You are Unregistered, please register to use all of the features of FirearmsTalk.com!    
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Discussion Forums > History >

Which WW2 Battle Rifle Was Best?


View Poll Results: Which World War II Rifle was Best
Enfield No 4 Mk 1 2 3.03%
Mauser 98K 3 4.55%
Stg 44 9 13.64%
Mosin-Nagant M1891 1 1.52%
Tokarev SVT-40 0 0%
M1 Garand 48 72.73%
M1941 Johnson 0 0%
Something Else 3 4.55%
Voters: 66. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-22-2014, 10:06 PM   #31
disappointed & disgusted, But DETERMINED...
FTF_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
DrFootball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Northern Arizona(Fmr. NYC & L.I.)
Posts: 8,039
Liked 3392 Times on 2294 Posts
Likes Given: 710

Default

I don't known how anyone could argue against the Garand. As far as the m1 Carbine. If my Dad had not switched out his battery's carbines for Garands and Tompsons in Korea, I would not be here.


Sent from my iPhone using Firearms Talk
__________________
askdrfootball@gmail.com

"The difference between a successful person and others is not a lack of strength, not a lack of knowledge, but rather in a lack of will." Vince Lombardi

"No One, and I MEAN NO ONE Craps on me and Gets away with it!!! Those days are gone...
DrFootball is offline  
shadecorp Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2014, 10:43 PM   #32
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
hairbear1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Molong,NSW Australia
Posts: 888
Liked 791 Times on 394 Posts
Likes Given: 41

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrFootball View Post
I don't known how anyone could argue against the Garand. As far as the m1 Carbine. If my Dad had not switched out his battery's carbines for Garands and Tompsons in Korea, I would not be here.


Sent from my iPhone using Firearms Talk

Quite easy actually.
You can load the SMLE with 2 stripper clips without detaching the 10 shot mag in seconds and in the hands of an expert empty the mag in something like 6 seconds giving it a brilliant rate of fire and even in the hands of the average soldier you could with 2-3 others lay down a very good field of suppressive fire or blunt an attack.

The Jungle Carbine version of the SMLE was just as effective in the close quarters of New Guinea and the islands where a long shot could be 20 yds
but you still had the 10 shot detachable mag.

The .303 also had battle sights graduated out to 2000yds for plunging harassment fire but they were more effective out to 400yds and in the sniper rifle version were very effective for what they were.
__________________
The ability to think and speak doesn't necessarily guarantee intelligence
hairbear1 is offline  
TLuker Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2014, 03:37 AM   #33
Lifetime Supporting Member
FTF_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,626
Liked 1927 Times on 1079 Posts
Likes Given: 829

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrFootball View Post
I don't known how anyone could argue against the Garand. As far as the m1 Carbine. If my Dad had not switched out his battery's carbines for Garands and Tompsons in Korea, I would not be here.


Sent from my iPhone using Firearms Talk
Well, I argued against it because the FG-42, although produced in far less quantity than the M1, had all the features that one would like in a battle rifle

* In-line stock design and muzzle brake to reduce muzzle climb

* Pistol grip for better control and hand stop on forward hand guard for better control during firing and manipulation

* Side mounted detachable 20 round magazines for quick magazine changes from the prone position

* Folding sights and optics mount for a magnifying optical sight

* Shorter overall length than a typical battle rifle with a full length barrel

* Good weight distribution for better pointability

* folding bipod for prone fire

* Selective fire

It doesn't matter how many were produced, they did work and they did have a feature set (side mounted magazine and folding iron sights aside) that the designs that followed WWII had.

I like the M1 and M14 and own both, but the FG-42 had the feature set of the M14 about a decade before its introduction.

The M14 or something like it was what John Garand and Melvin Johnson originally had in mind to arm our troops with, but the brass overruled them and so the M14 didn't come to fruition until after WWII.

