Best WW2 Weapon...

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 05-03-2007, 04:44 PM

That is because he is probably fiction.

Here read futher:

Historians have continued to question the existence of this seemingly fictitious character. Listed below are a few of the reasons which suggest that he never existed:

No records of the SS ever being in Stalingrad have been found.

The SS had very few snipers, as they viewed this role as a dishonorable way to fight. Sniping was a task for the Wehrmacht.

No active sniper was ever given a rank as high as Major (Sturmbannführer), as snipers were expected to serve on the battlefield, not to lead.

At the end of the war, Germany's best documented sniper was a 21-year-old Private (Gefreiter) named Matthäus Hetzenauer, with a total of only 345 confirmed kills, compared to König's supposed 400-plus confirmed kills.

Soviet propaganda was rife with fictitious stories to boost morale during a time when the war was so uncertain. The Battle of Stalingrad was the turning point for the German offensive into Russia.

Erwin KÃ¶nig - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

timshatz · 05-03-2007, 05:11 PM

Not particularly suprising.

flojo · 05-03-2007, 05:48 PM

Wouldn't the Browning High Power not make a good candidate for best handgun?

timshatz · 05-03-2007, 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flojo

Wouldn't the Browning High Power not make a good candidate for best handgun?

Good weapon, no two ways about it. Not sure if it was a standard side arm for any of the major players in the war. Might've been the weapon for some of the lesser Armies (Belgian, Yugoslav, ect.).

However, if it was, it would make a candidate.

trackend · 05-04-2007, 11:09 AM

Harping back to the AT weapons I found this Citation for John Mahony VC which seems to show that the guys behind the weapon can somtimes overcome its short commings.
24th May 1944 Italy
A company of the Westminster Regiment (motor) Canadian under the command of Major Mahony was order establish a bridgehead across the River Melfa. (I'll shorten it to the salent points)
This they did under heavy machinegun fire the bridgehead was enclosed on three sides by and 88mm SP 450yds to the right four AA guns 100yds to the left a Spandau left of these a second 88mm SP and a company of enemy infantry with mortars and MGs.
One counter attack by the enemy consisting of SP's and Tanks was beaten back using PIAT's, 2in Mortars and grenades. the end result was three SP'S and one Panther knocked out.

It just goes to prove what can be achieved if you wait for the right moment even with not so hot Equipment.

Soren · 05-04-2007, 10:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DerAdlerIstGelandet

That is because he is probably fiction.

Here read futher:

Historians have continued to question the existence of this seemingly fictitious character. Listed below are a few of the reasons which suggest that he never existed:

No records of the SS ever being in Stalingrad have been found.

The SS had very few snipers, as they viewed this role as a dishonorable way to fight. Sniping was a task for the Wehrmacht.

No active sniper was ever given a rank as high as Major (Sturmbannführer), as snipers were expected to serve on the battlefield, not to lead.

At the end of the war, Germany's best documented sniper was a 21-year-old Private (Gefreiter) named Matthäus Hetzenauer, with a total of only 345 confirmed kills, compared to König's supposed 400-plus confirmed kills.

Soviet propaganda was rife with fictitious stories to boost morale during a time when the war was so uncertain. The Battle of Stalingrad was the turning point for the German offensive into Russia.

Erwin KÃ¶nig - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Exactly Adler.

Hetzenaur is the German top Sniper of WW2 - König never existed, and Thorvald which is just another nick for this supposed German sniper in Stalingrad as-well.

glennasher · 06-30-2007, 11:11 AM

The 82nd Abn. thought enough of the Panzerfaust to take two truckload they'd captured, to battle with them, and left their bazookas behind, this, according to Jim Gavin's book. The earliest bazookas weren't up to snuff, although they were improved later on.

As far as other "bests", I'd have to go with the 1911A1, M1 Garand crowd...The Lee Enfield would certainly come up for worthy mention, though. I'm a fan of the Browning pistols, but they just don't compare to a 1911. For an LMG, the Bren gun has to be in consideration, if not the outright winner, GPMG, probably the MG42.

LaggyMcLagLag · 06-30-2007, 03:27 PM

I think the best Machine Gun of World War Two was the MP-44 (don't know what machine gun class it would be in), although it didn't make much of a difference because of production rate reasons, it was still pretty darn good and very accurate. M1 Garand is best rifle (Weirdly enough they used scoped M1's in Nam), Thompson was best SMG since it was .45 caliber, same reason 1911 is probably best pistol, but the Russian SMG, the PPSh probably had the fastest rate of fire.

Theres also the FG-42, But I don't know if thats an assault rifle or a SMG or what.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 06-30-2007, 03:53 PM

Do you mean the MG42 which was a Machine Gune?

Oh and hi Bird-Nerd oh I mean LaggyMcLagLag.

LaggyMcLagLag · 06-30-2007, 04:05 PM

Bird-Nerd was my stupid uncle using my E-Mail because he's to lazy to get his own.
And no I mean the FG-42.

glennasher · 06-30-2007, 04:06 PM

Tests during the war concluded that the M3/M3A1 was better and more reliable than the Thompson, which is one of the reasons the M3 was adopted(that, and $$$$$) I'd have to vote STEN for best SMG, though, since it beat the M3, and the Thompson!. The Thompson definitely had the "cool factor" but cool ain't everything, it was heavy and awkward to carry, and the ammo weighed a bunch............

LaggyMcLagLag · 06-30-2007, 04:07 PM

FG42 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 06-30-2007, 04:19 PM

Aha that is as stated in the artical pretty much a light support weapon, sort of like the SAW today. Easy to carry, not too big but it is deffinatly not an assault weapon or sub machine gun.

renrich · 06-30-2007, 05:01 PM

I don't believe that the US had any official snipers in ww2 but it is a fiction that the 03 Springfield was more accurate than the Garand. A Garand could be made to shoot just as accurately and it was used as a sniper rifle in Korea. I question whether a M98 was any more accurate than the Garand either. Garands were like any rifle some more accurate than others. I was fortunate that old 5182609 was an extremely accurate example of the breed. It was capable of a lot more accuracy than the shooter but I still fired expert with it on the KD range. The Browning Hi Power is a nice pistol but the 9 mm parabellum round does not compare to the 45 acp in stopping power. I have a Browning as well as a 1911 government model Colt and I don't believe the Browning would be as reliable on the battlefield as the Colt.

LaggyMcLagLag · 06-30-2007, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DerAdlerIstGelandet

Aha that is as stated in the artical pretty much a light support weapon, sort of like the SAW today.

Ah okay. I didn't read all the way trhough the article until about 18 minutes ago...

Quote:

Originally Posted by renrich

ww2 but it is a fiction that the 03 Springfield was more accurate than the Garand. A Garand could be made to shoot just as accurately and it was used as a sniper rifle in Korea. I question whether a M98 was any more accurate than the Garand either. Garands were like any rifle some more accurate than others. I was fortunate that old 5182609 was an extremely accurate example of the breed. It was capable of a lot more accuracy than the shooter but I still fired expert with it on the KD range.

Really? cool. Since it's semi auto and has convinient en-bloc clips it's far superior to the springfield.