War winning weapons

[Lightning Guy]

5 rounds vs. 8 rounds. Advantage Garand. A bolt action can be used in a postion but its performance is hurt by trying to fire while standing or in firing from the hip. The Garand could be easily fired from any postion without having to move either hand. And again, 5.5 million rifles.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

but that was up until 1950, just talk about the ones used in the war, and you don't fumble with a bolt action, whatever posistion you're in, a good soldier can empty a 5 round magazine in seconds, and he will cock it without loosing his aim, i found when firering a semi-auto, the kick was so much i had to wait to retake my aim, not so with the bolt action as i could retake my aim whilst reloading, and it didn't have a clip, the round went straight into the chamber.........................

 

[MP-Willow]

Ok on this I wil point out that the Grand had that nasty habbit of slamming the breach on your thumb if you are not carful. Also it is an atempt to get the fire power of the machine gun and the range of the rigle. I know that is the argumnt for the asult rifle, but when you think abot it the semi-auto rifle is the next step. You get the rate of fire but the Grand poped that clip and made that ping noise to let every one know you are out. As for wanting the Tompson, have you fred one? That 45 caliber round packs a lot and after a while your hands hurt like firing the colt 45 pistol. But the Tompson was good for the city fighting in Europe and the jungles.

But if I had my pick I would go for a BAR

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

i would go for a bolt ation any day, and before you say "but the garand was better for street and jungle fighting", i would pick a stan for that.......................

 

[GermansRGeniuses]

I go with Stg.43/44. Best small arm of WWII.

 

[Lightning Guy]

So discount Garand production from 1945 until 1950 and you are still left with somewhere around 4 million rifles.

MP-Willow, the BAR was great for firepower but was a beast to lug around.

 

[plan_D]

A bolt-action rifle was also much easier to clear when it jammed. The fact that a Garand couldn't be reloaded mid-clip would make it difficult to clear.
You don't fire any rifle from the hip, unless you're stupid and want to completely miss everything.

GrG is right, the Stg. 44 was the best small arm of the war. The worlds first assault rifle. And it looks surprisingly like an AK-47 one, if not, the greatest assualt rifle of all time.

The fact is, if the American army were equipped with bolt-actions instead of semi-automatic rifles, the war would turn out the same.

 

[Crazy]

I tend to agree with you on all these points, plan_D. The war would have turned out virtually the same, with differences too minor to count. Besides, the American's weren't the only ones fighting the war. We had Moisin-Nagants and Lee-Enfields on our side as well.

The American's were still a large, potent force no matter which type of rifle they carried. Bolt-action or semi-auto, the actions of the troops wouldn't have changed much. Perhaps a few more losses because of the loss of semi-automatic fire, but perhaps a few more kills from a fewer amount of jams, and the ability to fix them when they occured

 

[Lightning Guy]

Well find a spirit medium and take it up with Patton.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

the Stg. 44 was the best small arm of the war

very heavy however..................

 

[Dan]

a good weapon that the Russians had during the war was the Mp 18 and was also a sub-machine gun like the thompson

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

although aparaently the thompson was hard on the hands.....................

 

[Dan]

yea i agree (probably the semi-automatic trigger or the recoil, either one)

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

it was alround a good gun though.....................

 

[plan_D]

If I could, I'd take it up with Patton.

The Stg. 44 was heavy, not as heavy as the BAR or Bren but it had the range and accuracy of a rifle and automatic capability. It was the worlds first assault rifle.

 

[Lightning Guy]

The Thompson may have been hard on the hands, but it was even harder on the enemy.

 

[plan_D]

The PPsH 43 was better, and easier to produce.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

now if you're looking for ease of manufacture, you'll be wanting a sten.....................

 

[MP-Willow]

Yes the BAR was a beast but what fire power and it had range.

The AK-47 was not in any way related to the German rigle. They were developed seperatly. That from the designer himself. Also the Stg.44 was in very small numbers for the SS and other specail units.

A tompson whold be hard on you, think of all that .45 rounds firing off, the recoil was prity good. 8)

 

[GermansRGeniuses]

Actually, it was based on the Stg. 43/44 as they were available in large numbers since most of the 500,000 made were deployed to the Eastern front (later to the BotB).

Regular Infantry got it too, but mostly NCO's, not Unteroffizers (privates).