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

M3 submachine gun

Discussion in 'Allied Light Weapons' started by warhistory, Oct 19, 2012.

  1. warhistory

    warhistory New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2012
    Messages:
    61
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    India
    via War44
    M3 sub-machine gun was introduced by United States and the service period of this gun was about 1942–1992. This master piece was the better alternatives of Thompson sub-machine gun as it was cheaper, lighter and more accurate.

    [​IMG]


    [​IMG]


    [​IMG]
     
    Otto likes this.
  2. warhistory

    warhistory New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2012
    Messages:
    61
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    India
    via War44
    Thompson submachine gun

    The Thompson submachine gun was introduced by John T. Thompson in 1919. This Thompson sub machine was favored by soldiers, criminals, police and civilians alike for its ergonomics, compactness, large .45 ACP cartridge, reliability, and high volume of automatic fire.


    [​IMG]
     
    Otto likes this.
  3. worldwar

    worldwar New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    0
    via War44
    The effective range of M3 sub machine gun is about 100 yards. The Barrel length of this M3 machinegun was 8 in (203.2 mm).
     
  4. Andy235

    Andy235 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2018
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    3
    It might have been smaller and cheaper to make, but the Thompson is such a handsome weapon.
     
    Otto likes this.
  5. Otto

    Otto Gearing up. Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    9,342
    Likes Received:
    1,524
    Location:
    DFW, Texas
    Wartime requirements generally care for price & effectiveness over looks, but I'd much rather own a Thompson over a "grease gun".

    On a side note, I always like to see imported threads (from War44.com) draw activity. It gratifying to see that the preserved data is getting attention.
     
    Andy235 likes this.
  6. Andy235

    Andy235 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2018
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    3
    I would like to see more discussions involving comparing and contrasting various small arms.
     
    Otto likes this.
  7. A-58

    A-58 Cool Dude

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2008
    Messages:
    8,296
    Likes Received:
    1,274
    Location:
    Baton Rouge, Louisiana
    To me, the only drawback to both the Tommygun and the grease gun was that there were no bayonet lugs. Other than that I would be happy to be issued either. Shanking someone with the bayonet would be awfully up close and personal, but no more so than with the M1 Carbine or the M1A Carbine. Both of which do come with bayonet lugs. Bayonets are nice because the tendency to run out of ammo in an intense firefight or having to deal with a malfunction is high. Sometimes field stripping a jammed weapon is not the recommended thing to do. Bayonets give you that extra "edge" when it's needed the most. Also they make it easy to open up a can of c-rations when you lose you P-38.
     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2018
  8. USMCPrice

    USMCPrice Idiot at Large

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2009
    Messages:
    4,601
    Likes Received:
    1,643
    Location:
    God's Country
    If I remember correctly; you were a "pig" gunner like me. Now in the Marine Corps if your TOE weapon was the M60, you also drew a K-Bar and a pistol. When my T/O weapon was an M16, I also rated an M7 bayonet. Now, I don't remember anytime that I wished I was armed with an M16 instead of the M60 simply because the M60 lacked a bayonet lug. In fact I found the K-Bar to be a much better all around for everything from knife fighting, can opening to brush cutting, the only thing the M7 was superior at was rifle/bayonet fighting, where it was very efficient. So, I don't see the Thompson SMG's lack of a bayonet lug to be a "deal killer", I'd just carry a K-Bar. Now the Marine Corps replacement for the M7 is the OKC-3S, which combines the best features of the bayonet with the best features of the K-Bar plus additional new features, so one knife/bayonet whether you're humping an M16A4 or an M240G.

    [​IMG]
    I agree it was cheaper (less than half the cost) and lighter (2lbs.), but it was not as accurate, nor nearly as reliable as the Thompson. The Thompson also has a better ergonomic design.
     
    Poppy and A-58 like this.
  9. harolds

    harolds Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    Messages:
    1,402
    Likes Received:
    195
    I've watched a few videos of both the Thompson and the M3 being shot. Several of the participants thought the M3 was easier and more accurate to shoot! I've shot the Tommy but not the grease gun so I can't compare.
     
  10. George Patton

    George Patton Canadian Refugee

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2010
    Messages:
    3,049
    Likes Received:
    1,042
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    M3 has a lower ROF, and is "easier" to shoot as a result. Its similar in control ability to the MP40 -- point, squeeze, hose down the target, reload, repeat. The Thompson can be a handful to control but there's a certain "art" to shooting one. Hold it right, and the foregrip will "balance" on your right hand. Its difficult to explain unless you've shot one -- its different than most subguns out there. That being said, the Thompson is a much more ergonomic gun to hold and aim. As for accuracy: they're both open bolt subguns so "accuracy" is a relative term, but the Thompson is so heavy the reaction to the bolt moving forward is significantly less than with the M3, which generally means it is easier to hold on target for the fraction of a second between the trigger pull, sear break and bolt slamming forward onto the cartridge. The sights are much better on the Thompson as well (not just due to the beautiful Lyman sights on the early models -- the sight radius of the Thomspon is much more than that of the M3, making for a precise sight picture).
     
