pistols of ww2

love the look of the luger but i would feel safe with a colt in my hands

 

Tokarev TT-33 because it has slightly more stopping power than the colt, but much better penetration and range, and 1 more round in the magazine. The browing Hi power would be my other choice, as although it fires only the 9mm parabellum it has 14 rounds in the magazine.

 

Another vote for the 1911A1-good power and reliability,and acceptably accurate.It is also very easy to clean and maintain in the field.
Clark

 

C96 with the 9mm mauser export...accuracy and bullet speed of the 7,62x25 mm TT and the power of the .45acp.Even a .357 will **** its pants.

 

I'm talking about the revolver that was used by police and sometimes given to paratroopers and other military personel within the us

 

While I agree, with modern JHP ammo, the 9mm is a potent round. I own 2 of them and l trust the caliber. Most of the knocks I have heard against the 9mm was when FMJ like what would have been available in WW2 was used. I own a Colt 1911a1 as well and I find it extremely accurate and controllable. The S&W Victory revolvers were very reliable as well and the .38 special round would have been comperable to the 9mm round. The only knock on them would come on the 6 round capacity and slower reloads compared to automatics.

 

That would be the famous "m1917 38 peace maker" would it ?

 

Colt M1911A1 'nuff said.

 

I would go with the colt. Now the Luger was a nice looking pistol, but I think that the colt takes the cake in terms of power.

 

Too bad it was so unreliable in combat, makes a pretty thing to throw at the opponent though I guess when it jams up.

 

The Luger was probably the most accurate pistol of the entire war, both because of its tight tolerance construction, low vibration recycling mechanism and ergonomic design. It just feels right when you hold it.

It was susceptible to dirt, but this was solved by introducing a new tight fitting holster which simply didn't allow durt to get into the gun.

When in operation I think the Luger beats all pistols in use during the war by a wide margin when in comes to accurate rapid fire. Even today it is considered one of the most accurate handguns around.

In a conflict however I'd still rather have the FN Hi-power P35, those extra 6 rounds are a great advantage, and the Hi-power is decently accurate as-well.

 

In combat i would rather have either the M1911 or the P38. If it was just to own, would have to be the Luger 08

 

Luger, has excellent range.

 

Was the 1911 a little trigger happy? Maybe occasionally a round might be accidentally shot? The Webley. It was in .45. Reliable revolver. And a good club when out of ammo.

 

I have to agree. Using personal weapons is generally forbidden by the US military today so, these would have to be issue. I know a number of people in SEALS and EOD and none of them have ever mentioned using a .357 revolver.

As for a WW 2 pistol of choice? Who cares? If they are that close club them to death. It would be just as efficent as pulling out whatever 'saturday night special' was crammed in a holster. Besides, when you are humping as much weight as you have to most of the time in the military why would you want that extra and almost useless weight?

 

The FN-HP35 would be my choice good pistol enough ammo in the mag.

Regards

Ulrich

 

brndirt1 wrote:

Very good points Clint and I fully agree. You might also mention that the 1911 has a grip safety so the weapon won't fire if not gripped in the shooters hand. I was an 0331 machinegunner for many years, was issued the M1911A1, it was a great pistol and I never encountered any problems hitting what I aimed at. I really enjoyed your post #54 on this thread, I would salute it but that option is not displayed, I guess because it's an older post, but I'll try to send some rep your way. Most people don't realize why the M1911 .45 ACP was developed.

marc780 wrote:

You're statement is true but there was an additional consideration that could be considered politically correct. Another reason for the adoption of the 9mm, that was widely discussed at the time but you don't hear about much anymore, is the issue with small statured servicemembers (many females) having a harder time becoming proficient with the .45 because of it's weight and recoil. (The M9 weighs about the same loaded w/15 rounds as the M-1911 empty).

Proeliator wrote:

First of all, your logic is flawed because much of the recoil is absorbed by the mechanical action and recoil system in an auto pistol. So the recoil you feel is not necessarily equal to the knockdown force coming out the other end. In my personal M-1911, (an M1911A1 manufactured in WWII by Remington) I installed a detonics recoil system years ago and further reduced the recoil experienced when shooting.
Secondly, a bullet of greated mass is more efficient in transferring energy than a bullet of lesser mass. The WWII .45 ACP round weighed 230gr as has been stated in earlier posts, the M882 9mm round for the M9 weighs just 112gr, less than half the weight. The WWII 9x19 had a 115gr bullet IIRC.
Furthermore the U.S. military is looking to go back to the .45 ACP (many SpecOps personnel already have) because the 9mm lacks knockdown power (and no I didn't say knock across the room i.e. Hollywood). Recent combat experience in Iraq and Afghanistan have shown that it often takes 2-3 hits, sometimes even more, from the 9mm to incapacitate an enemy fighter. In most cases the .45 would achieve this with one round, most hits will stop your target.

 

I'm probably the only person in the world who would choose one of these but seeing as how, if your life depended on a pistol, you'd be pretty chuffered, anyway...



If you're going to use something, it may as well be what you like.

I'm curious, though, as to why this wasn't included in the original list. It was the standard British Army service pistol, after all.

 

Hi USMC Price,

Were accidental shootings with soldiers carrying loaded M1911 a factor in the military's decision to switch to a double action pistol?

In so far as I know, FBI HRT, LAPD SWAT and the Army's anti-terrorism unit use 1911s. Some SF and SEAL teams go about their business with 1911s. a SF soldier who used to post here said in his SF Group (10th or 20th) he saw a lot of HK and Colt .45 cal guns, but after the road bombing madness operatives defaulted to M-9s and Glocks. They're cheap and replaceable.

Part of the reason for 1911A1's continued popularity is, surprisingly, accuracy. A good quality service 1911 could shoot as well as any many 9mm pistol, but a tuned 1911 is incredibly accurate. Combined with better stopping power, tuned M-1911 can be a good option for special units, especially if they can afford to have dedicated gunsmiths taking care of the weapons.

I was told one of the reasons for the fading use of 1911 is the expensiveness of skilled labor today. The M-1911 was not designed for an automated factory; it had to be fitted by hand and it has too many little parts.

 

Triple C wrote:

No, I do not think so. The pistol has a grip safety so it won't discharge unless the grip safety is depressed.

I fully agree with your above statement.

I do not think this is accurate. During WWII the M-1911 was produced by a wide number of manufacturers. The parts were completely interchangeable and I know that with my 1911 (WWII manufacture government model) any aftermarket parts I've added have fit perfectly with no need for gunsmithing.