Status
Not open for further replies.
What was wrong with the M2 Vern? Underpowered, worn out? Do you recall if they were Plainfield's, or Universals, perhaps? Just curious, thanks!
The 30 rnd mags had a bad reputation for jamming in full auto, as they were a compromise design. They work fine in my semi auto M1 carbine, but full auto is not so forgiving.
 
Plainfield and Universal carbines were not military issue; those were commercial models and were marketed to police and civilians.
Military issue carbines would have been from the original ~6 million made for WWII, and most had been arsenal reconditioned more than once.
CMP tests have shown that Korean and Vietnam era military issue ammo was much lower velocity than Winchester's design velocity of 1970 fps.

Back on Thompsons in Vietnam, all the photos I have seen from the Vietnam era showed M1 or M1A1Thompsons which again would have been WWII manufacture.
 
I have a couple photos of my father in Vietnam with a Thompson,Greasegun and a MP-40. He was in the Marines and carried a M-14 . The Thompson and Greasegun were in the armory and he carried the Thompson on a couple of patrols. The MP-40 he trade a bottle of booze and a carton of cigarettes for with 12 mags, also had to trade for ammo. He carried the MP-40 around on base but not in the field.
 
The M88A1 Recovery Vehicles in the 7thID(L) had M3's in '88 still when I left; I worked on some of them at the Post Maintenance Facility while visiting. (My SMOS was 45B, Small Arms Repair.)

Yes- The Grease Guns were for the M88 in my unit as well. The 45-series shop was one of my favorite places to stop by and supervise.
 
When you shoot someone, you want him to stay shot. I saw a man hit 11 times and still fighting. That's when I got rid of my carbine.
I've heard plenty of stories of soldiers getting shot with all types of weapons and not dropping right there. I used to have a medical report compiled by a friend of my mother's who was a WW2 medic recounting soldiers who'd been shot in the Pacific Theater who didn't even realize they'd been shot until they noticed the blood, or a buddy pointed it out. Apparently adrenaline and loud noises can do that. I'm not saying it was by any means an average experience, but it did happen.
The carbine obtained a bad rep in the Korean War when soldiers claimed the .30 carbine round wouldn't penetrate the heavy quilted winter coats the North Korean soldiers wore. Yet corpses of NorK soldiers with those coats were recovered, when it was known theyd been shot with M1 Carbines, and their were clear entrance and exit wounds -- through the coats.
I'm not doubting you saw a man get shot 11 times with the carbine, I'm just saying that such a thing is not really unique to the carbine, and probably rare enough with any weapon.
 
I never seen a Thompson in Vietnam,i'm not saying they wasn't used there, I just never seen one. I was a 0311 grunt, I seen the .45 auto grease gun being used by some Marine Officers.
 
I never seen a Thompson in Vietnam,i'm not saying they wasn't used there, I just never seen one. I was a 0311 grunt, I seen the .45 auto grease gun being used by some Marine Officers.

The M3 Grease Gun was issued as late as 1990 for tracked vehicle crew members in Europe.

We had a Welder/Machinist in our unit who said he could make one for about 13 bucks.
 
Plainfield and Universal carbines were not military issue; those were commercial models and were marketed to police and civilians.
Military issue carbines would have been from the original ~6 million made for WWII, and most had been arsenal reconditioned more than once.
CMP tests have shown that Korean and Vietnam era military issue ammo was much lower velocity than Winchester's design velocity of 1970 fps.

Back on Thompsons in Vietnam, all the photos I have seen from the Vietnam era showed M1 or M1A1Thompsons which again would have been WWII manufacture.
Both Plainfield's and Universals were bought by and supplied to the ARVN through official and unofficial (CIA) channels, thus becoming available to US troops. I was wondering if Vern had run into reliability issues with these in country, but apparently he was referring to the guns lack of stopping power. :)
PMCVietnamApr 1966.jpg
 
Wow. How would you rate the effectiveness of the M16/M14?
The M16 lacked penetration -- which is critical in jungle fighting. The M1 and M14 were about the same -- good penetration. The trick in jungle fighting is to see where the enemy fire is coming from and "work" that area -- cover it with a pattern of closely-spaced shots.
 
S Vietnam was very corrupt and you could get anything you wanted. In my unit there was 1 person who had a .357 blackhawk and another with the Thompson.

The Thompson is for close to medium work and probably why no one had them. I almost bought one a few years ago but after handling it I passed and went for an M4. The Thompson was heavy and awkward.

I heard a lot of reports about the M16 being terrible. But when I was there in 69-70 it was the best thing for jungle warfare in my opinion.
 
...

WW2 veterans told me that Thompsons were given to the guys who could not shoot. However, they could be combat effective if they could point and hose a target with their Thompson. I have been in South Pacific jungle, sometimes you can't see 25 feet through the foliage, you don't need long range accuracy in the under brush.

One of my great uncles who served in NW Europe was issued a Thompson, because his eyesight wasn't great (apparently not bad enough to make him 4F, though). He was told to point it in the direction of any Germans and hose them down. IIRC, he was not an infantryman, and never had to actually do that.
 
None issued in regular units as others have commented. My Battery Commander had a commercial Thompson w/100 Rd drum he picked up somewhere. MPS caught him with it and they confiscated it.

M3 grease guns were pretty common as it was the issued weapon to track drivers. Most of those guys carried M16s though.

I "bought" an M-3 from a Viet Namese militiaman for a carton of Kool Filter Kings. After shooting and otherwise playing with it for a couple of months, I came to the conclusion that I got the short end of that deal.
 
At the main entrance to an ARVN division headquarters on Rt. 1 in Quang Tri City, there was an Arvn soldier standing at parade rest 24 hours a day with a Thompson at port arms. Never saw one in the field. Compared to an M-16 or CAR 15, the Thompson is a high maintenance, overweight pig with limited range. Even an M-1 carbine would be a better carry.
 
I was with 3rd Marine Amphibious Force south of Da Nang 1965 and you could buy Thompson from local ARVN. We got warning about not buying them or 30 Carbine.
What was the reason behind getting a warning not to buy them?
 
My Uncle Larry (1919 - 2001) was a Marine and he fought the Japanese during several island campaigns in the south Pacific during WWII. He was issued a Tommy gun as he called it and he killed many enemy soldiers with it. But he also liked grenades a lot, too. Uncle Larry didn't like to recall the many battles but would tell me about some of his actions later in his life.

TR
 
T.R.

My Dad was in the Armored Infantry in Europe during WWII. He shot Expert with the M1 and qualified with the M3 Grease Gun on the Army's version of an "obstacle course". Never did get to use an M1 Thompson but was really fond of the M1 Carbine on those "little" 20 mile hikes they use to take every so often.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top