Tommy vs Mp40

Which do you think is the best??? Tommy gun or the Mp40

Maybe this video may help you;

:mp44kickback:

YouTube - Thompson vs MP40

I vote for the Tommy gun !!!!!!!!!

 

I have to say the Tommy gun. Nice, high rate of fire, easy to use, extremely famous...but apparently it was prone to jamming and that it was to be used most effectively if fired in short bursts. Is this true?

I read that in a copy of "The Wooden Horse" by Eric Williams, in which there's a line with Williams talking (this is a true WWII escape story) to a French resistance-fighter and the resistance-fighter is asking him about a certain sub-machine gun. Williams said that..., and I quote:

"...It should be fired in short bursts, like a Thompson..."

 

Tommy gun. No doubt in my mind.

 

never handled a tommy. does it have machined inner parts or stamped?

 

Well any gun will jam if it is fired at full auto for too long, plus your chances of hitting anything at that rate of fire is decreased as well. Three bullet Burst fire is the best way to get alot of rounds out while still keeping some accurary. The Germans used the same technique with there MG34 and 42's so they didn't overheat to quickly, jam and its more accurate(but also because a rookie could go through all his ammo in no time)

But as for me I think the MP40 cheap to produce has a foldable stock for different fire positions and it is quite accurate.

 

the Thompson, if for nothing else, pure stoping power!

 

the tommy for me for shore

 

The tommy for me!

 

Sten! I mean Thompson!

 

So? How about you enlightening us as to why you would pick a particular weapon. Not that those who actually served in the field really had a choice.

 

No question. A Tommygun, hands down. That 45 acp ammunition will drop an elephant in its tracks.

 

Well, I havn't actually had any experience in using either of the weapons, but I have heard that the MP-40s where more acurate than most SMGs and German weapon Engineering was supposed to be much better in the war. I vote MP-40.

 

i highly disbelieve a .45 acp will knock down a elephant, thats like saying your gonna take a bull down with a .22LR

 

statement is not to be truly taken at face value, there are tests which show the .45 ACP through the 10.5" barrel in the Thompson to be quite impressive (for a heavy pistol round).

That said, here is a portion of an interesting report (Philip B. Sharpe review of the M1928A1 Thompson from 1929):

"This .45 automatic pistol cartridge, in the arm designed for it (1911 pistol), delivers about 810 foot per seconds velocity. In the 10 1/2-inch barreled Thompson it delivers about 925 f.p.s. Tests indicate that accuracy and penetration is quite respectable, even at the longer ranges. A single shot two feet from the muzzle, using the 230 grain bullet, tested on 3/4-inch yellow pine boards spaced one inch apart, ran through 6 3/4 boards. At 100 yards it would plow through six boards; at 200 yards through 5 1/4; at 300 yards, 4 1/2; at the 400 mark through four boards, and at 500 yards it could still stumble through 3 3/4 boards sufficient to cause very unpleasant sensations in the body of a recipient." [Page 1107]


(me again) Of course they weren't "shooting at elepants", but they were shooting at tethered animals in the Chicago Stockyards. That said, only those last few lines surprised me, I wouldn’t have thought it would have that good a penetration at 300 yards and up! I wonder how much elevation a guy had to put on the Thompson to get a bullet TO the targets over 200 yards!

And don’t forget that the original "Thompson gun" had a 1200 rounds per minute rate. The US military wouldn’t even consider the thing until the rate was reduced. Originally it could empty it’s 100 round drum in under 4 seconds without jamming! The Thompson people made the bolt heavier, and the return spring stiffer, and "slowed it down" to about 700 rpms (rounds per minute), but it still threw out a very heavy bullet,very rapidly, and with its Cutts suppesor with very little barrel climb.

BTW, one can (I've done it) take down a bovine "bull" (or steer or cow) with a .22 LR. It is a matter of placement, you don't want to try and shoot them in the mass of the body of course, but it (the .22LR) is quite deadly when delivered correctly. I wouldn't want to try it as an animal was charging me, but very deadly if delivered in the proper spot. I personally picked the .22 mag for dropping animals for butchering on the farm, since I could do it in the field at a distance of about 30 yards. If I had the "subject" in the corral, the .22 LR would sufice under 5 yards. I've done it for years, don't tell me it cannot be done.

 

ROLFMAO! guess he told you huh mauser

 

Hey Clint. I remember the discussions like this over on THC LOL. This weapon "vs" that weapon. Which would you "Choose"? Which was "better"?

 

no changing my mind on that, you show me in person that you can kill a elephant with a .45 and you MIGHT change my mind.

 

what do you think I should do?

Ignore mis-statments and "ethnocentric" posts?

Or post the stats on the weapons considered and discussed? A query.

BTW, it really is "placement" of the projectile, not anything else. That .22 behind the eye and in front of the ear canal will drop a "bovine" (no matter the weight) like a ton of bricks (don't shoot them "between the eyes", that is their strongest place).

They aren't dead really (simply stunned) with that behind the eye shot in front of the ear canal, but cutting the throat and letting the heart continuing to work is a good thing. Less blood in the system, less hanging time, less trauma to the muscle tissue which makes the meat tougher than needed.

 

Clint your an honest to goodness Cowboy Awesome!

 

Nobody specified what size elephant. Would a .45 ACP drop a pigmey elephant?

Clint, I like my steak rare, if you please.