|
just for fun.....Fantasy ww2 weapons
There was a lot of good technology, but do to manufacturing priorities were made limited or only prototype. Heres the rules: Using only existing technology and manufacturing processes from the time come up with some cool guns.
The AK-47 was possible. Id say a Good AK would be a much better gun for the russians. the medium cartidge and firepower would be excellent for stalingrad like environments. The AK47u would be possible too. Its easy to carve wood into a front pistol grip, the tommy gun had it. make it with a longer stock (no body armor in ww2) and a thicker grip. I also say the 276 petersen round as our MBR cartridge. A m14 type gun would be possible. Get a Garand to use BAR mags or something. Lighter recoil with range and punch in the petersen. Modify the 1911s with bigger sights and bigger safety, and gold bead front sights. I think asquad gpmg wold be good but dont know how to make it, maybe a bar size gun with a belt feed and a compensator? |
M1941 Johnson LMG, converteted to belt feed, possably with a heavier barrel.
|
Quote:
David. |
An M1 or M2 carbine chambered in a round with more range and power than .30 carbine. It could have one of the first assault rifles and would have done good in the house to house fighting in Europe.
|
A much more developed family of weapons based off the battle proven Stg/MP-44 series. Seriously, if the Germans had implemented the MP44 early in the war, it would have made a bigger impact. Imagine the entire German infantry with assault rifles against the US Garands.
Though I have always wished the BAR was lighter with a higher capacity box magazine. |
I never understood why antitank rifles weren't immediately repurposed as long range sniper/antimaterial rifles.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Maybe these rifles weren't that common to begin with.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Edit: Apparently they were also used by The Philippines well into the 1960's. Edit 2: Disney produced the training video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rODm7HF5lFU Wikipedia also says the Chinese Nationalists did use them as sniper rifles, but it's not sourced. |
Scopes back in the day flat out sucked compared to modern standards. Shots beyond 1000 meters were pretty much impossible considering the technology. If you can slap a simple 2.2-4X scope to a rifle which weighs 40 pounds that fires a bullet that one won't even be able to observe outside traditional effective range of the infantry rifle's round with a weak, albeit state of the art optic, next to something less than a quarter of the weight, firing the same bullet as the standard infantry rifle, with an effective range well within view or practicality, most will take the latter.
|
Didn't have the accuracy, for one. I own a PTRD-41, and it is in no way capable of the accuracy required for shots over 300M. They're designed for (relatively) close-range penetration, not range.
|
|
I always thought that the supposedly "on the drawing boards but never quite took off" external magazine fed M-1 Garand in .276 Pedersen would have been great.
Further more, I once read a short story in Military History Quarterly about Marine Raiders and the 1st-SSF, the "Devil's Brigade" carrying both Government Models in .38 Super and Smith and Wesson Heavy Duty revovlers in .38/44 |
Quote:
|
Maybe a double stack 1911
|
Quote:
Although, I'd think the existing Maxon/M3 Halftrack combo was much more mobile. |
Seeing as how the U.S. military was already supplying .38 Spl, .45 ACP, .30-06, .30 Caliber Carbine, and .50 BMG to all fronts, why not replace the .30 Caliber Carbine with a .270 in the same platform.
That would have been one hell of a weapon. |
It would have been cool if one of the higher up commanders or Generals carried one of those full-auto converted 1911 pistols that John Dillinger and Baby Face Nelson used.
Aside from making them look like a total badass, I imagine such a weapon would be intimidating to the enemy. |
True, but I can't see that being practical in a .45 ACP weapon.
Dillinger's were .38 Super if I recall correctly. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
On that notion though, the Colt Machine Pistols used in Public Enemies were 9mm, so I wonder how one built in 9mm would fair. There'd be plenty of ammo to salvage off the enemy weapons. |
Personally, I always thought the notion of a "Pistol, Officer's, General's" was a bit ridiculous, but I liked how it was a Colt 1903 in .32 ACP, definitely a gentleman's gun.
|
Quote:
|
True...I find it sad that in the modern world, people scoff at the .357 and .44 Mag, which with the exception, oh trout fishing in Alaska, is all the gun you need in a hand gun.
