Author Topic: That Russian SMG thing... (Read 1019 times)

Nefarious · « **on:** April 05, 2005, 01:26:46 AM »

The PPSH? Might have the Designation wrong here.

Favored by the Germans over the MP40 in World War 2, Today I was watching a Documentary on the 24th Infantry Division, It was highlighting there action in Korea.

In the old B Roll Footage, Some American Troops were carrying them while fighting in Korea.

Was this Common in Korea? Were US GI's issued Thompsons or Grease Guns in Korea? I guess what Im getting at is, which is better the Tommy Gun, the Grease Gun, or the PPSH?

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #1 on:** April 05, 2005, 01:34:36 AM »

Well i fired both mp40 and tommy gun for a few hundred rounds each. I liked the Thompson more than the MP40, but only because it was hevier and thus easier to shoot on auto for an inexperienced shooter such as me. I dont think i'd like it as much if i had to carry it around a battlefield all day. Maybe that was why gis might have carrieed those ppsh?

GreenCloud · « **Reply #2 on:** April 05, 2005, 01:41:00 AM »

PPSH....somthn..

great gun in CalL of Duty

Its got a rotorry magazine that lays flat on top?

does it shoot 45's?

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #3 on:** April 05, 2005, 01:48:50 AM »

http://www.a-human-right.com/RKBA/ppsh.html

Ack-Ack · « **Reply #4 on:** April 05, 2005, 02:08:22 AM »

wasn't it a 75 round drum magazine of 9mm? great gun in medal of valor too

ack-ack

fd ski · « **Reply #5 on:** April 05, 2005, 02:14:33 AM »

my history teacher from poland fought in WWII, said it wasn't very good at long range, lost velocity very quickly.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #6 on:** April 05, 2005, 02:22:51 AM »

I bet, its a very small 7.62x25 round.

Schaden · « **Reply #7 on:** April 05, 2005, 04:12:19 AM »

Believe it was favoured by the Wermacht too, large mag, chrome barrel, easy to clean, easy to use.........Sov weapons are very, very good far better in many cases than the Guccified crap that the west uses.

33Vortex · « **Reply #8 on:** April 05, 2005, 06:11:28 AM »

The best thing about the PPSh was it was produced in large numbers. Production rates were as much part of the war as the fighting. Looking at what the soviets produced, airplanes, tanks and infantry weapons, they had some very talented and ingenious engineers.

Fishu · « **Reply #9 on:** April 05, 2005, 07:10:41 AM »

Except they had to look at Suomi KP/31 before making their PPSh

http://guns.connect.fi/gow/suomi1.html

"Despite the limited production capacity the numbers of the Suomi KP/-31 were increased to meet the demands of Finnish armed forces. There are some similarities between the KP/-31 and PPSh -41 such as magazine capacity, cyclic rate of fire and the wooden buttstock. The Finnish gun is, however, a first generation submachine gun while the PPSh is a typical second generation submachine gun: Mass-produced for a massive army, and thus possessing neither quickly detachable barrel nor some other luxuries such as versatility with very slight - if any - alteration of the receiver mechanism"

rshubert · « **Reply #10 on:** April 05, 2005, 07:22:41 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by GScholz
There is nothing "small" about that round. Same ammo the Tokarev used.

7.62 x 25 is a relatively anemic pistol cartridge. Even with the improvements in performance due to the longer SMG barrel, it is still anemic. Much less power than 9mm, or .30 carbine, or 9x18 Tokarev...

And certainly much less power than the American standard for evaluating pistol performance, the .45 ACP.

Fishu · « **Reply #11 on:** April 05, 2005, 07:27:00 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by rshubert
7.62 x 25 is a relatively anemic pistol cartridge. Even with the improvements in performance due to the longer SMG barrel, it is still anemic. Much less power than 9mm, or .30 carbine, or 9x18 Tokarev...

And certainly much less power than the American standard for evaluating pistol performance, the .45 ACP.

Why not to just use a 20mm pistol, if bigger is better in that way.
9mm is used in more submachineguns than any other caliber.
Of course 7.62 is alot used if you count in the russians and chinese with the massive amounts of different models of PPSh and couple of others.

7.62X25 Tokarev
Mass = 85 Velocity = 1187
Kinetic Pulse = 119.112 kp
Kinetic Energy = 265.881 ft-lb
Momentum = 0.448 slug f/s
Energy/Momentum = 593.500 E/M

9mm Luger
Mass = 115 Velocity = 1007
Kinetic Pulse = 133.121 kp
Kinetic Energy = 258.895 ft-lb
Momentum = 0.514 slug f/s
Energy/Momentum = 503.500 E/M

9mm Luger
Mass = 147 Velocity = 909
Kinetic Pulse = 159.989 kp
Kinetic Energy = 269.657 ft-lb
Momentum = 0.593 slug f/s
Energy/Momentum = 454.500 E/M

45 ACP
Mass = 230 Velocity = 816
Kinetic Pulse = 283.328 kp
Kinetic Energy = 339.997 ft-lb
Momentum = 0.833 slug f/s
Energy/Momentum = 408.000 E/M

indy007 · « **Reply #12 on:** April 05, 2005, 08:12:37 AM »

The PPSh is considered one of the best SMGs of WW2 by alot of people. One of the most infamous uses of it was with the "Tank Riders" in Stalingrad. A large group of infantry would be loaded up with PPSh's, jump onto T-34s, and throw themselves headfirst at fortified German positions. Very few survived to be veterans.

lazs2 · « **Reply #13 on:** April 05, 2005, 08:33:46 AM »

shubie... I think you are mixing up the 9x18 makarov round with the more powerful tokerev one. the 7.62x 25 is more potent than eitber of the weak 9mm rounds.

I would still go for the .45 acp with the grease gun or tommy gun.. to bad they didn't have the 50 round drum for the military thompsons like the civilian ones.

I liked shooting the grease gun a lot. not as heavy as the thompson but seemed easier to control.

lazs

Fishu · « **Reply #14 on:** April 05, 2005, 11:04:29 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
I would still go for the .45 acp with the grease gun or tommy gun.. to bad they didn't have the 50 round drum for the military thompsons like the civilian ones.

Grease gun has rate of fire of ~350, tommy has ~650-750
Brits early on had Thompsons with the drums, but most were issued to the navy

Besides brits didn't like the drums as much as the stick magazines, because of the rattling and more cumbersome handling.
Thompson was already rather heavy for an SMG.
The grease gun was lighter, but had a poor rate of fire by the time it was introduced.

The germans who switched from MP40 to PPSh41, did so because of the higher rate of fire (~500-600 -> ~800-950) and more rounds if used with the drums.
However for the riflemen its not a big wonder if they opt for an SMG in CQB.

I would rather choose 9mm SMG.
Surprisingly it would be the Suomi KP/31, better than the PPSh41