the weight contributes to it having borderline zero recoil so follow up shots are easy to make. No one wore body armor in WW2 so an SMG was fricking king
Its weight also make it hard to wield. I have a closed-bolt AO copy of a Thompson, and you aren't wrong about the recoil. But you feel that weight when carrying it, and you feel that weight when you aim.
The M2 Carbine is much light and doesn't recoil much either. In a pinch, I'd take the M2.
It's also much shorter and can fire 22 more times with far less recoil. The M1 is an excellent rifle but subguns were king for CQB in this era.
It's one of the most complex and expensive subs of WW2
https://i.imgur.com/BFSsHTN.png
>simplicity
>not STEN >not M3 Grease Gun >not PPSH >not Owen
Expensive, yes, but not that complex, it's an open-bolt blowback gun like all the others. The M1A1 is vastly simplified and economized compared to the earlier Blish Lock guns.
>>Soft recoil
Only the first version was soft because the high fire rate. the WWII version was shit and the recoil was bumpy thx to the lower fire rate.
The thompson was never smooth to shoot like MP28, MP40, M-31 or even the Sten.
Yes, the recoil really isn't much of anything, partially because it's a heavy gun. It's very easy to control and to make bursts on targets, even sustained fire is a breeze.
[...]
[...]
THIS is soft recoil
The recoil of the Thompson isn't exactly harsh or even noticeable.
https://i.imgur.com/2gJOwnl.jpg
>>Soft recoil
Only the first version was soft because the high fire rate. the WWII version was shit and the recoil was bumpy thx to the lower fire rate.
The thompson was never smooth to shoot like MP28, MP40, M-31 or even the Sten.
You are wrong. It'll want to climb a little bit but it's very easy to keep in check.
That's clearly one of the earlier guns with the much higher rate of fire, the M1A1 has only slightly higher rate of fire than the MP40 and just barely more recoil (mainly a subtle muzzle rise).
>>Soft recoil
Only the first version was soft because the high fire rate. the WWII version was shit and the recoil was bumpy thx to the lower fire rate.
The thompson was never smooth to shoot like MP28, MP40, M-31 or even the Sten.
Sten and Grease were kings for what that war needed. The Thompsons were amazing though. Basically government supplied gucci guns of the day. They were literally already immortalized in film and probably single handedly lead to the automatics ban.
The tactical advantage is the your stock doesn't break itself after firing 200 rounds because it's rubbing up against and being slammed by the metal of the receiver.
The Thompson has moronic ergonomics, but they were cutting edge at the time.
[...]
Okay now you have actually triggered MY autism.
I have numbered the stock grooves 1 to 5 and I will explain each of them.
#1: Allows you to place your thumb around the stock like a pistol grip, makes picking it up easier. Also limits the surface area between the stock and the receiver and keeps all the forced transferred into one solid joint.
#2: Slight curve in the bottom flange of the stock, makes it easier to wrap your hand around the stock and pick it up.
#3: Very small curve, meant to minimize the chance that the sling swivel drags on the floor, etc
#4: Extra rounded section so you don't poke yourself in the ribs and puncture a lung every time you shoulder the rifle
#5: Rounded section so you don't poke yourself in the clavicle every time you shoulder the rifle.
Thanks for listening to my TED talk.
BONUS AUTISM:
The reason why you would shape joint at curve #1 like that is because wood has grain structure, meaning that it resists force very strongly in two directions directly parallel, but very poorly in any other less than parallel
direction.
If the stock were full at that groove, it would split very quickly.
The tactical advantage is the your stock doesn't break itself after firing 200 rounds because it's rubbing up against and being slammed by the metal of the receiver.
The Thompson has moronic ergonomics, but they were cutting edge at the time.
Okay now you have actually triggered MY autism.
I have numbered the stock grooves 1 to 5 and I will explain each of them.
#1: Allows you to place your thumb around the stock like a pistol grip, makes picking it up easier. Also limits the surface area between the stock and the receiver and keeps all the forced transferred into one solid joint.
#2: Slight curve in the bottom flange of the stock, makes it easier to wrap your hand around the stock and pick it up.
#3: Very small curve, meant to minimize the chance that the sling swivel drags on the floor, etc
#4: Extra rounded section so you don't poke yourself in the ribs and puncture a lung every time you shoulder the rifle
#5: Rounded section so you don't poke yourself in the clavicle every time you shoulder the rifle.
