Whatif: Which rifle for WWII Patrol?

Status
Not open for further replies.
DMK

DMK

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
8,868
Location
Over the hills and far, far away
You're in an infantry squad in WWII, Europe theatre. You're on the advance so expect a lot of walking.

Your issue rifle got blown up, but you can scrounge one of the following rifles:

Which rifle would you choose and why?

1903 Springfield
M1 Garand
M1 Carbine
BAR
M3 Grease Gun
M1 Thompson
Captured K98
Captured MP40
 
Last edited:
M4 Carbine, possibly with a nice M203 hung off of it. :D

Actually I personally think I would do just fine with a nice M1 Garand. Maybe a STG44 as long as I could get plenty of magazines for it.

Chris
 
The Garand, no question. Reliable, accurate, reaches out a long distance, and easy to use. Ammo would be easy to find as most GI's carried the M1 theater-wide. Platoons with the BAR and the .30 cal light machine gun would have the same round if you needed to re-supply. Nasty to think about, but you could also scrounge ammo from fallen GI's.

The M1 Thompson or the M3 would be the second choice especially if there was a possibliity of close combat or city fighting. But I would want a 1911 as a sidearm to go with either one. You get a second weapon that uses the same ammo.
 
The M1 or the BAR. The 1903 is a distant third choice.

The M1 and the BAR are what the quartermaster corps will supply ammo for in the most convenient packages.
 
An M1 Garand. Because if I'm in Europe and advancing a lot my boss would say it's the finest battle weapon ever devised. :)
 
Thompson, because it hits super hard with minute of enemy accuracy. Under 50 yards I wouldnt really give any other gun of the day much thought. Its a great room, trench and alley broom and it is the kind of gun that will keep you alive when things go bad and you get overrun.

If it comes to long range shooting, I'll just keep my head down.

Plus ammo commonality with my trusty sidearm doesnt hurt.

I assumed standard issue stuff. If I could get a semiauto scoped BAR or a garand that takes BAR mags, I would pick that instead.
 
I'd prefer the MP40 - it's the best bullet hose of the lot. But logistics trump all, and the Garand would be the best all-around choice. The Thompson and BAR are appealing, but given that they both weigh MORE than the Garand I'm not sure that I'd want to hump either around. I'd also like to know that I can always count on my squad mates' pool of en bloc clips instead of having to stuff magazines all the time.....
 
So - where is my Enfield then huh!?
Click to expand...
Monty is having a hard time keeping up. No Brits around to "aquire" one from. ;)

THR sure is a Battle Rifle crowd! :) Interesting how few folks would go for a subgun. From what I've read, the Thompsons and Grease Guns were actually highly prized. If a guy had one and got hit, a fellow GI would surely keep it warm for him.
 
That's what I'd choose too. But STGs are rare(and mostly used on the western front).
Click to expand...
They were used mostly on the Eastern front.

Interviews with WWII vets state that using enemy weapons would draw friendly fire on you.

My choice would be the Garand.
 
I'll take the BAR, mostly because of the firepower i'll be able to lay down for the other guys in my patrol. If something goes down, i'll pin the jerry's heads down while everyone else maneuvers in to get the job done.
 
You haven't specified the terrain in which the patrol will be moving. For close-range, heavily-forested areas, or ruined urban terrain, I'd want something with high rate of fire, and I'd sacrifice long-range accuracy for it. In more open terrain, I want something that can reach out and touch someone. Also, I'd balance my weapon against those in the rest of the patrol. If there are a couple of marksmen with decent long-range weapons and skills, that frees me to move to a weapon with a higher rate of fire. That could be a BAR (for longer-range work) or a sub-machine-gun (for up-close-and-personal exchanges).
 
I'd take the M1 Thompson. Full auto=very useful, .45=stopping power, handy in surprise encounters (i.e. turn corner, see Nazi a few feet away, blast Nazi into next week, move on). That, and ammo commonality with the sidearm is a definite plus. Also, it's one of those things you could keep to annoy the anti-gun lobby of today (HA HA, I HAVE A FULL-AUTO WEAPON!!!) :neener: . Fun all around.
 
I carried an M1 during my first tour as an adviser in the 18th ARVN Division -- after my issue M2 Carbine got wrapped around a tree. I have also used a BAR, and had access to both a Thompson and an M3 (the latter two mostly carried in a jeep, but not in the field on operations.)

In any conditions you can think of, the M1 is the best of those listed. It has all the rate of fire you need, with range and penetration (the latter is essential in combat -- people will get behind things when you're shooting at them.) In built-up areas, many people assume a submachine gun is best, but the penetration of the M1 makes it a clear winner.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

E
  • Locked
  • Poll
*Hypothetical* WWII: What do you carry?
2
Replies
41
Views
2K
texlurch
T
R
  • Locked
Accuracy WWII Rifles?
Replies
18
Views
4K
geojap
G
hps1
  • Locked
Interesting Article on History of the M1 Garand
Replies
11
Views
1K
Garandimal
Garandimal
D
  • Locked
New production of old designs... why not?
Replies
9
Views
603
Lobotomy Boy
L
C
  • Locked
Help Finding Authentic Springfield, Garand & Carbine For Museum Display
Replies
17
Views
648
RCArms.com
R
Back
Top