• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

New rifles for the axis

Deathsai said:
Anywhere you look, it says that Kalashnikov "furiously denies" basing the rifle on the StG-44. Parts of it were taken from examinations on other assault rifles, but the AK-47 wasn't based on it.
Yeah and Mr. Kalashnikov is also very confident of himself. Noone will ever really know I guess.

As for the rifles:
More than 130.000 G33/40 were produced from '40-'42 (compared to only a few thousand MP41s), so I think it should be in some maps.

G24(t) was issued in even greater numbers (more than 200.000), but the differences between K98k and G33/40 are bigger, so I'd like to see the G33 first.

The G41(W) was built up to 1944 and the total number exceeds 100.000. Seeing as how this would give the Germans some semi-auto rifles for the early war maps I would also include it. The rifle itself isn't really as unreliable as people think... if cleaned and maintained often. It was also built to a higher standard than most G43s.
 
Upvote 0
KrazyKraut said:
The G41(W) was built up to 1944 and the total number exceeds 100.000. Seeing as how this would give the Germans some semi-auto rifles for the early war maps I would also include it. The rifle itself isn't really as unreliable as people think... if cleaned and maintained often. It was also built to a higher standard than most G43s.
Well first off that would be some sort of lame weapon balancing. It's not like it's that big a deal if you can get the first shot off. If you get blindsided with a bolt-action you'll die as easily as someone with an SVT.

But the G41 was actually very bad. It was given three bad restrictions (no holes for tapping gas for the loading mechanism were to be bored into the barrel; the rifles were not to have any moving parts on the surface; and in case the autoloading mechanism failed, a bolt action was to be included.) The Mauser design failed miserably because it followed these three guidelines, and out of only around 6673 produced, 1673 were returned as unusable. The Walther design ignored the last two restrictions but it still suffered the same miserable fate of the Mauser design. The Bang system (the system used as the firing mechanism in the rifle) was too complicated and broke down frequently under the stress and wear of combat. No cleaning and maintaining can fix that. The gun was also too heavy, notably due to the complex and heavy operating machinery located near the front, which weighed the muzzle down. Nothing any soldier can do about that. Since the magazine was inbuilt and had to be filled from two separate charger strips, reloading the gun also proved difficult and time-consuming. Again, this was not something cleaning would do. Only around 14 334 Walther were produced, so that makes a total of only 21 007 G41s produced, Mauser and Walther combined.
 
Upvote 0
EvilAmericanMan said:
Only around 14 334 Walther were produced, so that makes a total of only 21 007 G41s produced, Mauser and Walther combined.

Check your numbers again. As I explained in another thread here this morning over 100,000 G41's were produced and delivered between 1942 and 1944.

If you don't believe me, please refer to "Hitler's Garands" by W. Darrin Weaver (available at www.collectorgrade.com) and Claus Espeholt's G41 serial number study: http://claus.espeholt.dk/mediearkiv/G41_c.pdf

They're a lot more prevalent than you think.
 
Upvote 0
^what he said

Also:
IIRC the G41(w) had no manual bolt, only the G41(m) had that. The G41(W) could be operated manually by simply using the charging handle like on any othe semi automatic rifle. Both were heavy, yes. And both used the Bang-system, that is also true. While this system is inherently sensitive to fouling and dirt it works as long as kept clean. I have talked to someone who owns the rifle (Walther version) and he said it is very durable and relatively accurate. Like I said above: Unlike the average G43 it was built to a high standard and to tight tolerances.

The MP40 was also prone to dirt due to a flawed magazine, but as long as weapon jamming isn't modeled in this game, why bother.
 
Upvote 0
kabex said:
They can say what they want, the STG44 is the one and only assault rifle.

Everyone and their grandma copied the STG44.

Um...No. They all implemented the concept that the STG started.:rolleyes:

The only rifle that you could say even remotely copies the STG would be the CETME (which I have sitting next to me as we speak). See my Sig also.

It is a decendent of the STG series because it's develpers are the basically one and the same. The German g3 is next in line as it is a licensed copy of the Spanish CETME.
 
Upvote 0
Rogers1337 said:
Why would be give credit to the germans whom they were just at war with 2 years ago, why would he give their enemy credit for a weapons breakthrough when the russians could take full credit for it themselves. Iam a bit more curious then to just trust the inventor.

What weapons breakthrough are you talking about?

You don't even have to take the word of Mr. Kalashnikov. It's common sense.
All you have to do is dissasemble both weapons and you will see that they are completely different technologies. No rocket science required.

Just because some kids see a similarity in outward appearance in some book somewhere does not make them the same. Listen to the people who know guns and how they work.

Mr. Kalashnikov already gave credit the the M1 as the basis for part of his design. He is humble enough for that and I give him credit.

Some of you guys are not even aware that you are comparing apples to oranges.

Do I really have to post photos of the innards of both the STG, AK and CETME to make my point? Sheesh. :rolleyes:
 
Upvote 0
Iam not trying to pick a fight :rolleyes: Iam just curious, and Ive heard alot to what your saying and the opposite. Iam sure your probably right in the end. The breakthrough, well that word wasnt the right one, but the AK is a damn good assult weapon, hence its cheap to produce you can bury in the dirt and it keeps on working. Its a damn fine gun, still one of the best to this day. I cansider a gun of that caliber that is still used widley 50 some years after its creation a breakthrough of sorts. :D
 
Upvote 0
I have seen both guns disassembeled next to each other, and the gas system looks very similar. Also the 7.62x39 is virtually a derivate of the German GeCo cartridge. The cartridge was called 7.75x39mm but in fact by '38 the bullet and cartridge dimensions were changed to what is pretty much identical to an M43.