BONUS AUTISM:
The reason why you would shape joint at curve #1 like that is because wood has grain structure, meaning that it resists force very strongly in two directions directly parallel, but very poorly in any other less than parallel
direction.
If the stock were full at that groove, it would split very quickly.
BONUS AUTISM:
The reason why you would shape joint at curve #1 like that is because wood has grain structure, meaning that it resists force very strongly in two directions directly parallel, but very poorly in any other less than parallel
direction.
If the stock were full at that groove, it would split very quickly.
based autist. Also more of an example of what made the Tommy a gucci gun as stated
Sten and Grease were kings for what that war needed. The Thompsons were amazing though. Basically government supplied gucci guns of the day. They were literally already immortalized in film and probably single handedly lead to the automatics ban.
I'll never understand why people on PrepHole call attention to detail and research skills, both considered traits of an intelligent human being ; "autism"
I like both of them a lot. The way the Thompson is simplified to the M1A1 makes it nicely utilitarian, but the way the M3, and especially the M3A1, is designed around economy and designed around rapid assembly line factory production, that is beautiful as frick.
It's incredible how simple the Greasegun is, it's like a .45 caliber Sten with better magazines and designed around mass factory production rather than for small workshop production, I just love how most of the receiver is made by a big machine stamping the left and right halves out from a single sheet of steel, then they're spot-welded together.
It's one of the culminations of 1940s American industrial capabilities.
They never sold them commercially, NFA items or not, and the US Army never surplused these things to the public in any capacity, as whole guns nor as parts kits, so yeah, Greaseguns are actually pretty rare. Well, I said in any capacity, but they did actually surplus off quite a lot of the magazines, and that's the magazines which the MAC M10s would use later, along with some other .45 caliber guns.
It's not like barely any survive, though, it's just they aren't available. A couple million were sent as military aid to the Philippines once during the Cold War, and they've used some over the years, but they probably still have lots and lots left which have barely been used, if at all.
Not much going for repros, because the design of the gun inherently lends itself to massive factory mass production, but would be ridiculously cost ineffective for any kind of small repro production, given how the receiver is made by a big machine punching out two halves of it from a single sheet. You could maybe make something very similar with more modest stamping setups, but stamping is just not cheap on a small scale.
There's some transferable M3s and M3A1s, but not very many, a number I've seen says 75, but that's probably waaay low because they do actually come up on occasion. Probably a fair few unregistered ones exist out there, hidden away, and likely there's some parts-kits semi-auto builds, but not that man. One company made a vague lookalike semi-auto but it's all milled and it just looks very off, another called Medea made less than a hundred receiver bodies, supposedly of pretty poor quality, some registered as MGs, some not, and uh, some seem vague.
I think the best chance to have one without spending $30000 is if the Flips offload a bunch as parts kits on the US market some day, if we're really lucky (or if the NFA and GCA are struck down, they can send them straight, but I don't expect that to happen).
I love this thing. Heavy and expensive to make, just like the Thompson, but equally as rugged and reliable, both are easy to keep on target and put lots of orcs into the ground, and both can be used as a warclub if needed.
By far the best first generation subguns.
Have you? The recoil is easy, and it's not hard to take single shots even on full-auto. Maybe you've shot one of the earlier models, some which had a really high rate of fire, but the M1A1 is an easy 600rpm.
?t=219
Yeah, the Thompson is more expensive, but the magazines are far better, not having to rack the bolt between reloads is a nice bonus. The stock is somewhat awkward, but it's not like the stock on the MP40 feels nice at all.
My semi-auto Auto-Ordnance Thompson is controllable, but it's also awkward as hell. If you walk the trigger you can feel a slight climb, but I think you are right.
There’s literally no reason they couldn’t have fed the magazine through the grip in order to cut down on length. Note that this is not a bullpup. You could get the same length as the M3 with a full sized suppressor too (.45 is natively subsonic).
Anachronistic fuddlore moronation
No, you can't make a Grease Gun into a "bullpup", it's a simple blowback action, it takes gas pressure pushing against the frame of the gun to push back the chamber, which is lighter than the frame.
If you change the point of balance, the gun doesn't fricking cycle.
Theoretically you could design a gun that shoots bullets in the context you're talking about, but it would be hundreds of times more expensive per unit with literally NO tactical benefit.
PS your bullpup version is going to be heavier and slower firing than standard with lower muzzle velocity.