  11. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,100
    Likes Received:
    1,188
    Location:
    Michigan
    I would think a M3 would be awkward to use with a bayonet
     
  12. harolds

    harolds Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    Messages:
    1,402
    Likes Received:
    195
    Why do you need a can opener on a firearm anyway.

    I don't seen the advantage of having good sights on a bullet hose.
     
    A-58 likes this.
  13. USMCPrice

    USMCPrice Idiot at Large

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2009
    Messages:
    4,601
    Likes Received:
    1,643
    Location:
    God's Country
    Because a trained Thompson gunner seldom uses his SMG as a "bullet hose". He fires aimed bursts, and the sights and weapons good ergonomics help make sure those bursts are on target, not pray and spray.
     
  14. A-58

    A-58 Cool Dude

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2008
    Messages:
    8,296
    Likes Received:
    1,274
    Location:
    Baton Rouge, Louisiana
    Yes, I know that the concept of a bayonet on a Tommygun or Grease gun is a bit silly, but I really like to have as many options as can be afforded. Mostly the posts were just to generate conversation. It worked!
     
  15. A-58

    A-58 Cool Dude

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2008
    Messages:
    8,296
    Likes Received:
    1,274
    Location:
    Baton Rouge, Louisiana
    Not saying that the non-existent bayonet lug on the Tommygun would be a deal killer, but it would've been neat to have that option. I'm all about options. In the great movie Kelly's Heroes, at the minefield scene when they ambushed the German unit investigating the explosion of the mine, one of Kelly's men had a bayonet secured by wire (commo wire I assume) to his Tommygun. That's where I got the idea from. That and Formerjughead always mentioning the fact that "but it doesn't have a bayonet lug" on every weapon system discussed here in the forum, whether it was man carried, flown, or driven.

    Yes, I really loved the M-60. Shooting it, not carrying it and all the accouterments that made the weapon system complete. Yes, the 60 gunners in the Army drew and carried the 45, and was issued the M-7 bayonet. My blade of choice was the K-bar as well. It was bestowed on me by a great friend of the family who was an artillery officer in the 101st in Vietnam, a forward observer/artillery spotter. Had to give it back when I got out and went home, but it sure was a nice tool and melee weapon if needed.
     
  16. BigEFan

    BigEFan recruit

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2011
    Messages:
    10
    Likes Received:
    0
    I purchased a replica of the "Vic Morrow" Thompson and it looks beautiful, exactly like on the Combat! TV series in the 1960s. I was wondering about the daylight I can see between the top of the 30-round magazine and the gun. Is that normal? Also it looks like the Thompson could accommodate a magazine of longer LC (Long Colt) .45 rounds, which are one cm longer than the ACP .45 rounds. Anyone know if there ever was a 30-round magazine of LC ammo for the Thompson?
     
  17. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    7,661
    Likes Received:
    1,627
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    I thought it was .41 Long Colt....
     
  18. George Patton

    George Patton Canadian Refugee

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2010
    Messages:
    3,049
    Likes Received:
    1,042
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    The M1923 developmental model was intended to fulfil the LMG/automatic rifle role. It was chambered in .45 Remington-Thompson, a 250gr bullet fired at 1500 fps. The design went no where.

    There was never a Thompson chambered for 45 Long Colt, unless it was a tool room prototype or custom-built. Even then, I doubt it as the rimmed cartridge would have been extremely unreliable to feed. Limited numbers of Thompsons were made in a variety of calibres including 9mm and .380 ACP but .45 LC was not one of them.

    [​IMG]
     
    BigEFan likes this.
  19. George Patton

    George Patton Canadian Refugee

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2010
    Messages:
    3,049
    Likes Received:
    1,042
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    And yes, it is normal to have a gap between the top of the Thompson magazine and the reciever. Thompsons magazines do not fit "tight" .
     
    BigEFan likes this.
  20. WILD DUKW

    WILD DUKW Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2018
    Messages:
    163
    Likes Received:
    29
    The original version of the M3 was very dangerous to carry. The safety mechanism was easy to disengage which lead to a very real threat of friendly fire. The Army eventually fixed the problem. My father flat refused to carry one in combat. His weapon of choice was the M1 Rifle or if he couldn't latch onto a German machine pistol, a fully auto M1 Carbine for fighting indoors. (He carried a M1911 just in case, and on at least one occasion found it very useful in room to room fighting.
     
    A-58 likes this.

Share This Page