Best Weapons of World War II (Somewhat Long)

Modeling Subjects Armor
1

As a Complete WWII nut, I decided to post a list of what I think are some of the best Weapons of WWII. I know this is not Modeling related but there are quite a few military fans and I thought some of you will like this and also I’m curious what else everyone thinks/their own favorites. I also posted here even though This also contains aircrafts because I think armor threads gets the most “Traffics.” Sorry for going off traffic if you guys think I’m going off-topic.

Now all of the weapon are based on several factors: 1. reliability, how reliable the weapon is. If it keeps on breaking down, obviously it won’t do you much good. 2. How effective was it. If it doesn’t get the job done, then it’s no good. 3. Usefullness. Meaning how much use did it find itself in the war. A cannon like the Dora would certainly makes it the most powerful and one of the best artillary piece in the war but it was used only once (maybe twice). That will limit it’s effectivness. and 4. How much it impact the war. Again something like the Dora would be effective and best but it didn’t impact the war because it was used only twice. While something like the U.S. 105mm howitzer had far more impact!

Best Rifle

Winner: M-1 Garand

Why. Simple. Yes, the thing does have some weakness, like not be able to top it off when it is half full, the “ping” noise it makes when the last round is fired but stil The M-1 is the first rifle that offers semi-automatic fire for an army! This means for the avearge U.S. solider, they can get off more shots than the Germans or any other soliders that participated in the War! Sure you can argue that the British SMLE or Karl K38 is more accurate and doesn’t have the disadvantages associated with the M-1, but the M-1’s semi-automatic ability fully negated those!

Honorable Mentions:

German Sturgehweher 44. The world’s first assualt rifle. On any other day, this would have been the best rifle by a clear margine because it combined the useful effect of an rifle with the firepower of a Submachine gun. However, remember I’m also judging it usefulness and impact on the war. The Sturm came simply too late to have any lasting effect on the war.

Brithish SMLE. Second best rifle to the M-1. Smooth bolt-action and much fast loading that the K38.

[B]Best Submachine Gun

PPSH[/B]

Man! This will raise a furor among the Sten and M-1 Thompson lovers but sorry, I have to give the honor to the Russian gun! The reason being the PPSH was built in far greater quantities, armed far more people, had a greater magazine capacity and generaly a great all around performer with great reliablity! I’m not putting down the British or the American made weapons. They are great sub-guns in themselves. This catagory can come down to personal opinons and I give it to the PPSH!

Honorables:

M-1 Thompson. Great gun! In terms of firepower, The M-1’s .45 cal beats the pants off the 9mm fired by both the Stens and MP40 but however, it’s not easy to make thus making it more expensive. This is what keeps it back

Sten: This little fella is cheap to make, how cheap? At one point, it cost you only $5 bucks to make one of these guys! That’s how cheap! It’s reliable and effective for it’s job. It came down between the Sten and the PPSH and in the end, I gave it to the PPSh for reasons above

MP-40. Best German Submachine gun!

Best Machine Gun

Overall: MG-42[/B]

This is a terrifying weapon! When the concept first came out, people laughed at the General Purpose Machine Gun, A machine gun that can fullfill the duties of both Heavy and light machine guns. But the MG34 proved them wrong. The only thing was, the MG34 was still too expensive to produce so the Germans retooled the process to make it cheaper and quicker. The end result is a rather ugly machine named the MG-42.

The moment it entered service, it more than proved its worth. Reliable, easy to carry and flexable, the gun offered plenty of firepower in defense or offense! The gun’s massive firing rate of 1500rds per minutes terrofied anyone who has to face it! GI called this thing the Hitler’s zipper or Hitler’s Buzzsaw because to the human year, the bullets comes out in one terrifing stream! Overall, the MG-42 wins the honor here.

[B]Best of light machine gun

The Bren[/B] make no mistake, the Bren is the most effective light machine gun in the War! It was reliable, cheap to produce and accurate and does its job and does it well! The gun was so effective it was heavily copied by the Japanese for their own forces.

[B]Best Heavy

M-2 HB Browning .50Cal[/B] Still in use today heavily should tell you something…

[B] Best Tank

T-34[/B] Nope, no Tigers or Panthers. The T-34 wins because one, These things are FAR more reliable than the German tanks (and produced in far more numbers. Only 2500 Tigers and 5000Panthers were produced in the war) and have more firepower than the Sherman. It’s also extremly adaptable. Going from an early war 76mm to a 80mm in a bigger turret. All this makes this tank the best in the War.

Honorables:

Russian JS-2: Can tackle a Tiger or Panther no problem. Only thing is, it arrived a bit late in 1944 and it’s shell is in two pieces, making loading a pain and reducing maximum firing rate to 3 rounds per minute.