Straight blowback is exactly what it sounds like, straight, vectoral blowback.
If you introduce force vectors that are not parallel to the action you cause malfunctions.
Have you ever heard of "limp wristing" on a Glock?
Do you actually offer valid criticism or do you just say buzzwords and memes to make people feel bad?
Propose a more cromulent physics model for straight blowback firearms.
2 years ago
Anonymous
See this is why i think you are esl
>gas operated moves the chamber back
Yes, in a direct gas blowback firearm the chamber is pushed backwards by the recoil impulse of firing a round.
Do you think the fricking entire frame of the gun goes back, and then miraculously the hammer jumps forward?
The round slams into the firing pin, DEFINITION OF OPEN BOLT FIREARM
>Yes, in a direct gas blowback firearm the chamber is pushed backwards by the recoil impulse of firing a round.
the chamber is part of the barrel and doesnt move at all.
the bolt is what moves.
2 years ago
Anonymous
The chamber is the part between the rifling and the firing pin. It's where the gases expand during firing.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Lmao really? How do you not understand what a chamber is. It’s inside the barrel. It doesn’t move with the bolt. Are you dumb? Genuinely curious.
>gas operated moves the chamber back
Yes, in a direct gas blowback firearm the chamber is pushed backwards by the recoil impulse of firing a round.
Do you think the fricking entire frame of the gun goes back, and then miraculously the hammer jumps forward?
The round slams into the firing pin, DEFINITION OF OPEN BOLT FIREARM
>Yes, in a direct gas blowback firearm the chamber is pushed backwards by the recoil impulse of firing a round.
No, you fricking homosexual, it's not about recoil at all, it's about continuing gas pressure inside the case pushing the case back against the boltface, which happens regardless of where the grip is on whatever gun it happens in.
Straight blowback is exactly what it sounds like, straight, vectoral blowback.
If you introduce force vectors that are not parallel to the action you cause malfunctions.
Have you ever heard of "limp wristing" on a Glock?
Do you actually offer valid criticism or do you just say buzzwords and memes to make people feel bad?
Propose a more cromulent physics model for straight blowback firearms.
Never mind that he's not suggesting a bullpup, or that you're using fudd completely wrong, you're a mouth breathing moron.
their weapons match their looks perfectly >big oaf with sawed off shotty >dweeb with long barrel revolver compensating for his size >standard looking guy with outdated fashion sense and a bolt action rifle >dapper gentleman with the gucci gun >psycho motherfricker uses grenades
Direct gas and straight blowback are not the same thing or even the same concept.
Open bolt gun with a hammer?
what?
Open bolt guns dont have hammers
a grease gun has no hammer in it.
it has a bolt which you keep calling a chamber and a sear which is what holds the bolt locked back.
Its like you heard these gun terms but dont actually understand what they mean.
>Sten >Cheap and reliable >Germans literally copied it
>MP40 >Effective to the point where it continues to be in use to this day
>Thompson >Heavy but a bruiser and a piece of industrial art
>M3 Grease Gun >Cheap >Reliable >Easy to Maintain >45 ACP >Not a little heavy
Now fill out your student loan forms and register for several classes which are completely unrelated to your degree and also one which you object to on a primal level.
>Sten >Cheap and reliable
Cheap, yes, but reliability could be iffy as frick at times. The magazines are copied from the Lanchester subgun's magazines, which was copied from the MP28's magazines, which formed the basis for the later MP38/MP40 magazines.
Inherently, both the Sten and MP40 have the same problem where the feed lips on the magazine are very easily damaged, and where you'll eventually have to start loading 30 and later 28 rounds in the magazine to retain reliability, rather than the full 32. A lot of Sten magazines were also made in Literally Who workshops, rather than factories, so consistency and quality could vary wildly at times.
>Germans literally copied it
For two purposes. The first was complete clones, including with the markings and serial numbers, for obfuscation in certain operations, these were not produced or issued widely. The other was way late in the war when everything was in the shit, and even then it wasn't a 1 to 1 clone, because they didn't have the industrial capacity for even that.
>MP40 >Effective to the point where it continues to be in use to this day
Fricking where? In the rear echelon of some guerilla unit? You'll just as well find Stens, Thompsons, and other old shit in those kinds of places, and it's not because old guns like those are just so amazing and desired as weapons in 2022, it's because those are odd ones they manage to source and are forced to rely upon.