We produced, literally, billions of rounds of ammunition in WWII, some of which are still being used to this day and the brass was worried about our guys using too much ammunition, so detachable 20 round magazines were not to be (until after Korea happened and people like your father and my grandfather learned the hard way that even a M1919 with 3 barrels with 8 belts between him and the gunner weren't enough to stop a single battalion of the Chinese Army, literally freezing to death, from advancing towards them up the side of a mountain and into their machine gun when only every third man was armed with a WWII bolt action and no supporting mortars or machine guns).
kbd512 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2014, 08:24 PM   #34
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,068
Liked 278 Times on 198 Posts
Likes Given: 30

Default

I read that the Garand wasn't equipped with a box magazine because dirt might enter through the mag well and the mag might get damaged .
Rentacop is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2014, 09:59 PM   #35
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
manta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: UK.
Posts: 2,695
Liked 1466 Times on 892 Posts
Likes Given: 521

Default

Quote:
I read that the Garand wasn't equipped with a box magazine because dirt might enter through the mag well and the mag might get damaged .
If that was the case why did they fit magazines to sub machine guns and every rifle since WW2, and the M/14 that replaced the Garand.
manta is offline  
kbd512 Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2014, 10:08 PM   #36
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Mercator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 11,276
Liked 6246 Times on 4130 Posts
Likes Given: 3211

Default

Best is not necessarily the most advanced or sophisticated. I think each side had a different answer, dictated by their circumstances. The US Army had the M1, the Soviets, the SMG, the Germans moved to the StG.
Mercator is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2014, 10:46 PM   #37
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Mercator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 11,276
Liked 6246 Times on 4130 Posts
Likes Given: 3211

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by manta View Post
If that was the case why did they fit magazines to sub machine guns and every rifle since WW2, and the M/14 that replaced the Garand.
Higher capacity.

The disposable M1 stripper clips were no doubt more economical than an equal number of loaded magazines!
Mercator is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2014, 12:19 AM   #38
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Chainfire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 4,145
Liked 2025 Times on 1201 Posts
Likes Given: 403

Default

The way the question was asked, I think the Garand is the answer.

Maybe the more interesting question would be; if you were an infantryman in WWII what weapon (from any army) what personal weapon would you have chosen to carry? Keep in mind, you may have to hump the weapon and ammo for hundreds of miles before the war was over.

The answer would probably vary according to the battlefield, but my personal choice would not be the Garand.
__________________
"It is better to be too skeptical then too credulous"

Carl Sagan
Chainfire is online now  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2014, 12:31 AM   #39
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Mercator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 11,276
Liked 6246 Times on 4130 Posts
Likes Given: 3211

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chainfire View Post
The way the question was asked, I think the Garand is the answer.

Maybe the more interesting question would be; if you were an infantryman in WWII what weapon (from any army) what personal weapon would you have chosen to carry? Keep in mind, you may have to hump the weapon and ammo for hundreds of miles before the war was over.

The answer would probably vary according to the battlefield, but my personal choice would not be the Garand.
Speaking of. Is that a Mosin receiver on your avatar?
Mercator is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2014, 03:50 AM   #40
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,068
Liked 278 Times on 198 Posts
Likes Given: 30

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by manta View Post
If that was the case why did they fit magazines to sub machine guns and every rifle since WW2, and the M/14 that replaced the Garand.
I assume that the people making the decisions on the M-1 design were not the same people deciding on various box magazine-equipped guns .

Side note : I remember that Beretta built box-fed M-1s after WWII : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beretta_BM59
Rentacop is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
AR 7.62 Battle Rifle 1911love Auto & Semi-Auto Discussion 58 07-09-2013 02:05 AM
Battle rifle TooStrongTerry General Rifle Discussion 48 06-19-2012 06:43 PM
PSL or FPK as battle rifle? Caoimhin Auto & Semi-Auto Discussion 3 01-23-2012 07:37 PM
Battle Rifle M500 Auto & Semi-Auto Discussion 150 12-17-2010 12:37 AM