Who had the best machine guns? America or the Nazis - MOVIE

A

Amsdorf

Moderator
I thought you guys would appreciate this old Army movie.

I'm still trying to put my feelings about it into words, but it is apparent it was intended to bolster confidence in American machine guns in light of the overwhelming superiority of the German machine guns.

Here is the movie, see what you think.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35R2WENXMl8
 
That's the propaganda one I mentioned in the other thread, at least in regards to the MG34. They use it in exactly the way it's NOT used in real life. In real life, guns like the MG34 are used as long range shotguns against moving targets that are only exposed for a short period of time. Having spread is not necessarily a bad thing because rarely will your aim be perfect anyway
 
This could be one of those endless threads.. So many different aspects to each gun that is a plus & Minus...

None were Failures, Each has its advantages

I think the bigger issue on the Heavy machine guns is how they were used..

The Germans used their Machine guns to attack with the rest of the squad used to support the gun

The Americans used the foot soldier to attack with the Machine guns to support them..

As someone who has played & stripped both the 1919a4 and the Mg42, When I field strip the the Mg42, I am always dripping blood from a scrap or a cut. There is a lot of sharp edges on that beast .. Never when I strip the 1919a4... The 1919a4 IMHO is a better designed creature.. (Thank you John browning)

On the other hand the quick change barrel on the mg42 is to die for...

Also on an emotional level.. The Mg42 is just beautiful with its futuristic/Art Deco look..
 
I think the MG42 influenced, by far, the development of machine guns, much more than Browning's 1919.

Of course, the video didn't even mention the BMG .50

I wonder why not?
 
It was called Hitler's Zipper for its fast rate of fire. Wasn't the M-60 heavily influenced by the MG-42?
Thanks for the video, first time I heard them all fie together like that.:cool:
Also first time I heard an M3 Grease Gun called "new".:eek::cool:
 
All of the stamped sheet steel guns were pretty similar.

I think the M3 grease gun was as good as the German MP 38/40 Schmeisser. It was accurate, relatively light, and very robust. The M 3 was also more compact than its German counterpart. Its rate of fire was 450rpm as opposed to 500 for the MP 38/40.

The M1928A1 Thompson was, except for its weight, superior to the Schmeisser.

The MG 34/42 were better than the M1919 .30. That being said the M1919 was a fine gun in its own right.
 
The feed system on the M-60 was more or less copied from the MG42, and it seems that the M-60 bolt has more than a passing resemblance to a Lewis gun.
 
As someone who has played & stripped both the 1919a4 and the Mg42, When I field strip the the Mg42, I am always dripping blood from a scrap or a cut. There is a lot of sharp edges on that beast .. Never when I strip the 1919a4... The 1919a4 IMHO is a better designed creature.. (Thank you John browning)
Click to expand...

I assure you, that is the ONLY advantage of the 1919 design. No one during WWII designed guns around the concept of not getting cut during dis assembly. The MG 42 had a high rate of fire, was made of stamped metal, reliable, etc. You should probably talk to about it with a 88 yr old man who faced one and see what he says. Our men were terrified of the MG 42 because we knew how powerful of a weapon it was. Ever see the propaganda film where the guy is telling the American soldier not to be afraid of the sound of an MG 42. It had a specific sound because it fired so fast, the rounds fired did not report the same as other machine guns of the time. It was like the sound of dominance for Allied soldiers.

As for submachine guns, thats close. The Mp40 was probably easier to make and it was lighter. The Thompson has the better cal and was controllable. However, the MP43/44 was one of the best arms of the war IMO. It combined the semi rifle and the submachine gun, giving someone the benefits of each.
 
The tommygun was made to too high of a standard for military use, in my opinion. MP40 must have been infinitely easier to stamp out than the tommy was to make. But the Soviets made some very effective and reliable machine guns and subguns, perhaps better than either the Americans or the Germans
 
The 1928 Thompson was very intricate, difficult and expensive to make. The M-3 Grease Gun was cheap, stamped, reliable and could be made very quickly. I did have a buddy who had them in his Army Reserve Tank unit in the 80s, and said it was as accurate as a thrown brick...but they weren't new any more.
The Soviet subgun that made history was the PawPawShaw, the PPsH 41. The subsequent PPsH 43 was a better gun, from what little I've been told, just didn't look as good. :)
 
Its a testimony to the MG 42 design that variants are used by armies of the world today. The M1919 simply went away.
 
Its a testimony to the MG 42 design that variants are used by armies of the world today. The M1919 simply went away.
Click to expand...

+1. Overall, I personally think the MG 42 was the best machine gun of the whole war. While some of them may have did 1 or 2 things better, overall, it was the best.

The Germans were leading the technology race overall at the time. We are lucky that the Germans made so many mistakes strategically or they could have easily accomplished more than they did.
 
Well I do agree that the mg42 In variants (Mg3) are still in use by many militaries Today..

The m1919a4 is still in use also, Portugal and the French navy come to mind..

But the design of the M1919a4 Is still being used by its bigger Sister Ma Duce..

And the US Military has spent a fortune trying to replace the M2 50 cal for years and yet she still goes strong after 90 years
 
Wow that is a scary thought for the ammo bearers

@ 1200 rounds per min with 100 linked 50 cal rounds weighing in at a Hefty 35 pounds,,

A 30 second burst would use up 210 pounds of cartridges

Each Second would eat up 7 pounds of cartridges

As per cost... @ 3 dollars a bullet that is $60 a second


Of course you are blowing the living snot out of the Target down range
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top