The Owen gun isn't used by the Aussies today because they have Steyr AUGs, but it was absolutely a superior performing gun compared to the Sten and MP40 back during WW2, it has a much better magazine which is far more robust, and it's also particularly resistant against harsh and filthy conditions for how the recoil spring is sectioned off from the bolt.
Yeah I'm sure it's not just people picking up whatever gun is available, fricking tourists
2 years ago
Anonymous
And the fact that two people had the same idea at the exact same time tells you that you're somehow right? If everybody is telling you you're wrong, and their factual claims are accurate, how do you get the impression you're right?
The Owen was extremely good though, it performed very well in the intense jungle combat in the pacific which the Aussie troops got involved in.
Guns like Stens and Thompsons didn't actually cut it there to the same degree.
It's actually about guns. Which is what this board is for
Slow day in Ukraine
Christ, I'm just wondering why OP would make the trouble of telling /k/ he's a moron who doesn't know dick from wiener when it comes to submachine guns. I'm fricking tired of hearing about Ukraine, too. We have our own goddamn problems here.
I want an M3 so badly. They look so cool, just nothing but cold efficient steel representing a marker for absolute human efficiency. It's simple, raw and fearsome technology. No tricks, no facade. The M3 just is.
It's heavier than an M1 Garand and not as powerful. It's a fine piece, sure, but it was obsolete going into WWII.
it's also considerably shorter and automatic, dumbass.
oh shit, we should have just used the BAR and nothing else. This anon's cracked the code!
It's shorter, yes. But it's also heavy and hard to make effective use of. It's not handy.
Also, the M2 Carbine will outshoot it.
the weight contributes to it having borderline zero recoil so follow up shots are easy to make. No one wore body armor in WW2 so an SMG was fricking king
Its weight also make it hard to wield. I have a closed-bolt AO copy of a Thompson, and you aren't wrong about the recoil. But you feel that weight when carrying it, and you feel that weight when you aim.
The M2 Carbine is much light and doesn't recoil much either. In a pinch, I'd take the M2.
The Greatest Generation just built different
It's also much shorter and can fire 22 more times with far less recoil. The M1 is an excellent rifle but subguns were king for CQB in this era.
Expensive, yes, but not that complex, it's an open-bolt blowback gun like all the others. The M1A1 is vastly simplified and economized compared to the earlier Blish Lock guns.
Better subguns at the time for cheaper
>Soft recoil
>Good rate of fire
>More reliable than a sten or a grease gun
>soft recoil
i’ve heard the contrary
THIS is soft recoil
of course
it's 9mm
Yes, the recoil really isn't much of anything, partially because it's a heavy gun. It's very easy to control and to make bursts on targets, even sustained fire is a breeze.
The recoil of the Thompson isn't exactly harsh or even noticeable.
You are wrong. It'll want to climb a little bit but it's very easy to keep in check.
the thompson is shit. Only popular because muh italo gangsters
Killed plenty of Italians in WW2.
>Soft recoil
If you aren't a noodle armed homosexual it's not bad.
That's clearly one of the earlier guns with the much higher rate of fire, the M1A1 has only slightly higher rate of fire than the MP40 and just barely more recoil (mainly a subtle muzzle rise).
>>Soft recoil
Only the first version was soft because the high fire rate. the WWII version was shit and the recoil was bumpy thx to the lower fire rate.
The thompson was never smooth to shoot like MP28, MP40, M-31 or even the Sten.
It's one of the most complex and expensive subs of WW2
>simplicity
>not STEN
>not M3 Grease Gun
>not PPSH
>not Owen
Owen gun kicks ass, best sub gun of ww2
Sten and Grease were kings for what that war needed. The Thompsons were amazing though. Basically government supplied gucci guns of the day. They were literally already immortalized in film and probably single handedly lead to the automatics ban.
What’s the tactical advantage of that weird curve on the lower side of the stock? It’s hurting my autism.
The tactical advantage is the your stock doesn't break itself after firing 200 rounds because it's rubbing up against and being slammed by the metal of the receiver.
The Thompson has moronic ergonomics, but they were cutting edge at the time.
Thanks anons!
Okay now you have actually triggered MY autism.
I have numbered the stock grooves 1 to 5 and I will explain each of them.
#1: Allows you to place your thumb around the stock like a pistol grip, makes picking it up easier. Also limits the surface area between the stock and the receiver and keeps all the forced transferred into one solid joint.
