User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/14/2019 10:30:13 AM EST
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You left out the Sten. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2019 11:31:30 AM EST
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Thompson is a fat pig. It’s as heavy as a Garand. The M3 was much better in this aspect. It was no lightweight itself but at least it’s barrel wasn’t a mile long. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I have never shot an smg. I once held a thompson and an m3 and was completely surprised that I liked the way the m3 felt much better than the thompson. I would like to shoot both. The M3 was much better in this aspect. It was no lightweight itself but at least it’s barrel wasn’t a mile long. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2019 11:36:36 AM EST
[#3]
It'd be cool for Forgotten Weapons and C&Rsensl to do a WW2 version of their Project Lightening for subguns.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2019 11:45:49 AM EST
[#4]
Having shot the M3, Thompson, and Mp38 in auto, I would not feel undergunned with one. The idea of the PPSH is pretty good though.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2019 11:50:26 AM EST
[#5]
I don’t have any experience with the m3 or Owen, but shoot the other four regularly.
Of those four it’s no contest for the mp40 |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2019 11:54:54 AM EST
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I have to disagree. You don't have to be Bill Clinton to understand that the best SMG is the one that can be manufactured quickly and cheaply and in enough volume to actually affect the war effort. Quality in the hands of the end user is a great thing, but quantity is even more so. Simple math proves this. And IMHO, the MP40 best strikes that balance. Cheap and fast to make but not crude. Easy to use, Right cartridge, good magazines, decent ergos, rate of fire right in the sweet spot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2019 7:26:27 PM EST
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's the first I've heard about soldiers disliking it, but that doesn't seem to be the dominant position. The weapon's reliability and ability to bring devastating automatic fire to close quarters combat made the Thompson a favorite of the [British] Commandos. They even honored the weapon in the design of their unit recognition flash; a stylized Thompson superimposed on an anchor headed by an eagle. It's a flash that's still used to this day. ... Even though the M1 Garand and M1 carbine were the most common infantry weapons in the U.S. Military, any dogface or jarhead who could get his hands on a Thompson adored the weapon. Eventually, it was issued to NCO's and officers in the European theater and many Marines in the Pacific. The sheer reliability of the Thompson, particularly in its less-expensive but equally deadly M1A1 model, made it the perfect weapon to endure battlefield conditions where rain, mud, snow and sand made weapon care a chore. https://www.itstactical.com/warcom/firearms/annihilator-rise-fall-thompson-submachine-gun/ And while the PPsH was a very good gun, the Thompson was better made, and its weight and side-eject made it very accurate. In terms of cost, it was never obsolete, with an M1A1 costing about the same as a modern M4 when adjusted for inflation. WWII presented unique issues in trying to arm a lot of soldiers in a short time, that's why they went to the M3, not because the Thompson was "obsolete." I'd take a Thompson over a PPsH any day.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D53opaeollQQuote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: Build quality of the Thompson was very good for a WWII-era SMG, but the .45 ACP cartridge made it practically worthless for anything other than personal defense and close quarters clearing. Actual Infantrymen didn't like it. Ken Hackathorn did a good video on it where he related the personal experiences of guys who had actually used them, and it was a turd. PPsH smokes them all in capability. It will do everything that any of them will do in close quarters with better penetration, then exceed the effective range of any of them that aren't chambered in 7.62x25, while providing more firepower/ammunition feed device capacity. The main things I don't like about the PPsH are the magazine retention latch and the rate of fire on auto. The weapon's reliability and ability to bring devastating automatic fire to close quarters combat made the Thompson a favorite of the [British] Commandos. They even honored the weapon in the design of their unit recognition flash; a stylized Thompson superimposed on an anchor headed by an eagle. It's a flash that's still used to this day. ... Even though the M1 Garand and M1 carbine were the most common infantry weapons in the U.S. Military, any dogface or jarhead who could get his hands on a Thompson adored the weapon. Eventually, it was issued to NCO's and officers in the European theater and many Marines in the Pacific. The sheer reliability of the Thompson, particularly in its less-expensive but equally deadly M1A1 model, made it the perfect weapon to endure battlefield conditions where rain, mud, snow and sand made weapon care a chore. https://www.itstactical.com/warcom/firearms/annihilator-rise-fall-thompson-submachine-gun/ And while the PPsH was a very good gun, the Thompson was better made, and its weight and side-eject made it very accurate. In terms of cost, it was never obsolete, with an M1A1 costing about the same as a modern M4 when adjusted for inflation. WWII presented unique issues in trying to arm a lot of soldiers in a short time, that's why they went to the M3, not because the Thompson was "obsolete." I'd take a Thompson over a PPsH any day. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D53opaeollQI'm old enough to have worked with a lot of WW2 veterans, who were in Europe, Africa, and the Pacific. They liked the Thompson and I never heard a word they didn't. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2019 7:39:33 PM EST
