# The "Swedish K" submachine gun in Vietnam?



## Lucky13 (May 20, 2018)




----------



## The Basket (May 21, 2018)

Indeed.


----------



## mikewint (May 21, 2018)

SF pretty much got whatever it wanted. Our armorer would obtain almost any weapon you asked for. One guy in my unit actually carried a German Schmeiser. My choice was an Uzi. Suppressed .22 were also to be had for the taking of prisoners

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Glider (May 21, 2018)

Fair comment. I have seen pictures and papers showing the SF using Landrovers and Carl Gustav 84mm anti tank weapons. Clearly not standard US Army issue


----------



## tyrodtom (May 21, 2018)

When I was in NKP Thailand, but downtown, which was right on the Mekong river.
Just across the river was Thakhek, Laos.
We'd see troops in town dressed in strange uniforms, no markings, no real idea what they were, CIA, Special Forces, or whatever.
Always armed, but no standard arms, and driving Land Rovers, Mitsubishi Jeeps, even a Russian Jeep like vehicle. These had to have been brought across on a ferry, because there was no bridges across the Mekong anywhere nearby, it was about 1/2 mile wide there.

I saw some Swedish Ks carried by them, but they were called Carl Gustavs then.
That was in 1967, never saw any Uzi, the Israels were pretty tight with their Uzis, probably needed every one they made in that time period.


----------



## The Basket (May 21, 2018)

What is been asked?
Is Sweden an exporter of arms?
Did USA use thus particular gun?
Why use the K? 
Sweden embargoed arms so there we go.
Although what the Australians and NZ guys used gets my attention. Hi-powers, SLRs and Sterings or Owens


----------



## tyrodtom (May 21, 2018)

Sweden never put a embargo on selling arms to the USA till 1966, I think.
A little too late. By then plenty had already been sold , and arms dealers have always been pretty adept at finding ways around embargoes.
S&W got a license to make Swedish Ks, but wasn't ready for production till 1967.
A little too late again. By then the Army, Navy, etc. was looking at other weapons.
The K had a reputation of being a well made, easy to control, and tough SMG.

By the time I was in Vietnam in 1971, and in the Army, I saw about every SMG made. There were a lot of loose guns . Owens, Stens, Sterlings, MP-38/40, Uzi, M-3, Grease Guns, Thompsons, various French SMGs, PPSh, and more. Even saw what I think was a MP28.


----------



## The Basket (May 22, 2018)

Why the long list of different smgs? 
I assume use of the K is to say well it's not American issue so any K found have nothing to do with America.
Why use different smgs in a squad? Mags won't fit?


----------



## soulezoo (May 22, 2018)

mikewint said:


> SF pretty much got whatever it wanted. Our armorer would obtain almost any weapon you asked for. One guy in my unit actually carried a German Schmeiser. My choice was an Uzi. Suppressed .22 were also to be had for the taking of prisoners



I agree. My brother loathed the M-16 (during 65-66 IIRC) and he chose a Para M-1 carbine as his personal weapon.


----------



## mikewint (May 22, 2018)

The Basket said:


> Why use different smgs in a squad? Mags won't fit?


And bullets in many cases. I guess it was kinda a kid in a candy store mind set...ANY weapon!! The first AR's I saw were a shock...thought they were BB-guns and the Mattel logo on the butt-stock did't help nor did the jamming. About '66 or so we began to see the CAR-15 Colt version with the 10 inch barrel and folding butt-stock. Very nice to carry but it had a muzzle-blast like a cannon and sounded like one. Colt soon supplied a flash/suppressor which helped with the flash and a bit with the noise. Its extra weight also helped with balancing. 30-round mags were like hen's teeth though. By about '67 everyone carried one


----------



## The Basket (May 22, 2018)

Yeah plenty of calibres in that mix of smgs.
Was the French stuff the leftovers from their Vietnam wars or more modern? I guess it would be the MAT-49 and not the MAS-38.

Any Japanese stuff left over too?