#2: Slight curve in the bottom flange of the stock, makes it easier to wrap your hand around the stock and pick it up.
#3: Very small curve, meant to minimize the chance that the sling swivel drags on the floor, etc
#4: Extra rounded section so you don't poke yourself in the ribs and puncture a lung every time you shoulder the rifle
#5: Rounded section so you don't poke yourself in the clavicle every time you shoulder the rifle.
Thanks for listening to my TED talk.
BONUS AUTISM:
The reason why you would shape joint at curve #1 like that is because wood has grain structure, meaning that it resists force very strongly in two directions directly parallel, but very poorly in any other less than parallel
direction.
If the stock were full at that groove, it would split very quickly.
naruhodo
based autist. Also more of an example of what made the Tommy a gucci gun as stated
I'll never understand why people on PrepHole call attention to detail and research skills, both considered traits of an intelligent human being ; "autism"
Brevity
Autism = noticing or caring about things that the average person would either not give a shit about or laugh at you for caring about.
>Thompson
>simplistic
lol no. Grease gun.
this.
frickin' love this gun.
US tank crews used them all the way into the early 2000's I think
I used to like the Thompson more than the M3 but god damn the M3 has really grown on me in recent years, there's a certain beauty to it's ugliness.
I like both of them a lot. The way the Thompson is simplified to the M1A1 makes it nicely utilitarian, but the way the M3, and especially the M3A1, is designed around economy and designed around rapid assembly line factory production, that is beautiful as frick.
It's incredible how simple the Greasegun is, it's like a .45 caliber Sten with better magazines and designed around mass factory production rather than for small workshop production, I just love how most of the receiver is made by a big machine stamping the left and right halves out from a single sheet of steel, then they're spot-welded together.
It's one of the culminations of 1940s American industrial capabilities.
Are they unobtanium nowadays? If so, does anyone make good repos?
They never sold them commercially, NFA items or not, and the US Army never surplused these things to the public in any capacity, as whole guns nor as parts kits, so yeah, Greaseguns are actually pretty rare. Well, I said in any capacity, but they did actually surplus off quite a lot of the magazines, and that's the magazines which the MAC M10s would use later, along with some other .45 caliber guns.
It's not like barely any survive, though, it's just they aren't available. A couple million were sent as military aid to the Philippines once during the Cold War, and they've used some over the years, but they probably still have lots and lots left which have barely been used, if at all.
Not much going for repros, because the design of the gun inherently lends itself to massive factory mass production, but would be ridiculously cost ineffective for any kind of small repro production, given how the receiver is made by a big machine punching out two halves of it from a single sheet. You could maybe make something very similar with more modest stamping setups, but stamping is just not cheap on a small scale.
There's some transferable M3s and M3A1s, but not very many, a number I've seen says 75, but that's probably waaay low because they do actually come up on occasion. Probably a fair few unregistered ones exist out there, hidden away, and likely there's some parts-kits semi-auto builds, but not that man. One company made a vague lookalike semi-auto but it's all milled and it just looks very off, another called Medea made less than a hundred receiver bodies, supposedly of pretty poor quality, some registered as MGs, some not, and uh, some seem vague.
I think the best chance to have one without spending $30000 is if the Flips offload a bunch as parts kits on the US market some day, if we're really lucky (or if the NFA and GCA are struck down, they can send them straight, but I don't expect that to happen).
M3 is not some fancy, dolled up courtisane. She's a nasty, nasty girl and she'll rock your world for cheap.
>not the M2 Hyde
THUNKTHUNKTHUNKTHUNKTHUNKTHUNKTHUNKTHUNKTHUNKTHUNKTHUNKTHUNKTHUNKTHUNKTHUNKTHUNKTHUNKTHUNK *KA-CHING*
For me it's the
I love this thing. Heavy and expensive to make, just like the Thompson, but equally as rugged and reliable, both are easy to keep on target and put lots of orcs into the ground, and both can be used as a warclub if needed.
By far the best first generation subguns.
Closest I'll get to ever owning one.
Semi-auto parts kits builds exist. Please do not post that picture again.
That's a cool-looking approximation of the KP/-31. Please do post that picture again.
Heck of a shotgun
Love me some Suomi
So much fricking SOVL in the simplicity.
Mp40 is better in every way
>flimsy single position feed magazine which doesn't even lock the bolt back for you after the last round
You lost for a reason.
