Why didn't the Germans make 20/30 magazines for their Gewehr 43 rifles?
>>29313666
Because grunts can't be trusted not to dump most of their ammo in one go.
They probably figured that it was a lot of steel to use for little gain on the part of the user. Also hanging 20+ rounds of 8x57 off the bottom of your rifle starts to get unwieldy.
Because that was not part of their doctrine, or any country's doctrine for that matter.
>>29313755
why tho
![a50b8e79bd4a831e3366ce09ca8c71f9[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/At1Ix9H.jpg "a50b8e79bd4a831e3366ce09ca8c71f9[1].jpg")
>>29313666
MG 13 magazine on Gewehr 43.
Also done to the G98 since ww1.
>>29313666
Sounds boner enducing
But a volksfront 16 year old with that type of power with minimal training would be a awful waste of ammo
Because you have to kill children with that many rounds
![6e5df32beb49a62b42cbd40a5646ce52[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/tODVdcy.jpg "6e5df32beb49a62b42cbd40a5646ce52[1].jpg")
>>29313775
A more complete picture.
>>29313778
Volksfront would be the prenazi leftist alliance. You're thinking of volkssturm, who would not get g43 though, nor were they a concern or even a concept when it was developed.
>>29313846
I knew it sounded wrong, ty lad
>>29313666
because 30 wasn't invented yet
>>29313874
They made 10 rounder so why not 20 or 30?
>>29313951
'why dont all our assault rifles have 200 round magazines?' is what future /k/ will ask
>>29313959
don't be silly, nothing wrong with 30 round magazines. They made the STG 30 round magazines....
>>29313965
but what i mean is that at the time 5 or 10 was what people thought a reasonable amount of rounds was for a magazine, later on it became 20 or 30. armies didn't have as robust of supply lines as we do today and leaders were afraid of their troops blowing through their ammo.
>>29313996
ah ok
>>29313951
This, it's a little known fact the the number 30 wasn't invented until 1953.
>>29313951
Because they loaded the guns via 5 round chargers. Magazines are expensive to build too.
>>29314206
Wasn't 20 still all the rage?
>>29313713
Must be why grunts only get 5-10 round magazines issued to them today
oh wait you're fucking stupid, underage and no guns
You don't need more than 10 rounds to hunt jews.
>>29313666
Some stupid excuses like it sticking too much, costs to much etc. Real reason of course that generals wanted their guns looking slick like G98 and previous generation wanted G98 looking like musket. Parades first.
>>29314648
>oh wait I'm fucking stupid, underage and no guns
it shows
because that literally was the the reason military establishment has resisted high capacity rifles since before the turn of the century. rifle with 1 5-10 round mag, bolt action or top feeding semi automatic was literally the standard of every modern army in the world for over half a century.
>>29314648
You.
You are a fucking idiot.
That was the reasoning at the time.
Modern day tactics would have prevented WW1 from dragging on so long, WHY THE HELL DIDNT THEY DO IT? BECAUSE MODERN TACTICS WERE FUCKING DIFFERENT.
It is YOU who is the underageb& fucktard.
>>29313666
>why didn't the americans design the garand with a detachable magazine?
magazine capacity and tacticool speed reloads were less of a concern these days and to some extent today.
and a 10 round magazine is less bulky when carrying and easier to use from a rested or prone position
>>29313666
Because that wasn't the point with it. The G44 isn't particularly good anyway.
That said, if you really want it, many 7.92mm rifles can be made to use 25rd MG13 magazines.
