No i ment shooting it.
It just was easier for me to kill with it when compared to the mp40.
It just was easier for me to kill with it when compared to the mp40.
Upvote
0
Tactics MP41 vs. MP40
- Thread starter piller
- Start date
The MP41 has wooden stock which makes it heavier and slower to move about in free-aim but is more accurate when firing from down the sights.
Upvote
0
i like them both, but the mp41 is sexy, so i take it sometimes. I like both because i can empty the magazine and have a good grouping.
Upvote
0
You wouldn't say that if you used one inr eality, the metal stock on the MP40 inmmy humble opinionation a piece of ****e
Upvote
0
You wouldn't say that if you used one inr eality, the metal stock on the MP40 inmmy humble opinionation a piece of ****e
It was simple and took very little material and it made it more compact.
Upvote
0
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/56/Maschinenpistole_MP40.jpg
It's actually quite nice. The stock was stupid when the Russians copied it for the AK (had too much recoil and beat up the stock too fast), but it worked fine on the MP40.
I use the MP40 for the same reason I like the PPSh. It's the German WW2 SMG, not a relatively uncommon MP gun. Besides, I'm already used to the recoil of the Soviet guns, so it's not a handicap. I also hear it shoulders faster due to less weight, which I like.
It's actually quite nice. The stock was stupid when the Russians copied it for the AK (had too much recoil and beat up the stock too fast), but it worked fine on the MP40.
I use the MP40 for the same reason I like the PPSh. It's the German WW2 SMG, not a relatively uncommon MP gun. Besides, I'm already used to the recoil of the Soviet guns, so it's not a handicap. I also hear it shoulders faster due to less weight, which I like.
Upvote
0
When I use the MP40 ( my favourite is the STG44), I prefer it over the MP41 because of the recoil. It's almost the same as the STG, and close to the PPSh.
Upvote
0
This is starting to sound like the debate between evil black rifles (m16s and whatnot) and traditional wood stocks. After much deliberation, I've decided that wood stocks are classy and actually can be pretty much as light as metal or composite stocks. If I had a choice between really owning an MP40 or an MP41 I'd take the MP40 because it is a historical icon. However, I think the MP41 is a little bit prettier and more practical. Also, I think it would be more practical to bed the action (have the metal free floating on top of the wood stock) on a MP41 than the solid MP40, which, in theory, would make it more accurate.
Upvote
0
how is the #1 pro of the mp40: lightweight, while the #1 pro of the mp41: heavier?
that makes no sense when comparing!
Upvote
0
of course it makes sense. The '40 is lightweight and faster to manipulate in your hands. you swing it around faster, and shoulder it to aim down the sights faster.
the '41 is heavier, therefore being able to absorb more recoil. take the FG42 and StG44 for example. The FG42 was very light and small, but had huge recoil. therefore it was impractical to use full auto because it would be like trying to hold a porcupine farting. The Stg44 was big and heavy and therefore could absorb more recoil, making it more steady.
there you go. that's why a mac10 is hard to hold steady on full auto and a MP5 isn't.
the weight of the gun makes a difference.
the '41 is heavier, therefore being able to absorb more recoil. take the FG42 and StG44 for example. The FG42 was very light and small, but had huge recoil. therefore it was impractical to use full auto because it would be like trying to hold a porcupine farting. The Stg44 was big and heavy and therefore could absorb more recoil, making it more steady.
there you go. that's why a mac10 is hard to hold steady on full auto and a MP5 isn't.
the weight of the gun makes a difference.
Upvote
0
![Dumba [cro]](/data/avatars/s/5/5293.jpg?1568638684){kind=avatar}
Melikes MP41 better... although they are pretty much the same
OT: Great sig "Maksim", not breaking any of the rules.
OT: Great sig "Maksim", not breaking any of the rules.
Upvote
0
lol thanks. just a couple of harmless dogs worshipping tree symbols. lol
and remember. the MP40 is recoil absorbed through your arm making you jerk more.
the MP41 has recoil absorbed into the Gun so less is pushed against you.
that's why the MG42 has relatively low recoil. cuz it weighs frickin 65 pounds!
and remember. the MP40 is recoil absorbed through your arm making you jerk more.
the MP41 has recoil absorbed into the Gun so less is pushed against you.
that's why the MG42 has relatively low recoil. cuz it weighs frickin 65 pounds!
Upvote
0
![[TW]Ramm-Jaeger](/data/avatars/s/0/2.jpg?1568638684){kind=avatar}
Have you ever SHOT an MG42? I have, and I wouldn't say it has "relatively low recoil". The thing will push you around like crazy. Also the bipod version weighs about 25 lbs, not 65 lbs.
Upvote
0
no i have not shot an mg42 outside of RO. but i have watched videos of it, and when properly anchored it will not 'throw you around' like a PPSh does when you're running and gunning at the hip.
I have found that it is quite controllable and when firing full auto will get into a groove that will allow you to have virtually no recoil for a given time.
And i was exaggerating about the weight. I really have no idea how much they weighed
I have found that it is quite controllable and when firing full auto will get into a groove that will allow you to have virtually no recoil for a given time.
And i was exaggerating about the weight. I really have no idea how much they weighed
Upvote
0
Not to say anything positive about the germans but i think the germans did pretty good considering they were outmanned 10-1 on the russian front alone. so it just shows there weapons got the job done
Upvote
0