Rifles and Machineguns of WW2

[plan_D]

The only defining feature of the M1 Garand was the semi-automatic ability of it. It lacked the stopping power, accuracy and range of standard British and German bolt action rifles.

The clip wasn't small; it carried 8 rounds but it couldn't be reloaded mid-clip. The Lee Enfield Mk.IV was one of the best rifles of the war, it wasn't revolutionary but it was a good solid build and would easily stop someone in one shot.

The German K98 was another great rifle, comparable to the Lee Enfield. The Gewher 43 was a semi-automatic rifle used by the German forces but I don't know how it performed. And of course, the Stg.44 the most most weapon personal firearm to come forth from World War 2; the assault rifle.

Best fixed position LMG - MG42. Best squad support LMG - Bren. Best sub-machine gun - Thompson or MP40. Best rifle - K98 or Lee Enfield, although you have to give the Mosin Nagnant some credit. Best Assault Rifle, well there was only one the Stg.44!

[trackend]

I put it badly D sorry I meant small as in for a semi automatic as you tend to get through rounds at a fair rate of knots for the Sub Id always pick the Tommy gun the .45 rounds used where not very far from dum dum with there very thin copper sheath even a hit in the arm will blow big lumps off Ideal for building/room clearance I don't think the Schmisser,s 9mm had the same stopping power. I go with you on the Bren almost as accurate as a rifle in the right hands.

[the lancaster kicks ass]

and of course you'd have one hell of a struggle trying to get past a good soldier with a Lee Enfeild No.4............

[plan_D]

The MP40 didn't have as much kick as the Thompson in sustained fire, I think 9 mm would do enough damage to stop people especially in close quarters room combat. It also packed a whole TWO more rounds.

[wmaxt]

Originally Posted by plan_D

The MP40 didn't have as much kick as the Thompson in sustained fire, I think 9 mm would do enough damage to stop people especially in close quarters room combat. It also packed a whole TWO more rounds.

The .45 was created after the US fought the Phillipenoes in the first few years of the 20th century. The .38 (Virtualy the same as a 9mm) could not stop the attackers and their bambo armor. The .45 could knock them down anyway.

In the '80s the FBI went from the 45 to the 9mm. When they did they found the stopping power reduced to the point that people they had shot several times were shooting back and killing agents, they created the .40 calibre (they were too embarassed to admit they made a mistake by going back to the 45).

wmaxt

[plan_D]

The MP-5 is one of the best, if not the best, SMGs in the world today, it is 9 mm. It will practically cut anyone in half. The MP40 packed 32 9 mm rounds, now I don't know about you but I wouldn't want someone pointing one of those things at me.

If you burst into a room with a MP40 and unload that entire clip, I will safely say you'll probably drop at least 4 or 5 people in the room, if not more.

[Wildcat]

What about the good old Vicker's Machine gun? How did it compare to the MG42 or the US 30 Cal. ?

[plan_D]

It was a sturdy and reliable gun, I'd say equal to the US .30 but inferior to the MG42.

[trackend]

The Vickers was an old weapon by ww2 but as you say D very reliable by using water cooling it could maintain continuous firing for long periods with out problems.
The problem with all high rate of fire weapons like the (excellent)MG42 is the amount of ammunition that they use.
In ww2 for example it is forgotten that transport was not all by truck or half-track most squaddies walked everywhere
Troops even in blitzkrieg walk into battle this means all the ammo and equipment has to be carried. some times a high rate of fire is not always an advantage especially if your the poor mug who has to hump the stuff about.
The H&K MP5 is a good weapon but you cant compare a 1920's weapon with a modern firearm as I said the Schmisser lacked the hitting power compared to the Thompson the other problem with the Schmisser is its a machine pistol with only a rudimentary skeleton stock this makes accuracy of any sort very poor.

[CharlesBronson]

Panzer-terror in action.

[cheddar cheese]

Nice

[trackend]

I can tell you now a good film when you see it CC Bullit is a classic and the music is so cool.

[cheddar cheese]

Definately!

[P38 Pilot]

I dont know about the vickers. It was a great machine gun to lay down fire with but i would got with the M2 Browning or the German MG42 anytime. The Scmessier (Mp40) seemed like a good submachine gun to use but like I posted earlier I would prefer the Tommy Gun anyday. But back to the MG42, its rate of fire was so deadly that soldiers were being taught how to get down when they heard the sound!

[plan_D]

The Vickers was just as good as the U.S .30 cal. I hardly believe that people were trained to get down when they heard the MG42, first off you don't need to train someone to **** themselves and duck. And secondly that could possibly be one of the worst things, you don't get down and duck if you're advancing. You keep your enemies heads down and advance. Why do you think German soldiers were so good? Because they advanced QUICKLY to cover, they never just hit the deck.

One thing about MG42 crews though, which I thought was quite smart, they used to have two MG42s set up, one loaded with tracer ammo and the other not. They'd test fire the tracer loaded one at night so it could be seen, and they'd fire it above head height so Allied soldiers thought it couldn't be depressed anymore.
Then the other was set up below that so it COULD hit the enemy, the Allied soldiers were advance thinking they were out of the field of fire of the MG 'cos it was firing above them...and by the time they'd realised that another one was hitting them, half the squad was dead or dying.