The best weapon of WW2?

[MSG. Steven J. McMillan]

I was thinking, what was the best weapon of the second world war? I'm not just talking numbers and statistics with how far the weapon can shoot, it's accuracy and ammunition capacity, but it's reliability amongst the men using them, it's weight and even ease of use?

Now... Everyone could plonk for one weapon and I have an idea in mind as to what that weapon would be, so to make it more diverse and less statistic orientated, let's say: "what would be your preferred weapon if you were a soldier in the second-world-war and why?" You may pick any weapon.

If I had to choose from all the weapons invented/used during the second-world-war, it would have to be the COLT M1911 pistol. Yes, unconventional choice when I could have picked an assault rifle or anything better than a pistol, but leaving all the firepower jargon aside, this baby packs one hell of a punch and is incredibly reliable.

The simple fact this weapon entered service around 1911 (with small adjustments made throughout time), it didn't finish it's service until 1985 and is still favored by veterans and firearm collectors as a regal piece of weaponry to own and even use. So this baby saw a lot of action, it's official use as a military sidearm: World War I, World War II, the Korean War, and the Vietnam War.

The non-official use of the weapon as a sidearm: Gulf War, War in Afghanistan, and Iraq War.

So it's one hell of a reliable weapon and still serves a purpose today. What would be your choice?

[☤Theodorijk Wijzemens]

It occurs to me, that many of the weapons used in the second world war were also used in the first world war, just as the M1911. For example, the Mosin-Nagant, Lee-Enfield, Springfield 1903, and the K98 were all the mainstays of their respective armies in WWI. The Mosin, Enfield, and K98 went on to be the mainstays of their respective armies in WWII, while the Springfield was the standard rifle in the Pacific for the US Navy and Marines. Each of the rifles, with the exception of the K98, are used to this day in standing armies. The Springfield is even still in use in the US Army.

That being said, some of the technical considerations should be discussed. For example, the size of the bullet fired by all of the bolt-action and semi-automatic rifles were around the same size (.30 or 7.62mm) Pistols were useful, but not as useful as rifles. Sub-machine guns had a habit of jamming and using up too much ammunition too fast. The machine-guns were reliable, for the most part, but overheating must be taken into consideration.

If I was to go to war in the WWII, the weapon I would want at my side, hands down, would be the Mosin-Nagant. It first entered service in the Imperial Russia Army in 1893 and is still used as a reserve rifle by the Russian military, should a major conflict arise and they cannot supply their soldiers with AK74s (I meant 74, not 47). It was also the reserve rifle throughout the cold war. It rarely if ever jammed and could stand rugged conditions, common in Russia more than in other places. It fired a large round that would guarantee a knock down and a probable death. The stripper clips would be inconvenient, but that was the standard for such rifles, not just the Soviets'. The Mosin is also known as one of the most accurate and precise rifles ever designed.

If I were to choose any other weapon, it would be the BAR.

My two cents.

[Cpl. Thomas West]

Both the M1911 and the Mosin Nagant's are great weapons. As a World War Two Reenactor, I've had the pleasure to handle both weapons. I have live fired them, as well as in a reenacting war setting. The BAR also came into service during the end of World War One, actually.

Something else people might forget is that the Browning .50 cal machine gun was invented around the same time, used during World War Two and is currently used today still by the US military, as well as other nations. Of course, over time it has had some modifications and upgrades, but the basic designs remains relatively unchanged. It was originally developed as an anti-tank weapon. But when combat evolved and tank armor grew thicker, it found use in Anti-Aircraft and Anti-Personnel roles. And to great effect.

But it's not the Browning .50 cal that I would want at my side during World War Two. I could risk being generic and say the M1 Garand. After all, it was the ONLY semi-automatic Rifle that was a standard weapon during World War Two, Patton called it the "war-winner", and it gave American forces a HUGE edge over the competition.

However, the weapon that I would want at my side during World War Two was a weapon that only saw limited service and ended up being given to the Dutch in surplus. That weapon is the Johnson Rifle. The Johnson Rifle was a weapon developed and given to the US Army for testing to compete for the contract as the standard Rifle for America's Forces. Obviously is lost out to the M1 Garand. However, this is not because of lack of ingenius design.

The Johnson Rifle was Semi-Automatic and fired the Springfield 30.06 rounds, same as the Garand. However, the Johnson held 10 rounds as opposed to the Garand's 8. The weapons was loaded from the side as opposed to the top with the Garand. Stripper clips could be used to feed into the weapon (2 Stripper clips of 5 rounds each) Or! A box magazine could be affixed to the weapon. It was lighter than the Garand, and shorter which meant it was more portable and easy to carry, and yet would still pack the punch of a rifle.

But even though all of that is grand, I must say that this next part is the clincher for me. The Johnson Rifle can be TOPPED UP IN MID MAGAZINE OR STRIPPER CLIP!!! That's right! If I fed in a Stripper Clip, only fired two rounds, and wanted to reload without the hassle of taking the clip- out and putting in a new one, I could! All I would need to do is feed more rounds into the side where they are loaded in and voila! The same could be done with the box magazine. I could fire 6 rounds from the Magazine, and if I wanted to, could stop, and reload it right there on the spot. I would never have to reload a fresh magazine.

