Best Rifle Of WWII
- Thread starter 102first_hussars
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
P38 Pilot
Tech Sergeant
STG-44 was classified as a rifle. It could fire semi-auto and full auto.
trackend
Chief Master Sergeant
I still prefer the Garand. The STG44 was very tinny by comparison with too many stamped out components also the stock attachment was poor and could not take much abuse in hand to hand without breaking the very large magazine was also not conducive to prone usage.
Total production run was around 500,000 and ceased not long after the war The Garand run was around 5,000,000 finishing in 1957 the Lee enfield was about 9,000,000 ending its 60 year production run in the mid 50,s but stayed in service the late 80's re-chambered to the 7.62mm NATO as a sniper's weapon.
Total production run was around 500,000 and ceased not long after the war The Garand run was around 5,000,000 finishing in 1957 the Lee enfield was about 9,000,000 ending its 60 year production run in the mid 50,s but stayed in service the late 80's re-chambered to the 7.62mm NATO as a sniper's weapon.
- Thread starter
- #44
102first_hussars
Tech Sergeant
Today we would consider the STG-44 an Assault rifle, but Im sure it was considered a SMG back during the war, so with that being said, the STG-44 can go to hell 
102first_hussars said:Today we would consider the STG-44 an Assault rifle, but Im sure it was considered a SMG back during the war, so with that being said, the STG-44 can go to hell
STG = Sturmgewehr = Assault Rifle
It was the weapon that coined the term!
I want one!
- Thread starter
- #46
102first_hussars
Tech Sergeant
Actually "Sturm" means Storm, Storm-rifle.
schwarzpanzer
Senior Airman
- 662
- Aug 8, 2005
If you storm a position, what do you do? - You Assault it. ( pepper it
)
German doesn't always translate directly into English.
The StG was originally the MKb MachinenKarabiner - Machine Carbine.
The problem was, the Nazi's were infighting and the Luftwaffe thought it could score Brownie points with Hitler with it's FG42. The Army the same with it's MKb. This one-upmanship went on and on and Hitler got sick of this and ordered an end to it. He thought making a weapon less powerful than his old G98 was pointless (though ironically, so was the K98k).
The soldiers were crying out for the MKb, but it wasn't allowed. A new MachinenPistole (SMG) appeared in 1943 - the MP43. It wasn't an SMG at all, but an upgraded ( banned) Mkb42!
- If anyone is going to bury an Assault Weapon, I'd think it'd be hippies, not Hitler!
Anyway, glowing reports came from the front lines about the new weapon. Hitler took a look at the 'new' weapon and apparently was furious. He eventually came round though.
SturmGewehr was merely a catchy name. It is unknown whether it was made up to sell it to Hitler, or whether it was made up by him for Morale/Propaganda purposes.
The history of the earlier Fedorov Avtomat Assault Rifle is very similar...
)German doesn't always translate directly into English.
The StG was originally the MKb MachinenKarabiner - Machine Carbine.
The problem was, the Nazi's were infighting and the Luftwaffe thought it could score Brownie points with Hitler with it's FG42. The Army the same with it's MKb. This one-upmanship went on and on and Hitler got sick of this and ordered an end to it. He thought making a weapon less powerful than his old G98 was pointless (though ironically, so was the K98k).
The soldiers were crying out for the MKb, but it wasn't allowed. A new MachinenPistole (SMG) appeared in 1943 - the MP43. It wasn't an SMG at all, but an upgraded ( banned) Mkb42!
- If anyone is going to bury an Assault Weapon, I'd think it'd be hippies, not Hitler!
Anyway, glowing reports came from the front lines about the new weapon. Hitler took a look at the 'new' weapon and apparently was furious. He eventually came round though.
SturmGewehr was merely a catchy name. It is unknown whether it was made up to sell it to Hitler, or whether it was made up by him for Morale/Propaganda purposes.
The history of the earlier Fedorov Avtomat Assault Rifle is very similar...
Joe2
Banned
The Lee-Enfield rifle was basicly made in the 1890s and almost made it to the 1990s, nearly 100 years, so it must have been a good gun.
Emac44
Staff Sergeant
303 bolt action Lee Enfield my vote sorry to be late. especially backed by sheer Aussie Infantry with fixed bayonets fighting the Bloody Japanese and giving what bloody for
The Enfield was used until the early 90's as a Sniper-rifle, the K98K was used as a Sniper-rifle up until 1997 by the Isreali's. However both these would be at a disadvantage in close Urban settings where most wars are fought, the Garand and Gewehr 43 possessing far more firepower.
renrich
Chief Master Sergeant
The Garand. In fact it would be an outstanding weapon today in Iraq.
Why do you say that? I served in Iraq and I would not even think about using a Garand there...
renrich
Chief Master Sergeant
The reason I say that is that I understand that the troops in Iraq have in some cases traded in the M16 for the old M14 because they like the greater pentration and longer range of the 7.62 Nato round. I qualified in the army both with the Garand and with the M14 and I think I would prefer the Garand in combat although I fortunately never had any combat experience.
Are the .308 and the 30-06 that much different balistically? Not tossing a dig out, honestly don't know. Have fired them both (in different weapons at close ranges) but found no substantial difference. About the same weight round too (around 140 grains).
Maybe the difference comes in at longer ranges?
Maybe the difference comes in at longer ranges?
The 30-06 has the same ballistics as the .308, however with a heavier projectile. With the same weight projectile you will achieve a slightly flatter trajectory with the 30-06.
However if I had to choose between either the Garand or the M-14 for use in Iraq, then I'd definitely choose the M-14. You've got the same ballisctics but with more rounds. But if its long range shots a bolt action is always the best choice - with the exception of a few semi auto's such as the PSG-1 perhaps.
However if I had to choose between either the Garand or the M-14 for use in Iraq, then I'd definitely choose the M-14. You've got the same ballisctics but with more rounds. But if its long range shots a bolt action is always the best choice - with the exception of a few semi auto's such as the PSG-1 perhaps.
The only M-14s in Iraq are used by snipers or specialized units. There are no large scale issued M-14s going around in any units serving in Iraq.
The basic issue for a soldier is the M-16/M-4 and the units do not have M-14s for the soldiers to trade them out with nor will the Army allow them to do so.
While I agree the 7.62 is better than the 5.56, the 5.56 still kills the enemy just fine in Iraq. That is not why we are losing the war there.
renrich
Chief Master Sergeant
Right, I understand that only specialised troops or units would be issued M14s. It would be a nightmare to have troops in regular units using 2 different service rifles in 2 different calibers. I understand that the 1911 government model is being used by some special units now also. The only reason I preferred the Garand over the M14 was that it seemed easier to carry because of the lack of the box mag., it was slightly more powerful, I felt it was easier to reload under stress and it was slightly more reliable. Oh yes it would make a better club and a better mount for a bayonet.
bananafoothead
Airman
- 22
- Dec 23, 2006
bananafoothead
Airman
- 22
- Dec 23, 2006
AND, I should add, it was designed by some guys who have been fighting a war pretty much continualy since 1948 against Iraq like opponant/s
