from ww2 infantry soldier which rifle

Good luck with ammo for those back in the '40s.

Hmmmm... Say again, jeepguy?

i went non full auto to try & even the playing field.

Click to expand...

The M14 is/was full auto.

Rugr 10-22 supressed

I hate to take the bait, but if you exclude full auto, I would not be at all unhappy with the following "modern" weapons in WW2: Rifle, M1 (as in: the Garand) and the Pistol, M1911A1.

Nihil novum sub sole?

WWII firearms are effectively the same guns made today. I doubt the outcome would have been any different.

If talking true WW2 weapons, it's easy.

ETO/MTO:
M1 Garand and 1911A1, hands down.

PTO:
M1 Carbine and 1911A!. Again easy pick.

But gang, we used 03A3 Springfields for the first of the war, BOTH ETO/MTO and PTO. We didn't have Garands on the front lines for the first seveal months. And the M1 Carbine didn't come out to about '43, over a year after our envolvment in the war.

Modern 7.62x51 rifles would have the problem of no ammo, just as a 5.56 would. Only the 9x19 and .45 Auto would have ammo made back then.

Deaf

Most firearms made and fielded during WW2 are still around today. They are still quite good. I would have no issue carrying a weapon from that period into combat.

Heck look at the M14, its pretty much a Garand with a mag stuck on it. Soliders today still use it, and it works quite well.

The 1911 has served us in every war since WW1 and hasn't failed us yet.

We have made some advances in man portable arms available to the infantry squad since WWII, I'd say chief among them being things like the M203 and light and medium machine guns like the M249 and Mk48.

I'd say the biggest advances would be all the on call support to the infantry squad, the improvements in communications, GPS, etc. They didn't have SATCOM, FBCB2, GPS navigation, BFTs, and all the other wonders of modern communications that make it easier for the squad to stay in contact with HQs, ISR, CAS, etc. back then.

Oh yeah, and they didn't have body armor or speedy medevacs like we do now, those have saved a lot of lives.

Back then they had full auto as an option also, the BAR.
Of course if ammo wasnt an issue (endless supply following you) I really liked the M16A2 (never left me down, great accuracy, Im sure the A4 with optics such as the ACOG would be a great choice (3 rd burst no auto). Modern military firearms have the main advantage of ergonomics, lightweight, handling, easy control, and high firepower.
I agree with the other advances also with modern firearms making the big difference, blackhawk helos traveling at around 200 mph at treetop level to get you in and out, body armor. Communications and navigation today that would have been a sci-fi fantasy even 20 years ago let alone in the 40s.

Okay, Jeepguy, I'll get involved. I would keep the old M1 Garand. I like mine. However, since what you are asking is would we take any modern weapons back then, I would say yes. For backup to the Garand, get me a Glock. Either G17 or G21, so I could use the 9mm or 45acp that was available. Nice, light pistol that is pretty much indestructable and will run almost without fail.

My point to the OP is that as far as I'm concerned, the M14 (especially since he's limited it to semi-auto use in his post) isn't much of an advance over the M1, and the P226 isn't much of an advance over the M1911 (and barely any advance at all over the P35, which was widely used in WW2).