"Best" individual infantry weapon of WW2?

My grandfather was drafted into the Korean War and served 3 years before medical discharge. He never spoke of his time in “the pissed off Boy Scouts” as he always called it until Alzheimer’s made me and my cousin (late teens and early 20s at the time he passed) his war buddies on some visits to see him. Most of the weaponry they had was WW2 hand-me-downs. He apparently had total disgust for every weapon that was not either a Garand or a BAR, although he did have a 7mm mauser that he hunted with (never shot it at a deer, just sat there and watched deer holding it). One day while retelling the story of his injury he said that when his buddy got hit and a log fell on them that he Knew he was dead until he heard his own BAR light up. According to his story they melted the gun down and shot every round of ammo they could through it before the gunner swapped back to his Garand.

So in memory of a drafted factory worker by day and plow boy by night, I’m going to say he was right. The BAR is a mean SOB for whatever it’s aimed at, and the Garand just keeps on going. After that fight he was pulled from infantry and finished his tour serving by driving ambulances and picking up the dead. And his Garand that he carried before inheriting the BAR was an International Harvester. He said they told him it was only fitting for him to keep driving his old tractor.

My father was issued an International Harvester when he joined the Marine Corps and later, a B.A.R. He told me that he swore, when he got out of the Marines, he'd buy a Garand, bury it up to the wrist of the stock and piss down the barrel every morning.

He told me that the day he opened the box his DCM Garand came in and caressed its walnut stock.

I think the finest weapon of World War II was the M1 Garand. One of the finest weapons I've ever shot.

The worst was the one shot Liberator the Allies scattered all over France by airplane.

https://www.recoilweb.com/the-svt-40-108294.html

SVT-40, sadly production was disrupted by Germany's invasion.

These probably saved more Infantrymen than most people would ever guess.

A study done for Secretary of War Henry Stimson's staff by William Shockley estimated that invading Japan would cost 1.7–4 million American casualties, including 400,000–800,000 fatalities, and five to ten million Japanese fatalities.

Click to expand...

But not really an infantry weapon.....

I would say the M1 rifle for an infantry weapon.

Japanese Knee Mortar. Extremely effective 50mm grenade. More mobile than a LMG and able to almost immediately be put into action upon contact.

I would have to say the Ka-Bar.

Bwana John said:

How much were the PPsH 41 used with stick magazines? (32 round?)
I have been able to shoot one a couple of times and was really impressed with it.
I have only shot stick magazines though.
Pointed naturally, no recoil, no muzzle blast, very little tendency to rise, built like a tank, light ammo to carry, a round that penetrated well, kinda heavy... but not compared to a Thompson!I

Click to expand...

Almost never. Have you ever seen a pic from WW II of a PPSH 41 with a stick mag in it? I haven't. Not that I can remember, anyway.

No muzzle blast???? Uhhhhh OK.... each person has his own definition of what constitutes "muzzle blast" No muzzle blast compared to what, Ma Deuce? The 7.62 X 25 is a much lighter round than a .45 ACP, but a drum full of them is quite heavy. The PPSH was not a perfect gun, no gun is. Its strengths were its ruggedness and ease of manufacture. Its greatest weakness is those cranky drum magazines and a rate of fire that was unnecessarily high. If it fired at half its actual rate it would have been a better gun, IMHO.

230RN said:

An awful lot of European Theatre combat area photographs seem to show a lot of GIs carrying the M1 Carbine. So, not bad for a pistol replacement really intended for more rearward personnel.

There's a story about Audie Murphy clearing a building and blasting away with his M1 Carbine when a mirrored image of himself suddenly appeared around a corner.

Click to expand...

Audie Murphy is on record as stating his "favorite" weapons was was situation based. If he was going to march and long way or clear a house, he got himself an M1 Carbine. If he was attacking/defending in the open, an M1918, and for long range work, an M1. So, according to him, each one was "best" for a specific task.

I don't get the love for the M3. Slow firing and open bolt - doesn't seem ideal.

I know it was a different war, but for the most part, it was fought with the same small arms. My father had a stated preference in Korea, he never talked about it much, but over the years a lot slowly came out.

Not including his one-time mention of being down to a shovel, mentioned in a real PTSD moment (he called it shell shock). . . you know, it is hard to think of my father as a 19-year old battle-hardened E6 holding a bloody shovel that he had just fought, and killed, with. . . I digress, but it is hard to think of my father that way, this is a man who both explained, and lived, the principles of stoicism.

Back to the point, he liked the M3 Grease Gun. He explained that there here was always someone nearby carrying a Garand if he needed one.

As far as the rank at 19, the story was that an officer showed up where he was and asked, "who's in charge here?" The others pointed at him and said, "he's regular army." The officer told him, "you're the sergeant now" and left, never to be seen again. So, he was probably an E5 his DD214 says E6 though.
. . . and that scene was almost the whole reason he took me to see Acopolpse Now with him.

roscoe said:

I don't get the love for the M3. Slow firing and open bolt - doesn't seem ideal.

Click to expand...

Have you fired one? That slow rate of fire worked well to keep the gun very controllable. Every B.A.R. man I ever talked to told me that they kept the gun on "low rate" because it was the only way you could hit anything

The charging handle on the original M-3s was a pain in the ass but the army quickly corrected that. It was the cheapest and easiest to manufacture subgun of the entire war, with the possible exception of the Sten.

The open bolt? I think every subgun used in the world at that time fired from the open bolt. Yes, the bolt slamming forward throws off one's aim, but we're not talking about aimed semi-auto fire with the intent of killing an enemy with a single shot. We're talking spray and pray.

Open country M-1 rifle
City- Thompson

roscoe said:

I don't get the love for the M3. Slow firing and open bolt - doesn't seem ideal.

Click to expand...

As @tark pointed out, the low rate of fire is a benefit. It basically synchronizes with your recovery from the recoil of the last shot.

Open bolt isn't as much of a disadvantage as people make it out to be. Yea it's not good if you're on a bench trying to put all the bullets into one hole. Shooting at man-sized targets within 200 yards? Doesn't really matter.

The sights are also surprisingly good.