MG42
-
- Banned
- Posts: 113
- Joined: 05 Mar 2003, 23:51
- Location: San Diego
MG42
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
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
- Aufklarung
- Member
- Posts: 5136
- Joined: 17 Mar 2002, 05:27
- Location: Canada
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
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
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
http://www.diddybop.demon.co.uk/bustin1.htm
mg42
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
The Us Army was impressed, as many others were and they went on to make there own version.
admfisher
- Christian Ankerstjerne
- Forum Staff
- Posts: 14028
- Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 15:07
- Location: Denmark
- Contact:
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
Christian
-
- Banned
- Posts: 113
- Joined: 05 Mar 2003, 23:51
- Location: San Diego
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
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
- Scott Smith
- Member
- Posts: 5602
- Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 22:17
- Location: Arizona
- Contact:
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.
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.
- Aufklarung
- Member
- Posts: 5136
- Joined: 17 Mar 2002, 05:27
- Location: Canada
Hi AndyAndy H wrote:.......British GPMG.........
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.
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'.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)
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
-
- founded 1717
- wnsr2.jpg (35.56 KiB) Viewed 1535 times
-
- c9.jpeg (3.14 KiB) Viewed 1535 times
-
- c6.jpeg (3.65 KiB) Viewed 1536 times
-
- Banned
- Posts: 113
- Joined: 05 Mar 2003, 23:51
- Location: San Diego
-
- Banned
- Posts: 113
- Joined: 05 Mar 2003, 23:51
- Location: San Diego
- Von_Mannteufel
- Member
- Posts: 1913
- Joined: 17 Feb 2003, 06:49
- Location: Brasil
- Contact:
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.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