It is also interesting to know that from 1946 until 1952 Hugo Schmeisser, inventor of the StG44, worked at the exact same factory No.74 at Ishevsk where Kalashnikov was working on the AK47, no?

That doesn't make the AK a copy, but it certainly was influenced by the StG44. The question is to what extent. And only Kalashnikov will know for sure.
 
Upvote 0
If you use the word "influenced" then yes. The STG gave influence too just about all modern assault weapons. But that could also be said about the STG in that it technically was not the first assault weapon ever, only the first opperational one. I remember reading that Russians were experimenting with them in the early 30s but never implemented them.

IIRC even the Italians were working on what one would call a sturm gevehr back in WWI.

If anybody want's me to post the pictures them PM me your email address. I do not have enough space on my web page to host them.

Anyone here can do a simple search or other research which will tell them that the AK uses a rotating bolt and the STG44 uses tilting bolt & CETME uses roller locking bolt. CETME's bolt is direct decendent of STG though it uses rollers.

AK and STG are two totally different animals.

Most modern assault weapons have two things in common that make them assault weapons. One is select fire and two is the intermediate cartridge.

Most modern assault weapons use a gas system but is only a small part of the rifle and is not what I would consider the main operating component. The bolt is what idicates what type of action it has.
 
Upvote 0
I disagree to some extent. An assault rifle is more than a select-fire weapon with an intermediate cartridge. To me the layout counts too. Without the inline-stock and the pistol grip it's not really an assault rifle. And the StG44 is the first to combine ALL the assault rifle features, the first that was succesful and the one that coined the name for all the following, that's why it's the first true assault rifle.
 
Upvote 0
You have a valid point there but I don't think that's written in stone. Or at least I have never seen that defenition.

To be fair though, the CETME was not an assault rifle like it's grandfather was (The STG/MP44) because it shot a full size rifle round. So it is fact in the "Battle Rifle" catagory along with the FAL and M14.

While I agree that the M14 is not an assault rifle, I still think that most would agree that the CETME/G3 and FAL would still fall into the Assault Rifle catagory in most minds regardless.

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_rifle

"Assault rifle is a term describing a type of automatic rifle generally defined as a selective fire rifle or carbine, chambering intermediate-powered ammunition. They are categorized between the larger and heavier light machine gun, which is intended more for sustained automatic fire in a support role, and the smaller submachine gun, which fires a handgun cartridge rather than a rifle cartridge. Assault rifles are the standard small arms in most modern armies, having largely replaced or supplemented larger, more powerful rifles ('battle rifles') such as the WWII-era M1 Garand and Tokarev SVT. Examples of assault rifles incorrectly include the AR-15 as it does not fire as an automatic, its military incarnation, the M16 rifle is a fully automatic weapon, the ubiquitous AK-47 genus, and the bullpup FAMAS. More exotic examples include the LR 300 By Z-M Weapons and the HK G36, which makes extensive use of modern polymers and computer aided design.
The name is a translation of the German word Sturmgewehr coined by Adolf Hitler to describe the Sturmgewehr 44, the firearm generally considered the first practical widely used assault rifle and effective progenitor of the concept. It gradually became the common (if not technically accurate) term for the sub-family of similar firearms, and also has been used retroactively with earlier weapons possessing such traits. While it is not a completely accepted or technically correct label, it is widely used to differentiate current small-caliber weapons such as the AR-15 and AK-74 from earlier semi-automatic or select-fire rifles that fired larger cartridges, such as the M1 Garand, M14, HK G3, CETME, and FN FAL, which are sometimes referred to as 'battle rifles'. Technically, all are 'rifles' of different caliber, with some being semi-automatic or having select-fire capability, thus being either 'semi-automatic rifles' or 'automatic rifles'. Since the smaller-caliber weapons tend to be distinct in construction and modern use from their counterparts, the term 'assault rifle' has proven useful and popular for referring to them specifically."

FWIW, Here is another interesting web page that traces the concept of assault rifles back to WWI:

http://www.sff.net/people/sanders/ar.html
 
Upvote 0
KrazyKraut said:
I have seen both guns disassembeled next to each other, and the gas system looks very similar.
Umm...duh? What is the gas system? The gas system is a means of turning pressure into a linear stroke to the bolt carrier. There are two ways to do this: direct impingement (the bolt carrier is the piston), and with a piston. Using a piston, there's short-stroke and long-stroke.

Those are the options for how to construct a gas system. It's almost impossible to make a gas system look different from another one.

And as has already been mentioned, the Kalashnikov action is rotary bolt, whereas the STG44 was tilting-bolt. The SKS was actually more similiar to the STG44 than the AK47.
 
Upvote 0
Yep, I've seen the same program. He seems to take it like an insult when he's asked if the AK-47 was designed with reference to the StG/MP-44.

Besides, it's not like the designers on the German end can say that they aren't guilty of taking someone else's ideas. Wasn't the Gewehr 43 made based on the Tokarev SVT40 design?

Also I used to have an FAL myself, and the CETME/G3 look like they all follow the same general design. But in my eyes like you said GonzoX they all can fall under the assault rifle category even with the full-size rifle rounds.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Rogers1337 said:
I mean comon, the russians have 3, the germans have 1. Iam talking about bolt action ofcourse, what other rifles could they give the germans, and also do you guys think they will add in earlier versions of the semi auto gewehr, to compete with that damn soviet 40?

What the hell do we need another rifle for? The Kar98 works fine. Besides the Germans made like three bazilliontrillion of the things.
 
Upvote 0