Panther: If one on one, I’ll take the Panther thank you. It has more firepower and protection than a Tiger and slightly more reliable. However, it’s still not nearly reliable as hoped in terms or a war winning weapon and impact, the T-34 beats it!

Sherman: Low firepower, low armor, was a pain for it’s crew who have to take on the Tigers and Panthers but it does have aboundant reliablity and numbers and its also very adaptable so it’s here.

Tiger: The Tigers goes on the bottom even though it got a fearsome reputation. However, the truth is, it’s SLOW, not very reliable, not very manuverable and produce WAY too few in numbers to really have that much effect on the outcome of the war. Sorry you Tiger fans!

[B]Other armored vehicles

Halftracks: American M-3 Series[/B] The only reason the American Halftracks wins over the German Sdfkzs is because of greater numbers.

Cars M-8 Greyhounds. Great Recon vehicles. Sure the Germans have better vehicles to some but for me, this vehicle is the best combination a scout car should have.

[B]Best Artillary Piece

German 88. [/B] The Flak 88 reputation is well deserved! Not only is it good against aircraft, when leveled, it’s even more terrifying against tanks! This piece is overall the best simply because it’s not good at one job, but two and it formed the basis of nearly all of German’s tank guns.

[B]Best Fighter

Tied, P-51 Mustang/F6F Hellcat[/B] Ohh boy! Spitfire and Focke-Wolf fans will raise up a storm! But the winning nod to the Mustang is its “Legs!” Compare the Spitfire, Me-109, FW-190 range to the Mustang and you will find just how short these fighter’s range are. The Spitfire was great during the Battle of Britain but when the British took the offensive, they quickly found out Spit’s short range was just impratical to carry any sort of aerial offensive. It’s this reason why the RAF went to Night bombing instead of daytime because they just can’t find a pratical escort for the bombers during daytime. The Fw-190 and ME-109 was great at defending the Reich and causing American huge headaches before the Mustang appeared. However, it’s woefully short legs means the Luftwaffe never had any chance at offensive and if they did, can’t sustain it. The Mustang, on the other hand, with its massive range, took the fight to the Luftwaffe front door, gut punch it before ripping its heart out! That’s why the Mustang win, It’s an OFFENSIVE weapon because it has the “legs” to goto the enemy, fight on THEIR terms, and win! There is a reason why when Herman Goering said that when he saw Mustangs over Berlin, he knew the Germans lost the war! Although give the British some brownie points for the Rolls-Royce Merlin engine. Without it, the Mustang would never come to fruition! :stuck_out_tongue:

At first I said only the Mustang, but after some though I added the F6F because the F6F, like what P-51 did in Europe, did in the Pacific by facing off against the Japanese Zero and beating it! Grabbing the sky from the Japanese for good and changed the outcome of the Pacific war!

Honorables

Spitfire, Fw-190: These fighters are already mentioned why they didn’t make it. Although if judgeing just by performance terms, its arguable that these guys perfomed better than the Mustang.

F4U Corsair. The Japanese called this thing the Whistling Death. The 32-1 kill ratio is something rarely matched in any terms!

[/B] Best Bombers

Light: British Mosquito[/B]

The Wooden Wonder as it was called is the best because it served as a long range fighter, night-fighter, light bomber, recon aircraft, clandistant mission aircraft and others. It became such a headache for the Luftwaffe because it was so hard to catch that Herman Goering said he wondered why noone build him a wooden aircraft yet!

Honorables

A-20 Havoc, Ju-88

Medium: B-25 Mitchell. Why? Well for one, it took off from the Aircraft Carrier Hornet and bombed Japan. Try that with any other bomber! SEcond, adaptablity. Later version can carry up to 12 .50 cals, 8 in the nose and four in packs, two each on the fuselage sides, making it a fearsome strafer or a 75mm cannon to really put the hurt on shipping! The B-25 is an excellent aircraft with an excellent reputation!

Honorables

HE-111, B-26 Marauder

Heavy: B-17 Flying Fortress

There are so many books and stories written on the B-17s there should really be no introduction! Sure you can say others like B-24 and the Lancaster is better performer than the B-17 but IMO, the lasting effect of the B-17 on the war is far more keenly felt especially consider this fact, Although the losses suffered by the B-17 was heavy, it also shot down over 10,000 Luftwaffe aircrafts, mostly fighters! That alone with Allies fighters, especially the P-51, help to rip the heart out of the Luftwaffe!

Honorables

B-24, Lancaster. Both are very good aircraft for what they do but IMO, B-17 exceed them by a little bit.

