The Best Standard Infantry Rifle of WW2

[PanzerJaeger]

Well heres another one of my stupid WW2 polls.. let me know if I missed any rifles.

[CBR]

Sturmgewehr 44 über alles of course.


CBR

[Kagemusha]

As a basic type i voted Mosin-Nagant.Its accurate and reliable.Obviosly my favourite rifle is Finnish m28/30 ,wich was based on Mosin-Nagant. :bow:

[Kagemusha]

Sturmgewehr 44 über alles of course.


CBR

Wasnt sturmgewehr 44 an assault rifle?It shouldnt be here.

[master of the puppets]

i like the m1, reliable, sturdy, multible shots, and more powerful than the carbine but less than the k98. all around great gun.

[Uesugi Kenshin]

I don't think the Sturmgewehr should count, though it is the best gun on the list it was never a standard rifle. The guns I would include are the M1 rifle, Enfield, Arisaka, K98 and Mosin Nagant. Possibly a couple others, but I would have to look into how widely they were produced and whether their reliability issues were fixed (for example the G43).

[CBR]

Well G43 were not widespread either so for German rifles it should be K98 only if thats the criteria.


CBR

[Uesugi Kenshin]

That's why I would have had to check how widespread the use was, I didn't think the G43 made widespread use, but just to be sure. Anyway thanks for confirming what I thought CBR.

What about that Soviet semiautomatic rifle? The SVT or something like that.

[lars573]

The SVT-38/40 (Samozaryadnaya Vintovka Tokareva - Tokarev Self-loading rifle) is the Tokarev.

[Marquis of Roland]

How about the FG-42?

[Beirut]

Wasn't it Patton who said the Garand was the "greatest battle implement ever devised"?

I'd go with the Garand. The Lee-Enfield second. If it's a MKV model, a very close second. I still slap myself for selling my MKV. What a dodohead!

I've never fired a Garand but I have handled one. Very nice. Fired lots of Lee-Enfields. Love 'em!

[PanzerJaeger]

I dont understand what the big deal is with the M1.. they are simply ammo eaters. If you've fired one, or even an m14, you know that its difficult if not impossible to fire accurately after the first shot without regaining your sight picture. Also, they are accurate semis, but not close to bolts in accuracy.

Ive shot most of those guns on the list, even got to shoot an 44 2 summers ago, and i would definitely say I would rather be in combat with a bolt action.

The arisaka is a nice weapon, for us tall people, as is the lee infield. I had to go with the best bolt action gun of ww2 though, the K98. (and yes, i was heavily biased to begin with ~;) )

Also the FG-42 was not ever supposed to be a standard rifle. If I remember correctly the G43 and Stg44 were supposed to be standard issue and were in fact issued, just not in large numbers before the war ended.

[Kagemusha]

I agree with you PJ on that M1.Maybe some people just think that more bullets you fire then better result you have.It doesnt help much when somebody is shooting all over the place another one, aims, shoots that guy down,reloads and aims the next one. :bow:

[sharrukin]

There is no question that a bolt-action rifle is more accurate than a semi-automatic rifle such as the Garand. The Garand however is reasonably accurate and most combat takes place at less than 500 meters. The point is that in war, things are not often fair. If you have three guys in front of you then there is a lot to be said for one pull of the trigger, one bullet. With a bolt action rifle, life, and your continued participation in it, has suddenly become a lot more complicated.

[Kagemusha]

Thats is why most assault troops used machine pistols in WWII.So you wouldnt have to aim much in close quarters.But even if you were shooting with an assault rifle,only your first shot is accurate.For suppressive fire there was lot better weapons like Machine guns and light machine guns.We compared single shots against shooting bursts in army with laser simulators on assault rifles and if the enemy uses ground well you dont get better results with shooting bursts.Most of the bullets would hit over the target. :bow:

[Uesugi Kenshin]

You were supposed to regain your sight picture after firing each shot with the M1, the major advantage was that it was still a whole lot faster than pulling the bolt and regaining your sight picture. The History Channel shows some good clips of demonstrations with one guy firing an M1 and the other a Springfield.

Also volume of fire is much more valuable in war than accuracy, as shown by the AK-47. One problem that US troops ran into was they were taught to only fire at what they could see, when in reality suppressing fire and working up a good volume of fire is much more useful. The soldier still needs to be able to fire accurately, but slightly lower accuracy and a much higher fire rate are better than slightly higher accuracy and a much lower fire rate.

I think the FG 42 ran into issues with being inaccurate at medium and long range due to it's high rate of fire.

[Kagemusha]

Kenshin.I dont agree with you on suppressive fire.If soldier is shooting too long he also reveals his position.We were tought to shoot once or a double shot to the enemy then move away from your position under cover to another firing position.If you stay too long in one firing position you start to gather hostile fire towards you.For supressing fire there are Heavy and light machine guns and grenade rifles.Btw the assault rifle types that we used in Finnish army RK 62 and RK 95 are both based on AK 47 Kalashnikov like the majority of worlds assault rifles. :bow:

[VikingOfThule]

Japanese rifles suck so damn much. So unreliable.

