Literally every other submachine gun of WW2 was better
Yeah probably true. I actually held one at a shop recently, and was surprised at how small it was. I guess because you only ever see it being used by Italian manlets who make it look huge, and people always rightly bitch about its weight, I expected it to be much bigger than it was. Still a solid block of metal to be carrying around in the pacific.
>>62910145Thompsons are quintessential 30s gangster kino the fact that they were used in dubyadubyatwo is just icing on the cake.
>>62910145It was obsolete by the time of WW2 but it pioneered the category. The French had a heavy machined hunk of clockwork in a similar vein but it fired the sad 7.65mm instead of anything actually good.
type 100
>>62910145>slopThis word has lost all meaning
>one of the most overbuilt, overdesigned, expensive SMGs to ever be fielded in meaningful numbers AND appearing in wars 50+ years after its inception>slopYou should kill yourself
Was good for the time (a century ago ffs) and has infinite SOVL. You can’t imagine a Tommy gun without a gangster in a Pinstripe suit.
bait used to be believable
>>62910145Until you need to club a motherfucker.
>>62910145>PPSH and thompsonHow common was it for troops to actually use drum mags, like media always depicts?
>>62910516the military guns werent drum compatible
>>62910145Doesn't matter. Dead war of no remaining importance and an obsolete turd like everything except M2 Browning.
>>62910516Only the M1928 could take drum mags, and was only used in limited numbers by the US marines and Brits during lend lease.
>>62910533you've dunning kruger'd yourself
>>62910516PPSH drums were pretty common, but they weren't for the Thompson. Tommy drums could only be used with the 1928 (and 1921, but those weren't used by the military) and they weren't well liked by troops because they weren't all that reliable and were heavy. The M1 and M1A1 couldn't use them at all.
>>62910545Brits got tangent sights on those beasts?
Still reliably made more consistently than an MP40 that naziboos tried to recreate constantly and fail like 80 years later. Even though it's considered a horrid mess of machinery to create, heavy, firing a sub optimal round for most purposes. Even stamped steel bullshit desperation guns really fail to ever work or mass produce anything. It's got a storied history that's out lasted it's competitors and I'd trust someone that isn't great with a pistol to shoot a lot more accurately with a stock with some training. It does seem like a real bullshit weapon you don't get a proper rifle with a better round, and you still get a weapon that's kind of bullshit to carry around that clatters and bangs on shit all the time like a rifle with a sling compared to a pistol in a holster. People were still cobbling together trench maces so any gun is probably better then no gun in those kind of circumstances.
>>62910145I dunno the PPD was Hella sloppy, and most marks of the Sten's were jam-o-matics>>62910196The French SMG was mechanically fine and quirky but compact, 7.65 (aka .30 Pedersen) is what the French had in abundance anyway - the real downside is production numbers because they went full retard on their bolt and reciever cuts - tldr like alot of 1930's SMG's>>62910197It's an MP-28/34 tube gun clone in a underpowered cartridge - it was fine. Not coming out with it 5 years sooner is the problem - they should have been mass producing MP-28 clones as soon as they captured them from the Changkoros
>>62910533the initial M1926A1 (or whatever designation) were just standard off the shelf thompsons that were compatible >>62910549the later ones like the M1 and M1A1 werent
>>62910145The M2 carbine makes the Thompson look like it was designed by retards for gorillas, but the Thompson is still the most desirable widely produced WWII submachine gun for a reason. It is reliable (assuming you don’t fuck up the mags) and durable. And while the durability advantage doesn’t matter for a military trying to buy 1 million of something for a bunch of second line troops who probably won’t need to use it, since it comes with the trade off of tremendous expense, the gun is still excellent to shoot.
>>62910533Why not? Wasn’t controllable high-volume fire the whole point of the SMG?
>>62910549oh im sorry i wasnt specific enough for your autistic assthe m1 and m1a1 which was made specifically for the us military were not drum compatiblethe older versions which were civilian models sold to militaries took drums
>This thread brought to you by Grease Gun gang
>>62910589the drums suck to carry, rattle, and load differently into the guns.
>>62910591wow, it only took you 6 minutes to read the wikipedia article. next time just don't post if you're not knowledgeable
>>62910601someones butthurt he didnt get to be autist prime with his callout
>>62910589it's possible to achieve a lower volume of fire with drum mags if they don't work right and are cumbersome to use30 rounds turned out to be the magic number for magazine round count
i have shot one, it was not great. climbed fast, stock was awkward; not or methe M3A1 on the other hands, pure sex. i fucking love that grease gun
The Reising and any Sten variant save for the MK.V were flat out worse than the Thompson.
