Name me a better LMG from the WW2 era. You can't.
inb4 people post jam machines like the MG42
>>29424775
The MG42.
BAR
>>29424775
MG42
>>29424785
This
>>29424785
>20casings magazine
>hard to change mag while prone
>heavier than your mother
Bren gun. Lewis gun too if you want to stretch the definition of "light".
>>29424785
>>29424795
The BAR was great in WW1 but by WW2 it was mediocre compared to other options. For some reason, the US Army saw fit to attach a bunch of junk to the design that did nothing but increase weight while other nations focused on trimming weight off their LMG's. If the Army had gone the route of the Colt Monitor it could have been God-tier but alas they did not.
>>29424775
MG34
>>29424775
Nambu Type 99
>>29424781
>>29424789
Have fun clearing malfunctions or having the gun explode.
>>29424856
See above, multiply by 10
>>29424829
Somewhat the same as the DP-28, just with a magazine blocking your sight and less reliable.
Johnson.
/thread
>>29424775
The DP-28 is actually not bad as a weapon to provide covering fire, the pan magazines are a bit unusual, and dated even for the time, but they're flat, and 42rds of 7.62x54mmR is pretty solid.
I kind of prefer the Bren or Zb-26 tho.
Also the MG-42 isn't an LMG, it's a GPMG, it's not light and not meant to be used as an LMG. I'd hesitate to call the DP-28, Bren or BAR an LMG too.
>>29424785
>shows up just as WW1 is ending, doesn't get a chance to see use
>it's decided it has to be "upgraded" for WW2 and they tack on a bunch of dumb shit to it, making it even heavier than it already is
It did an OK job (better than having none), but it was hardly the best weapon of it's kind, a Lewis gun would have been much more practical.
>>29424873
Where the fuck are you getting the idea that they're exploding or excessively unreliable?
The MG42 stuck around as the MG3, which has worked great.
The bolt can sometimes bounce on the MG42/MG3, but there's ways to fix that.
In my opinion, the flaw with the MG42 is that it cycles way too fast, slowing it down to 700-800rpm would make it much more practical.
The MG34 is overall good, I'd say mechanically slightly more reliable, doing the same thing as the MG42, while being heavier and more expensive.
>>29424908
You can't /thread your own post, nigger.
>>29424928
>I'd hesitate to call the DP-28, Bren or BAR an LMG too.
They are just "MGs" but are retroactively LMGs because they were used in the role of LMGs (well, not the BAR) before LMG existed as a classification. The modern distinction of LMG only exists because of intermediate cartridges, The DP28 and BREN are from before it was defined and don't need to adhere to the criteria.
>>29425122
Well I guess you can. 'Cause he just uh, did.
>>29424781
>>29424789
>>29424775
Either the MG42 or ZB26.
>>29425155
>literally a heavier bren in a shittier cartridge
I see the hipsters have arrived.
>>29425176
>.303: rimmed blackpowder cartridge turned into a smokeless cartridge as a compromise
>7.92x57mm: designed as smokeless from the start
They do about the same thing, sans magazine capacity.
>>29425176
>heavier than BREN
Wrong.
>>29424775
Type 96 or 99 LMG.
>>29425223
>ZB vz.26: 10.5 kg (loaded)
>Bren mk3: 9.75 kg (loaded)
I get it, you want it to be better because its more obscure, but it just isn't the case.
>>29424928
>Also the MG-42 isn't an LMG, it's a GPMG, it's not light and not meant to be used as an LMG.
When used with a bipod the Germans called it a lMG, which stands for leichtes Maschinengewehr.
>Where the fuck are you getting the idea that they're exploding or excessively unreliable?
German small arms from WW2 are notorious for beeing unreliable. Thats what you get when you design low tolerance weapons and let slave workers build it. MG42, K43 and the StG44 are all known to malfunction quite frequently. Name me one German gun which reached comparable reliability to allied, let alone soviet weaponry.
