UBB.threads Forums General Militaria Historic and Period Firearms Forum Best Military Rifle for it's Period

What do you think was the best military rifle for its period, or even the best military rifle ever?

Dave

The M1 Garand won WWII. And most still fire today. that one gets my vote.

AK47.

Takes a licking and keeps on ticking... still in use to intimidate and kill all over the world today.

John

[quote=JohnZ]AK47.

Takes a licking and keeps on ticking... still in use to intimidate and kill all over the world today.
Simple but VERY effective for sure.
Seiler.

Don't forget the MP43/44. The concept was the forerunner of the entire Assault Rifle (read Sturmgewehr) family.

The 1903 Springfield would get my vote - very powerfull round and superb accuracy. Smooth handling and nothing every seemed to break on the rifle. Sights a little complicated, but once you got the knack for adjusting them there was nothing you couldn't hit out to 500 yrds.

Agree, Mike, the Sprinfield was a great rifle teamed with a great round - the 30-06.

For the US Civil War period, I would pick the British Enfield which was sold in large quantities to the South.

I'd probably vote for the AK-47 as well. They're very rugged and have proven they'll hold up to abuse with little to no maintenance.

yea but, the mp44 & ak-47 are not really rifles ,but assault weapons / sub machine guns type weapons.
But, agree that they ,in their time frame were the best to come out.
though the mp-44 did have it's issues when it came out.
the ak-47 still rules the world in many places today.
jeff

Right. I'll open a thread on SMGs and MGs

Good point. I'd probably have to go with the Garand for it's time period then. The Garand could lay down some serious firepower.

OK, if we're tossing the MP44's & AK47's into another catagory (which I'm not sure I agree with), I will vote for the M1940 Tokarev. As much as I would like to vote for the Garand, the Tok gets my vote because of it's equal reliability, the detachable magazine & the ease of reloading, while being of a caliber that is comparable in power to the U.S. .30.

Regarding the assault weapons not being rifles - what other catagory would they be placed in?
A machine gun is generally thought of as being a larger, heavier sometimes crew-served weapon that fires a full-sized rifle cartridge or larger.
A submachine gun is defined as a full auto or select fire weapon that fires pistol cartridges.
That sort of leaves the assault rifle as a "bastard child", albeit one that has made most rifles obsolete....
This is an interesting thread and I would love to hear the opinions of others.

Deny

I think that for our purposes the assault rifles capable of full automatic fire are the successors to the sub machine gun. The sub machine guns mostly died out as the various rifles/assault rifles came on the scene.

I did not intend to toss this thread into disarray....
just a rifle seems an item for longer distance & accuracy. tend to be less of both with an "assault weapon". And yes I know mp44s & stg-45s were married up with scope for sniping.
other side... most of these ,including the m-16 were labeled as rifles.

M1 Garand and the Enfield

It is puzzling that neither Germany nor Japan developed a semi-automatic infantry rifle. Both stuck with 1900 era technology and even more puzzling is Japan's retention of the small caliber round.

Is anyone aware of experimental semi-automatics from either country ?

Dave

do you mean like the german g-43 rifle ?
mauser worked earlier on other weapons (post ww1 =?) Mr.Mauser lost an eye test firing one of his guns , intended to replace the g-98.

The Germans had automatic infantry rifles in very limited numbers as early as the 1941, just not in a dependable design. The G43 was a big improvement, but it was a little late and not manufactured in the numbers it probably should have been.

The Japanese had a prototype automatic rifle made in very small numbers. One online company had an incomplete one for sale for years. I'm not sure if they finally sold it or gave up trying.

Many in the German military were well aware of the need for a semi-automatic rifle, but were fighting an uphill battle against others who felt that soldiers would waste ammunition if so equipped. This was a classic argument in the world's military during the first half of the 20th century. Actually, it's surprising that the U.S. developed and adopted the M-1 Garand. The U.S. military of that period was not well-known for it's inovative thinking.
Also as Jeff mentions, the Germans were well on their way to developing a full blown semi program with the G41, G41(M), G/K43 and several other types of rifles that used select-fire or their intermediate 8.92x31mm cartridge. Had the war continued a few more years, I'll bet we would have seen some pretty interesting stuff.

The Japanese has also begun to realize the need for a self-loader as witnessed by their Naval arsenal developed copy of the Garand. Also, the Japanese 7.7mm rifle cartridge was only slightly smaller than the U.S. .30, or the German 7.92 rounds.

I never knew any of that except that the US military, particularly the Marines, were not initially enthusiastic.

Anyone have pictures ?

Dave

If you go to Youtube and search "Japanese garand" there's a neat video showing a Type 5 in NRA's collection.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUBvrCACNDQ

I never knew of the japanese grand either.
See , we all learn something new every day , even if we don't want to.
I own a g-43 ,with the scope & mount. paid more for the scope & mount than the gun.
never shot it yet , just collecting dust....
jeff

I have a M1941 Johnson, beat the Garand in testing, but the Garand won the WWII contract.

Harry

M-1 Garand in WWII and beyond. After that, the M-14 hands down.