MG42

Discussions on the small arms used by the Axis forces.
Post Reply
ReconMarine
Banned
Posts: 113
Joined: 05 Mar 2003, 23:51
Location: San Diego

MG42

#1

Post by ReconMarine » 09 Mar 2003, 18:15

Does anyone in this form know if the Germans helped develop the M60 Machine gun?

My xo (superior officer) told me that the M60 is basically a German weapon.

However, it is made in the US and I have seen nor heard that it was German until just recently.

Thanks for any knowledge you can impart.

/s/ Recon Marine

User avatar
Aufklarung
Member
Posts: 5136
Joined: 17 Mar 2002, 05:27
Location: Canada

#2

Post by Aufklarung » 09 Mar 2003, 18:51

Hi
During the end of and shortly after WW2 the US had a MG called the T44. This light belt fed MG design was greatly influenced by the German MG42. The feed mech was a direct lift from the German wpn. Plus the piston and bolt assy were copied from the FG42, another German MG.
The T44 made it to production as the M60 and the initial wpn was not a success. Changing barrels was a real chore due to bad design. This and many other small problems took a while to eliminate but now it is as efficient as any like MG.
I do not think it is still in front line US Army service but may be wrong.
Regards
A :)


User avatar
Ranger
Member
Posts: 25
Joined: 18 Jan 2003, 02:40
Location: USA

#3

Post by Ranger » 09 Mar 2003, 23:45

Here is a link if you want to read more about the developement of the M-60 and it's German roots.

http://www.diddybop.demon.co.uk/bustin1.htm

User avatar
admfisher
Member
Posts: 645
Joined: 30 Mar 2002, 02:38
Location: Toronto
Contact:

mg42

#4

Post by admfisher » 10 Mar 2003, 01:04

I will throw my hat in here to say Yes.
The Us Army was impressed, as many others were and they went on to make there own version.

admfisher

User avatar
Andy H
Forum Staff
Posts: 15326
Joined: 12 Mar 2002, 21:51
Location: UK and USA

#5

Post by Andy H » 10 Mar 2003, 01:10

Just on a personnel note, IMO the M60 is so inferior to the British GPMG, but thats for another thread

Yes I agree that it's (M60) roots are German

Andy

User avatar
Christian Ankerstjerne
Forum Staff
Posts: 14028
Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 15:07
Location: Denmark
Contact:

#6

Post by Christian Ankerstjerne » 10 Mar 2003, 01:33

I don't know if it's a myth or a fact, but I've heard that the Americans had severe problems using M.G. 42s for testing right after the war - they loaded them with 7.62mm ammo in stead of 7.92! (I can imagiune that the difference in ammunition size would not be apparent unless you matched them closely...)

Christian

ReconMarine
Banned
Posts: 113
Joined: 05 Mar 2003, 23:51
Location: San Diego

#7

Post by ReconMarine » 10 Mar 2003, 07:42

Well number one, I do not know about the US Army. We are completely different in my [u]Marine Corps[/u].

We have a different version of the M60 than the US Army has.

Also, yes, the M60 is still used as a "front line" weapon (whatever that means).

All my Marines will more than than likely be using our version of the 60 for quite some time.

However, we do use the a foreign (Belgian) made "SAW" Squad Automatic Weapon.

It fires approx. 1,500 rounds per minute of 5.56 Nato ball rounds.

It also accepts magazines from the Colt M-16 A-2.

But the barrel must be changed often, so not sutained fire.

I have never worked with the Tommies, but my Marines and I worked with French Foreign Legionaires in desert storm.

They had some serious automatic firepower.

But, i gotta say that the 60 with its 7.62 Nato Ball round is my best friend and I would not be comfortable with anything else in my fire teams for serious fire suppression and ambush. (or for cutting down forests for that matter)

/S/ Recon Marine

User avatar
Scott Smith
Member
Posts: 5602
Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 22:17
Location: Arizona
Contact:

#8

Post by Scott Smith » 13 Mar 2003, 04:02

The U.S. M-60 is nothing like either the German MG 34 or the MG 42 other than looks and changeable barrel. Also, the M-60 has disintegrating links on the belt and not the continuous ones. I understand that the NATO version of the MG 42 in 7.62 x 51mm NATO can use both types of belts, however.