>>62910145normally id agree but you had to use a gaynigger buzzword therefore you are gay retarded and wrong
>>62910620>climbed fastImagine not being able to control handgun rounds out of a 10 lb gun
>>62910715the stocks ergonomics force it to climb, it is literally the worst solid stock on a smg. you can argue some flimsy wire folders or sliders are worse but the thompsons stock is awful.
>>62910715you sound like a no gunz faggot
>>62910145>higher ROF non-milspec models more controllable>late min-maxed production got the costs down at leastTrue. But with the ubiquity of interwar gangster films to the point of it being a propaganda tic on the Axis side, they just had that badass cachet.>>62910589Intrinsic unreliability. Otherwise in the Pacific and banzai charge bullshit, that extra sustained fire would have brought a bit of peace of mind. Marines were running Springfields a lot later than most over there in the beginning. >>62910722Yep. Fairburn & Sykes manuals back East show them point shooting maxxing with the stock pinched to to the torso often.
>>62910196>>62910571what french smg are you guys talking about?mas 38?
>>62910145>Overated>SlopOne or the other in this case.
>>62910145yeah but i bet the fit and finish was pretty good, or atleast I hope that it was because the whole reason they hated it was because it cost too fuckin much comparative to the completely stamped steel car fenders theyd rather you to carry.
>>62910892Yeah. It sucked. MAT-49 slays.
>>62910145>Literally every other submachine gun of WW2 was betterThe BSA version of the Thompson was worse.If a pistol caliber carbine counts as an SMG, the S&W "light rifle" was leagues worse than any Thompson variant.
not overrated its pretty damn good, but maybe too good and overbuilt+overpriced and anything else would do
Beretta M38 was the best smg of WW2 and all other answers are wrong>9mm>reliable and has good magazines>reasonable rate of fire making it easy to control (fuck you PPSH)
>>62914542Some of the really fancy European wooden stocked inter-war SMGs are in the running as best WWII subgun too. But they were all much more expensive and slow to produce than the Beretta.The similar-looking MP.41 isn't in the running simply because it uses single feed magazines which kinda suck.
>>62914542Based. Sterling debuted at the end of WWII though.And as goofy as it looks, the Owen was based.
>>62914542it was the M3A1 because the question is subjective and it was the final refinement of the dirt cheap but reliable sheet metal SMG concept
>>62914655>.45 ACPnoSMGs weren't only a backup for vehicle crew or specialist weapon during the second world war, it was your primary
>>62910145behold
>>62914677Everything that makes .45 a poor carry cartridge makes it a good primary cartridge. Modern 9mm didn't exist yet, making the gap between their power wider.
>>62910145The Thompson was a design with World War I combat still in mind, just like the BAR. So of course they weren't ideal for the high-mobility warfare of WWII that was the exact opposite of WWI Western Front static trench warfare.
>>62914707>I like the Suomi, but what if we made it retarded instead of heavy?
>>62914711The problem with .45 ACP from SMGs is that the cartridge doesn't really benefit a lot from a longer barrel and in an open bolt design you end up with a really clunky reciprocating mass of a bolt. 9mm SMGs can hit stuff out to 200 yards while .45 ACP SMGs would struggle due to the sheer bullet drop
>>62914707
>>62910145>Literally every other submachine gun was betterThis is how you know OP is a midwit with very little understanding of WWII weapons
and mp3008and blyskawica
>>62914784DAST IS VERBOTEN
>>62914726Walking fire is based though, if retarded.
>>62910145A select fire M1 carbine, which was actually already fully designed, but they decided to only stick with semi auto last minute until Korea when they did start converting them to full auto with the M2, would’ve been a far better submachine gun for ww2 than the M1 Thompson. The gun isn’t bad by any means, it’s effective and reliable. But it is definitely overrated, It was far more expensive than a submachine gun needed to be, it was far heavier than a submachine gun practically should be, And it was far more complicated to produce that is a submachine gun ought to be. The M1 and later adopted full auto M2 carbine was lightweight, cheap, and simple to produce, which is what a submachine gun is actually meant to be.
>>62910722What was the idea behind giving the stock a drop like a Kentucky longrifle anyway?
>>62914711Funnily enough lol9mm was widely considered to be a more effective cartridge in the per round sense by both GIs and even immediate post war researchers. There were some interesting post war studies done on the effectiveness of axis weapons which claimed that the rounds higher velocity and frequently tougher construction made it better at breaking or shattering bone than .45.I don't put too much stock in that, but it's pretty funny to me given all the boomer fascination with the cartridge and 2 world wars memery.>>62914776Devils advocate, .45 is low enough velocity out of a handgun to actually run into some slight problems. Projectiles meaningfully under 1000fps are more likely to deflect off of bone than ones at or above it. Similarly .45 has surprisingly lack luster barrier performance in many loadings despite decent SD. Within the close ranges SMGs excell at the velocity increase .45 gets is more meaningful than the one 9mm does, although the 9mm will have a longer practical effective range
>>62910589Auto Ordinance raped the Army on pricing.
