Best Pistol of WW2

[WilliamDS]

Colt .45 automatic
Browning (UK) and P-38 {Germany}; TT-30 {USSR}
I put these last three in second place-simply because the caliber is smaller than a .45
The luger I place dead last for the simple reason it was not adopted by the US Army it failed the dirt/water test; another reason the .45 was chosen is because .38 pistol used in the Phillippines 1899-1901 wasnt strong enough in battle against charging warriors...

The Parabellum was withdrawn from further consideration when DWM decided not to produce a sample series past the first two prototypes. Each company that passed the initial trials had to build a series of 100 test pistols at their own expense. Colt built 100, Savage built 181 as apparently 81 were lost before the Army received them, and DWM built only the initial two. All three had passed the initial tests to the extent they were considered satisfactory for service.
Interestingly, the Navy and Marine Corps were trialing the Remington Model 53 (a .45 ACP Model 51), but with the outbreak of WWI decided to cut costs by adopting the same handgun as the Army. At the time this was not necessarily standard procedure, often the Army and Navy would adopt different small arms and even cartridges.

[ChristopherPerrien]

Long time ago , made a post error. The Browning HiPower has less parts (37) than a 45 ACP(44).

[genstab]

General interest post here, dealing with the user's army conceding their pistols were shitty, I have a FN Model 1910 which my uncle, a Navy flier, brought back from the Pacific. He probably bought it from an Army soldier or Marine who had to get it the hard way. The pistol's holster has Japanese markings on it. This particular FN 1910 (actually made in 1940 by the serial number) is 7.65 mm (.32 caliber). They were also made as 9mm kurz (short) or .380 caliber guns- really all that has to be done to convert them is change the barrel and mag. It is the same gun that killed Franz Ferdinand and his wife and started World War I, though I have heard both that one- in a museum today- was a 7.65 mm but some sources say it is a 9 mm kurz.

FN expert author Anthony Vanderlinden told me that before the war the Japanese ordered a shipment of FN model 1910 pistols and mine is one of them. There you have it- the Japanese Army knew their pistols were junk. BTW, Vanderlinden has a very good book with plenty of photos on the history of FN Herstal's guns.

Best,
Bill

[von thoma]

Walther P-38.

[vladalex]

1. Walther P-38.
2. Walther P-38.
3. Walther P-38.
...
...
...
Others ...

[Sid Guttridge]

Hi von Thoma and vladalex,

OK, so do we have any examples of the Walther P-38 killing anyone in conventional combat where it was the primary weapon of choice rather than that of last resort?

Cheers,

Sid.

[vladalex]

Of course, not.
Perhaps it is important for you, and that’s the reason I responded, but for me not.
Today, when the technology cancels quality of almost everything has been built in the past, it is risky to compare things based on efficiency.
Because otherwise it would be preferable a fighter-plane Foker Triplane instead of an F-22, a bow used in the Battle of Hastings instead of crossbows that is used today at the World Championships or any German submarine type VII instead of any atomic submarine - evidently untested in a real battle and so on ...
However, I had a Walther P-38 in my hand, fired him about 100 cartridges at a paper target with circles and from a distance of 10m - 35 feet it’s impossible to do less than 28 points , only if you are totally untrained.
So, I keep my ranking proposal ...
Regards,
Vladalex

[Gulo]

1. Walther P-38.
2. Walther P-38.
3. Walther P-38.
...
...
...
Others ...

I spoke to a veteran who compared the Vis 35 with the Walther P-38 and in his opinion the German gun did not work well when it was dirty. You can say: "He preferred Vis because he was a nationalist". Maybe. But this man had a collection of over a hundred (!) guns and if he says that Walther had problems, he might be right. This man used pistols for many days in difficult conditions, in a destroyed city, so he probably could have judged better than officers who sometimes just took out the gun and had time to clean it often. He also praised decocker but maybe this is less important.

[vladalex]

No comment about personal and subiective opinion.
P-38 was the gun used by one of the best army of the world ...
It was designed and builded , especially for the army.
No german guns, rifles or machine guns work well when it was dirty ...
Russian guns, rifles or machine guns have not this problems ...
It's OK a conclusions based on this two statements ?
Regards,
Vladalex.

[Gulo]

the best army of the world ...

This is subiective opinion. In addition, it depends on what year you speak.

No german guns, rifles or machine guns work well when it was dirty ...

And you think that it was a good weapon for war? Of course I know that the Germans like to clean, but it is rather difficult in the war. The same problem was with the Panther and Tiger wheels. There was a small gap between them and they had to be clean.

[vladalex]

Hello Gulo,
I think that ( excuse for offtopic ) you have a little problem, a little but problem.
That is : Do you not see in a sentence, than what you like or what you do not like, as appropriate.
In my last post I write " one of the best army in the world " ,but you have seen only
" the best army in the world ". Is a little difference, no ?
Back to our subject.
You not respond to my question from my last post, but expand the problem of
discussion, comparing our subject whith the wheels of tanks. Let's be serious !

Best regards,
Vladalex

[Gulo]

OK, I read too fast. But the quality of the entire German army is irrelevant. The English used an old revolver and then some Italian pistol for a small cartridge, but the British planes were good. Walther certainly had a big advantage: DA/SA. This is certainly important especially for a police pistol. But if Walther did not work when he was dirty... This is a big problem in the war. The question: did not work when it was just a bit dirty? Heavily dirty?

[vladalex]

Not very OK .
The response to my question is YES or NO ?
Another question only for you :
Is it possible that Germany lost the war because of the terrible dirt from the front ?
And finally :
the complex problems that appearing in different army when weapons are dirty,
or the soldiers do not clean their fighting equipment, exceed me intellectually.
I wish you good health and good look,
Vladalex

[Sid Guttridge]

Hi vladalex,

Given that this thread hasn't yet found anyone killed in conventional battle by any pistol, even a Walther P-38, it seems unlikely in the extreme that dirt in pistols influenced events anywhere much at all in WWII. Hence my scepticism about any search for the "Best Pistol of WW2". It is like looking for the best item on the menu of the Titanic. We may find it, but it rather misses the point that nutrition wasn't a significant problem on the liner's maiden voyage.

On the other hand, tank maintenance was likely a major issue because the weapon was one of the decisive factors in the war and so serves some attention.

Cheers,

Sid.

[Gulo]

No german guns, rifles or machine guns work well when it was dirty ...
Russian guns, rifles or machine guns have not this problems ...
It's OK a conclusions based on this two statements ?.

That is the question? My conclusion is: Germans made a mistake while designing a weapon. The more interesting question is: why? They had an experience from the previous war.

Is it possible that Germany lost the war because of the terrible dirt from the front ?

Maybe some German reports contain an answer to this question.

Given that this thread hasn't yet found anyone killed in conventional battle by any pistol .

I've heard about this situation in Vietnam. The soldier had a bolt-action sniper rifle and a pistol. When the enemies were close, he used a pistol. I also saw a documentary film from the second war and a soldier went there with a pistol in his hand, it was probably during the fighting in the city. Maybe the pistol was more comfortable than a long bolt-action rifle in this situation. A soldier also told me he must have a pistol and hold it in one hand, because in the other hand he sometimes carries an object.