>>29424775
>talks about jamming
>posts a DP
>One of the DP's main drawbacks though was its bipod; it could not withstand much abuse and broke easily.[1] Furthermore, the recoil spring was located under the barrel, around the gas piston; this was one of the design problems of the DP, since the spring tended to lose its temper due to overheating
I think it's a troll thread. The DP had numerous flaws, and the pan magazines ware retarded.
But wome americans will droll to any soviet shit... Im from post-soviet block, and I tell you, this weapon was not held in high regard.
Bren is the best lmg in this contest, and we all know it.
P.S.
The Saw should not even be mentioned, it's not an lmg.
>>29425755
not to mention the old ass pan magazine filled with rimmed ammo. I wouldn't want to rely on it.
>>29425512
>Thats what you get when you design low tolerance weapons and let slave workers build it
German weapons were made in a variety of places, and only some weapons used concentration camp labor (the G41 is one), and it should be noted that productions changed as time went.
An Stg44 made in 1944 is going to be miles ahead of an Stg44 rushed out in the dying months of the war as they're desperately trying to hold it together, there is a VISIBLE difference.
>Name me one German gun which reached comparable reliability to allied
Sure
>K98k Mauser comparable to Enfield and Springfield, better than the Nagant
>Walther P38 comparable to 1911 and Tokarev, miles better than the Enfield and Webley revolvers fielded in majority by the Brits, lightyears ahead of the Nagant revolver
>MP40, comparable to Sten, used the same magazines (which weren't perfect), lighter and MUCH cheaper than the Thompson, comparable to PPS43
>MG34, comparable to M1919 but more expensive
>MG13 comparable to Bren and BAR
>Browning Hi-Power (the ones not made in camps)
>Walther PP
>FG42 (very advanced and well made, but fielded in tiny numbers)
>Panzerschreck comparable to Bazooka
>Stg44 arguable comparable to M1 Carbine but different intentions, and not as well made
>let alone soviet weaponry
Soviet weaponry was far from perfect.
>SVT-40 was a complete failure, no magazine interchangeability and couldn't be accurized, this was gonna be their new service rifle
>Drum magazines for the PPSH-41 were janky dogshit, and the curved lower capacity mags were only somewhat better, it was replaced for a reason, it was also very expensive (the PPS-43 was quite good though, cheaper and much more reliable, easier to make)
>Mosin Nagant isn't bad, but it isn't great either, it's average in most aspects but they could make it for cheap and in great numbers, which is what mattered for the time
>Nagant M1895 still saw service, and was horribly dated at it's inception
>>29424775
Type 99 gud
>>29425820
>MP40
Ditched in droves by German soldiers because it couldn't handle a bit of dirt. The Landser rather used the PPscH-41 which with its selective fire and 7,62x25 Tokarev was kind of the first assault rifle in the broader sense as we know it.
>MG-34
Of course i can't hate on it per se. The idea of a belt fed machine gun which can be carried by one man and the ability of a quick barrel change were the way to go, but the low tolerances again made it very prone to jam. And i'd rather have a "worse" gun which shoots then a "great" gun which often malfunctions. Not to forget you culd also change the DP-28 barrel quite quick.
>SVT-40 was a complete failure, no magazine interchangeability and couldn't be accurized, this was gonna be their new service rifle
Yet every soldier was issued 3 magazines, while the Germans only issued 1 spare magazine for every K43. Just like with the Panther the Germans copied a soviet design and made something fancy yet unreliable.
>Mosin Nagant isn't bad, but it isn't great either, it's average in most aspects but they could make it for cheap and in great numbers, which is what mattered for the time
Also the Mosin Nagant had a longer barrel, which gives it more accuracy and its bayonet causes far worse wounds then the german knife bayonets, also they have less chance to become stuck in the enemy.