----------



## tyrodtom (May 22, 2018)

The long list of SMGs was just some of what I saw in Vietnam. 
Not all in the hands of GIs though.
You had ARVN, Viet militias of various sorts, South Koreans, Australians, CIA, and more.
Not many wore uniforms that you could identify for sure. Sometimes you could get a clue if they spoke a few words.

Most of the time I was there, you had to carry your issued firearms. But flight crew could carry "spares, just in case".

Vietnam for a gun nut was like a 8 year old being locked up in a candy store.


----------



## The Basket (May 22, 2018)

SLRs were supposed to be highly thought of by American forces. Were any use by Americans?
The Grease gun was standard issue so I have a fair understanding why other SMGs may have been preferred.


----------



## tyrodtom (May 22, 2018)

By 71 even the Marines had been converted to the M-16, but some still wanted the 7.62x51, so you still saw some M-14s.

I saw some SLRs, carried by who I assumed was Australians. But because of the mismash of uniforms, you sometimes didn't know who you were looking at.
My older brother had been in Vietnam, 63, 65, 67, and 70, maybe more. He was SF part of that time. But he was there in 64-65 during the debacle of the early M-16 introduction to combat. 
By 1971, all of the M-16's problems were solved, according to the Army. But I trusted my older brother's experience with the M-16 more than I did the Army.
My primary weapon was a M-60, but my official standby was a what we called then a Car-15, sorta like today's M-4. My greatest fear was getting shot down and having to E&E in the dark. The Car-15 had a big muzzle blast, I didn't like that, nor did I trust the gun itself.
My chosen standby was a grease gun, that someone had fitted a pretty good muzzle suppressor. I bought wadcutter rounds thru the PX, that fed thru the action with no problems. So I had a easy to control SMG, plenty of knock-down power, no big muzzle signature, and accurate enough for my needs.
I just had to keep the wad-cutter rounds out of sight since some officers were " by the book".
Other door gunners made different choices, not many stayed with the Car-15.


----------



## The Basket (May 23, 2018)

Love this kinda discussion 
I'm learning!
Interested to hear about the M-16 experience in Vietnam and how that still taint the modern gun.
Although still wondering what Lucky was about in this thread and whether he was asking a question or just saying.


----------



## tyrodtom (May 23, 2018)

I went through Army basic in 1969, even though I'd been in the USAF 4 years, they made me go through Army basic training.
In basic training the Army put a strong emphasis on maintaining the M-16, and keeping it clean.
Maybe they over emphasised keeping it clean, leaving the impression if it wasn't perfectly clean it'd jamb.

That along with their over-exaggeration on how effective the fast moving round could be was counter productive in my case.

For example they said a M-16 hit in the lower leg could shattered the leg to the hip. Right across the knee joint?? Yeah right !
Their BS ended up tainting everything they said.
Everyone knows you clean your weapon every day, but they ended up making you think you had to maybe break off action and clean it, or it'd jamb. That didn't inspire a lot of confidence.

Right or wrong, I didn't trust it. And I wasn't by myself in that.


----------



## soulezoo (May 23, 2018)

The failures of the early M-16 were not born from the inherent design of the weapon, but big Army. Those failures are well documented. Everything from wrong propellant in the cartridge, the idea that it was so good it didn't need to be cleaned (and cleaning kits not even issued!), to an over reliance on the lethality of the bullet itself.
Since this is off topic to the OP and the info is so readily available, I'll not expound on this too much. However, much as this forum discusses the evolution of aircraft (take the Spitfire for instance), things evolve as lessons are learned and modifications made.

The modern M-4 is not even at the end of its development cycle and continues to improve and it's nearly as reliable today as an AK-47 is. (Nearly-- not quite) An example of this is an off the shelf AR-15 dubbed the "Filthy 14". It has been used in a training class for some years (EAG) and purposely not been cleaned at all for the duration. Last I saw, it was over 40,000 rounds with no cleaning and no adverse effects from the no cleaning. All that has been done is to lube the heck out of it. This flys in the face of the notion widely held that one does not want to over lube a weapon because it attracts dirt and could cause problems thusly. Well, what they found was "over lubing" tended to wash out crud and kept everything flowing smoothly. Like overeating exlax. The conventional wisdom now as a result is to keep the weapon properly cleaned of course, but also to keep it well lubed and not dry.
As far as the projectile goes, great advances have been made here as well. Current issue Mk318 is a wonderful round for terminal ballistics. For long range, I regularly shoot Mk262 clones out to 800 yards from a 16" barrel.