So there is my pick. If I could choose a weapon, it would be the Johnson Rifle!!

(You know, there was even a variation of it that made it into a light machine gun..? hehe)

There's my pick! Sorry for being long winded!

[Edward"Butcher"McMillan]

Althought I agree with Doc about the Nagant, I personally would prefer the Karbiner 98k over the Nagant, but mainly due to personal preference. Both were extremely accurate. The 98k however was slightly heavier, and you may think "Why would that be a plus?!" Well with a heavier weapon it reduces sway in your sights due to breathing and heart rate, granted it is slightly more difficult to carry, the weight difference is slim. The 98k was also 7 inches shorter which means a smaller weapon profile and a little bit easier to move with in tighter spaces.

With the weapon being bolt action it forces the operator to place his/her shots as you cannot put a large volume of fire down range, also it does not create a flase sense of empowerment that semi auto or full auto weapons will do with inexpereinced soldiers.

So there you have it, my personal choice of weaponry had I been involved in WW2.

-JT

[MSG. Steven J. McMillan]

I could risk being generic and say the M1 Garand. After all, it was the ONLY semi-automatic Rifle that was a standard weapon during World War Two, Patton called it the "war-winner", and it gave American forces a HUGE edge over the competition.

It wasn't the only standard semi-auto rifle? For the Americans perhaps. The Germans had the Gewehr 43 which saw service before the M1 Garand. The British/South Africans had the Reider Automatic Rifle and New Zealand/British again had the Charlton semi-auto rifle, however the Charlton could be considered more of a LMG than semi-auto rifle.

Just thought I would point that out.

Oh and JT, I never took you for a bolt action kind of guy? No offense, not being all stereotypical thinking you're gun-ho, but thought you would have chosen something with more firepower and fire-rate? I am surprised, but not disappointed.

Having combat expereince, I'd prefer to know I'm gonna hit what I'm aiming at, that and I'm a pretty good shot as well

[Cpl. Thomas West]

Jul 12, 2011 0:19:25 GMT MSG. Steven J. McMillan said:

I could risk being generic and say the M1 Garand. After all, it was the ONLY semi-automatic Rifle that was a standard weapon during World War Two, Patton called it the "war-winner", and it gave American forces a HUGE edge over the competition.

It wasn't the only standard semi-auto rifle? For the Americans perhaps. The Germans had the Gewehr 43 which saw service before the M1 Garand. The British/South Africans had the Reider Automatic Rifle and New Zealand/British again had the Charlton semi-auto rifle, however the Charlton could be considered more of a LMG than semi-auto rifle.

Just thought I would point that out.

You're correct in that! However, those weapons were not the STANDARD ISSUE rifles given out in those other Armies. The US was the only nation with a semi-automatic rifle as their standard infantryman weapon. That is how I meant it haha.

[Mac Bargett]

I think we all know what gun I would want.

[∬: Erik Schneider]

Jul 12, 2011 0:03:04 GMT Edward"Butcher"McMillan said:

Althought I agree with Doc about the Nagant, I personally would prefer the Karbiner 98k over the Nagant, but mainly due to personal preference. Both were extremely accurate. The 98k however was slightly heavier, and you may think "Why would that be a plus?!" Well with a heavier weapon it reduces sway in your sights due to breathing and heart rate, granted it is slightly more difficult to carry, the weight difference is slim. The 98k was also 7 inches shorter which means a smaller weapon profile and a little bit easier to move with in tighter spaces.

With the weapon being bolt action it forces the operator to place his/her shots as you cannot put a large volume of fire down range, also it does not create a flase sense of empowerment that semi auto or full auto weapons will do with inexpereinced soldiers.

So there you have it, my personal choice of weaponry had I been involved in WW2.

-JT

I defer to JT's combat experience and wisdom and pick the K98 as well and then stand behind him the entire war.

[Heiko Alkema]

Jul 12, 2011 0:52:39 GMT Cpl. Thomas West said:

Jul 12, 2011 0:19:25 GMT MSG. Steven J. McMillan said:

It wasn't the only standard semi-auto rifle? For the Americans perhaps. The Germans had the Gewehr 43 which saw service before the M1 Garand. The British/South Africans had the Reider Automatic Rifle and New Zealand/British again had the Charlton semi-auto rifle, however the Charlton could be considered more of a LMG than semi-auto rifle.

Just thought I would point that out.

You're correct in that! However, those weapons were not the STANDARD ISSUE rifles given out in those other Armies. The US was the only nation with a semi-automatic rifle as their standard infantryman weapon. That is how I meant it haha.

He's actually wrong on both counts as the M1 was adopted by the US Army in 1936 while the G43 was adopted by Germany seven years later in 1943 (hence the "43" in G43). And The Rieder and Charlton being four and six years after the M1 respectively.

[MSG. Steven J. McMillan]

I may be wrong about the G43 (although the M1 didn't see extensive use until 1945), but how am I wrong about the Reider and Charlton rifles? I never said they came before the M1 Garand, they're just "other" semi-auto rifles, because Thomas thought the M1 Garand was the only semi-auto rifle...