Personally, I think the .357 Magnum is probably the best duty round available, with the 10mm a close second, with the .357 Sig a distant third. |
Quote:
And Patton coupled it with a nickle-plated, ivory-handled Colt SAA that HE ACTUALLY KILLED MEN WITH, so yeah, bad ass. (This is all coming from a guy who not only carried two nickle-plated, ivory-handled pistols at once, but a former Olympian who also the Army's youngest Master of the Sword, who also helped design a cavalry saber still used by the Army today. Frankly, I'm shocked he didn't carry a saber in addition to his brace of pistols.) |
Quote:
.44 Magnum still holds some respects, mainly because of its Dirty Harry fame. While much bigger rounds succeed it now, it still enters the realm of "this will destroy you", which for some reason the .357 doesn't have (even though it's effectiveness is pretty damn close). |
Extended mags for 1911s would be easy to make, all one needs is longer sheet metal and springs, and of course machines and knowhow, but it certainly wouldn't be impossible for the day and age. As far as .45 ACP being a problem, one could make at least a 15 round mag and it wouldn't be too long.
.357 wasn't necessarily eclipsed because they put it in smaller guns, it's just that other calibers came out that were more powerful, and power nazis fed on that, ignoring overall practicality. This also tugged revolvers away from general gun folk as they became associated with immense power as opposed to for what they were known for the longest time, reliability and simplicity. This worsened even further when autos became in vogue and revolvers were mostly abandoned, save for, again, ones chambered in really powerful cartridges, and conversely, ones that were really small. With the former niche burned in, the latter became the new thing, but because of even more power hooplah over .38 Special out of 2 inch barrels, models were made in .357 Mag, because if one is to have five shots, they should be powerhouses. The "middle ground" that is the full size .38 or .357 Magnum revolver area was killed off by this separation in revolver desire and the wondernine craze, not because of the little .357s that came about much later. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Unless it's supposed to be clip fed
I want an M1 Carbine chambered in .45 |
Nope the DeLise carbine used standard unmodified 7 round M1911 magazine. I've heard of 15 round straight magazines and 30 round drums for the M1911 but I'm not sure how avalable they would have been durring wartime.
The weapon's themselves are impressive. I have a friend with a couple of Spanish Destroyer Carbines that were turned into DeLise clones and they work amazingly well. At the shoot I was at earlier in the month there was a couple of .44 magnum carbines using a DeLise type supressor and they were like air rifles insted of .44 magnums when it came to sound. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
You sure? I've seen demos on how the .45 ACP fired from the 1911 had greater power than the .30 caliber carbine.
|
In terms of velocity and energy, no, the .30 Carbine is much faster and has more energy behind it. I read info everywhere that says it's a very puny round, and perhaps within a stones throw, or in a lab shooting something at point blank range, the .45 ACP is better, but out past that at excess of 50-100 yards or further, the .45 won't be very effective, and perhaps neither will the .30 Carbine, but the .30 Carbine will at least have better ballistic efficiency out to those ranges making hits easier.
|
So you're saying close range weapon, the .30 Carbine would beat the Tommy when it comes to fire power
|
Quote:
|
I cross referenced a velocity/energy chart on another site where they shoot different loads out of different barrel lengths, and .45 ACP still didn't put out that much more velocity or energy when fired out of a 16 inch barrel, or at least it wasn't close to the .30 Carbines output. And within the parameters of this thread, there would not have been a 185 grain +P round in that time, only 230 grain military ball.
And again, this is all just in theory with numbers on paper. When you have people like Hickok45 shooting handguns at 230 yards and hitting, this kind of stuff all goes out the window. I'm only trying to rationalize or figure out why the DoD chambered it in .30 Carbine and not .45 ACP at the time. Quote:
|
The m1 carbine is horribly overrated. It was s atep up for scouts or rear troops who had originally been given pistols and needed a light but better powered weapon, but it should never have been issued as a main infantry rifle, the 30 carbine ball was a horrible manstopper and the thing was not accurate at range, 100 yards is a realistic estimate, not 300.
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 02:45 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.