Comparing today's M-4 to yesterday's M-16 and thinking it's all the same is a lot like saying a Spit Mk XIV was the same as a Spit Mk I.


----------



## mikewint (May 23, 2018)

We had the very first AR-15s and like I posted earlier they looked like BB-guns, had a Mattel logo on the butt-stock, and those tiny .22 cal bullets seemed to be a joke after having trained with the M-14. We were told specifically by the very factory reps that the new 15s were such precision instruments that they did not...not...not need to ever be cleaned and as such no cleaning kits. Then came the jams and the gas tube burn outs. I kept my nice little Uzi
The little .223 bullet is/was easily deflected. A leaf was enough. In flesh it did tend to tumble and did make some nasty lethal wounds quite different from the kind the big M-14 made. In a jungle the tenancy to deflect was a problem and we learned that we needed at least 1 or 2 M-14s in a squad. 
The CAR-15s were very nice, small compact, folding butt-stock which was a wonder but badly balanced. Then you shot one and saw/heard that massive blast and unburned powder quickly fouled the barrel. All kinds/types of flash suppressors were tried and nothing worked. And big mighty Colt couldn't make a working 30-round mag!!! Eventually 4 or 5 arrived! WTF, this is COLT!!! When 30-rounders started appearing on the civilian market we STILL could not get any. Units started pooling money and actually sent away to buy them on the civilian market


----------



## The Basket (May 23, 2018)

As a former military medic myself....although not Special forces!!!! I would be interested in wounding of different rounds.
I do think the Swedish K and the M-16 is relevant to this thread as the K would be replaced by the AR-15 variant. And SMGs are been replaced by carbines. When the initial issues with the M-16 were resolved was it still unreliable or was it perceived to be unreliable.


----------



## mikewint (May 23, 2018)

Cleaning resolved most of the problems plus the addition of the forward assist. The gas tubes were strengthened and made of a higher temp metal as burnouts became less frequent. It remained the Swiss Watch in a jungle weapon. The VC would bury an AK in the mud and sand for months, dig them up and shoot. Cleaning was an old rope dipped in old motor oil.
The initial CAR-15s had the problems already posted above. Eventually a flashhider/suppressor about 4in long was developed that mostly eliminated the flash and reduced the sound a bit plus Colt lengthened the barrel (11.5in) with an indent for a grenade launcher, taken together they improved the balance and improved the shootability but barrel fouling, range, and accuracy problems remained and 30-round mags never did appear.
Can't say that we ever treated many wounded VC/NVA but I do have some pics which I hesitate to post. An AR wound: *“looks like a grenade went off in there,” University of Arizona trauma surgeon Peter Rhee stated when comparing the damage done by AR-15 bullets and 9mm handgun bullets. “The other looks like a bad knife cut.”

The bullet from an AR-15 rifle leaves the muzzle at three times the speed of a handgun bullet. That means it has plenty of energy to “distribute” inside the body upon collision. It can disintegrate three inches of leg bone, turning it to “dust” according to Donald Jenkins, a trauma surgeon at the University of Texas Health Science Center. “The liver looks like a jello mold that’s been dropped on the floor,” if hit by the same bullet, Jenkins says. The exit would can be the size of an orange. In addition to turning a bone to dust or liver into jello, the high energy would also cause damage around the entry and exit wounds.
When a high-velocity bullet pierces the body, human tissue can ripple just like water does when you throw an object in it. But it all happens at increased velocity. The bullet and its ensuing fragments might miss a critical artery, but the cavitation effect could tear through blood vessels.
An AR-15 bullet wound needs three to ten surgeries to repair it.*


----------



## The Basket (May 23, 2018)

The 5.56 is often seen as weedy whearas the 9mm is a shot stopper.
But I have seen, not first hand, the mess 5.56 or similar projectiles can do.


