Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Browning M1919 vs MG42

Discussion in 'The Guns Galore Section' started by Danyel Phelps, Nov 16, 2005.

  1. dave phpbb3

    dave phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    1,626
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Bristol, England
    via TanksinWW2
    just a question here
    isnt the M1919(in its various models) a medium machine gun whilst the MG42 is a GPMG and therefore both have a slightly different role?

    I do admit tho that 20 rounds a second is just stupid and unessacryily wasteful but like some1 metioned b4 it is a good fear factor and with that kind of fire it will deffinately put you down because you are more likely to get hit by more than 1 bullet
     
  2. Zhukov_2005

    Zhukov_2005 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    1,652
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Toothless Capital of the World
    via TanksinWW2
    I think the technical role of the 1919 was medium general purpose machine gun.

    Nevertheless, each weapon worked as its respective countrys' LMG/GPMG, so comparing them makes sense.
     
  3. Roel

    Roel New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    12,678
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    It matters whether we are talking about the bipod or tripod version the MG42. One is generally seen as a squad LMG where the other is a heavy MG.
     
  4. Zhukov_2005

    Zhukov_2005 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    1,652
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Toothless Capital of the World
    via TanksinWW2
    The MG42 with a bipod, I assume.
     
  5. Gunter_Viezenz

    Gunter_Viezenz New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,838
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Windsor, Ontario
    via TanksinWW2

    its called bursts.
     
  6. Kaiser phpbb3

    Kaiser phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005
    Messages:
    650
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    And i have made it clear in my reasoning that no soldat in his right mind will fire an entire burst.All soldiers are trained to fire in short bursts.In that case,the ammo chewing problem is resolved to a certain extent
     
  7. Zhukov_2005

    Zhukov_2005 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    1,652
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Toothless Capital of the World
    via TanksinWW2
    The Germans had the MG18, I believe with a 13mm bullet. Whether they used this in the field, or not, I don't know.
     
  8. Danyel Phelps

    Danyel Phelps Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2003
    Messages:
    1,357
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    United States
    via TanksinWW2
    "What they were trained to do" and "What happened" are often two entirely different stories.
     
  9. Roel

    Roel New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    12,678
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    The role of this weapon was fulfilled by the BAR in the American army. M1919s were issued to the MG section at platoon level. Hence we should be talking about the tripod version.
     
  10. Kaiser phpbb3

    Kaiser phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005
    Messages:
    650
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    Of course,then these are up to the individual soldier isn';t it?and as such,wouldn't it be wiser not to include what the soldiers had done but what it was intended to do?There should be some allied soldiers that wasted a whole clip on nothing i am sure,but we didn't bring that up.

    And in any case,unless you were there danyel and can prove that this happen in ALL cases,that cannot stand.
     
  11. GP

    GP New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2004
    Messages:
    1,432
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    Actually a MG in the SF (sustained fire) mode is used to supress the enemy so that your own soldiers can move in closer.
     
  12. Man

    Man New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2004
    Messages:
    1,457
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Norway
    via TanksinWW2
    Which brings us back to, 20 RPS is a waste for prolonged fire (SF). It is sufficient with 8 RPS.

    I do agree though, for short bursts, 20 RPS is better.
     
  13. Zhukov_2005

    Zhukov_2005 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    1,652
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Toothless Capital of the World
    via TanksinWW2
    But the MG42 on a tripod filled different roles than the M1919, for the most part. The MG42 tripod version should be compared with the M2. It's never ending. :roll:
     
  14. GP

    GP New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2004
    Messages:
    1,432
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    Again like anything it depends on the enemy you face, how many rounds you have and how they are fed into the maghine gun (belt or magazine). Also if you have a gun as accurate as the Bren gun (modern day LMG) then a magazine of 30 rounds can be fired in one burst at the target with all 30 rounds hitting within a very small area. The GPMG is a spread weapon and can be fired constanlty to cover a large area. As you say though bursts of 3 to 5 rounds with a hand held or not dug in weapon is more than enough.
     
  15. Ricky

    Ricky Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,974
    Likes Received:
    105
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    Potential silly question time.

    Did the MG42 have a selector switch thingy whereby you could chose a slightly lower rate of fire?
     
  16. Zhukov_2005

    Zhukov_2005 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    1,652
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Toothless Capital of the World
    via TanksinWW2
    Not that I know of. I believe the BAR had one, but the MG42 most definitely did not. A MG42 gunner was exceptional if he could squeeze off only one round.
     
  17. Ricky

    Ricky Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,974
    Likes Received:
    105
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    Don't know how accurate it is, but this site ( http://www.wwiirelics.com/weapons7.htm ) claims that when they designed the MG42 they deliberately left out the select-fire function to make it less complicated.

    They also (as has been noted above) deliberately made the barrel easy to change, as due to the high rate of fire (a design requirement) it would wear out after 250-300 rounds of sustained fire. A barrel could be changed in 6-10 seconds.

    If anybody has some solid sources to back this up or disprove it, please speak up!
     
  18. Kellhound

    Kellhound New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2004
    Messages:
    401
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Spain
    via TanksinWW2
    Spanish MG3 have a second bolt group with a diferent weight in the spares/tools bag.
    One bolt allows 1200 rpm, the other around 800 (I'm quoting from my half-remembered time as ammo carrier). Don't know if MG42 had those two bolts, but we were induced to think they had.
     
  19. Gunter_Viezenz

    Gunter_Viezenz New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,838
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Windsor, Ontario
    via TanksinWW2
    are we talking about the browning automatic rifle or the browning 30.cal?
     
  20. AL AMIN

    AL AMIN New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2005
    Messages:
    300
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    some where in the middle east
    via TanksinWW2
    the mg 42 was and the mg3 is the best mg of the world point
    and if you dont belive it ask some d day veterans they will tell ya that this weapon was made by the devil sppiting the seed of death with 1600 1200 rpm
     

Share This Page