Gewehr 43 vs M1 garand

which one do you think is better and why?

 

found this 2005 thread with same question,you may wish to look thro...

m1 garand v.s. mauser

 

Garand

Accuracy, Dependability, Servicability, Functionality and shear Quantity.

I think the M1 Carbine is a closer match to the G43 as far as performance and functionality.

 

I always thought the G43 was better. They have roughly the same accuracy, range, and reliability. However, the G43 has a 10 round magazine (compared to the m1's 8), can reload in mid-clip, and does not make a "ping" sound when it clip is empty.

 

The G43 had a shorter barrel life, was rather crude, slower reload, less reliable than the Garand, Jug is correct in his assesment

 

The M1 by far. One of the biggest drawbacks to the Gewer 43 is that it is comparatively crudely made. By the time it came out the Germans were taking shortcuts on virtually all manufactured goods. The G 43 included a large number of stampings and parts that were rough machined from castings.

This along with no adequite testing led to problems with it jamming due to powder buildup and misaligned parts along with a low service rate again due to powder corrosion.

 

I think you guys are confusing the G43 with the G41. the G41 was unreliable, has a slow reload (due to it using stripper clips), and had a short barrel life. the G43 used a 10 round detachable box magazine, was very reliable, and could mount a scope for sniping purposes.

 

They are not confusing anything. The M1 Garand was among the toughest service rifle in WWII. The G-43 was a design inspired by the Russian STV which is not reliable in the same class with the Garand. Accuracy wise, both Garand and G-43 could accept scopes and be used as sniper rifles. But the M1 was among the most accurate service rifle ever built and its direct descent the M-14 is still used as a sniper rifle today. Do you see a G-43 in the German Army now?

 

Did the Germans had verticle dispersion problems?

 

The G43 had a 21 1/2 inch barrel firing a 7.92x57 Mauser round with an overall length of 44 1/2"

The Garand has a 24" barrel firing a .30-06 round with an overall length of 43 5/8"

So looking at the math the Garand is firing a smaller round out of a longer barrel which translates to better accuracy.

You can add in the longer sight radius (distance between the front and rear sights) of the Garand and that lends itself to even more acuracy.

Now don't be fooled by the technical data provided on Wikipedia that says the Garand only has an effective range of 402M according to the Army Manual (the article cites as a reference) it has an effective range of 500Yrds or 550M.

http://www.biggerhammer.net/manuals/tm9100522212/M1GARA.PDF

I won't even get into the the amount of marksmanship training that was being provided by the Germans in 1943 compared to that of the average US infantry Soldier; suffice it to say that the M1 was a better rifle fielded by better trained marksman.

 

As we're all aware, these 'better' arguments can go around in circles.

To add my two penn'orth, although 'heart' says to me G.43, 'head' has to agree with T A Gardner ; as a weapon used in WWII combat the M1 was 'better' all round.

Having said which, the G.43 was not without merit, being relatively light, ergonomically a big improvement on its predecessor, powerful ( certainly more so than the M1 Carbine ) and it was quite highly-prized by German soldiers.

But by all acoounts, the reality was that build quality was very poor, Shores in 'British Snipers...' quotes a British Officer as saying that 'rifles of (G.43) type were made of the poorest materials he had ever seen used in any firearms' ( p.183).

The M1 Garand was the better weapon.

 

It is a mistake to say that the G43 was slow to reload and unreliable, it wasn't, that would be the G41. The G43 was a sturdy, reliable and decently accurate rifle. The G43 however did sometimes suffer from a problem, some batches of G43s suffering from being made with low quality materials, mostly resulting in soft metal recievers. So with that having been said the Garand is overall the better rifle, it's just all in all a great rifle. In short the Garand was the best semi automatic full powered rifle to be made during the war, just like the K98k was the best bolt action rifle made during the war.

But having read a lot about both weapons, Garand & G43, I will have to say that it's a very close match. Both had their advantages and disadvantages, and they are both great rifles. Infact despite all the factories manufacturing them having been destroyed after the war the Czech continued to use the G43 as a service rifle up until the late 50's, alongside the Vz.52, both being replaced completely in 1959 by the Vz.58 (a near copy of the AK-47).

 

With the development of the G43, the Germans had at last a semi-automatic rifle design that could be mass produced in relatively short order. With the subtitution of stamped sheetmetal parts for many of the earlier milled steel components on the G41(W), and time saving short cuts such as a pressed in barrel in lieu of threading, and forged receivers, production time and rifle weight were significantly reduced. Unfortunately for the Germans, the rifle proved to be substantially over powered for the 7.92x57mm cartridge, and was prone to malfunction. Initial design flaws were never completely rectified before this rifle went into full scale production in late 1943, and the design was continually changed and revised through to the end of hostilities in 1945.
taken from the gewehr43.com webpage..

if you can make a case for each,doe's it not come down to personal choice,and preference would come from having fired each rifle,also under combat conditions! which is where the weapon will prove itself? or not...

 

Both rifles were great, and if made with the proper materials (as some were) I'd just as soon take a G43 with me on the battlefield as a Garand.

 

M1 Garand, athough the G-43 is an excellent weapon.

There's just something about the Garand...

 

In terms of functionality the Garand was certainly better. It was made in american workshops, using top quality metallurgy, with first class quality control at every level. Moreover practically everyone that built them was interested in turning out a top quality product, i believe there were few saboteurs in the garand factories.

Contrasted with the G43: roughly made, of crude semi-finished castings and low quality stampings using second-rate metallurgy (due to constant shortages), often by foreign slave labor, who naturally took every opportunity to do whatever they could to botch the German war effort.

that said the G43 was a better, more modern design. The proof is that no one has copied the Garand's 8 round en-bloc clip (California post-ban, break-open-to-load, AR-15's 10 round clips don't count- that's due to law.)
The Garand had 3 serious shortcomings in battle: the "ping" noise the empty clip made when the gun was empty, the rifle could not be topped up with ammo, and there was no way for the soldier to tell how many rounds he had remaining in the weapon. The G43 lacked all of these shortcomings. Moreover mounting a scope on an M1 could be done, but was rare, while the G43 was regularly pressed into service as a sniper rifle as it was easy, and commonly done, to mount a scope on it.

Also the G43 magazine held 10 rounds plus 1 in the chamber. The Garand held 8 rounds, with 0 rounds in the chamber.

All that aside, if i had the choice i'd probably choose a Garand if i had to go into battle in WW2. It is accurate, hard-hitting, reliable and a first class weapon - nothing crude or shoddy about it, from the start of its production run to the end.

 

My dad never found the G41 to be unreliable and not only are stippers fairly quick to reload you could top off a magazine pretty easily. Don't remember reading anything about short barrel life either. In fact would be rather surprised as barrel tech was not new and these were made before material shortages or labor problems really cropped up. Of course my dad used it as a deer rifle rather than in combat but he did so over a period of well over 20 years.

 

The g41's gas system was overly complex and caused the system to foul often. the stripper clips also reload much slower than a box magazine.

 

The Garand's stripper type enblock clip comes pre-loaded, they are discarded when emply, not reloaded by the troops. That is not to say they couldn't be reloaded, but generally the troops took them out of stores pre-loaded.