User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/5/2013 10:50:47 AM EDT
[#1]
I would assume the manufacturing process has changed very slightly over the years and that there are very slight differences besides the round they're both chambered for. That's just a logical assumption.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2013 10:54:02 AM EDT
[#2]
Caliber?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2013 10:55:51 AM EDT
[#3]
7.62 nato/.308
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2013 10:56:15 AM EDT
[#4]
The bolt and the rollers are different for a slower RPM. I think one of the guide groves were moved a bit to one direction to accommodate. You're supposed to be able to change out bolts and barrels easily though.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2013 10:56:17 AM EDT
[#5]
IIRC , barrel , recoil booster, recoil buffer, changes to feed tray/mech. for different links/link spacing, and materials for furniture.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2013 10:56:50 AM EDT
[#6]
ROF is slower to be more controllable.
ETA: Beat by N1Rampage. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2013 10:57:06 AM EDT
[#7]
slower rate of fire
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2013 10:59:04 AM EDT
[#8]
In principle it's the exact same gun, just re-barreled for 7.62 NATO and slower rate of fire. Just looking at it and handling it, you cannot tell any difference.
There might be some minor technical differences. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2013 11:07:20 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In principle it's the exact same gun, just re-barreled for 7.62 NATO and slower rate of fire. Just looking at it and handling it, you cannot tell any difference. There might be some minor technical differences. THis; having fired an original in 7.92; the 42 has a retarded ROF, almost 1500 rounds-per-minute, depending on how heavy the bolt installed and if you remove the "booster". The MG3 is almost the same weapon, except for the chambering to comply with NATO standarization. 
Here's one for ya, DK. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2013 11:21:03 AM EDT
[#10]
Today's 2 man MG crew does not have to face 12,000 charging Siberians by themselves.
In 43-45 the rate of fire was appreciated in spite of the recoil which seemed easy to tame with adrenalin when you saw those 12,000 Siberians and your desire to see Greta's firm breast again Wulfmann |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2013 11:23:16 AM EDT
[#11]
One of the coolest military vehicles I've ever seen was a G-Wagen the Danes were rolling in A-stan with a twin MG3 mount mounted on the roof.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2013 11:25:46 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In principle it's the exact same gun, just re-barreled for 7.62 NATO and slower rate of fire. Just looking at it and handling it, you cannot tell any difference. There might be some minor technical differences. I thought there was two different types of bolts that could be used. A heavier one for a slower rate of fire (900 rounds a minute) and a lighter one that the germans still prefer for over 1200 rounds per minute. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2013 11:28:12 AM EDT
[#13]
I'll take one of each, please.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2013 11:56:55 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Today's 2 man MG crew does not have to face 12,000 charging Siberians by themselves. In 43-45 the rate of fire was appreciated in spite of the recoil which seemed easy to tame with adrenalin when you saw those 12,000 Siberians and your desire to see Greta's firm breast again ]  and lol
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2013 12:00:26 PM EDT
[#15]
The MG3/M53 has an updated bolt head/extractor, an updated more reliable feeding top cover. I think it also has an updated buffer assembly as well. Some small other minor updates other then shooting .308 versus 8mm.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2013 12:06:16 PM EDT
[#16]
Quoted:
Is it basically the same gun? Yes and no. The MG42 fired a longer cartridge, 8mm, vs the MG3 firing .308/7.62. The feed tray, top cover assembly and barrel are different. Another point to think about is that the 8mm is a lower pressure round than the .308. We run 8mm in our MG42 so I haven't done the switch but some do recommend upgrading the drive spring. The operating mechanism and general manufacturing are very close to being the same though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2013 12:12:58 PM EDT
[#17]
I read that the big reason for the high ROF during WWII was psychological. The Germans wanted to reduce it but the troops were convinced that the ROF had an intimidating effect.
Might be true, the US Army had to specifically train troops to overcome their hesitance to attack them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2013 12:17:35 PM EDT
[#18]
One of our customers and friend playing with the MG42. The rate of fire is slowed because of the anti bounce device installed in the bolt carrier. Also, the FTF's were from some really crappy ammo.
|
|
|
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.
