# Best WW2 Weapon...



## Lucky13 (Apr 21, 2007)

Which were best in their respective field?


----------



## Lucky13 (Apr 22, 2007)

Can we just delete the poll part of this Adler and keep it simple as to which was the best Rifle, Sub Machine Gun, Machine Gun etc. etc?
I willingly admit that I took it a tiny bit too far with too many choices in the poll which made too complicated....


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 22, 2007)

This is a restart of a thread that Lucky13 started...


----------



## Lucky13 (Apr 22, 2007)

You're the MAN Adler! Cheers!


----------



## Maharg (Apr 23, 2007)

Anything German.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 23, 2007)

Well lets see, just my opinions on the subject.

Pistol - Colt M1911 .45
Rifle - Mauser K98/M1 Gerand
Assault Rifle - Sturmgewehr 44 (StG44)
Machine Gun - MG42


----------



## timshatz (Apr 23, 2007)

Sub Machine Gun, lots of options. Like the PPSh but the MP40 and Thompson are definite options. Still, the PPSh with the large drup (72 rounds?) is pretty nasty up close and personal.


----------



## timshatz (Apr 23, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Well lets see, just my opinions on the subject.
> 
> Pistol - Colt M1911 .45
> Rifle - Mauser K98/M1 Gerand
> ...



Agree with ya' on everything but the K98. Think the Lee-Enfield Mk 4 was a better rifle. Bigger Magazine, nothing lost in smoothness of action by comparison (maybe even gained, but that is an opinion). But the Garand was a better standard service rifle than either of them. 

Can't beat the Colt 1911, same with the MG42 (critic on it being wasteful on ammunition- 20 rds a second is very high) but in ease of use and simplicity, there was none better. 

Might add the Bren Gun. Very good light machine gun. Better than the BAR (IMHO). 

Sturmgewhr44 is a winner in that catagory simply because there is nobody else in it. Revolutionary design. Not sure about the operational history.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 23, 2007)

I enjoy the K98. I own a few of them and they allways were a joy to shoot. They are very accurate and would also make a decent sniper rifle.


----------



## Jank (Apr 23, 2007)

Sub-machine gun -- Thompson .45

At close sub-machine gun ranges, it hits hard and makes big holes.


----------



## timshatz (Apr 23, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> I enjoy the K98. I own a few of them and they allways were a joy to shoot. They are very accurate and would also make a decent sniper rifle.



Very true, the basis for a lot of hunting rifles out there. 

Now if the question was "Which standard military rifle would make the best sniper rifle in WW2", I'd give it the K98 or it's american knockoff, the Springfield '03. Only odd duck would be the Lee Enfield 4 which had some odd harmonics or something that made it very accurate at super long ranges. But don't quote me on that 'cause it sounds like a sea story (even when I heard it).


----------



## Matt308 (Apr 23, 2007)

Never heard of that one timshatz. Are you thinking about the jungle carbine No.7? That one was notorious for a wandering zero and a vicious kick.


----------



## Lucky13 (Apr 23, 2007)

Some people state that the Finnish M28 and KP31 is the best ever sniper rifle....







Simo Häyhä, the highest scoring sniper in history with accounted 
542 kills. Will probably be unmatched as long as we live atleast.

