who made the best cc weapons in WW2?

[Viking]

Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
Agreed, and besides, the 30 carbine round is not really powerful enough to qualify. The 30 carbine is a neat little weapon, more powerful and accurate than most military handgun type side arms, yet light, and user friendly. But even the select fire version isn't really an assault rifle.

Few would argue that the German weapon was NOT the first really functional and useful "assault weapon", in the true modern sense of the term. The U.S. didn't have a true "assault weapon" until the advent of the AR series of rifles, which were actually originally intended as survival rifles for the USAF, and eventually became the M-16 series.

I'm not sure I can agree with you that the .30 Carbine round is too weak to be considered an intermediate round. It is on the weak side sure, but... It's arguable.

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

Originally posted by Viking
I'm not sure I can agree with you that the .30 Carbine round is too weak to be considered an intermediate round. It is on the weak side sure, but... It's arguable.

There are common hand gun rounds that easily exceed the 30 carbine round in power. It just doesn't make the cut as an intermediate rifle round. It is a lot on the weak side.

[Viking]

The .30 Carbine round has more than twice the muzzle energy of the .357 magnum round, and more than half the energy of the 7.62x39R round. It is arguable if it is an intermediate round or not, but I tend to think it is one.

[lasersailor184]

Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
Agreed, and besides, the 30 carbine round is not really powerful enough to qualify. The 30 carbine is a neat little weapon, more powerful and accurate than most military handgun type side arms, yet light, and user friendly. But even the select fire version isn't really an assault rifle.

Few would argue that the German weapon was NOT the first really functional and useful "assault weapon", in the true modern sense of the term. The U.S. didn't have a true "assault weapon" until the advent of the AR series of rifles, which were actually originally intended as survival rifles for the USAF, and eventually became the M-16 series.

The only way this argument stands is if you analyze the frailty of the STG 44.  The STG was an assault rifle, just as much as the AK47 is.  

I argue that the full automatic selection is a plight on the standard infantry weapon, and is thus moot as to whether or not an rifle needs to be fully automatic to classify as an Assault Rifle.  Since you argue that the Automat had too big of a round, that means that the M1 Carbine is the first assault rifle (IMO).

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

Originally posted by lasersailor184
The only way this argument stands is if you analyze the frailty of the STG 44.  The STG was an assault rifle, just as much as the AK47 is.  

I argue that the full automatic selection is a plight on the standard infantry weapon, and is thus moot as to whether or not an rifle needs to be fully automatic to classify as an Assault Rifle.  Since you argue that the Automat had too big of a round, that means that the M1 Carbine is the first assault rifle (IMO).

I argue that the Automat shoots too large a cartridge? Where? I never mentioned the Automat.

You can argue that select fire full auto is a Blight on the infantry weapon if you want. The fact remains that the ACCEPTED definition includes full auto select fire.


As to other arguments:


When compared in equal barrels (around 18"), the 30 Carbine fires a 110 grain bullet at around 2000 FPS, and a 357 Magnum fires a 110 grain bullet at around 2400 FPS, and a 125 grain bullet at around 2200 FPS. So I don't agree that the 30 Carbine has twice the power of a 357 Magnum.

Now, HALF the power of 7.62x39 is not what I'd call an acceptable intermediate rifle cartridge.

[lasersailor184]

The you wasn't necessarily directed at you.  I should have been more clear.


Anyway, we're getting into personal opinions here, and won't advance much farther.

[Viking]

You do not get to redefine the definition of an assault rifle. Sorry.

[lasersailor184]

Originally posted by Viking
You do not get to redefine the definition of an assault rifle. Sorry.

But when the use of fully automatic fire of a standard infantry rifle has failed compared to semi auto, I think it's definitely up for contention.

[Viking]

No. The use of fully automatic fire from assault rifles and submachineguns is very effective and an important element of urban combat. There is a reason why your soldiers are preferring to use the M-4 and Iraqi AK-47's in urban combat in Iraq instead of the M-16. The whole purpose of the assault rifle was to have a single weapon capable of being used as both a battle rifle (semi-auto) and as a submachinegun (full-auto), thus removing the need for dedicated assault troops armed with submachineguns. I think your lack of experience in these matters have led you make the wrong conclusions.

[FrodeMk3]

Originally posted by Viking
No. The use of fully automatic fire from assault rifles and submachineguns is very effective and an important element of urban combat. There is a reason why your soldiers are preferring to use the M-4 and Iraqi AK-47's in urban combat in Iraq instead of the M-16. The whole purpose of the assault rifle was to have a single weapon capable of being used as both a battle rifle (semi-auto) and as a submachinegun (full-auto), thus removing the need for dedicated assault troops armed with submachineguns. I think your lack of experience in these matters have led you make the wrong conclusions.

It's actually because the shorter overall length of both the M-4 and the AK-47 make them easier to use, thus better suited, to House-to-house (Urban) fighting. A longer weapon like the M-16A2 can be used, but is a little more likely to get 'hung up' on something like a vehicle door, Or get snagged on something, etc.

[Charon]

Battle Rifle -- M1 I would trade the ping over feeding stripper clips in a bolt gun any day. The Enfield would be second on the list. Talk about stripper clips though, the Enfield clips are a royal pain to use.

Pistol -- .45 1911. More stopping power with the same relative ammo capacity of the 9mm of the day (exception Browning Hi Point) Really a great, reliable pistol. Browning HP second.

SMG -- I'll go with the PPSh 41. Buzz saw up close, but with more velocity/penetrating power for shooting through cover and maybe more midrange accuracy than a .45 smg. More battlefield useful, perhaps. The real winner would have been a more widely used select fire M2 Carbine which is the perfect WW2 weapon for the traditional SMG role -- room clearing to 200 yard ranges.

LMG -- Mg42/Bren Gun depending on tactical doctrine.

Grenade -- US Pineapple over Potato Masher, though don't know enough about the British Mills Bomb or the Russian grenades.

Sniper Rifle -- MN 91/30 PU. Why, because it is the only one I could afford to buy and still shoot Also, it may not be the absolute best, but it was widely deployed as part of a "squad marksman" concept of soviet battle doctrine. Good, solid, reliable scope and rifle combo. On a side note, the turned down bolt vs the standard straight bolt eliminates the only major flaw of the 91/30, IMO. Easy as butter to work with that change in leverage.

Personal ATW -- Panzerfaust.

Weapons that changed the post war world -- MG42, Bazooka/Panzerfaust and StG 44.

[Fishu]

Meh, why everyone goes with the crappy and cheap PPSh 41 instead of Suomi KP31

[Charon]

Meh, why everyone goes with the crappy and cheap PPSh 41 instead of Suomi KP31

I considered it What were the major real world differences between the two?

Charon

[FrodeMk3]

Originally posted by Charon
I considered it What were the major real world differences between the two?

Charon

The Soumi's chambers' the 9mm, right? Probably the major one right there.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Funny that you spend so much time discussing the calibers and muzzle velocities. You should look at battle records instead.

The Suomi kp was extremely rugged and reliable with 9mm ammo which everyone here seem to diss completely. Yet the patrols wielding it were nicknamed the white death by the russians. The weapon had a low recoil, relatively high fire rate with a high ammo capacity and it was accurate for what it was. And it proved extremely effective in combat.