I don't agree Martin. The MP44 is another category weapon. As a squaddie you'd prefer the weapon that keeps you alive longer. And if you get to choose between a semi auto 8shot mag. rifle and an assault rifle the choise is easy.

Joe
Yes the British army stuck by the Lee Enfield for many years, as did it with SLR even though most other nations equiped their forces with fully fledged assault rifles. Many have argued that this was so because of the doctrine of carfully aimed shots. Not nessesarily wrong either. One of the logics behind this is the experience of the British Army fighting overseas. If you give the squaddies a weapon that will fire 600 rounds per minute, you need to find a logistics solution that enable the army to supply them with 600 rounds per minute. A result of British thinking and doctrine is apparent by the stats after the Falklands war in ratio bullets used compared to men killed. I cannot remember it now, but it was a far cry from the 50,000 per kills in the Vietnam war.

__________________
'We march. The enemy is retreating in transport. We follow on foot.' Lt.Neil McCallum 5/7 Gordons 19th November 1942

I don't think I'd call the G41 a copy of the Garand by any means. Especially as there were two very distinct versions of the former.

well if I was sittin' in a foxhole and a bunch of crazy germans were running at me, I'd want the Garand, semi-auto!! I'd hate to have to stop to mess with the bolt, the enemy could be right up on you at that point!

__________________
Scott

Close range, semi-auto would be easy since you could shoot sereval shot. Far range would be alot easier with the bolt-weapon since it is less recoil.

__________________

Sturmkreuz

Less recoil with a bolt action than a semi-automatic????

Go to the nearest airport and get a ticket to Vigra Airport Norway. I'll pick you up myself and we can go to the Garrison in Åndalsnes. I'll let you try a selection of weapons in semi and bolt in the same calibre and then we can discuss recoil.

Quiz: What makes the semi automatic weapon eject the spendt cartridge and feed a new one into the chamber?

1. The Fairy Godmother told it to.
2. I guess it's part of that PC madness people are talking about.
3. The mechanism uses some of the kinetic energy from the fired round to operate.

__________________
'We march. The enemy is retreating in transport. We follow on foot.' Lt.Neil McCallum 5/7 Gordons 19th November 1942

ummmm..........no.

hehehehe.....fairy godmother!....hehehehehehe

__________________
Scott

Oops Wrong.. Mauser had more recoil, I typed it all wrong.

But how more recoil did the Mauser had than the Garand?

__________________

I have been fortunate enough to shoot both firearms. In battle I would choose the Garand,
but I think the K98 is a much nicer firearm. The Garand felt nose heavy to me. I owned a K98 as seen in my Avatar.

Is there any significant differenses in recoil of "blow-back" and "gas-operated" weapons?

__________________
Handle every stressful situation like a dog.
If you can't eat it or hump it.
Piss on it and walk away

Those are different phrases to describing essentially the same thing.

__________________
Best Regards,
JW

Well.....an M1 rifle is what it is, the old '03's were based on the Mauser's, the Springfield's had a stout kick, but a fella could get pretty quick with a bolt action when he had to. When the M1 was available, that was the weapon to carry, I used a Springfield fitting with a long scope from time to time, and I remember the boxed ammunition was something special, it had a heavier bullet, and I think the boxes were labeled "not for use in rifle cal .30 M1".

Someone metioned the M1 carbine, I only carried one on the line one time. I don't remember anyone with anything good to say about it either. It seemed to be accurate enough, but when you hit a man three or four times and he is still trying to get up run at you, it's not much of a weapon. Too light to use a good club as well.

take care,

__________________
All the Best
Jack

Thanks for sharing.

M1 was a Generals weapon, wasn't it?

__________________

Actually, not the same.
But i did make a mistake, Since i'm trying to compare assualt rifles, i'm not sure "blowback" was used in them.
I should've asked about differences in recoil of "recoil operetad" and "gas operated" assualt rifles.
But, still "blowback" and "gas-operated" weapon principals are NOT the same.

__________________
Handle every stressful situation like a dog.
If you can't eat it or hump it.
Piss on it and walk away

Well,I think that it isn't a right poll.Why?Because one is a bolt action rifle and the other is a semi automatic rifle.It would be correct K 98 K vs. Springfield M-1903.Two bolt action rifles.Or Gew 43 vs. Garand.This is my own opinion.Surely the precision of Kar 98 K was more higher than Garand.