Simo Hayha W.W. II Finland 542 
Ivan Sidorenko W.W. II U.S.S.R. 500 
Nikolay Yakovlevich Ilyin W.W. II U.S.S.R. 496 
Kulbertinov W.W. II U.S.S.R. 487 
V. N. Pchelintsev W.W. II U.S.S.R. 456 
Mikhail Budenkov W.W. II U.S.S.R. 437 
Fyodor Matveevich Okhlopkov W.W. II U.S.S.R. 429 
Fyodor Djachenko W.W. II U.S.S.R. 425 
Vasilij Ivanovich Golosov W.W. II U.S.S.R. 422 
Afanasy Gordienko W.W. II U.S.S.R. 417 
Stepan Petrenko W.W. II U.S.S.R. 412 
Sulo Kolkka W.W. II Finland 400+ 
Erwin Konig W.W. II Germany 400 
Vasili Zaitsev W.W. II U.S.S.R. 400 
Semen D. Nomokonov W.W. II U.S.S.R. 367 
Abdukhani Idrisov W.W. II U.S.S.R. 349 
Philipp Yakovlevich Rubaho W.W. II U.S.S.R. 346 
Matthäus Hetzenauer W.W. II Germany 345 
Victor Ivanovich Medvedev W.W. II U.S.S.R. 331 
E. Nicolaev W.W. II U.S.S.R. 324 
Leonid Yakovlevich Butkevich W.W. II U.S.S.R. 315 
Nikolai Ilyin W.W. II U.S.S.R. 315 
Lyudmila M. Pavlichenko (F) W.W. II U.S.S.R. 309 
Alexander Pavlovich Lebedev W.W. II U.S.S.R. 307 
Ivan Pavlovich Gorelikov W.W. II U.S.S.R. 305 
Ivan Petrovich Antonov W.W. II U.S.S.R. 302 
Heinz Thorvald W.W. II Germany 300 
Gennadij Iosifovich Velichko W.W. II U.S.S.R. 300 
Moisej Timofeyevich Usik W.W. II U.S.S.R. 300 
Nataly V. Kovshova 
Maria Polivanova (Female team) W.W. II U.S.S.R. 300 
Ivan Filippovich Abdulov W.W. II U.S.S.R. 298 
Yakov Mikhajlovich Smetnev W.W. II U.S.S.R. 279 
Liba Rugova W.W. II U.S.S.R. 274 
Anatolij Chekhov W.W. II U.S.S.R. 265 
Zhambyl Evscheyevich Tulaev W.W. II U.S.S.R. 262 
Sepp Allerberger W.W. II Germany 257 
Fyodor Kuzmich Chegodaev W.W. II U.S.S.R. 250 
Ivan Ivanovich Bocharov W.W. II U.S.S.R. 248 
Mikhail Ignatievich Belousov W.W. II U.S.S.R. 245 
Maxim Passar W.W. II U.S.S.R. 237 
David Teboevich Doev W.W. II U.S.S.R. 226 
Vasilij Shalvovich Kvachantiradze W.W. II U.S.S.R. 215 
Bruno Sutkus W.W. II Germany 209 
Mikhail Stepanovich Sokhin W.W. II U.S.S.R. 202 
Noj Petrovich Adamia W.W. II U.S.S.R. 200 
M.A. Abbasov W.W.II U.S.S.R. 200 
Gefreiter Meyer W.W. II Germany 180 
Yekaterina Zuranova (F) W.W. II U.S.S.R. 155 
Vladimir Ptchelinzev W.W. II U.S.S.R. 152 
Inna Semyonovna Mudretsova (F) W.W. II U.S.S.R. 143 
Feodosy Smeljachkov W.W. II U.S.S.R. 125 
I. Merkulov W.W. II U.S.S.R. 125 
H. Andruhaev W.W. II U.S.S.R. 125 
Oleh Dir W.W. II Germany 120 
Tatiana Igantovna Kostyrina(F) W.W. II U.S.S.R. 120 
Janis Roze W.W. II U.S.S.R. 116 
N.P. Petrova (F) W.W. II U.S.S.R. 107 
V. N. Pchelintsev W.W. II U.S.S.R. 102 
Yelizaveta Mironova (F) W.W. II U.S.S.R 100+ 
Aliya Moldagulova (F) W.W. II U.S.S.R. 91 
Nina Lobkovskaya (F) W.W. II U.S.S.R. 89 
Lidiya Gudovantseva (F) W.W. II U.S.S.R. 76 
Helmut Wirnsberger W.W. II Germany 64 
Alexandra Shlyakhova (F) W.W. II U.S.S.R. 63 
P. Grjaznov W.W. II U.S.S.R. 57 
Roza Shanina (F) W.W. II U.S.S.R. 54 
A.P.Medvedeva-Nazarkina (F) W.W. II U.S.S.R. 43 
Marie Ljalková (F) W.W. II Czech Army 30 
James Bedford MacArthur W.W. II Canada 9


----------



## timshatz (Apr 23, 2007)

Matt308 said:


> Never heard of that one timshatz. Are you thinking about the jungle carbine No.7? That one was notorious for a wandering zero and a vicious kick.



