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

Rating WW1's Sub/Machine Guns by Aesthetic Pleasure!!

Discussion in 'The Guns Galore Section' started by JJWilson, Aug 2, 2018.

  1. JJWilson

    JJWilson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,404
    Likes Received:
    445
    Location:
    Arizona U.S.A
    Hello everyone, today I am 18 years old, and can legally own and purchase firearms, and I'm already a registered voter, along with registering for the draft this morning. Anyway, today I have another thread on judging weapons by their looks, this time it's the Sub-machine guns, and machine guns of WW1! I rate these weapons based on how they look from least attractive, to most attractive, this is purely my opinion and I would love to hear yours! Note that some of the weapons on this list did not serve extensively or in large numbers during the Great War, they are included to diversify the list.

    19. French St.Entienne mle 1907- I understand that this was one of the first MG's France made......but wow it's ugly!!
    [​IMG]
    18. Italian Fiat-Revelli M1914- A very clunky and awkward looking piece of machinery........
    [​IMG]
    17. Japanese Nambu Type 3- Japan's first Machine gun isn't too inspiring in the looks department........
    [​IMG]
    16. German MG. 07- Another clunky and unattractive weapon, this time made by Germany.........
    [​IMG]
    15. U.S Browning M1917- America's first true modern MG is similar to the other MG's of the time....in ugliness
    [​IMG]
    14. French Hotchkiss M1909- Really this is the first gun on this list that isn't terrible looking.......
    [​IMG]
    13. French Hotchkiss M1914- This is better than the 1909.......barely
    [​IMG]
    12. German MG. 08- Not a fantastic looking gun, but better than the 07.......
    [​IMG]
    11. U.K Maxim M1911- The Vickers is better functioning........and better looking......
    [​IMG]
    10. U.K Vickers Mk.1- Not a bad looking piece of machinery.......but not beautiful either....
    [​IMG]
    9. French Chauchat M1915- A very strange looking MG, and even stranger for it's time......not bad though....
    [​IMG]
    8. Colt-Browning M1895- It is kind of sad that an 19th century MG is in the top 10 on this list...........
    [​IMG]
    7. Italian Villar Perosa M1915- This is a very unique MG that is pretty cool looking in my opinion......
    [​IMG]
    6. German Parabellum M1914/17- A very odd feeding system.......but a neat looking gun nonetheless [​IMG]
    5. Italian Beretta M1918- It looks eerily similar to the Carcano Carbine.....just with a Banana clip instead....[​IMG]
    4. Danish Madsen M1902- This is a really good looking gun.......probably because I associate it with the Bren...[​IMG]
    3. U.K Lewis Gun- An all time favorite of mine with it's large muzzle and cool Circular Magazine........
    [​IMG]
    2. U.S Browning Automatic Rifle M1918- Need I say anymore..................
    [​IMG]
    1. German Bergmann MP-18- For being Germany's first Sub-Machine Gun.....it looks amazing!!
    [​IMG]
     
  2. belasar

    belasar Court Jester Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    8,039
    Likes Received:
    1,043
    It is almost impossible to find a 'good looking' WWI era machine gun simply because the technology simply didn't allow for it, much like WWI tanks all look clunky when compared to second world war or even modern versions. Its a pity the Thompson can't be included as it was held back deployment as I understand it for security reasons, but I'm not sure if that is more legend or truth.
     
    JJWilson likes this.
  3. JJWilson

    JJWilson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,404
    Likes Received:
    445
    Location:
    Arizona U.S.A
    Yes WW1 was not a particularly attractive time for machine guns and tanks, I actually like the British Mark 1's design, along with the Renault FT-17, but yes, generally the designs of that era were not particularly pleasing. A shipment of Thompson's arrived on the Armistice day, I don't know how many there were, but that's my understanding of what happened.
     
  4. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,312
    Likes Received:
    1,230
    Location:
    Michigan
    No expert but didn't the WWI version of the BAR lack the bipod?
     
  5. JJWilson

    JJWilson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,404
    Likes Received:
    445
    Location:
    Arizona U.S.A
    Some lacked the bi-pod, but others were fitted with them. I could not give you details as to what the ratio of non-bipod to bipod was though.
     
  6. George Patton

    George Patton Canadian Refugee

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2010
    Messages:
    3,092
    Likes Received:
    1,068
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    You are correct. The "original" M1918 BAR did not have a bipod. The bipod was introduced on the M1918A1, introduced in 1937, and was retained with the M1918A2, introduced in 1938. The M1918A2 was the mainstay throughout WW2 but you will often see the bipods removed in period photographs. The bipod is in a terrible location and is poorly designed, and adversely impacted weapon handling and balance.

    Note that the rather obscure BAR-based M1922 Cavalry Machine Rifle introduced a bipod but this was of course not in service prior to the armistice.
     
    JJWilson likes this.

Share This Page