I would have to say Thompson Model 1928a1, like R Lee Ermy said " American made by Union men" OORAH!
-
-
Well, as far as the "BEST" sub gun of WWII, my vote was for the MP-34(o). It had some of the best machine work of the era (with the Thompson 1928a1 a very close second) and unlike so many others on the list where everyone is arguing about 9mm vs .45acp, the MP-34(o) could be changed to shoot EITHER caliber, along with 9mm Largo, and 9mm Steyr and if they had kept making it, it could very easily also been adapted to 7.62x25 as well- all by about ten seconds with one 17mm wrench to screw the barrel in and out, and by popping up the top cover and changing the bolt in a matter of a minute to go from 9mm to .45 and back. This was not the most used gun, or the most well known one, but I could see where the argument could be made that it was indeed the BEST sub gun of the era.Comment
-
The Owen
The best SMG isn't listed? The Owen. Went on for years and was used in Vietnam. Even the Brits used it as a post war replacement for the Sten.Comment
-
Mp38/40Comment
-
mp38 of course
I like the quality of all the parts
Comment
-
No doubts,my choice is Suomi M/31.Comment
-
The best MP WW2 ? It' s easy -Russian PPS 43
Comment
-
The best SMG of WW2 is this one
[IMG]
[/IMG]
Comment
-
All stens are cool, even the MkIII.
Comment
-
Thoughts
This is more difficult, as I've only fired about half on this list. Bottom line, really, is that none stands out. The finely crafted 9mms, such as the Beretta, Suomi, or Mp34 are more like auto carbines: they are long, at times poorly balanced and/or heavy, and overbuilt. I'm very fond of the Thompson (and would quibble that the M1928 and M1 series are totally different weapons) versions, but they are heavy. The Sten is quite functional, but is simply not consistently well built and, again, unbalanced and, in many cases dangerous. At the end, I'd have to go for the MP40, not because it's that good (it's magazine design is not nearly as good as the Thompson's) but because it introduced some excellent concepts, namely composite receivers, collapsible bolt, collapsible stock, and stampings. It was a revolutionary SMG, period. It's much too big and bulky today, but it's the direct predecessor of the Uzi and MP5 series. As for the M3, several of which I've fired, I have little good to say about it: it is smaller than the MP40, but its stock is wonky, its double recoil springs are ill conceived, and the cocking mechanism is a disaster. Frankly, none of these choices would be good in today's combat environment, but they are all wonderful to own, aren't they?Comment
-
i have shot a thompson.and a mp40,i prefer the mp40 i think it a overall good machine pistolComment
-
PPsh-41
Gentlemen:
I agree that the ERMA MP-40 is one of the most efficient , deadly and simplistic weapons in its final production version. It's a hard decision. But, if we're talking about combat conditions on the eastern front, I'd prefer the Poppa-Sha for two reasons:
* Soviet tolerances were not as "finely tuned" allowing better functionality in severe weather conditions.
* Two pouched 71 drums with one loaded in the subgun allows for addtional firepower.
(PPsh-41 Drawbacks): The drums have weight and loading issues, You must hold the weapon away from you when firing or else you get a hot brass shower. Take notice of some of the Eastern Front Soviets on the attack in archive movies and photos and the way they are holding the PPsh-41.
RolfComment
-
Best Sub-machinegun
Gents: I've fired the Suomi M/31 and it has my vote and the Reds were very impressed and mad their own cheaper verision the PPS 43.
Regards,Oiva
Comment
-
My vote PPsh41
Used still , during nam , and campaigns in between. Its a close in weapon that had no semi switch, and to touch the trigger would still pop off a bunch of pistol rounds. Of course now superceded by the AK , the ppsh41 kicked A_ _, because they made enough to give almost every infantryman one in the cities.
Mp 38, and 40s had a hotter round to make em work right, and got hot, and would burn your hands . The pistol rounds the ppsh used were nothing special, and used in the tokarev pistols also.Cheep to shoot....so they kill one guy with one, he drops it, and another guy picks it up, and keeps coming. The barrells were easily replaced ,had a protective vented cover, and they dissassembled fast, could be REPAIERED QUICKLY re-assembled to make more working examples from daMAGED GUNS AS THE PARTS WERE ALL INTERCHANGEABLE.(arriba arriba, arriba,,,andale andale andale.)
The advent of this machine pistol Suprised the germans like the T-34's Debut...and i totally agree with the comment saying german machining was overdone. The germans just to tap a hole used 5 taps, we used 3....the russian machine shops secrets was ..they had many women working running turrent lathes, and mills..shapers...and they even fought in the field. The russians owe a lot to the russian women.... fellows, believe it or not. They were the backbone of the factorys. My hats are off to you russian ladies wherever you are. Yep---PPsh 41 for me.Comment
-
I have both built and fired a Suomi M 31 and a PPSH 41. The only similarity between the two is the drum mags, the PPSH 41 is a completely different gun and a piece of junk when compared to the Suomi.Originally posted by Oiva View PostGents: I've fired the Suomi M/31 and it has my vote and the Reds were very impressed and mad their own cheaper verision the PPS 43. Regards,OivaComment
Comment