Actually, I might be thinking of the SMLE of WW1 fame. Do not know much about the Jungle Mark 7. Looks pretty cool, with the flash supressor.

Have fired the Carbine Moison Nagant. Not a bad little rifle, for the size. Accurate and also with a good kick.


----------



## Watanbe (Apr 26, 2007)

Pistol: Colt .45
Sub MG: Owen gun
Rifle: M1 Garand
LMG: Bren
MG: Mg42
AT weapon: ?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 27, 2007)

Watanbe said:


> AT weapon: ?



Panzerfaust...


----------



## Joe2 (Apr 27, 2007)

It could only be used once though. Ill go with the Panzershreck.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 27, 2007)

I was just making an example.


----------



## timshatz (Apr 27, 2007)

Both were deadly. First really effective , mass produced, shaped charge weapons.


----------



## Watanbe (Apr 29, 2007)

What about the Piat and Bazooka?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 29, 2007)

The PIAT (Projector, Infantry, Anti Tank) was an eary attempt by the British and thought it was smaller and could be used in confined spaces it was primitive, heavy, cumbersome, strenuous to ****, and had a very short range compared to the Bazooka and Panzerschreck. So therefor....

No

The Bazooka was a great weapon but the Panzerschreck was developed based off of the Bazooka and better in my opinion. The reasons for this are the Bazooka was only accurate and short ranges and the US even saw that it was inferior to the Panzerschreck and later reworked there Bazooka to a better standard such as the Panzerschreck.

Armour Penetration:

PIAT: 102mm
M1A1 Bazooka - 100mm
Panzerschreck - 200mm
Panzerfaust - 200m

It is quite clear the Panzerfaust and Panzerschreck were the best anti tank weapons of WW2.


----------



## timshatz (Apr 29, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> The PIAT (Projector, Infantry, Anti Tank) was an eary attempt by the British and thought it was smaller and could be used in confined spaces it was primitive, heavy, cumbersome, strenuous to ****, and had a very short range compared to the Bazooka and Panzerschreck. So therefor....
> 
> No
> 
> ...




That pretty much covers it. Good post.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 29, 2007)

There was a version of the Bazooka called the M20 Super Bazooka that could penetrate 200mm and reworded based off of the Panzerschreck but it was only post war I believe.


----------



## trackend (Apr 29, 2007)

Good info and post Adler. 
The PIAT was a nightmare thing and having spoken to a guy who used one in anger he reckoned it nearly ruptured you to c.ock the thing let alone having the perilous job of getting close enough to do any real damage. It was ok for light AFV's but at best was a track remover on anything substantial.


----------



## Watanbe (Apr 30, 2007)

trackend said:


> Good info and post Adler.
> The PIAT was a nightmare thing and having spoken to a guy who used one in anger he reckoned it nearly ruptured you to c.ock the thing let alone having the perilous job of getting close enough to do any real damage. It was ok for light AFV's but at best was a track remover on anything substantial.



Thanks for that info always wondered on the PIAT.

How useful effective was the Bazooka in penetrating the German Medium/Heavy Tanks. Or was it just targeted at the rear of the vehicle and fired at the tracks to immobolize.