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This. I'm old enough to have worked with a lot of WW2 veterans, who were in Europe, Africa, and the Pacific. They liked the Thompson and I never heard a word they didn't. Dumb round, rate of fire to high, the only reason it was halfway controllable is because it was way too heavy. Magazine attachment system was pretty bad, ergos weren’t great. Complicated internals. But most importantly, it was as heavy as a rifle, it costs as much to make as a rifle... this defeats he purpose of the wartime SMG. Fortunately our troops had the fantastic little M1 Carbine to do SMG jobs. Thompson would have been awesome in WWI for which it was designed, but by the time it actually got to fight it was pretty thoroughly outclassed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2019 7:50:20 PM EST
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This. I'm old enough to have worked with a lot of WW2 veterans, who were in Europe, Africa, and the Pacific. They liked the Thompson and I never heard a word they didn't. Arfcommers stand around at the range and shoot these sub guns in a casual setting. Declaring this one good and this one bad in a subjective manner. People who fight and kill form opinions based on totally different criteria. They go with what works. A tradesman picks his tools based on what works, so does a warfighter. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2019 7:54:55 PM EST
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
the tradesman picks his tools based on what works, so does a warfighter. With all due respect to those aforementioned WWII vets, do you really think they got much of a chance to shoot, let alone actually fight with, comparable weapons from other countries? Hell, most of them probably didn’t get a chance to do that with the other weapons in the US arsenal. I don’t think there was a whole lot of “hey sarge, I really don’t want to lug this big ol’ Garand around, gimme one of them Thompsons!” |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2019 7:55:27 PM EST
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think I've figured out why we have this opinion difference. Arfcommers stand around at the range and shoot these sub guns in a casual setting. Declaring this one good and this one bad in a subjective manner. People who fight and kill form opinions based on totally different criteria. They go with what works. A tradesman picks his tools based on what works, so does a warfighter. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: This. I'm old enough to have worked with a lot of WW2 veterans, who were in Europe, Africa, and the Pacific. They liked the Thompson and I never heard a word they didn't. Arfcommers stand around at the range and shoot these sub guns in a casual setting. Declaring this one good and this one bad in a subjective manner. People who fight and kill form opinions based on totally different criteria. They go with what works. A tradesman picks his tools based on what works, so does a warfighter. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2019 7:59:22 PM EST
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Outside of some HSLD types, no... they really don't. With all due respect to those aforementioned WWII vets, do you really think they got much of a chance to shoot, let alone actually fight with, comparable weapons from other countries? Hell, most of them probably didn't get a chance to do that with the other weapons in the US arsenal. I don't think there was a whole lot of "hey sarge, I really don't want to lug this big ol' Garand around, gimme one of them Thompsons!" |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2019 8:00:47 PM EST
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Outside of some HSLD types, no... they really don’t. With all due respect to those aforementioned WWII vets, do you really think they got much of a chance to shoot, let alone actually fight with, comparable weapons from other countries? Hell, most of them probably didn’t get a chance to do that with the other weapons in the US arsenal. I don’t think there was a whole lot of “hey sarge, I really don’t want to lug this big ol’ Garand around, gimme one of them Thompsons!” Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
the tradesman picks his tools based on what works, so does a warfighter. With all due respect to those aforementioned WWII vets, do you really think they got much of a chance to shoot, let alone actually fight with, comparable weapons from other countries? Hell, most of them probably didn’t get a chance to do that with the other weapons in the US arsenal. I don’t think there was a whole lot of “hey sarge, I really don’t want to lug this big ol’ Garand around, gimme one of them Thompsons!” Though after carrying the Thompson, I'd be begging for a M3/A1 or M1/2 Carbine, but at least it wasn't a BAR. Vets tend to think whatever they had was the best, because they formed an emotional attachment to it (which is understandable, they defended their lives with it afterall). In hindsight, without emotions involved, its easier to compare and contrast. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2019 8:02:07 PM EST
[#14]
Here's what Col John B George said about Thompsons in his book "Shots Fired in Anger."
