New Grease Gun... opinions/ experience?

[cdbeaver]

Bart, you're right when you state that the grease gun had a slow cyclic rate of fire.

This may be an urban myth, but when I was in Korea, some of the guys in the R&I platoon claimed they substituted Browning light machine gun recoil springs for the M3 springs and dramatically increased the rate of fire.

I never actually shot one that was "converted," so don't know how much--if any--truth there was to the claim.

 

[444]

I was issued an M3 in the Army in the early 1980s.
I was a tracked vehicle driver at the time and we were issued 1911s. We had the M3s in the arms room and the sgt. in charge of the arms room was a shooter and thought it would be fun if we were issued greaseguns along with the 1911s.
We only fired them a few times, but I never had any problem with it at all. I also thought it was a very clever design.
I would love to have one now, but then I do own a Sten.

 

[jercamp45]

I have heard they are quite reliable....

I have always been facinated by them....and think that would be my subgun of choice..until HK brought out the UMP.
I rented one at the Gun Store here in Vegas, and put about 200 rounds through it. The Cyclic rate seemed higher, occassionally I got one or two rounds, other times three with a short trigger tickle...but the Range Master said they had worked on it alot over the years and it had ALOT of rounds through it with very few problems. It worked flawlessless through my brief experience.
Always liked the OSS versions with the 'can'. Big heavy quite bullets!!
I understand in the beginning of Delta Force, they were used because they were available, reliable and had alot of thump; but the brass did not want our elite force using 17 dollar subguns and stopped that(I imagine the guns were getting old and parts were getting hard to find too).
Looked at the semi carbine, and OK it looks cool, but they are heavy and you can do better, but if you are starting a WWII collection...the semi's are alot cheaper than the Class III.
For real world use, I'll stick to the AK.
Jercamp45

 

[tankertom]

The slow cyclic rate makes them quite accurate for a subgun. Very popular at MG shoots.

tt

 

[Quartus]

Yeah, but after being used to an M-16, it REALLY takes some getting used to! You REALLY need some patience to wait for those rounds to come wandering out!




Didn't use them in combat, but this thread is the first time I've EVER heard anyone question their reliability. They're infamous for chuggin' along.

 

[fallingblock]

Roger that, Quartus....

"this thread is the first time I've EVER heard anyone question their reliability. They're infamous for chuggin' along."
************************************************************


I was a 45B20 (small arms repairman) in the Vietnam-era army, and the M3A1's reputation was 'reliable as a brick', as long as you had good magazines. The gun itself is very robust, if somewhat crude compared to a Thompson.

The Guide Lamp division of G.M. at Anderson, Indiana produced the WWII M3 & M3A1.

Ithaca produced some M3A1's under contract (30,000?) for the Korean war.

Slow and heavy, it isn't really what a subgun should be, but it does what it does well and reliably.