Author Topic: What the heck is this??? (Read 1873 times)

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #15 on:** April 21, 2005, 05:12:52 PM »

No, think about the M1 Carbine. It only had a slight edge on the M1 Carbine in some categories (besides full auto). The other categories, it came about dead even. It was only a slightly better gun.

And even then, some people would take their M1 Carbine and file down the sear pin. So it really didn't have much of an advantage there.

Tails · « **Reply #16 on:** April 21, 2005, 06:07:50 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lasersailor184
No, think about the M1 Carbine. It only had a slight edge on the M1 Carbine in some categories (besides full auto). The other categories, it came about dead even. It was only a slightly better gun.

And even then, some people would take their M1 Carbine and file down the sear pin. So it really didn't have much of an advantage there.

**Foxy looks at his M1 Carbine...looks for a file...looks to make sure BATF aint looking...**

Klum25th · « **Reply #17 on:** April 21, 2005, 06:25:10 PM »

Thanks guys. I thought he was IR or something like that, but I didnt think they had the Technology after WW2 tell like the late 50s or early 60s.

Tails · « **Reply #18 on:** April 21, 2005, 08:43:24 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Klum25th
Thanks guys. I thought he was IR or something like that, but I didnt think they had the Technology after WW2 tell like the late 50s or early 60s.

Actually, the germans had that tech during the war. Some of their night fighters used it.

I dont know how effective, or how common it was, but it did exsist back then.

GScholz · « **Reply #19 on:** April 21, 2005, 09:30:59 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lasersailor184
No, think about the M1 Carbine. It only had a slight edge on the M1 Carbine in some categories (besides full auto). The other categories, it came about dead even. It was only a slightly better gun.

And even then, some people would take their M1 Carbine and file down the sear pin. So it really didn't have much of an advantage there.

Umm ... the StG has about twice the effective range of the M1 Carbine, and is very comparable with the 7.62x39R round (AK-47) in power. I agree that many other rifles are far better for the sniper role, but the StG-44 was hands down the best infantry weapon of WWII.

CPorky · « **Reply #20 on:** April 22, 2005, 07:00:53 AM »

Wow! Thats a first, I actually agree with GScholz.

I think I need to go take a shower now, next I'll start shamelessly bashing the US.

In all seriousness, the StG was another 'too little, too late' weapon, if it was made in sufficient numbers it would of been alot tougher to get across the Rhine.

The Germans based their platoons on the MG, with rifleman covering the flanks of those MG. A Mauser is alot less effective than a 30 round automatic weapon for such a defense...

Quote

Originally posted by GScholz
the StG-44 was hands down the best infantry weapon of WWII.

GScholz · « **Reply #21 on:** April 22, 2005, 07:08:03 AM »

Well CP, there's a first for everything ... but didn't you agree with be once before as Capt. Pork?

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #22 on:** April 22, 2005, 07:09:22 AM »

Quote

Umm ... the StG has about twice the effective range of the M1 Carbine, and is very comparable with the 7.62x39R round (AK-47) in power. I agree that many other rifles are far better for the sniper role, but the StG-44 was hands down the best infantry weapon of WWII.

Oh wow. Never before in all of your political discussions have you ever been this wrong.

The garand was the best weapon of WW2. But I wasn't even going to bring it up.

First off, the Kurzpatrone only had about 100 more joules of energy over the .30 carbine. It was roughly 550 joules short of the AK round. The AK round had 1/3 more energy then the Kurzpatrone. That's not even close to being compareable.

Everyone claims that the STG was the worlds first Assault Rifle. It wasn't. The M1 Carbine was the first.

GScholz · « **Reply #23 on:** April 22, 2005, 07:43:11 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lasersailor184
Oh wow. Never before in all of your political discussions have you ever been this wrong.

The garand was the best weapon of WW2. But I wasn't even going to bring it up.

First off, the Kurzpatrone only had about 100 more joules of energy over the .30 carbine. It was roughly 550 joules short of the AK round. The AK round had 1/3 more energy then the Kurzpatrone. That's not even close to being compareable.

Everyone claims that the STG was the worlds first Assault Rifle. It wasn't. The M1 Carbine was the first.

Complete and utter crap. The 7.92x33mm Kurz round was an 8.1g round with a muzzle velocity of 686 m/sec and a muzzle energy of 1,900 joules while the 7.62x39mmR M1943 round has 7.9g, 710 m/sec and 2,000 joules. The .30 Carbine has a measly 7g, 580 m/sec and 1,200 joules of muzzle energy; in addition it had a round nosed bullet that quickly bled energy over range.

The M1 Carbine was a semi-auto weapon with a 15 round magazine with an effective range of little more than 200 yards. That's not an assault rifle by anyone's standard. The M2 Carbine however can more easily be considered an assault rifle since it has selective fire and a larger 30 round magazine (I don't. It's just a powerful SMG) ... However the M2 did not enter service until early 1945, two years after the MP-43/44/StG-44.

