat (talk) 13:33, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: British adoption of the Maxim?

message: I seem to remember some ppl calling this gun the "Devil's Paintbrush" due it having a firing rate of 666 rpm. Now, I know that all cyclic rates of fire are purely an average and cannot be estimated down to the first decimal place, but I'd like to know who said this and when. PowderedToastMan 09:13, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Devil's Paintbrush 

message: "On the Western Front, 90 percent of bullet-related casualties were inflicted by "Maxim-type guns"[citation needed]." This one seems insane. It probably means that 90 percent of fired bullets were shot from machine guns. Until we have some extremely reliable source to the "90 percent of casualties" claim I'm removing it. Wikinist 13:01, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  90 percent? 

message: The article says "Maxim could fire 600 rounds per minute, equivalent to the firepower of about 30 contemporary breech-loading bolt-action rifles". Firstly, that claim is not referenced. Secondly, it is unlikely that 30 rifleman could average a rate of fire of one round every three seconds (remembering also that they had to reload/change magazines). Thirdly, even if they did, they would hardly have been employing the full efficiency of the weapon. Try it some time, by firing at a target.  Fire, reload, sight your weapon, fire, reload, sight your weapon, fire etc. I'll bet your score is nowhere near what you expected. Imagine doing this where you are under extreme mental and physical pressure because people out there are aiming guns at you! The info in the article might be a nice theory but is in reality quite meaningless. Away with it. 222.153.65.1 (talk) 21:20, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Meaningless rate of fire info

message: Hiram Maxim already redirects to Hiram Stevens Maxim.  Assuming WP:NC is being followed, this leads me to believe that Hiram the Elder is the better-known of the two and is the one most people are referring to when they say "Hiram Maxim" (assuming anyone actually says that).  His page also disambiguates between him and his son, as is custom for pages describing people who share names with other encyclopedic folk. 
IMO, either would be correct but Hiram Maxim is not wrong.Flakeloaf (talk) 17:16, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Third Opinion

message: Not a major point, but Maxim decided to use recoil when he suffered a sore shoulder one day after an afternoon of shooting. Bigger men are more prone to this.  He also copied the toggle-link mechanism from a Winchester '73. The toggle -link was admired by the Europeans, also having been used in the Borchardt and Luger pistols.Tintinteslacoil (talk) 12:39, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Development?

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 14 May 2012 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant 
This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 06:57, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Maxim wczesny.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: Is this qualification required in this article? Obviously is it required on the article of the man himself but seems redundant here given the wikilink. The source provided also disambiguates him as "American inventor". The Britannica page for the gun states "developed by engineer and inventor Hiram Maxim in about 1884, while he was residing in England", which seems like it would be more appropriate here too. (Would also mean we can remove the ref in the lede) Just a thought I had while passing! Nikthestoned 16:25, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  "American-born British inventor" 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Maxim gun. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080828003722/http://www.colonialwargaming.co.uk/Inspiration/Poetry/Newbolt/Traveller.htm to http://www.colonialwargaming.co.uk/Inspiration/Poetry/Newbolt/Traveller.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:47, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: Might this film clip be used in the article?SovalValtos (talk) 00:08, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historic film clip 

message: Considering how the maxim gun sees current use by the Ukrainian Ground Forces in the Donbas war, should the service history be updated from 1959 to present to account for this?
Benjideaula (talk) 10:45, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Even further, I've seen pictures of a Maxim gun mounted on a small trailer in use by Russian forces. I would update the article to display its use in the Russo-Ukrainian War as a whole. 75.110.152.26 (talk) 01:19, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Service history