It's not that German armament was abysmal but after the ww2 lot of myths came up regarding the Wehrmacht, one of them the one about their superiour armament. While in reality the evil soviet hordes produced weapons which were made for war and not shooting ranges.
>>29424832
Waffle BAR is sexy BAR
>>29426070
What's waffle about a Colt Monitor?
>>29426047
>Panther
>interleaved road wheel torsion bar
>75mm anti-tank focused gun
>heavy tank weight
>three man turret
>copied a soviet design
Well, I guess it had a sloped glacis and V-12 engine, so it copied the T-34 lol
>>29426103
He mistook it for a BAR variant made by fn
>>29426047
Troll plz go and stay go.
>>29426047
https://youtu.be/J_mShSOaV2s?t=15m28s
Here is the DP-28 barrel change btw.
>>29426105
You can't deny the Panther got its form from the t-34.
>>29426047
>a blowback tube MG couldn't handle a bit of dirt
>DP-28, feeding a rimmed cartridge from a retarded pan magazine being considered at all reliable
>every Soviet was issued 3 magazines when the Tokarev's mag was fitted to the rifle
>Mosin more accurate just because longer than Mauser
day/k/are plz
>>29426175
The most T-34 feature it borrows is its heavily sloped sponsoons.
>muh sloped glacis
Bren gun and FG42
>almost 200 posts
>nobody posting grorious nippon steel raifu
>>29426047
>Ditched in droves by German soldiers because it couldn't handle a bit of dirt.
The chief flaw of them were always the magazines, otherwise they handled dirt just about as well as the Sten, PPS-43, M3 or the later Uzi, it's an open-bolt blowback gun.
>The Landser rather used the PPscH-41
Actually, the MP40 found lots of favor with plenty of soldiers.
>which with its selective fire and 7,62x25 Tokarev was kind of the first assault rifle in the broader sense as we know it.
No, not really, also the MP40 fires slow enough that you can easily time individual shot with basic practice, also this is the same logic that tries to define the Fedorov as an assault rifle, which it simply isn't.
Also the PPSH-41 had TERRIBLE magazines, worse magazines than the Sten/MP40, the 7.62mm Tokarev and 9mm Luger cartridge are just about comparable.
>MG-34
>The idea of a belt fed machine gun which can be carried by one man and the ability of a quick barrel change were the way to go,
The MG34 did not feature a quick barrel change, this was a feature added to the MG42 due to the absurd rate of fire (nevertheless a good feature to have on an MG)
>but the low tolerances again made it very prone to jam
>And i'd rather have a "worse" gun which shoots then a "great" gun which often malfunctions.
>Not to forget you culd also change the DP-28 barrel quite quick.
I think you're the first person I've seen who thinks the DP-28 is magically more reliable than the MG34
>Yet every soldier was issued 3 magazines,
One in the gun, two spares, these magazines were not interchangeable with other guns and had to be force-matched, they performed pretty poorly, but the idea was that you'd load it with stripper clips and the spares were for emergencies.
If you lost them, you were court martialed.
>while the Germans only issued 1 spare magazine for every K43
I never said the K43 was good, I just said the SVT was bad. Both were shitshows honestly.
>>29426213
It been posted 4 times, weeb.
>200 posts
>>29426225
my eye a very squinty from too much dick sucki from GI wife. make a very hard to read. Go home GI. you wife say she miss you
>>29424928
the pans actually hold 47 rounds, with the 48th slot being a follower, just me being picky
>>29426047
>Also the Mosin Nagant had a longer barrel, which gives it more accuracy
This is retarded, and not how that works.
Also the Russians would eventually begin to issue the M44 carbines to frontliners because the long length was seen as unnecessary.
>and its bayonet causes far worse wounds then the german knife bayonets, also they have less chance to become stuck in the enemy.
Not particularly relevant considering bayonets were falling out of style for combat by around this time.
>but after the ww2 lot of myths came up regarding the Wehrmacht,
No kidding?