But the best would have to be the Garand, without a doubt. Mauser 98k would come in next.

[CBR]

My dad was in the Danish army (around '49 I think) and started out with British Enfields. He said that it was difficult to take one recruit's rifle, to show the poor guy how to shoot with it, as each rifle had to be sighted in. The Garand, which they got later, was much easier as all rifles had same aim.

Maybe wear and tear on the Enfields I dont know. In theory a bolt action is more precise than a semi automatic rifle but I havent read anything bad on rilfes like the Garand. And as we can see in WW2 several nations started using semi automatic rifles as the increased rate of fire did give better overall firepower.

Being able to shoot faster means you are not as dependent on the MG for providing supressive fire. The German troops who used the StG 44 was very happy with it using it both in semi and auto mode when assaulting Russian positions.


CBR

[VikingOfThule]

That did'nt come out till '44 though.

[Kagemusha]

Being able to shoot faster means you are not as dependent on the MG for providing supressive fire. The German troops who used the StG 44 was very happy with it using it both in semi and auto mode when assaulting Russian positions.


CBR

Or should we say. shooting Russians as they were assaulting German positions back in 1944-45. ~;)

[CBR]

Or should we say. shooting Russians as they were assaulting German positions back in 1944-45. ~;)

The few after actions reports I have are actually of Germans attacking/counter attacking ~:)


CBR

[Samurai Waki]

Enfield hands down on accuracy if you could get the bloody thing sighted in well. A Well trained British Soldier could fire off a clip with the enfield almost as quickly as an American could fire off a clip with the m1. The M1 on the hole had better supressive fire, and was really the first rifle that did well at that role, and the Mosim Nagant had the best killing power.

[lars573]

Also the FG-42 was not ever supposed to be a standard rifle. If I remember correctly the G43 and Stg44 were supposed to be standard issue and were in fact issued, just not in large numbers before the war ended.

Very true. The intention was to replace all front line infantry K98's with G43 and all frontline units MP-40's with the Stg-44.

[Kagemusha]

The few after actions reports I have are actually of Germans attacking/counter attacking ~:)


CBR

Yes.I know it was mostly used by "sturmkompanies".I was just joking around. ~:)

[The Stranger]

Best Bolt-Action Rifle = Springfield
Best Semi Automaic Rifle = M1 Garand or Tokarev
Best Semi Machine Gun = PPsh
Best Machine Gun = MP44 A.K.A Sturmgewher 44
Best Machine Gun = MG42

[Kraxis]

The M1.

It has all been mentioned before but I will sum it up (again).

Good rate of fire, if you so chose, good enough accuracy (ranges lessened more and more and actions beyond 300m in WWII and afterwards have been rare to say the least), fair sized clip (many still had 5-6 rounds) and ease of use, both in combat, learning and cleaning.

Most of the others are better in one department or the other, even two perhaps, but if we are to give scores for places then the eternal #2 will eventually end up as #1. That is the reason it is best.

And yes I have shot, disassembled and cleaned the bastard. Compared to the G3 (I believe, it is that blocky assault rifle from H&K with a 20 round clip) I later had to do the same with, it was a treat. And that weapon isn't exactly known to be troublesome.

Btw, and don't hang me up on this as I have only heard this from other netgoers, wasn't the Mosin-Nagant 'only' a copy of the K98 with more pieces in it (k98 2-piece barrel, MN 3-piece)? How then could it be more powerful?

[The Stranger]

enfield and springfield are very good sniper rifles.

enfield carrying soldiers had 5 bullets advantage most of the time.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

I dont understand what the big deal is with the M1.. they are simply ammo eaters. If you've fired one, or even an m14, you know that its difficult if not impossible to fire accurately after the first shot without regaining your sight picture. Also, they are accurate semis, but not close to bolts in accuracy.

The M-1 is the gun that won WW2. It and the M-14 are extremely accurate. I could get 10 bullseyes out of 10 at 500 yards and Im sure Div could also. About the accuracy though . It has been covered to some extent here but we found out that accuracy wasnt that important. Even seeing your target wasnt important. In fact one of the hardest things troops had to unlearn was that. The name of the game was suppressive fire. The idea was always for one fireteam to pin the enemy while the others manovere and its still what we use today. Leave the accuracy for the snipers. No other rifle was as improtant a factor for the troops who used it or had as big an impact on WW2 than the M-1. In war they shoot back. Target practice is whole different matter. Dont judge a weapon by how good it is on the firing range but in combat. Again having been a PMI and expert with the M-14 and pistol I think I know a bit about this topic.

Id also like to point out that in terms of stoppong power, accuracy and reliability both the M-1 and M-14 are far superior to the M-16 yet we dont see them on the battlefield anymore. Also its been a longtime but I believe one of the favorite sniper weapons in Nam was still the old springfield.

[The Stranger]

yeah, thats true, while all ww2 rifles dissapeared the springfield was the favorite for pro snipers in Nam