Have you actually fired either one in full auto?
Question was rhetorical. Mp40 is better.
Have you? The recoil is easy, and it's not hard to take single shots even on full-auto. Maybe you've shot one of the earlier models, some which had a really high rate of fire, but the M1A1 is an easy 600rpm.
?t=219
Yeah, the Thompson is more expensive, but the magazines are far better, not having to rack the bolt between reloads is a nice bonus. The stock is somewhat awkward, but it's not like the stock on the MP40 feels nice at all.
My semi-auto Auto-Ordnance Thompson is controllable, but it's also awkward as hell. If you walk the trigger you can feel a slight climb, but I think you are right.
The semi-auto closed bolt ones are a pretty different experience alltogether.
I thought the overall experience of the mp40 in full auto was better.
It just seemed like I'd rather have one of those over the Thompson.
However the MP44 was king. Probably the most comfy to shoot full auto. The ergonomics, control, caliber, everything. Absolute perfection.
There’s literally no reason they couldn’t have fed the magazine through the grip in order to cut down on length. Note that this is not a bullpup. You could get the same length as the M3 with a full sized suppressor too (.45 is natively subsonic).
I mean that's basically what the Mac-10 is, it even takes the same magazines
Anachronistic fuddlore moronation
No, you can't make a Grease Gun into a "bullpup", it's a simple blowback action, it takes gas pressure pushing against the frame of the gun to push back the chamber, which is lighter than the frame.
If you change the point of balance, the gun doesn't fricking cycle.
Theoretically you could design a gun that shoots bullets in the context you're talking about, but it would be hundreds of times more expensive per unit with literally NO tactical benefit.
PS your bullpup version is going to be heavier and slower firing than standard with lower muzzle velocity.
>If you change the point of balance, the gun doesn't fricking cycle.
Are you really this moronic? Please never post again.
Straight blowback is exactly what it sounds like, straight, vectoral blowback.
If you introduce force vectors that are not parallel to the action you cause malfunctions.
Have you ever heard of "limp wristing" on a Glock?
Is english your first language? is this some google translate bullshit of terms you dont actually understand?
Do you actually offer valid criticism or do you just say buzzwords and memes to make people feel bad?
Propose a more cromulent physics model for straight blowback firearms.
See this is why i think you are esl
>Yes, in a direct gas blowback firearm the chamber is pushed backwards by the recoil impulse of firing a round.
the chamber is part of the barrel and doesnt move at all.
the bolt is what moves.
The chamber is the part between the rifling and the firing pin. It's where the gases expand during firing.
Lmao really? How do you not understand what a chamber is. It’s inside the barrel. It doesn’t move with the bolt. Are you dumb? Genuinely curious.
Chyna numba juan!
>cromulent
verily
Is this a troll? Because you’re stupid as frick lmao
>hundreds of times more expensive
>gas operated moves the chamber back
>slower muzzle velocity with same barrel length
>gas operated moves the chamber back
Yes, in a direct gas blowback firearm the chamber is pushed backwards by the recoil impulse of firing a round.
Do you think the fricking entire frame of the gun goes back, and then miraculously the hammer jumps forward?
The round slams into the firing pin, DEFINITION OF OPEN BOLT FIREARM
>Yes, in a direct gas blowback firearm the chamber is pushed backwards by the recoil impulse of firing a round.
No, you fricking homosexual, it's not about recoil at all, it's about continuing gas pressure inside the case pushing the case back against the boltface, which happens regardless of where the grip is on whatever gun it happens in.
wat am I reading
Never mind that he's not suggesting a bullpup, or that you're using fudd completely wrong, you're a mouth breathing moron.
i like it because it was the gun of gangsters that became the gun of a world war
their weapons match their looks perfectly
>big oaf with sawed off shotty
>dweeb with long barrel revolver compensating for his size
>standard looking guy with outdated fashion sense and a bolt action rifle
>dapper gentleman with the gucci gun
>psycho motherfricker uses grenades
Direct gas and straight blowback are not the same thing or even the same concept.
Open bolt gun with a hammer?
what?
Open bolt guns dont have hammers
a grease gun has no hammer in it.
it has a bolt which you keep calling a chamber and a sear which is what holds the bolt locked back.