----------



## bobbysocks (May 23, 2018)

the k was made by S&W as the model 76....and was still being used way after Nam. when I was dealing arms in the mid 90s they were available to law enforcement and class 3 dealers like me. I knew a former SFer whose arm of choice was an old M2 carbine. since the US was in places where official we didn't have troops ( Cambodia and Laos...aka Daniel Boone and Prairie Fire ) having a weapon that didn't point directly back to the US was convenient.


----------



## tyrodtom (May 23, 2018)

I've seen M-16 wounds also.
In basic they were telling us a hit in the lower leg, ankle, would shatter the leg bones clear to the hip. My BS detector got set off.
Surely none of you are seriously trying to suggest that could happen ?


----------



## The Basket (May 24, 2018)

Dunno. I don't have anywhere near enough medical training to suggest either way.
However every wound is different so each has to be treated on its merits.
But if an elderly patient is suffering from osteoporosis then it's possible I suppose.
But top of my head no. A rifle wound to the foot or ankle should not shatter bones to the hip. Although what a mess! So I would suspect typical army bull poop.


----------



## The Basket (May 24, 2018)

Simple blowback smgs in 9mm parabellum was pretty much ubiquitous so why copy the K? And wouldn't that need some kind of license from the Swedes?


----------



## mikewint (May 24, 2018)

Not hardly. Perhaps 4 or so inches of totally destroyed bone. Soft tissue damage is considerable as the bullet tumbles every which way.
This is a X-ray of a lower leg hit by a 5.56 round. As you can see the tibia and fibula are severely damaged. I won't post any soft tissue unless and until the mods OK it. They are truly horrendous, the pics, NOT the mods!


----------



## soulezoo (May 24, 2018)

Mike, would you happen to have a photo of the guy shot in the leg in the PI at close range with 5.56?

That was a horrendous wound and nearly took his whole leg off.

That said, no small arms caliber is a death ray and many instances of 5.56 making a tiny entrance and exit wound where the bad guy didn't even know he was shot. The same anecdotal stories can be found for 9mm or .45 acp as well. The results of anything are often unpredictable.
Unless it was .50 BMG... then all bets are off.


----------



## mikewint (May 24, 2018)

I do but this is a site visited by many different ages and or sensibilities so unless and until I receive permission from a mod I will not do so. The little 5.56 does massive damage as it tumbles its way through the body. On the other hand a leaf can deflect it


----------



## soulezoo (May 24, 2018)

mikewint said:


> I do but this is a site visited by many different ages and or sensibilities so unless and until I receive permission from a mod I will not do so. The little 5.56 does massive damage as it tumbles its way through the body. On the other hand a leaf can deflect it



Oh, I know this and we agree totally. I was just wondering if you had the photo-- and I thought you may. For those who have doubts about what the round CAN do, well, that picture says a lot. And it's as ghastly as any small arms wound to the extremities I've seen.


----------



## mikewint (May 24, 2018)

I was initially assigned to the 8th Field Hospital Nha Trang and hated every minute of it. I didn't spend all that time an effort in Basic Medic and Expert Medical to be essentially an orderly doing scut-work the nurses didn't want to do. When volunteers were needed to take government services out to the village level I was first in line. Working up in the northern highlands with the Yards and Nungs was the best time of my life


----------



## The Basket (May 24, 2018)

I guess this is a military chat with a lot of ex military but I would have to say that showing pic of severe wounds is just not the ticket. Maybe it should be and maybe we need to see what war is cos we don't because the showing of guts and gore is censored on TV but nah.
Plenty of internet shows that so maybe watch the gore there. Don't want little Timmy Toddler throwing his corn flakes up over reality.
But still hear how 5.56 isn't powerful when scientific says it's plenty enough.