>one of them the one about their superiour armament.
Yes, wehraboos are an annoying thing.
>While in reality the evil soviet hordes produced weapons which were made for war and not shooting ranges
As did everyone, this sounds like the sentence some retard fudd would say at the gun counter trying to impress someone, when it's just bullshit conjecture.
>>29426195
>every Soviet was issued 3 magazines when the Tokarev's mag was fitted to the rifle
This isn't untrue, rather, this was the theory, or one of them, for how the SVT would be fielded. Now, given that the SVT was expensive and had production problems, I wouldn't be surprised if this ended up not being the case in practice.
MG34 was much better than DP-28
>>29426047
>longer barrel
>better accuracy
This is not true.
>>29424785
>>29424795
lol
>>29426378
I like both equally. :)
Also this was best smg of the war.
>>29426215
>
The MG34 did not feature a quick barrel change, this was a feature added to the MG42 due to the absurd rate of fire (nevertheless a good feature to have on an MG)
yes it fucking did
>>29424775
I'm probably the only person on /k/ that un-ironically agrees with that
>light weight for an LMG of its time
>short enough to be realistically carried by one man
>47 rounds, minus stoppages
Of all the contemporary LMGs, it seems to be the closest match to what an LMG is expected to do. Shame about things like >>29425755
>the recoil spring was located under the barrel, around the gas piston; this was one of the design problems of the DP, since the spring tended to lose its temper due to overheating
this though.
>>29425128
It's light/short enough to be carried around at the squad level and it provides automatic firepower to establish the base of fire. It's an LMG and so are all the other ones you mentioned.
>>29426875
Huh, so it does, I never see anyone talk about it.
I guess it isn't -quite- as pressing as with the MG42, given the lower rate of fire, but it does make sense that it features it.
>>29426883
at least the main issue was fixed with the introduction of the DPM, and then the RP46 came out and its GG, belt fed and thic as fug barrel
>>29424873
>magazine blocking your sight and less reliable.
can a person be this retarded?
>>29424775
M1919A6
>>29424873
>>29424928
>>29425512
YouTube knowledge on german WWII weaponary:the posts
Seriously, if you have never shot, maintainaced or worked with the MG42/MG3, keep your stupid away from threads about it.
Sincerely
a german Staffsergant
>>29427089
In my ignorant opinion they should not have transitioned to a fixed barrel with the intermediate-cartridge RPD
opinions?
>asks for best Guns
>Says no Jam machines
>Posts a Jam Machine
Nigger
>>29427205
Scheiß BRD Söldner.
Japshit LMG best LMG
>>29427013
Yup, the reason noone talks about it is because everyone sees the MG42 as the pinnacle of german MG design, though quite frankly they had alot of good designs. Sadly only two were used in the ground role to a significant extent.
The barrel change system on the MG42 is also much better, and tends to be pointed out as one of the best features of the gun. Whereas the MG34 barrel change system, although decent, was far from as innovative and effective as the one on the MG42
I don't see why you wouln't feature a quick change barrel for a belt fed machine gun. The MG34 cycles around 900 rpm, and with continious fire from a belt fed weapon, barrels tend to get quite hot.
The MG3 fires at around the 800-900, and of course retains the quick barrel change system from the 42.
>>29427638
>I don't see why you wouln't feature a quick change barrel for a belt fed machine gun.
True, though I think the Pecheneg lacks a quick detach barrel, and instead it is finned, and has "forced air-cooling".
I have no idea how well this works.
>MG3 has 800-900rpm
That's a good bit more sane than the MG42 which I think averaged at over 1200rpm (1500rpm in some models IIRC). I don't think there's any practical reason for any infantry/squad level weapon to have an RPM above 900, that's already plenty fast, anything higher should have burst-fire or be vehicle-mounted/crew-served.
>>29424775
>LMG
>full size round
bunch of retards in this thread
>>29427861
>>29427142
underrated post.
