WWII small arms

you should have it dated. if it predates the beretta 92, then it is rare. after ww1, gun buffs brought back lugers and discovered they made excellent trail and hunting sidearms. what could be weirder than a cowboy or a mountain man holding a luger?

 

My big question is how come you guys don't say any thing about the FG-42 paratrooper rifle used by few German paratroopers

 

Its mentioned in posts #10 and #11.

 

I read in a World War 2 small arms book and the MG-42 is like the US M-60 is that true:ac_me262:

 

I have fired:
P-08
P38
Broom Handle Mauser
Colt 1911
Garand
M1 Carbine
MP 40
Thompson
98K
And they all rock, although I love the Broom Handle.
If your ever in Las Vegas you can go to a number of ranges and rent FULL AUTO weapons to give a spin.

 

I have heard about this too; you have to admit that they look somewhat similar, even if they are in detail completely different.

 

It depends on what you mean by "like". As you say, they look similar but the only technical resemblance IIRC is the belt feed mechanism, which was copied from the MG 42. The M60's operating mechanism was I believe copied from the FG 42.

 

Is the Russian RPG-7 or the American LAW like the German Panzerfaust? I like the look of the panzerfaust and Panzersherck

 

IIRC the replacable barrel was another MG-42 feature that was similar between the two.

 

The RPG-7 is more like the Panzerfaust, becasue it has a front-fed rocket and the LAW not. However, the Panzerfaust and the LAW are similar in that they are both one-time-use weapons, that have one shot only.

I recently made a homemade "Panzerschreck" out of PVC tubing and wood (yes, I know).

 

Do you mean the specific locking mechanism? Quick-change barrels predated the MG 42 (the Bren and its predecessors, for instance).

 

No. Just the similarity between the two having the ability to be able to.

 

Well i have ...well my dad has a PPSH ....and i used a clip on it and i love it because of the Recoil and the amount of it that shoots...At first youll feel the push back but then you start getting the hang of it..and i loved it.

 

What if the Nazis came out with the STG-44 earler?

 

The war would've taken a faster pace, I tend to think, with weapon design and infantry tactics.

Didn't somebody cover that in another thread?

 

Yes T.A. did. I can't remember the thread though.

 

Here it is. Thanks and credit to T.A. Gardner.

"It isn't the weapon that is important, it is the orgainzed unit within which it is being used that is critical. The difference on the battlefield between the various submachineguns, excepting those of very poor quality, is insignificant, just as the choice of rifle is. Yes, semi-automatics do make a small difference as do assault rifles. But, in infantry units the only weapons of real military siginficance are machineguns, mortars, and grenade launchers / man portable HE /AT weapons."

http://www.ww2f.com/information-requests/22907-russian-vs-german-infantry-weapons.html#post277452

 

Read my post of today there, about 19:00 GMT

http://www.ww2f.com/information-requests/22907-russian-vs-german-infantry-weapons.html#post277478

 

I mostly agree with that.

The real benefit of the assault rifles is that they provided each soldier who had one with a multipurpose weapon, which could do the job of both an SMG and (at normal ranges) a rifle. So compared with a unit equipped with a mixture of SMGs and semi-auto or bolt-action rifles, the useful firepower was, on average, higher, since the rifle-armed men weren't very handy in street fighting while the SMG-armed men weren't much use in open country.