S&W 76 Vs UZI

[Dan Forrester]

I’m curious what everyone here thinks about the S&W 76 vs the full size UZI. Now I’m talking about a factory S&W gun compared to a top of the line UZI registered receiver like a Group Industries / Vector. Both are similar in the fact that they are priced similarly, fire the same cartridge, are open bolt, have easily changed barrels and are overall pretty simple and reliable guns.


My thoughts about the S&W 76:

• I like the tube design with the forward mounted magazine well. This allows for a better angled pistol grip.
• I have heard the S&W 76 sounds great suppressed. Not sure why it would be better or worse than the UZI but I have specifically heard the S&W 76 is just a great gun suppressed. The UZI from what I have read isn’t necessarily bad but I never hear people raving about how great it is suppressed. I live in a place where I can shoot pistol caliber pistols and SMG safely and not bother anyone as long as it’s suppressed so how it performs suppressed is definitely important to me.
• Factory mags are difficult to find. I know you can modify Suomi or Swedish K magazines but the originals are a few hundred each and difficult to find. I’ve always believed the most important part of any semi auto is the magazine and I like it when original unmodified factory magazines are plentiful and cheap. This doesn’t appear to be the case with the S&W 76
• The sights suck. They are just stamped metal welded onto the receiver. Not in any way adjustable or upgradeable.
• The wire stock sucks!

My thoughts about the UZI:

• magazines are plentiful and cheap.
• It’s an absolutely battle proven design.
• Parts are plentiful and will probably be so for many decades into the future.
• It looks like there are some limited options to mount a red dot to it.
• Good adjustable sights.
• Collapsable stock sucks but wooden stocks are cheap and plentiful.

Things I’m wondering:

• Which one is the better investment?
• Which design is more durable?
• Which one will my kids be happy I bought in 30 years?
• Which design will suppress better?

I would love to hear everyone’s thoughts. I currently own an M16 and a MAC10/9mm. If I wanted to buy one of these I would be selling the MAC to help fund the purchase.

Thanks,

Dan

 

[JT-AR-MG42]

My thoughts about the S&W 76:

Factory mags are difficult to find.

The wire stock sucks!

You have sort of answered your own questions IMO, and I do agree.
Acquaintance had a 76 that I shot enough to know that it was not for me.
Very reliable and all that, but it was too much like my MP-40 (albeit with a higher cyclic rate) to justify getting one.

My thoughts about the UZI:

magazines are plentiful

I bought a Vector some years back and have not regretted it.
It is a 'lil tank and just runs right along.

Collapsable stock sucks but wooden stocks are cheap

The metal stock is a better design than the 76, but you are correct that the wood stock is far superior for aimed fire.
I built a wood stock for my MAc-10 (.45acp) by making new stock extensions and mounting them on a FAL stock.
Gives good full auto control on the 'brick'.

Parts are plentiful and will probably be so for many decades into the future.

If I was getting one today I would sink a pile of dough in spare parts before they get banned just like imported barrels did.

Another factor not mentioned is .22 conversion kit availability.
Racine Joe's kit from subguns is the best money I've spent with my Vector.
Unlike the crap M-16 kits I've owned that cycled at 1000 plus, the Uzi .22 conversion kit cycles
about like the stock 9mm - maybe just a little bit faster.
Two shot .22LR bursts are the norm. You have to hold the trigger for more.
Best part is no brass to pick up and re-load!
Also, the kit is the way to go for introducing youngsters to FA fun.

a top of the line UZI registered receiver like a Group Industries / Vector.

Don't know your level of experience with these.
If buying today, I would want to test fire a Vector. Some of the guns had trunnion alignment issues from incorrect welds.
Totally fixable and Richard Hoffman lives down your way, but just thought I would recommend a test fire.

Which one is the better investment?

Neither IMO.
These are just toys that can be banned or further regulated (closing the loop all the way up).
While the cost has went up since up since '86, no one I know has bought one using investment income.

JT

 

[Dan Forrester]

Yea I kind knew the UZI was the answer I just wanted to hear it from someone else.

I never even thought about .22 conversion kits. I have one for my M16 that runs great but my MAC10 conversion kit I could never get it to run reliably. Extra magazines for the MAC10 conversion are also unavailable so it’s nice to see Black Dog Machine is making .22 UZI magazines.

Unfortunately machine guns are usually difficult to test fire first unless I find a local buyer. Is there anything I should look out for that might be a warning sign something is wrong with a particular gun? It sounds like the Trunion issues can be fixed relatively easily but I would rather buy something that works correctly in the first place.

I’m definitely not trying to justify this as an investment. I have other real investments. However, whenever I buy something I always try to take into consideration what it’s projected future value will be and within reason I try to optimize this.

I really appreciate all your info!

Thanks,

Dan