Anyway, the U.S. Army tried to copy the German MG 42 in the standard .30-06 ammunition (7.62 x 65mm) but the longer cartridge case than the German 8mm round (7.92 x 57mm) didn't work in the design. This was before the U.S. Army went to the shortened .308 Winchester (7.62 x 51mm NATO) for the M-14 that replaced the BAR and the M-1 Garand. A completely new design was done for the M-60 in 7.62 NATO. Most munitions suppliers don't want to knockoff something old but to sell the government their own design, even if it is inferior and more expensive.

The only drawback with the MG 34 was its expensive machining, and with the MG 42 the higher rate-of-fire, which war planners think is unecessary and wasteful. The M-60 solves both problems but it is nowhere near as good. It's okay if kept well-maintained. Fun to shoot.
:)
Last edited by Scott Smith on 22 Mar 2003, 13:20, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Aufklarung
Member
Posts: 5136
Joined: 17 Mar 2002, 05:27
Location: Canada

#9

Post by Aufklarung » 17 Mar 2003, 04:03

Andy H wrote:.......British GPMG.........
Hi Andy
Unless you are talking about a Bren MG you can't think the current Gimpy in the Brit forces is British. :? FN MAG is Belgian, methinks. Mine is. 8) Just pointing that out in a friendly informative way. :D
ReconMarine wrote:But, i gotta say that the 60 with its 7.62 Nato Ball round is my best friend and I would not be comfortable with anything else in my fire teams for serious fire suppression and ambush. (or for cutting down forests for that matter)
I've fired your M60 just last year and I gotta say that it does not compare favourably to the Belgian 7.62mm FN MAG that we(as the C6) and about 25 other countrys use. Same, same for that M249SAW. Lottsa other countrys use them. Nice tho'.
BTW can you tell me the origins of the USMC "Semper Fidelis" motto? How did it come about. No one can answer that Question for me. :? Thanx.

Regards
A :)
Attachments
wnsr2.jpg
founded 1717
wnsr2.jpg (35.56 KiB) Viewed 1535 times
c9.jpeg
c9.jpeg (3.14 KiB) Viewed 1535 times
c6.jpeg
c6.jpeg (3.65 KiB) Viewed 1536 times

ReconMarine
Banned
Posts: 113
Joined: 05 Mar 2003, 23:51
Location: San Diego

#10

Post by ReconMarine » 17 Mar 2003, 07:17

Semper Fidelis simply means "Always Faithful"

/S/ ReconMarine

User avatar
Korbius
Member
Posts: 1795
Joined: 01 Oct 2002, 00:53
Location: DC

#11

Post by Korbius » 17 Mar 2003, 14:29

ReconMarine wrote:Semper Fidelis simply means "Always Faithful"

/S/ ReconMarine
Hey ReconMarine, Auflklarung probably knows what Semper Fidelis is, but I think he was asking for the origins on how it came to be used always as the motto of the Marines. Do you know it? :wink:

ReconMarine
Banned
Posts: 113
Joined: 05 Mar 2003, 23:51
Location: San Diego

#12

Post by ReconMarine » 19 Mar 2003, 09:02

To be honest, I never asked.

I assume it has been used for a long time.

Our US Coast Guard uses Semper Peratus (Always prepared) (not sure of

spelling).

I will ask my XO and get back on this one.

/S/ ReconnMarine

User avatar
Von_Mannteufel
Member
Posts: 1913
Joined: 17 Feb 2003, 06:49
Location: Brasil
Contact:

#13

Post by Von_Mannteufel » 20 Mar 2003, 08:05

Christian Ankerstjerne wrote:I don't know if it's a myth or a fact, but I've heard that the Americans had severe problems using M.G. 42s for testing right after the war - they loaded them with 7.62mm ammo in stead of 7.92! (I can imagiune that the difference in ammunition size would not be apparent unless you matched them closely...)

Christian
well, i'm maybe wrong but i have to disagree with you, it must be a myth because MG42 used 7.92K ammo and USArmy used .30-06, wich is quite longer.

Post Reply

Return to “Small Arms”