Its like you heard these gun terms but dont actually understand what they mean.
so everything I said was correct I just don't suck as much israeli wiener as you to know the right buzzwords
Everything youve said is wrong
It is. But length of pull is ridiculous
Bitches don't know about the best SMG of WW2
Checks out
>You are a b***h
>You think the Owen gun is the best SMG of the war, probably because you don't know about the others
Owen gun:
Cheap
Reliable
Easy to maintain
Better than a Thompson or Sten
Maybe a little heavy
Educate me b***h
>Sten
>Cheap and reliable
>Germans literally copied it
>MP40
>Effective to the point where it continues to be in use to this day
>Thompson
>Heavy but a bruiser and a piece of industrial art
>M3 Grease Gun
>Cheap
>Reliable
>Easy to Maintain
>45 ACP
>Not a little heavy
Now fill out your student loan forms and register for several classes which are completely unrelated to your degree and also one which you object to on a primal level.
>Sten
>Cheap and reliable
Cheap, yes, but reliability could be iffy as frick at times. The magazines are copied from the Lanchester subgun's magazines, which was copied from the MP28's magazines, which formed the basis for the later MP38/MP40 magazines.
Inherently, both the Sten and MP40 have the same problem where the feed lips on the magazine are very easily damaged, and where you'll eventually have to start loading 30 and later 28 rounds in the magazine to retain reliability, rather than the full 32. A lot of Sten magazines were also made in Literally Who workshops, rather than factories, so consistency and quality could vary wildly at times.
>Germans literally copied it
For two purposes. The first was complete clones, including with the markings and serial numbers, for obfuscation in certain operations, these were not produced or issued widely. The other was way late in the war when everything was in the shit, and even then it wasn't a 1 to 1 clone, because they didn't have the industrial capacity for even that.
>MP40
>Effective to the point where it continues to be in use to this day
Fricking where? In the rear echelon of some guerilla unit? You'll just as well find Stens, Thompsons, and other old shit in those kinds of places, and it's not because old guns like those are just so amazing and desired as weapons in 2022, it's because those are odd ones they manage to source and are forced to rely upon.
The Owen gun isn't used by the Aussies today because they have Steyr AUGs, but it was absolutely a superior performing gun compared to the Sten and MP40 back during WW2, it has a much better magazine which is far more robust, and it's also particularly resistant against harsh and filthy conditions for how the recoil spring is sectioned off from the bolt.
Who the frick still uses the MP40 in 2022? Some random partisans?
Ukraine, for one.
Aw shit, homie. We posted at the same time. This means you're my twin bro now.
Yeah, in Ukraine.
Yeah I'm sure it's not just people picking up whatever gun is available, fricking tourists
And the fact that two people had the same idea at the exact same time tells you that you're somehow right? If everybody is telling you you're wrong, and their factual claims are accurate, how do you get the impression you're right?
>sten
>reliable
some yes quite, others not so much. Magazines, lmao good luck
The Owen was extremely good though, it performed very well in the intense jungle combat in the pacific which the Aussie troops got involved in.
Guns like Stens and Thompsons didn't actually cut it there to the same degree.
tell ‘em Donny sent ya
Hey, Donnie!!! I just shit myself!!! How do you like them apples???
>SIMPLICITY
so you know nothing about the thompson or why its design hasnt stayed around
The M1A1 isn't any more complex than other subguns of its time. It's straight-blowback.
the manufacture of the gun was too expensive because it was too complex, which is why they just wanted to use grease guns.
>Americans are so fricking fat they used grease guns in ww2
Actually
Is the Thompson the WORST smg of WW2?
For me, it's the Model 38
My grandma has a full auto one of these in a gun safe. Hope to buy it from her some day.
What the frick is the point of this thread?
Slow day in Ukraine
It's actually about guns. Which is what this board is for
>t. War tourist
Christ, I'm just wondering why OP would make the trouble of telling /k/ he's a moron who doesn't know dick from wiener when it comes to submachine guns. I'm fricking tired of hearing about Ukraine, too. We have our own goddamn problems here.
I want an M3 so badly. They look so cool, just nothing but cold efficient steel representing a marker for absolute human efficiency. It's simple, raw and fearsome technology. No tricks, no facade. The M3 just is.
It's not simple, that's why it was so expensive.
Black person, that is a blowback gun.
If 8 can't have the grease gun I've gotta have the m50
>simplicity
>completely unnecessary blich lock shit instead of direct blowback
goddamn video game children on this board smdh