Any FG42 lovers here?
- Thread starter the_big_mike
- Start date
Clead said:
Its not actually belt fed, it feeds from a side mounted magazine.
I'm actually not a fan. It's an admirable technical achievement, but I've heard they're somewhat poorly made, and it looks awkward as hell to use, particuarly with the side mounted mag.
Lee Enfield
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Republic of Alberta
A friend of a friend had one.
The shop that was acting for his widow donated it to a museaum for about 1/2 price...
Much bitterness ensued.
The shop that was acting for his widow donated it to a museaum for about 1/2 price...
Much bitterness ensued.
t-star said:
From my little reading about this machine gun the grip was at that angle because it was similar to the K98 Mauser grip. I do belive they did change it later on to a more vertical grip though.
Dimitri
The Germans would have known that there would have been no need for a comparo. The FG was never a success - too hard to control on full-auto, just like the M14 or AVT40. By comparison, the successful concept of the StG is reflected in the countless rifles made for intermediate cartridges such as the 7.62x39 or 5.56x45. Consider that 7,000 FG's vs about 500,000 StG's were made.oppy said:
I don't think that, at the time, it was that obvious. Points to consider:MarkCNP said:
1. Hitler did on more than one occasion direct the Waffenamt to cease R&D on the Sturmgewehr. In his opinion the infantry need self loading rifles like the Garand and the SVT firing a full sized cartridge. A new type of rifle firing a new cartridge was not in his plans. I guess the whole thing of controllable automatic fire kind of escaped him? Who knows, the guy was odd.
2. By the time the Luftwaffe started development on the FG42, the MKb42 was considered to be pretty much ready and out of R&D. The Wehrmacht proposed trials betwen the two weapons in hopes of standardizing on one, but it's my understanding that the FG42 had some real production issues and so the trials never happened.
Looks like the two arms of service went their seperate ways: the Luftwaffe with their FG42 and the Wehrmacht with the Sturmgewehr. Given that the Luftwaffe only had to equip paratroops, while the Wehrmacht wanted to equip (eventually) the whole Armee, I can see why many more Sturmgewehrs were made.
3. As well, I do believe that the Wehrmacht received the vast majority of Germany's war effort, so automatic rifles for the Luftwaffe might not have been as high a priority. It would be interesting to see production figures for the FG42, broken down by month/year.
Now, all this being said, I'd still love to add an FG42 to my collection.
oppy said:
It was obvious to many based on experiences in WWII. Development on a replacement arm for the German army using an intermediate cartridge started back in the early 1930's.
However the pace of Germany's re-armament ment that some corners had to be cut, so it was decided to simplify the Kar98 into the Kar98k instead of adopting a new rifle.
oppy said:
The army actually suggested that the FG.42 get chambered in the new intermediate calibre. But Goring refused to allow it. Apparently the Luftwaffe did a side by side comparison of the two but the report was written with a strong bias.
oppy said:
The FG-42 was a private Luftwaffe project that went completly outside of the normal armed forces supply and development channels. This is one of the reasons that not many firms responded to the project, they were busy enough fulfilling current orders.
On a side note Goring was so proud of his rifle that he suggested to Hitler that it become the standard infantry arm, but the cost of manufacture and the sucess of the MP.44 stopped this.