>>62910584Maybe the best part of the Thompson being such a shit gun is that while they were trying to come up with a replacement it got us the M1 Carbine in the mean time.
>>62910145Who cares, it looks cool
>>62910545Muhreens
>>62914968most engagement ranges for every war in the past 100 years have been 200-300 yards so it's important to at least be able to dip your toes into that range and .45 is unable to do so, even when given the advantage of a stock and 10 pound gun
>>62910145No shit a more than 20 year old design was overtaken by more recent designs. Still a cool gun.
based blish lock
>>62910196The cartridge is meh but at least the gun is small and lightweight.t. someone who handled one
Roland disagrees
>>62910560Those are the standard sights for the M1921 and M1928.
Too beautiful, too kind for this world...
>>62910145OP is a fag with poor taste and is part of the reason why everything is GLAWKS, (((SIGS)))), and GAYAR15 nowadays.
Which way
>>62910197100
>>62910145>Literally every other submachine gun of WW2 was betterYou sure about that?
>>62917647Don't forget that there's an even worse version of the Reising with (possibly) the worst folding stock of any firearm in history.
>>62916941Not present.
>>62914873Have you ever shot an m2? They were notorious in korean cold for not working. The m2 is not a very controlable gun on full auto despite what you think. I have shot two of them now and i really dont like the m2 at all. Its still has the sometimes questionable reliability of the m1 with more problems being full auto. The 30 round magazines are the single biggest problem of the gun. I have never and i repeat never have seen a fully loaded 30 rounder make it through a full mag dump with out a jam of some kind. Long story: gun was never meant to be full auto and several m2's were converted back to m1 standards and sold abroad. The m1 and m2 line were trying to do what the later m16 managed to do better. I love the m1 carbine design but its full of flaws that led to the design of a much better gun for the role. If i had to jump into the shit i would rather carry and m1 with mostly reliable 15 rounders then an m2 with 30 rounders. From my experience. Im sure their are people out there that have reliable 30 rounders with new springs and what not but i have just had a lot of negative experiences with the m2s. They are such cool looking and handy feeling guns then you pick up an m16 and just go "oh this thing does everything that gun does only better" just my autistic rant feel free to call me a faggot and why im wrong. /k/ is a magical place.
Once assault rifles were invented in the 40s-50s smgs honestly became obsolete. An SMG does nothing better than an ass salt rifle
>>62910145>extremely negative and crude opinion Do you feel better now? Is your life improving?
>>62917640Agreed. Quality effort post.
>>62918009This. I dont think i have ever wanted a gun more than the full auto m2carbine and after reading up im suprised by it and the all the problems the m14 had.
>>62917647>ResingGod what a POS. This happened last year:>Get a text from LGS, some boomer died & they are selling the guns from his estate. They know I like NFA stuff so they give me a heads-up.>I come over later. They hand me his old Resing to check out as I walk up to the counter.>First thing I notice is the front sight is drifted so far to the left I'm honestly expecting it to fall out>I actually reach my hand out to catch the sight, expecting its going to fall at any moment.>They comment "hey, don't move that, it took us all morning to get it sighted in, that's actually the correct position">Looks like it would hit two yards to the right at 10 yards distance, but apparently that's correct>Fit and finish is Soviet tier>>62917658There are some things, from past times and places, which are truly best forgotten.
>>62910145i wonder how much of their descision was to give the military an icon as a gun instead of something purely practicalsmgs werent particularly common but having a soldier see their officer carry around an infamous tommy gun has to carry at least some level of pride or inspiration with it
>>62910145>Literally every other submachine gun of WW2 was betterThere's no way this was better than a Thompson
>>62918726>controllable rate of fire>cartridge better suited to SMG use>cheap as fuck to build>doesn't spit gas into the eyes of the shooter through a vent hole placed in the worst possible place on the gun>doesn't weigh like 5 pounds more than it has any right to>has sufficient space for the bolt to travel so that it doesn't slam hard as fuck into the back of the receiver>has a proper magazine well making reloads quick and easyMy man, from a practical perspective the MP.3008 is legitimately superior to all versions of the Thompson
>>62918721I don't think the War Department and Army Chiefs cared at all about issuing and "iconic gun" so much as it was "well shit, the day we knew was coming has come while we had our thumbs up our collective asses and we've got to use what we've got on hand until we can build new shit. Tommy Guns are complicated, heavy, and expensive but they'll have to do for now. The SAS sure does love them!"As you mentioned, SMGs weren't "particularity common," which is correct. Because of that, they weren't given high priority even with the massive industrial resources the USA had. They did, however, make the effort to simplify and cost-reduce the M1928 design into the M1 and M1A1. (Forgotten Weapons does a good job explaining the cost reduction from 1928 to M1)Bear in mind, the US was (outside of Washington/Lend-Lease Act at least) pretending to be isolationist and was late to the game so they had to use whatever they had on hand by December 7th. M1928 Tommy Guns were that they had on hand and it took a couple years to get those simpler models, let alone Grease Guns. It takes a long time to design a new gun (Grease Guns and more practical M1 carbines), build a lot of them, and issue them to two fronts as well as your allies.