If you are going to berate me, first make sure you're right.

http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/Assault.htm

Edit: Quite easy to spot which round does not belong in the rifle category at all, isn't it?

Angus · « **Reply #24 on:** April 22, 2005, 01:45:16 PM »

Jeeez, I just shot a horse with a smaller round.
Range was very short though

humble · « **Reply #25 on:** April 22, 2005, 02:02:15 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GScholz
Umm ... the StG has about twice the effective range of the M1 Carbine, and is very comparable with the 7.62x39R round (AK-47) in power. I agree that many other rifles are far better for the sniper role, but the StG-44 was hands down the best infantry weapon of WWII.

OMG....I cant believe I agree with this guy on anything...or to put it more clearly that he's ever right about anything:)....

The AK-47 is more or less a direct successor to the stg-44.

As for the M-1 carbine being an "assult rifle"....not a chance. It was actually an alternative to a sidearm for officers and senior enlisted personnel. It was never issued in mass to any frontline combat formation at anytime for normal use. It was however a favorite of cooks, clerks and supply seargents everyewhere.

The Garland was (and is) a fine weapon. It was the first weapon of its kind. I'm not sure its better than the Kar-43 however. Neither is really an assualt weapon however.

Basically the stg-44 was the 1st weapon to bridge the gap between the rifle and machine pistol and is the forrunner to all modern military assualt "rifles"

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #26 on:** April 22, 2005, 02:09:14 PM »

Hate to tell you scholz, but your source is completely wrong.

I hate quoting this source, he bashes the hell out of american weapons. But he is never wrong about non american stuff. "http://world.guns.ru/ammo/am03-e.htm" .

There is no ****ing way in this physical world the Kurzpatrone went 686 m/s *****AND***** weighed 8.1 g. It either did one, or it did the other. NOT BOTH. That is physically impossible with the propellants they had available at that time.

Next, the STG 44 did not see service in 43. It was only called MP43 during development to fool hitler. It came in later 44 as the STG 44.

Also, sorry for saying that the M1 Carbine was the first assault rifle. I always forget about the Russian Gun.

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #27 on:** April 22, 2005, 02:15:39 PM »

Quote

As for the M-1 carbine being an "assult rifle"....not a chance. It was actually an alternative to a sidearm for officers and senior enlisted personnel. It was never issued in mass to any frontline combat formation at anytime for normal use. It was however a favorite of cooks, clerks and supply seargents everyewhere.

The Garland was (and is) a fine weapon. It was the first weapon of its kind. I'm not sure its better than the Kar-43 however. Neither is really an assualt weapon however.

Woah dude. You need to stop speaking now. You aren't even coming close to the truth either.

The M1 Carbine was designed as an alternative to the 1911 *****AT FIRST*****. But it was seen as being really powerful so it *****WAS ISSUED***** to front line troops in all theaters *****IN MASS*****.

Next, the Garand still is the greatest weapon only second to the M14. (Third is the AK47 which was a successor of the STG).

Next, I will seriously always laugh at anything you say from here on out because you said the G43 was a good weapon. The G43 originally came from the G41. The G41 was one of the worst weapons ever. It would often break from the power of the cartridge alone. The G43 was an attempt to make it better, but it still wasn't a great rifle. It was incredibly innaccurate, it did not have the reliability needed of a war time rifle and it would break easily. (BTW, the G41 / G43 series were copies of the Soviet SVT 40, which itself was a good rifle, still not comparable to the Garand though.)

humble · « **Reply #28 on:** April 22, 2005, 02:38:03 PM »

Please tell me which unit it was issued to in mass. It was designed as a replacement for the officer sidearm and used as such. It was commonly carried by senior NCO's and above. It was never issued at the squad level. Only broadscale use was by marine raiders and other specialized forces...

As for your comments relating to the garland....your ignorance is showing. I agree the M-14 is probably best infantry weapon ever made...SKS is a close second....garland doesnt crack the top 5.

The Kar43 was a perfectly acceptable weapon...it had relatively poor finish & fitting but was functionally a fine weapon. It was reliable and accurate. Please provide some 3rd party documentation that states otherwise....

By 1943 the Germans realised the necessity for an arm which could be produced at a very low cost in the least possible time. In the same year they produced the Gewehr 43. While this weapon appeared to be rather crude, it was in fact highly efficient. The rifle was later modified to carbine form and the designation KAR 43 applied.

http://www.rememuseum.org.uk/arms/rifles/armaslr.htm

humble · « **Reply #29 on:** April 22, 2005, 02:43:55 PM »

Also your wrong about the G41 being a copy of the SVT 40. The germans "stole" the gas sytem from the SVT 40 to replace the bang type gas pistons the G41 used when they designed the Gew.43....which in turn became the kar43.