M1 Thompson, British Sten or Type 100, MP40 or PPSH-41?

people have made that mistake for years. While the range and penetration of the Thompson is generally denigerated, it did have an exceptional range considering it was a pistol round. However, the accuracy was not that great beyond a 50 meters. The 10 1/2 inch barrel just wasn't up to the task, it was a "lead pump" first and foremost. That said, here is a portion of an interesting report (Philip B. Sharpe review of the M1928A1 Thompson from 1929):

"This .45 automatic pistol cartridge, in the arm designed for it, delivers about 810 foot per seconds velocity. In the 10 1/2-inch barreled Thompson it delivers about 925 f.p.s. Tests indicate that accuracy and penetration is quite respectable, even at the longer ranges. A single shot two feet from the muzzle, using the 230 grain bullet, tested on 3/4-inch yellow pine boards spaced one inch apart, ran through 6 3/4 boards. At 100 yards it would plough (sic) through six boards; at 200 yards through 5 1/4; at 300 yards, 4 1/2; at the 400 mark through four boards, and at 500 yards it could still stumble through 3 3/4 boards¾sufficient to cause very unpleasant sensations in the body of a recipient." [Page 1107]

It could "reach out there" more distance than I would have assumed, but I have NO idea where one would have to aim to get the bullet to that distance! 500 yards! Another poster (lwd) did the calculations, and I seem to recall him coming up with aiming to compensate for about a 45 foot drop at that distance. But since the rear sights (on the early models) were calibrated out to 500 yards it probably wasn't as hard to do as one might think.

 

Quite.

 

Quick calculation shows that you need to elevate the barrel about 1.7 degrees to compensate for 45 feet at 500 yards.

 

I've also read that they were noisy due to the rounds sliding back and forth. Apparently one of the first things the Brits learned was that their night patrols could be heard from half a mile away if someone was carrying a Thompson.

 

Everybody badmouths the Sten -but having fired all the weapons mentioned except the Japanese Sten variant??? -I can tell you that the Sten was as good as any of them when properly used.

It is correct that the mag was not to be used as a handle -the handguard around the barrel was the forward point of contact. In tens of thousands of rounds fired I cannot remember one stoppage due to anything but an empty mag.

Sure that stupid wide pyramid foresight could have been thinned down -but the main point is that while most war movies show all these weapons being fired from the hip -they were all designed to be fired -aimed-from the shoulder.

I love the look of the Thompson -but have you ever tried carrying one all day?

At fifty yards the Thompson and Sten could both hit a man-sized target reliably. Beyond that -what are you doing using an SMG when you should be using a rifle!

SMGs are for house-clearing not sniping. And in many if not most cases a well-placed grenade is superior.

Jock Williams Yogi 13