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
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.
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.
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
The Germans had the MG18, I believe with a 13mm bullet. Whether they used this in the field, or not, I don't know.
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.
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.
Actually a MG in the SF (sustained fire) mode is used to supress the enemy so that your own soldiers can move in closer.
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.
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:
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.
Potential silly question time. Did the MG42 have a selector switch thingy whereby you could chose a slightly lower rate of fire?
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.
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!
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.
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