----------



## Lucky13 (Apr 30, 2007)

"The unexpected advent of the M1 Bazooka in Tunisa made a considerable impact on the German military establishment.Not only did the Bazooka concept present a considerable danger to German armor but the simplicity , low cost and potential of the launchers design made a great impression.The immediate result was the abandonment of the R-Werfer 43 in favour of the novel Bazooka rocket delivery system.Within weeks the first examples of the 88mm (3.4in) Raketenpanzerbüchse43 (88mm RPzB 43) were coming off the HASAG production line at Meuselwitz.Most R-Werfer 43's already produced were sent to Tunisia or Italy and were soon forgotten or lost in action.A few were diverted to be emplaced among the defensive works covering the Normandy beaches as part of the Atlantic Wall defences. 
The RPzB 43 Panzerschreck (Tank Terror) was an enlarged version of the M1 Bazooka being scarcely more then a length of steel tube with a shoulder rest and firing arrangements attached , hence the alternative German nickname of Ofenrohr (Stovepipe).The calibre was selected simply because 88mm hollow charge warheads were already in production for launching from the R-Werfer 43 but with rockets for the RPzB 43 there was a difference .Having noted that the American M6 HEAT rocket was ignition method was altered accordingly , resulting in the RPzBGr 4322 weighing 3.25kg (7.2lb).However the Germans decided not to adopt the battery-powered ignition circuitry rapidly developing and adopting a magneto-driven ignition method.It is interesting to note that the Americans later adopted a magneto ignition system for their M9/M9A1 launchers. 
The weight of a loaded 88mm RPzB 43 was 9.5kg (20.9lb).Armour penetration performance remained as before ie 160mm (6.24in) of armour plate set at an angle of 60°.The length of the RPzB 43 (1.64m) meant that to handle it effectively called for a team of two , one acting as the loader and carrying five ready-use rockets on a special backpack frame.Only when a target approached was a rocket loaded into the rear of the launching tube where it was held by a retaining catch and connected by the loader to the firing circuit via two thin wires.The firer used simple fixed sights for aiming and cocked the firing arrangements by pulling back a spring-loaded lever. Operating the trigger produced a current for a primer to ignite the rocket motor and launch the rocket. 
RPzB 43 teams had to be masters of concealment and stealth for the practical range of the RPzBGr 4322 rocket was a maximum of 150m (492ft).Combat ranges were frequently considerable less.A trained team could launch four or five rockets in one minute.Panzerschreck warheads were also highly effective against field fortifications or buildings during fighting in built up areas. 
The RPzB 43 was very rapidly accepted into service and soon became the preferred portable anti-tank weapon for infantry formations.By 1944 the weapon was so well integrated that each infantry regiment had an establishment of 36 held by the regimental anti-tank company , along with three 75mm (2.9in) Pak 40 towed anti-tank guns.The so-called Volksgrenadier infantry regiments of the latter war years were meant to have a planned 72 Panzerschrecken. 
By mid-1944 the RPzB 43 was well into the process of being withdrawn from front line units in favour of the improved 88mm (3.4in) RPzB 54 , the RPzB 43s were transferred to second line and home defence militias.The main change on the RPzB 54 was the introduction of a shield for the firer plus the weight increased to 11kg (24.2lb).By 1944 the Panzerschreck series had already become so important that production was in progress in seven centers and many others were concerned with sub assemblies.The simplicity of the RPzB 54 and its lack of demand for critical raw materials or manufacturing resources was such that the unit cost was only RM70.Production totals during 1943 and 1944 reached 289,151. 
By the end of 1944 production was already switching to the 88mm (3.4in) RPzB 54/1 capable of launching an improved rocket , the RPzBGr 4992.While the armour penetrating warhead remained as before the RPzBGr 4992 was modified by having a far more efficient motor which completely consumed its propellant by the time it left the muzzle.The exhaust hazard to the firer therefore no longer existed , except under extremely low temperature conditions although the safety area to the rear still had to be observed. 
The improved RPzBGr 4992 motor also increased the maximum range to 180m (600ft) while at the same time allowing the overall length of the launch tube to be reduced from the former 1.64m (5ft 5in) to a handier 1.3m (5ft 0.25in) , the weight reverted to 9.5kg (20.9lb).RPzB 54/1 production had reached 25,744 by the time the war ended.By then 2,218,400 88mm RPzBGr 4322 and 4992 rockets had also been manufactured. 





Various firing positions were also used for the RPzB 54.The safest manner was the laying position.The gunner and loader had to lie at a right angle to the weapon. The kneeling and standing positions were used only from cover.




An If.8 infantry cart used to transport six Panzerschreck and along with a second wagon the thirty rounds of ammunition for a tank-destroyer group.