>>62918817Why did they even make the Grease gun instead of carbines with folding stock and pistol grip?
>>62918757Practical on paper, yes, but it also has the handicap of being a January-May 1945 German weapon. Meaning>pot metal or other low-quality metals>cottage industry machine shops made by dwindling quality tooling and personnel>low QE and parts interchangeability because so many different facilities invading their cities.It's a problem when your weapon may or may not feed/extract/fire consistently, let alone hold itself together. If this weapon was made in 1940 it would be a totally different story.Less-related:>made for Volksstrum and Hitler Youth because proper soldiers were all dead or deployed on other fronts.
>>62910145The gun did it's job pretty flawlessly, and it has a look of excellent mystique.
>>62918889What about these?
>>62918884They made a pistol-grip, folding wire stock M1 and select fire M2 in small numbers.However, a full auto SMG like an M3 still had a purpose that the M1 Carbine couldn't fill. It was still good for buildings and close-in jungle warfare, plus it;s more compact than an M1/M2 Carbine for drivers and tank crews.
>>62918934Was there a technical reason to limit it to semi auto or just the usual lack of imagination?
>>62918930I know of them. Were these actually good? Did the Poles make a better STEN than the British?
>>62918930>STEN clone with a smoothbore barrel and a terrible stockWorse than the Thompson.But it was made by hand in underground workshops in Nazi-occupied Warsaw. I don't think it counts.
>>62918953It's just a Sten a Pole secretly built in his basement out of whatever metal they could get their hands on.
>>62918951Probably the latter. Army brass still had that age-old though of "limit the fire rate of guns so the draftees don't get scared and waste ammo." That line of thinking went back to lever-actions in the Civil War to making the M16A2 and initial M4s burst fire.
>>62918009Pretty much all of the reliability issues of the M2 carbine were from the 30 round mags. If they designed a better more reliable magazine It wouldn’t have had most of those issues. But apparently that’s too difficult for the monkeys that work at Springfield.
>shits all over the Thompson in trials>selected to replace the Thompson>gun is reliant on brand new manufacturing technology>difficulties with advanced manufacturing means they never get mass produced>replaced by the General Motors M3Does this make the M2 Hyde worse than the Thompson?How did Hyde get away with this?
>>62910533>>62910545>>62910549The M1919, M1921 (this was the version most Prohibition-era gangsters used), M1928, and M1928A1 could all accept drum magazines and the latter two were standard issue in the US Military at the start of the war. The M1 and M1A1 variants that were introduced in late 1942 received new magazine catches that only allowed them to take 20 and 30 round stick magazines and these had largely superseded the the M1928/M1928A1 by 1944 (although the older models continued to see service right up until the end of the war).
>>62910516PPShs were initially issued exclusively with drum magazines (in fact they were usually issued with two drum mags right out of the factory and swapping magazines with different guns often caused failure to feed, because Soviet manufacturing lol) and more traditional stick magazines were introduced later on because they were cheaper, more reliable, and Soviet troops frequently complained about the long reload times (magazines were usually only loaded with around 60 rounds anyway to preserve the life of the spring).IIRC, late in the war, Soviet NCOs and assault troops usually carried a loaded drum magazine at the start of an engagement and would switch to stick magazines after expending it.
Pic related is the best SMG of WW2 but nobody know it existed because lazy wops used it.
>>62919447Lets not forget the PPSh bomber.
>>62919471Sten is best. Quantity > Quality
>>62919509>Quantity > QualityYou don't say.
Smith and Wesson number 3.
>>62910145>has never shot oneThe M1 completely outclasses every other SMG except for M43M, hitting someone with a .45 WILL put someone down and nevermind putting rounds through concealment, the 9mm will deflect off brush and boards while a .45 will punch through and continue to punch into your torso.
>>62920507>9mm will deflect off brushLol
gentelmen...we can make it hevier
>>62920726>Thomas Gun