"We received these weapons when we first landed in New Caledonia, early in '42. They were issued initially to the drivers and later to officers, and had the immediate result of becoming prime weapons of the chase for a few mad days. Everyone in uniform, colonels, majors, privates alike, went deer hunting with Thompsons submachine guns. A few deer were killed, a few more wounded and a great number of soldiers, civilians, and deer were badly scared. Jeeps, Tommy guns, and a plentiful supply of beer, with a little rum and whiskey thrown in, proved to be the makings of an Idiot's Holiday which went on until everyone got tired." "It was the perfect weapon for close-defense, carrying one provided perhaps the best life insurance a man could have [...] although they were much too heavy, I never wanted to carry one myself, it always made me feel good to have one or two close at hand [...] The Tommy gun was never good for anything beyond fifty yards or so. Its great inaccuracy made a gamble of shooting at greater ranges at targets which were at all able to shoot back. The rough sights, poor stocking, and awkward feel made it a poor pointer, hard to align quickly on a fleeting target [...] The advent of the carbine later on in the war eliminated, in my opinion, the last need for a Tommy gun." |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2019 8:04:56 PM EST
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Outside of some HSLD types, no... they really don't. With all due respect to those aforementioned WWII vets, do you really think they got much of a chance to shoot, let alone actually fight with, comparable weapons from other countries? Hell, most of them probably didn't get a chance to do that with the other weapons in the US arsenal. I don't think there was a whole lot of "hey sarge, I really don't want to lug this big ol' Garand around, gimme one of them Thompsons!" |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2019 8:06:13 PM EST
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
True but then why is the Thompson held in such high regard by that generation? I don't think it was because they didn't know any better. If you fight with something, you’re gonna develop an attachment to it, that’s just human nature. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2019 8:08:28 PM EST
[#17]
MP34
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2019 8:09:27 PM EST
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The vast majority probably didn't. But read "Shots Fired in Anger." The author on quiet days was able to inspect, document, and shoot almost every small arm used on Guadalcanal by both sides. At one point he even started carrying a Japanese bolt action carbine just because he liked it. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2019 8:12:33 PM EST
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well why did you ask us then, if you don't like our answer? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2019 8:13:39 PM EST
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have nothing better to do. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: Well why did you ask us then, if you don't like our answer? I will once again shit on American Small Arms (because the BAR deserves to be shat on). |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2019 8:17:27 PM EST
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Start a Pistol or LMG thread, and lets get it on. I will once again shit on American Small Arms (because the BAR deserves to be shat on). |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2019 8:20:48 PM EST
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The BAR is another one that didn’t get to fight in the war for which it was designed and in which would have excelled. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: Start a Pistol or LMG thread, and lets get it on. I will once again shit on American Small Arms (because the BAR deserves to be shat on). Wait whats that the Huns already have a better SMG (MP18)? Shit. Better keep 'em held in reserve anyways. But the BAR could have been much better for WWII if it was upgraded (like FN and Colt did with the Monitor and I forget what FN called its variants). |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2019 8:22:37 PM EST
[#23]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2019 8:44:46 PM EST
[#24]
I said Beretta M38 already, but here is a video that backs it up. It is a fucking fantastic SMG, yet hardly anybody knows about them.
 Italy's Sleeper Submachine Gun: The Beretta 38A |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2019 8:46:07 PM EST
[#25]
Quote HistoryThis man fucks.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2019 8:53:29 PM EST
[#26]
WWII SMG pron from my trip to the 45th Infantry Division Museum:
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2019 12:52:13 AM EST
[#27]
Ive shot a Thompson, Soumi, MP40 and Sten.
Out of all those, I liked the MP40. The rate of fire made ir very controllable. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2019 4:04:11 AM EST
[#28]
The Finns.....drums, coffin mags, stick mags,....Cold weather approved.....cause everything works when it's warm...
Found Unknown Soldier on Amazon Prime tv...3.99 rent....10.99 buy. I collect Finn stuff and I've never heard of the movie till now. Ps....had a Thompson M1 smg on a Form 4...they're not "junk" at 25-30k....mine was cheaper many moons ago. 50yds...ok...unsling your rifle past that.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2019 4:56:01 AM EST
[#29]
The Thompson with the barrel that has ridges down it and a barrel mag is a heavy gun. Hard wood stock etc.
I was able to hold one at a show in Florida. But that’s my vote. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2019 11:48:14 AM EST
[#30]
I've shot:
1921 1928 M1A1 MP40 MP34 Sterling MP5 M10 9mm Uzi Of all them I liked The MP34 and Sterling the best. The MP5 was nice also. The best Thompson was the M1A1. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
