Best WW1/WW2 SMG ?

What are you doing with it? It's chopped :(

It's only the reciever that's chopped. I'm going to rebuild it as a semi auto with a new reciever. Chopped recievers are not the end of the world by any means.

Side note... I had the provincial Firearms Officer here at my place today. Amongst other things we discussed my open bolt semi sten. The Firearms Officer is strongly of the opinion that the mag well is most certainly NOT the reciever or the registerable part of the firearm. I got my MKII checked out at the same time, same verdict.:)
 
Sten is the strategic SMG. I haven't fired them all so I don't know which one is the range queen. They all do exactly the same job, the winner would be the most reliable.

I don't know what you mean by a strategic SMG, but I do know that the don't all do exactly the same job. The Suomi has a longer range than the Sten, it is also much more accurate, and with it's drum mag is capable of a greater volume of fire. It was also made to last. The difference between these two weapons is vast.
 
Side note... I had the provincial Firearms Officer here at my place today. Amongst other things we discussed my open bolt semi sten. The Firearms Officer is strongly of the opinion that the mag well is most certainly NOT the reciever or the registerable part of the firearm. I got my MKII checked out at the same time, same verdict.

I take it you still don't have a certificate for either gun Spencer?

Give this guy a call:
F.A. William (Bill) ETTER
Senior Firearms Technologist
Section Head
Firearms Reference Table
Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Firearms Support Services Directorate
NPS - Rm 504

He will sort out for you quickly what the RCMP have determined to be the registered part of a sten mk2 or mk3. Did you use an original mk2 magwell on your mk2 sten?

On the FRT data for my sten mk2 SAS they were quite definite on what was the registered part (the magwell). And for a similar gun to your mk3, the BD3008, they also make mention in the text that the magwell is the registered part of the gun, and that it is welded to the tube.

However, that said, there are a few points supporting that the tube/trigger assy is the frame/receiver. A court case in Alberta years back, the judge mentions that the frame is the tube and trigger mech (crown vs rogan). Also, the FRT text on a couple of the stens, including the mk3 and the mk2, make mention that :
"factory name or code letters may be marked on the top of the magazine housing or on the body of the receiver/frame.
and from the mk2:
rotating magazine housing which can be swivelled around the receiver/frame to cover......

So by the RCMP's own text, the magwell is not the frame/receiver.

But the problem you will run into is this: it will be the lab which will have to inspect your gun. And they are the one who approve the product. So even though you may be right, they are going to seize the gun, and you will have to go to court to get it back. And even if you do win as to which part is the receiver, they can still likely convert your open bolt gun into a F/A in about 1 minute.
 
I take it you still don't have a certificate for either gun Spencer?

No nothing.

Give this guy a call:?

I spoke with him ages ago, he was going to get back to me but I have heard nothing since. The Firearms Officer is going to speak with him on my behalf.

He will sort out for you quickly what the RCMP have determined to be the registered part of a sten mk2 or mk3. Did you use an original mk2 magwell on your mk2 sten?.

No I made a new one.

When I spoke to him he did not seem to know what the registerable part of a MKIII was. He said "what is the reciever, that is the question " :confused:

On the FRT data for my sten mk2 SAS they were quite definite on what was the registered part (the magwell). And for a similar gun to your mk3, the BD3008, they also make mention in the text that the magwell is the registered part of the gun, and that it is welded to the tube.

However, that said, there are a few points supporting that the tube/trigger assy is the frame/receiver. A court case in Alberta years back, the judge mentions that the frame is the tube and trigger mech (crown vs rogan). Also, the FRT text on a couple of the stens, including the mk3 and the mk2, make mention that :

and from the mk2:


So by the RCMP's own text, the magwell is not the frame/receiver.

But the problem you will run into is this: it will be the lab which will have to inspect your gun. And they are the one who approve the product. So even though you may be right, they are going to seize the gun, and you will have to go to court to get it back. .
And even if you do win as to which part is the receiver, they can still likely convert your open bolt gun into a F/A in about 1 minute.[/QUOTE]

The lab will not be inspecting the MKIII, and the Firearms Officer is well aware of that. As for the MKII it has a newly made magwell. Of course they could conver the open bolt semi to full auto, but I think it would take longer than a minute. There are other semi autos that would be much quicker to convert to full auto than a semi auto sten yet they are still being sold and are in wide circulation.

I could rob a bank, I could publicly perform an indecent act with a dead moose, but that would probably be illegal too. The list is endless :)
 
I don't know what you mean by a strategic SMG, but I do know that the don't all do exactly the same job. The Suomi has a longer range than the Sten, it is also much more accurate, and with it's drum mag is capable of a greater volume of fire. It was also made to last. The difference between these two weapons is vast.

