MG-42 Question

[Virage]

Originally posted by Staga
If you're interested about high-quality vid of firing MG42 download this (21mb, right-click, save as).
Not sure how long I can store that so grab it while you can.

Thnx.

[Saurdaukar]

Originally posted by Gunslinger
You have NEVER fired a Machin Gun in your life have you?  The thing about MG42 is that it was extremly accurate with really short bursts.  You get a couple of these going at once and you could send ALOT of well placed rounds down range.

"Die mother****er, die"

Pause... repeat.  

[SmokinSS]

I work for a class 2 manufacturer on my off days and we built a 42. It is a great weapon if not a little tempermental. The weapon we restored was built in May of 43 excluding the feed tray and trunion. There are only 2 things needed to convert a 42 from 8mm to 7.62 and that is a small spacer in the feed tray and a barrel. It took us about a month to rebuild it and getting it running right. Finding the right timing for it is very time consuming. But once all the bugs were worked out it was a real hoot to play with. We used to take it to demo's for P.D.'s and let them shoot it. We would keep it hid until we had shown them our line of suppressors and then pull the 42 out. You should see some of the looks on thier faces it was priceless. Sadly the 42 was sold about 6 months ago to another dealer so the baby is gone, but a new 1919a6 is in the works. When we get it completed we will make a video or 2 for all the MG junkies out there.

Ohh and about firing the 42 flat out....ours was 8mm and on a AAA tripod it would beat the he11 out of you. We would only run 1 50 round belt at a time when we would let it rock just in case of a run away it would empty out pretty quick.

A little background on this weapon...Basically it is a shotgun. The weapon had such a high rate of fire that a good gunner could use elevation to put a high amount of rounds onto the target with pretty much the same impact time as the first round. The rate of fire was between 1400 and 1600 rounds a minute.

If you ever get the chance to go to a MG shoot give it a try. At an open shoot most owners will let you fire the weapons for a nominal fee plus ammo.

One more thing I sent Detch "asw" a few pictures of some of the toys I will see if he will post a couple of the 42 for me.

Have great weekend.
Robert

[lasersailor184]

Sorry, should have made it a little bit more clear.


Throw a Mg42 in the room.  Throw a Fg42 in the room.  Wait until the ruckuss is done.


You now have an M60.




BTW, I have heard that the M60 was a bad gun.  But everyone who had to use it loved it for some reason...

[SmokinSS]

The 60 was and still is a great weapon system. Fairly low maintenace, good reliability, and a fairly low rate of fire. Makes for a good combination. It is almost grunt proof.

Robert

[Dune]

The MG 42 also had a very advanced tripod for infantry use.  





The tripod had an intergal recoil-dampening system that made it extremely accurate.  You could squeeze the handle (shown on the bottom picture.  It is the two verticle wooden handles on the side of the mount, just below the butstock of the gun) and blow through a whole belt and it would cover a yard square area at 100 yards.  The two leather pads on the front were back pads for when it was folded up and carred like a back pack.

[Charon]

That was my thought (and experience) too Gunslinger and smokin. But I've come across at least two references that paint it as some marginal weapon (but without a lot of specifics). One said the Marines went to the MAG because of shortcomings. Mybe it's just one of those ours is better than yours kind of things).

Charon

[SmokinSS]

Dune...That mount is used for defensive position with the gunner below grade in a fighting position. I forget what they called it but there is a periscope sight along the side also. On this mount it is on the right side.

Charon...as with every weapon there are fans and critics alike. I was attached to a heavy weapons squad for 2 years and humped the 60 before it was phased out. Yes it malfunctioned but all weapons do. No matter how clean and well maintained they are fouls will occur. Me personally I like the 60. We had great service out of it. When we were issued the SAW and they took our 60's away we griped like all good little grunts do and once we got the bugs worked out of the new weapon we liked it. No more humping 2 kinds of ammo.

The 60 is still in service though. The teams still use it as well as the M-14. The 7.62 is a great round. It may eventually be completely replaced but I figure it still has many more years of service in it's future. That one is just my opinion though.

Robert

[lasersailor184]

Charon, I agree.  I believe that you are right.




But anyway, that tripod shown is for long range MG use.  You fire off a burst, give the handle one spin, fire off another burst.


It's not meant so that you can grab ahold of the gun and swing it around on the tripod.

[flakbait]

The main reason the M-60 was regarded as being nearly bulletproof was the Stellite lining of the barrel. Without that liner in the barrel you could really ruin it within a few hundred rounds. But with Stellite you get stories of guys shooting it until the barrel glowed. It was a really tough gun too. I think it was mostly gun writers who gave it a bad rap. Most grunts either loved it or just liked it; I don't know any 'nam vet who hated the thing. One or two have told me that without proper care it could get a bit tempermental, but that holds true for any gun.

As for the MG-42/MG-3, it still has the fastest barrel change system of any machine gun today. Pop a latch, swing the barrel out, pull. In about five seconds you can swap barrels on it with not a single tool. Spain uses a similar gun called the CETME, Austria has the MG42/59, and it was built as the Sarac in Yugoslavia.



-----------------------
Flakbait [Delta6]
Delta Six's Flight School
Put the P-61B in Aces High

[SaburoS]

Originally posted by Wolfala
Guys,

I know the MG-42 is pretty much the most badass LMG in existance - even if it was 60 years ago, but isn't there a version that is STILL in use today? If so, how does it differ - and what is a good site to do some research on the 42's genesis into other LMG's?



Wolf

All intents and purposes the same type. Main difference was the lower rate of fire.
Very good design, main reason for the MG42's inception was the high cost (both in time of manufacture and money) of the MG34.

[Raubvogel]

I used the M60D as a door gun for years and fired thousands of rounds out of it. It's a great gun as far as I'm concerned. Never really encountered any problems with the gun itself. The feed chutes used in the door gun system were a PITA sometimes, but the gun was great.

[Staga]

Even chicks love MG42...
http://www.kolumbus.fi/staga/guns/mg43.jpg

hmm... may work if you fix the filename to mg42

[wrag]

Had an M60 overheat a barrel and then jam, pulled the operating rod back to clear the jam (hopping it was just a minor malfunction) and pulled the trigger again and bam it was really jammed now

It burned my hand right through the flight glove.  Part of the glove went with the hot barrel as well.

[Pongo]

I have alot of time on FN MAGs. Colt M1919s and the M249. I only have a belt through the M60. And of course a few 1000 50 cal.
I have seen Mg3s.  The greek cypriots had them..
I would take the Mag..It has a heavy mount almost identical to the one picutred for the mg42. The gun looks diferent from the mg42, but may be derrived from it. It has a great quick change system and a high rate of fire...the US uses it on thier M1s I believe.