----------



## Lucky13 (Apr 30, 2007)

The Panzerfaust family of weapons was considerably easy to use. Simple usage instructions were often printed onto the warhead.Use of the Panzerfaust 60 was as follows: After detachment of the warhead the detonation charge and firing percussion cap were inserted the Panzerfaust was percussion-ignited like a rifle round. Then the warhead was again mounted to its shaft. After the sighting lever was locked in the "up" - position the gunner could remove the safety plug at the warhead and the weapon was ready to fire; the raised lever then served as the rear sight. The Panzerfaust 100 worked the same way except that the weapon came delivered ready to fire, charge and firing cap were already readied. The Panzerfaust 30 and the Faustpatrone had a slightly different arming system: instead of the lever it had a small cocking device in form of an arming rod on top of the barrel. After the charge and the cap had been inserted, the arming rod was pushed forward until the firing pin cocks and the firing button protrudes. The weapon is now cocked but still secured. To finish the arming the gunner has to turn a safety switch to the left. The rear of the firing tube of again all Panzerfaust weapons was factory-sealed with a cardboard cap against dirt. This cup did not have to be removed for firing. After the warhead left the tube it armed after a flight of about 5m.
Despite the seemingly easy usage and the fact that simple usage instructions were printed onto each weapon, many accidents happened because of wrong handling of often ill-trained personnel, sometimes also because of material defects of the weapons themselves. Although officially a single-use throw-away weapon, the used tubes of the all the Panzerfaust weapons were usually collected and returned for rearmament at the factory. 




Caution was to be paid to the back-blast of the weapon, it created an explosion blast of two to three meters ( 6.5 - 10 ft.) behind the tube. Therefore on many Panzerfausts, especially the early Panzerfaust 30 m, a warning in large red letters printed on the upper rear part of the tube advised to stay clear: Achtung! Feuerstrahl! ("Beware ! Fire Jet !"; see pic. above of four Panzerfaust 30 in delivery crate).
Sometimes other variations of this warning were stenciled on the upper rear. But the back-blast wasn't only dangerous to bystanders: the rear of the firing soldier had to be free of obstacles for at least 3 m (10 ft.), otherwise heavy burns on the back of the firing soldier would result. Officially the rear of the gunner had to be free for 10m for safety reasons and the back-blast was reported as lethal to a range of 3m behind the tube. Mostly the fiery back-blast, but also the atmospheric pressure and the relative hazardousness of the blast's smoke put heavy restrictions on indoor use; this holds true even more for the Panzerschreck.
Despite the seemingly easy usage and the fact that simple usage instructions were printed onto each weapon, many accidents happened because of wrong handling of often ill-trained personnel, sometimes also because of material defects of the weapons themselves.
Although officially a single-use throw-away weapon, the used tubes of the all the Panzerfaust weapons were usually collected and returned for rearmament at the factory.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 30, 2007)

Watanbe said:


> Thanks for that info always wondered on the PIAT.
> 
> How useful effective was the Bazooka in penetrating the German Medium/Heavy Tanks. Or was it just targeted at the rear of the vehicle and fired at the tracks to immobolize.



It could penetrate aprox. 100mm of armour. It could still take out the tracks thought at great distances. As stated though even though it had good range it was only accurate at close ranges.


----------



## Joe2 (May 3, 2007)

Lucky13 said:


> Some people state that the Finnish M28 and KP31 is the best ever sniper rifle....
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Hmm I read somewhere the where some British and American top snipers...


----------



## Soren (May 3, 2007)

I never heard about an Erwin König before...


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 3, 2007)

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 (May 3, 2007)

Not particularly suprising.


----------



## flojo (May 3, 2007)

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


----------



## timshatz (May 3, 2007)

flojo said:


> 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 (May 4, 2007)

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 (May 4, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> That is because he is probably fiction.
> 
> Here read futher:
> 
> ...



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 (Jun 30, 2007)

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 (Jun 30, 2007)

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 (Jun 30, 2007)

Do you mean the MG42 which was a Machine Gune?

Oh and hi Bird-Nerd oh I mean LaggyMcLagLag.


----------



## LaggyMcLagLag (Jun 30, 2007)

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 (Jun 30, 2007)

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 (Jun 30, 2007)

FG42 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 30, 2007)

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 (Jun 30, 2007)

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 (Jun 30, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> 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...  



renrich said:


> 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.


----------