----------



## Shortround6 (May 24, 2018)

There is power and there is reliable power. The 5.56 is plenty powerful if everything goes right (and is used at appropriate distances). However if things go a bit wrong then then 5.56 _sometimes_ comes up lacking. Since anything short of a major artillery round may come up lacking given the right set set of circumstances the arguments are over what ratio of failures people are willing to tolerate or what set/s of circumstances are judged too far out of the ordinary to factor in.


----------



## soulezoo (May 24, 2018)

The Basket said:


> I guess this is a military chat with a lot of ex military but I would have to say that showing pic of severe wounds is just not the ticket. Maybe it should be and maybe we need to see what war is cos we don't because the showing of guts and gore is censored on TV but nah.
> Plenty of internet shows that so maybe watch the gore there. Don't want little Timmy Toddler throwing his corn flakes up over reality.
> But still hear how 5.56 isn't powerful when scientific says it's plenty enough.



You have to realize there's a difference between how people think about something and the reality. The fact is the human body is not meant to withstand absorbing a high speed projectile. Really bad things can happen. However, it is never predictable. Why one guy can be shot numerous times and live (and still fight even) where others perish with a .22 to an extremity.
Scientific and medical research are not complete. Laboratory controlled environment tests for repeatability of the result can give an apples to apples comparison between cartridges and projectiles with telling results. But that alone can never duplicate the infinite variable of real world. Hence, wildly different outcomes. I remember hearing the story (and later the pictures) of a guy that took a 9mm slug to the forehead at 30 ft from the shooter. It hit square and deflected around between the skull and skin and came to rest behind his ear. Now how many times is that going to happen vs a nice new hole in the head?

Anyway... way OT. Back to the Swedish SMG. That's a fascinating gun.


----------



## The Basket (May 24, 2018)

Gunshot wounds have so many variables and the list is endless. A rabbit hole but if you don't use a scientific method then what your left with is anecdotes of some guy down the pub who saw 50 BMG bounce off a dog at 20 yards. Ad infinitum. I often think of the change of the Japanese from 6.5 to 7.7 and think was it actually a big deal because 6.5 was even criticized in the Russo Japan war in 1904 and any advantage of 6.5 was thrown away for some perceived lack of power just because your target didn't turn to vapour. Be interested to know if the Japanese did a real study or just listened to some guy in the cookhouse.
The Swedish K is a blowback 9mm and unless it was genuinely better I can't see it been worthwhile to copy and build clones as this would take time when other SMGs were available.


----------



## tyrodtom (May 24, 2018)

The Seals and S.F. liked the Swedish K, It doesn't have to make sense to us now.
But by the time S&W tooled up for production to satisfy them, they were no longer interested.

I've got a book by Timothy J. Mullin in which he test about 30 different SMGs, from the earliest Bergmann M1918, to the Heckler & Koch MP5. He test both Swedish K M45, and the S&W M76, evidently S&W did a poor job of copying the M45, or he had a bad example. He was barely enthused with the M45, but was just plain disappointed in the M76.

On a side note, his favorite WW2 era SMG was the Owen.


----------



## mikewint (May 25, 2018)

The wound pic I had in mind was a upper leg in and out but the 5.56 had yawed and tumbled quite a bit. The cavitation and hydrostatic shock had ruptured several major vessels and he had bled out in a minute or so. So no guts or gore of course that's always an opinion.
As Shortrounds posted the 5.56 has plenty of kill power but its BIG advantage is the size/weight of its cartridges. A 12ga shotgun with 00 buck and an old M-14 would/could have been more usable in many situations BUT would you like to be the one carrying 1000 rounds of 7.62 or 200-300 rounds of 12ga through the jungle? The selling point of the M-16 was its weight load


----------



## Zipper730 (Aug 27, 2018)

mikewint said:


> View attachment 494686


I assume with an injury like that if you didn't die, you'd probably have to amputate the leg right?


----------



## The Basket (Sep 4, 2018)

Modern medicine is different.
So Vietnam era to today different.
But either way his football career is probably gonna take a nosedive.


----------