.30 cal was pretty fucking excellent at what it did.
>>29427638
>>29427841
Is it the weight of the bolt which determines the rate of fire of a firearm?
>>29427931
weight of bolt, gas pressure, various spring tensions
>>29426047
what the fuck did i just read? im a slavaboo but this is like out of stalins gospel
>>29426047
>Yet every soldier was issued 3 magazines, while the Germans only issued 1 spare magazine for every K43.
The idea with each was that you'd use the magazine fitted on the gun and then reload with clips, the SVT was (ideally) issued with extra ones for emergencies.
The K43 was generally brittle and would beat itself to death, people who want to use them today have to get specialty gunsmithing done to them so that they don't break. However, it had substantially better magazines and was considerably more accurate than the SVT.
Neither was particularly good.
>>29424824
>not being strong enough to carry my mother
>>29426047
>a long barrel on a service rifle is a great trait
When i read this i knew the jig was up
>>29426215
to be fair, the fedorov was originally designed to use a proprietary intermediate cartridge and only later was it adapted to 6.5 arisaka which had broadly similar characteristics to the original round. the point seems lost on the majority of. . . *ahem* "Teutonic weapon enthusiasts".
that said, it's a silly semantical argument in the first place.
>>29424775
Why didn't those dumb commies just make this thing belt fed?
Finally, I can post my masterpiece again.
>>29428375
They did, its called an RP-46, a bolt on belt feed mechanism for the DPM lmg, it allows use of SG43 belts or you could take it off and use traditional pans :Y
>>29428434
Well OK then, carry on.
>>29426794
Fuck off spaghetti. The Owen Gun was the best SMG of WW2
>>29427841
The PKM has a rate of fire of around 650 RPM. I don't know if the PKP has the same, but that would make sense. With such a comparatively low rate of fire, and this air cooling system, I could see that it would be sufficent. However, I still dont see why you would not at least include quick change barrel as an option. Maybe its not neccesary at all? Modern materials and design could possibly make the barrel cool enough, but I don't know.
MG42 had a very high rate of fire, which has its benefits, and drawbacks for a LMG role, but mostly I think drawbacks. By the time the MG42 was widely fielded, you would have a Wehrmacht mainly on the defense, and mounted on a tripod, with sufficent supply of ammo it was an excellent machine gun. In the LMG role it would be more used like a GPMG would be used today, with one man carrying the gun, and one carrying the ammo, or maybe even a third guy with exta ammo if needed. Not resembling a modern LMG like the FN minimi very much.
>>29428484
Hrmhrm.
>>29425820
I would like to point out that MP40 and MP38 are WAY better than the Sten. The only thing the Brits can say about Sten being better than MP is that the magazine is on the side rather than beneath and therefore the gun is easier to use while lying down. As far as reliability and accuracy go MP38/40 are much better.
Dinner Plate 28.
>>29428571
Yes, the MPs are better, but they have the same inherent flaw, which is the same magazine design, which is weak and somewhat unreliable (I'll give the Sten points for being cheaper and easier to make, having less parts).
Also, again, like with German guns, Stens weren't all made at the same place, some were made at factories proper, some were made in workshops by decently competent machinists/mechanics, and some were made in basements/sheds by people who only had a vague idea about what they were doing.
Basically, not all Stens are equal.
>>29428610
Refer to >>29428392 you tard. Joke already used.
>>29424775
MG42 Brand MG42
>>29426794
that's a funny looking m3 grease gun
>>29428532
The PKP is intended to be a squad level lmg. In practice when the pkm was used in this role role guys wouldn't change the barrel, they'd shoot until the barrel glowed. The PKP has a heavier barrel and the air cooling should give it 600rounds of continuous fire, which should be plenty in the lmg role.
You're getting all wrapped up in the cyclic rate of fire. It's not that important. Generally the sustained rate of fire shouldn't exceed 200 rounds a minute.