I mean that the Sten's main function was to allow the UK to arm all its troops, giving them the means to fight a war. As opposed to hitting things at 200 yards.
The .303 Browning was the strategic HMG, it won the Battle of Britain.
 
I mean that the Sten's main function was to allow the UK to arm all its troops, giving them the means to fight a war. As opposed to hitting things at 200 yards.
The .303 Browning was the strategic HMG, it won the Battle of Britain.

It certainly fullfilled that function very well indeed, but I fail to see how that puts in the league of the best smg's.
 
spencer the rcmp techs change the rules as they go they can tell you one thing then do another

WHEN you submit your gun rest assured you wont have it back for 1+ years

even if they find it prohibited FA or CA you wont get charged you will just lose it (althrough if that is thier ruleing PM me for other options...)

you may also be wise to register with controled goods .......Im in the process as was recomended by several parties involved
 
There has been several threads on stens here of late, and I have even put one together myself. I like them because of the simplicity, a more basic weapon would be hard to envisage. It is also an easy weapon for almost anyone to put together precisely because it is so basic. The trouble with stens is that at the end of the day they really are a heap of crap when compared to almost everything else.

I like several WW1/WW2 smg's, but to me one that stands out way above the rest is what I would describe as a first generation smg, the Suomi KP-31. I would rate it the best due to the reasons listed below. ( not necessarily in the correct order)

1) Exellent accuracy.

2) Superb firepower, especially with its 71 rnd drum

3) Longer range than most smg's

4) Quick change barrel and barrel jacket.

5) Fully adjustable sights.

6) Rate of fire vacuum regulating valve.

7) Detatchable trigger group.

8) Takes a wide variety of magazines.

9 ) Last but by no means least, the outstanding workmanship and materials of the entire weapon, it was made to last and it just oozes quality. It is absolutely beautifull.

I can only think of one downside, and that is it's weight.

The Suomi KP-31 was a very expensive gun to produce, it was this that lead to it's demise.


suomi_01.jpg

What good is it if you had "THE Best Sub Machine Gun", whatever that may be, yet ended up DEAD in the war???? It's only as the person using it!!! LOL
:slap:
 
Old myth.

If you had the bolt on a sten closed and a loaded magazine, and the gun was dropped, it could go off once. But this was not the approved way of carrying the sten, it was supposed to be open and the cocking handle locked into it's safety slot. You could drop it 10 feet and it would not go off.

If a sten did run away, it would not spin around and around either. Laidler did a test with a similar open bolt gun (the sterling) and it just sat there happily chugging away.

Actually I had a Sten run away, but notin the way you would think.

Went to an indoor range and the PRATT at the counter said my steel jacketed rounds would punch holes in his backstop. so I bought his reloads. the gun emptied most of the magazine AFTER I released the trigger. His 9mm might have beek ok or a handgun, but wasn't hot enough to drive the bolt on the sten back far enough to catch the sear.
 
Actually I had a Sten run away, but notin the way you would think.

Went to an indoor range and the PRATT at the counter said my steel jacketed rounds would punch holes in his backstop. so I bought his reloads. the gun emptied most of the magazine AFTER I released the trigger. His 9mm might have beek ok or a handgun, but wasn't hot enough to drive the bolt on the sten back far enough to catch the sear.

I have had the same thing happen in my Sterling SMG when lesser brands of commercial ammo were used. Big surprise, the gun did not try to spin.
I generally only use IVI military surplus ammo in mine, but occasionally the stocks run low. Lots of oomph in those rounds.
 
That's like saying what good is it driving a Rolls Royce when you can drive a Ford.

If it's a Ford GT40, I'll take it!

But having "THEE BEST" SMG will not guarantee the grunt anything, like stepping on a landmine, or having an 88mm shell drop on your helmet,
or not coming back alive after being popped by the worst smg!, but if it gives him Best SMG bragging rights for the moment...:D
 
My opinion on the best SMG of WWI/II is the Sten.

My case for this is not based on it's ergonomics, reliability, function, ease of manufacture.

My case is based on the proliferation of them, and their ability to re-arm the commonwealth forces after the debacle at Dunkirk.

Can you imagine if the commonwealth had been forced to re-arm with only rifles?

Take 4 million rifles, at a cost of $50 each (guestimate) to manufacture. You have $200 million dollars.

Take 4 million Sten guns, at $10 each (guestimate) and you have 40 million dollars. For the same price as those 4 million Sten guns, you could only equip 800,000 riflemen.

The economics of war are that getting a reasonably effective weapon in the hands of the infantry is important, because they're the guys who put their boots on the ground. However, most of the actual killing is done with artillery or machine-guns. So, for the price of 4 Million Sten guns, vs 4 million Enfields, you have lots of money left over (around $160,000,000) to buy "other" nasty toys for supporting fires.

NS
 
Back
Top Bottom