Yeap it is 550 but that is still eneogh to supress or kill you enemy.
Best WWII automatic weapon
- Thread starter Desert Fox
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Yeap it is 550 but that is still eneogh to supress or kill you enemy.
mkloby
Senior Master Sergeant
I see M60E3 on the USMC equipment factfile under infantry weapons. They must have some still in the inventory, that haven't quite been replaced by the M240G yet.
Adler a helicopter is a clean inviroment compared to the dirt foot soldiers have to go through. In densly vegitated and/or muddy areas the M-60 suffered the problems I mentioned. Was it often ? Well that depends how much you've been through and it depends on the climate as-well.
And I sure don't remember our M-60's having any handle you could use when replacing the barrell - you had to touch the barrell with your hands, and if you didn't have any gloves then your treshold for pain had better be good - and the barrel only lasted a couple of hundred shots when dealing out suppressive fire before you had to change it. Fact is the M-60 wore out quickly.
Now I don't know if the M-60 has changed since, but thats how it was.
And I sure don't remember our M-60's having any handle you could use when replacing the barrell - you had to touch the barrell with your hands, and if you didn't have any gloves then your treshold for pain had better be good - and the barrel only lasted a couple of hundred shots when dealing out suppressive fire before you had to change it. Fact is the M-60 wore out quickly.
Now I don't know if the M-60 has changed since, but thats how it was.
It must have compared to what ever version or model you have used. Because what you described is competely different from the M60s that I have used.
It is much more durable and it is a lot different. I never needed to used gloves to change the barrel and by doing it that way, I never burnt my hand. I used the handle.
When did you use the M60? That might explain it. You may very well have been using an early model or version of it.
Could very well be then that your M60 was different than mine.
Matt308
Glock Perfection
What about the M60E3?
- Thread starter
- #89
Desert Fox
Senior Airman
Hi everyone, sorry i havent posted on my own thread lately, but Ive been away for a few weeks. Really good opinions guys!
renrich
Chief Master Sergeant
Does the M240G use the same cartridge as the M60?
Yes both fire the 7.62 x 51 NATO round.
drgondog
Major
I would have picked the Mp44, but of the ones on the list I would rather have the thompson for sheer stopping power. .45 over 9mm when pondering.
of the ones NOT listed Mg42, then Ma Duece for the crew served as long as I didn't have to carry it...
of the ones NOT listed Mg42, then Ma Duece for the crew served as long as I didn't have to carry it...
SoD Stitch
Banned
Yeah, I would've picked the Stg44 also, but I think they meant to limit the poll to SMG's, not assault rifles, MG's, etc.
However, I also would've listed the MG-34/42; possibly the most influential MG of the 20th century. Was effectively used on every front of the War, from freezing sub-zero Russian winters, to 100+ weather in North Africa; extremely reliable. Adaptable as a bipod-mounted crew-served weapon, highly accurate tripod-mounted weapon, anti-personnel tank weapon, aircraft-mounted anti-aircraft weapon, tank-mounted anti-aircraft weapon, etc., etc. Spawned a "copy" in the form of the late 20th-century MG-3, which is still in production in several countries today. Also had the highest rate of fire of any medium machine gun in history (I believe) at 1200+ RPM.
drgondog
Major
It was all of those things - I thought about the Mg34 just because I like machined weapons, less those with stamped parts - but both had about the same performance and reliability as I recall. Would like either one.
My uncle brought one back from ETO - he was ex 2nd, then 5th, Rangers - a Thompson carrying MD..I think they 'liberated' Dachau and he brought it back from there in pieces.
Aussie1001
Staff Sergeant
Well since i don't know much about this subject so i will just provoke questions (in a good way).
Wasn't the sten a contender for the best SMG i mean what were the brits dropping to the resistance in france and other countries ?
I personally like the owen however if a jap was coming at me a tommy wouldn't be bad for sheer stopping power remember some japs were fanatics so go on give me answers !!!!!!
Heh heh
Wasn't the sten a contender for the best SMG i mean what were the brits dropping to the resistance in france and other countries ?
I personally like the owen however if a jap was coming at me a tommy wouldn't be bad for sheer stopping power remember some japs were fanatics so go on give me answers !!!!!!
Heh heh
I went for thompson of course! 20-30 round 45. ACP would pack some serious stopping power! Once shot a can with my friends grandfathered Colt 1911 and wow did it do a number on the can. My Grandfather who fought in the aleutians in the Army Engineers dove under a bulldozer during a bonzai charge with his non-scoped springfield, he got hold of a Thompson, put it on semi auto and on his first shot it blew a Japanese Soilders leg in half, he says he thinks the bullet hit right below the shin. If not the Thompson i'd go for the PPSh-41, it had a very high rate of fire and with a 71 round drum it was one heck of a gun.
SoD Stitch
Banned
The main reason the Sten was so ubiquitous was because they were relatively inexpensive to manufacture (almost all of the parts were stamped steel), and there were only about two moving parts in the whole thing, so they were fairly reliable. The Brits used them up until fairly recently in their Spec Ops; I know the SAS used to train with them back in the '70's '80's.
trackend
Chief Master Sergeant
The Sten was made for 7s 6d which is about 35p in new money, in 1939 my old man was paid £2.50p a week in the Navy + 5p hard layers payment for combined ops service so even then it was a very cheap gun.
I personally think the Thomson was the best sub machine gun not prone to stoppages, not too higher muzzel velocity, a relitively heavy round and thin bullet casing so the stopping power was high. Ideally suited to building clearance and close quarter action.
I personally think the Thomson was the best sub machine gun not prone to stoppages, not too higher muzzel velocity, a relitively heavy round and thin bullet casing so the stopping power was high. Ideally suited to building clearance and close quarter action.
drgondog
Major
The only feature I didn't care for on the Thompson was tendency to 'ride up' in fully automatic fire - but I learned to fire short bursts and was able to control it just fine. This is one area that I favored the Mp40, but I would choose 40 S&W or .45 ACP for any short range stuff way over the 9mm or even 357 SiG.
Off topic - I recently fired the H&K Mp5 in 40 S&W - awesome piece, would choose that over any other small weapon available today from any era for short range stuff 50 yards or less.
trackend
Chief Master Sergeant
If I'm not mistaken slightly to the left as well? DD