That is a reasonable point, and it's difficult always to exactly compare 'like-for-like'. But I think the poll can be justified because both rifles were in front-line service with two of WWII's major combatant armies at exactly the same time.

__________________
"Stand by to pull me out of the seat if I get hit" - Guy Gibson

Indeed a reasonable point but I'd took K98k & M1Garand as main reason, that it were the main weapons of both sides.

__________________

And if you want to compare semi automatics why not the G41 vs the Garand? They are closer in many ways. Both were semi automatics designed to take a standard rifle caliber round. Both were the first semi's used by their respective services. Design times were closer...

I have 3 K98's and one Garand. The Garand, hands down! No comparison.

I've one ought 3 Springfield, one K-98, but no Garand. I've fired them all and the Lee Enfield.
The Enfield appears to be easier to eject & chamber a new round and get back on target quicker. The K-98 appears easier to get the first round on target. The Springfield appears to more solidly put paid to what you shoot at.
Just my opinions.
The Garand is the better war gun, for obvious reasons.

__________________
There's one way to find out if a man is honest-ask him. If he says "Yes", you know he's a crook. Groucho Marx

I'd definitely say Garand is the choice for power or accuracy because with the K98 you have to re-cock every time you shoot it.

Iwould pick the M-1 ove anybattle rifle in the ETO that and a BAR 30 06 is all hell. MP44 is a good weapon but for knock down power and range the Springfield or the M-1 . I own a SS K-98 and I own a Springfield M-1 #`ed under a million trust me the 7.mm round at no joke hell nor is a .22 but I like the weapons we had better more reliable.
Best regards,
Spike

What drugs are you taking Spike? Edit post due to spelling, and still it is white noise.

__________________
'We march. The enemy is retreating in transport. We follow on foot.' Lt.Neil McCallum 5/7 Gordons 19th November 1942

Kar98:

Advantages:
Excellent accuracy, great range.

Disadvantages:
Bolt-action, not as good in closer ranges.

M-1 Garand:

Advantages:
Semi-auto, almost an all-purpose weapon.

Disadvantages:
"Ping" noise when clip is done, doesn't excel in any catagory.

Overall I say M-1 is better with more ammo, and semi-auto.

Not that crappy 'ping' mumbo jumbo again!!!! Anyone who talks about the Garand and mention that 'ping' haven't set foot on a battlefield. On the field you are lucky if even see the enemy, not to mention your own team mates. You are jacked up on adrenaline and scared shitless at the same time. So through the noise of machine guns, and the supersonic crack of incoming fire, artillery and your bloody sergeant shouting you're supposed to hear the ping of a Garand clip at a distance.

It's only in Hollywood that this thing ring true gents. I have been working with infantry tactics (squad and platoon) for a decade, and the Garand 'ping' story is as laughable as turning it into an advantage. You know that part too right? You snap the clip and make it 'ping', and good old Jerry thinks 'he is out of ammo' and pops his head up to shoot, and you shoot him in turn.

As for comparing different CATEGORY weapons, I have discussed that in an earlier post.

__________________
'We march. The enemy is retreating in transport. We follow on foot.' Lt.Neil McCallum 5/7 Gordons 19th November 1942

Heard the "Ping" story (even repeated it) from an American soldier talking about street fighting (can't remember where) on a documentary show. Without cobblestone streets, and a separate. mano e mano (away from all other battlefield noises) fight, I doubt it would make an (distantly audible) sound.
I've put over a hundred rounds through various Garands, and have yet to hear it. I was wearing ear plugs/w "phone" protectors over them.
Scared is right. Lucky to notice you're out of ammo, and remember to reload, correctly, quickly.
It is said that 35% of the troops in the Civil War were ineffective because of improperly, or multiple load weapons. Some troops just kept loading and never fired. One musket was found (after some battle) with "8" rounds down the barrel. Others rammed home bullet (mini-ball) first. Wet powder, half the powder, no (forgot the paper) wading, bad primer caps, on and on.
Ah yes...training, there is a need.

__________________
There's one way to find out if a man is honest-ask him. If he says "Yes", you know he's a crook. Groucho Marx