B-29 Superfortress. Bought the Japanese to it’s Knees by dropping the two atomic bombs and before that, razed Japan almost entirely with its firebombings. However, came a little too late in the war.

2

Yup, totally off topic. Thanks for your opinions, but this is exactly what the Odds and Ends Forum is for. Lets keep this forum for Armor Modeling posts.

3

Interesting list. I did notice a typo regarding the T-34. It’s armament went from a 76mm to an 85mm gun (not 80mm). [:)]

4

Interesting list,makes for good reading.

The only thing that suprised me was that you missed the Hurricane off your list.It played as big a part in the battle of Britain if not bigger than the Spitfire and seeing as that was one of the major turning points in the war(along with the Monty’s sucess in North Africa)I’d have to have it in my list.[:)]

5

hey man[:D]— read your ‘somewhat long’ list—i thought it was well thought out and agree with alot of it–i agree with Comet about the Hurricane and there is another less well known plane that played a major role in wwII–the b 26 martin marauder— imho-- this kinda post seems o.k.to be here-- a large part was about armor and it stirs intrest i think-- so anyway dzhou-- i enjoyed your post[:D]-- treadwell(read up on the b-26!–lol)-- p.s. this is a pic of one of the b-26s my dad flew

6

An argument can be made that the MG-34 was better than the MG-42. Though the MG-42 was simplier to manufacturer, it was a hard to control (therefore less accurate) and more wasteful of ammunition. The sound of the MG-42 firing I’ve seen referred to as “the ripping of calico fabric”. One documentary that I saw, referred to the MG-42 as the G.I.'s most feared weapon.

7

The Tiger I was faster than you give it credit for. A top on road speed of 38 kilometers/h is very good for a heavy tank of it’s weight. It was able to keep up with the earlier panzers.

8

[#ditto]Well said that man[:D]

I’v been going through some of my armour books since my first post so this thread has certainly stirred my interest’s.[:)]

9

In fairness, the MG-42 in a more refined design is still in service, and it’s design inflenced later machinegun’s, mainly the M-60

10

That was a intresting read. now i’ll duck my head in a ditch to advoid the crossfire that is about to eusue.

11

Hi,

Well I have’nt posted in a while but this one really intrigued me, and I HAD to say something. Having a fairly good understanding of all the weapons of WWII, I think I can make some arguements. But first, I would like to add a sidenote for treadwell. That pic is cool, my dad was in the navy in the cold war(he flew on a P-3 Orion and hunted commie submarines! COOL!) And I just wanted to pass on a little saying he knows about flying planes(or landing them anyway!) “A good landing is when you walk away, a great landing is when you can use the plane again!” LOL I’m sure some have heard it before. Anyway, enough with my sidenote lets get down to business!.

First off, the German rifle is called the K or Kar98 not 38, I saw it typed twice so I dont think it was an error. The German’s also had more than one rifle, they also had the Gewher 43 or simply G-43. Now although this was intended to be a long-range semi-automatic sniper rifle, many did not use the scope, therefore making a rifle, which leads me to believe that it should get some mention, because all in all it was a great gun, it carried more rounds than an M-1 and could fire just as fast, not to mention it was just as reliable!

On to submachine guns! Although the sten was cheap and so many were made, I don’t think it really had as much impact on the war as you might think. Now, now I know it got honorable mention, but I would just like to clear something up! The Sten was a 9mm weapon, as was the German MP-40, therefore making the rounds interchangable. The Sten was a relatively simple weapon when compared to the MP-40. The Sten was inaccurate and unreliable, whereas the MP-40, was fairly accurate with relativley no muzzle climb, and also quite reliable. In fact, the British actually preferred MP-40’s over there Sten guns for these reasons. Since so many MP-40’s were made, You would more often see an Englishman with an MP-40 as opposed to a Sten!

The PPSH 41(Also known as the “Burp Gun”) was a good weapon, don’t get me wrong. It had an excellent rate of fire, nearly reaching that of the famed MG-42 Machine gun. It had a drum magazine which carried 71 rounds of 7.62mm TT Pistol ammuntion(As far as I know) This is a fairly small round,(Yes I know the modern day M-16A2 sports the same calibre, but today’s version is much more powerful!) It had a rate of fire of 900 RPM(Rounds Per Minute) which was good at the time(The MG-42 firing at 1500 RPM). And it carried enough rounds to take down a small army! However, in the beginning of the war, only Russian officers carried the weapon. There were 5 million PPSH 41’s made, but one must remember that there were MANY more Russian soldiers. Millions and millions of them(Russia is a HUGE country) with 20 million casualties alone taken in the war, with some 40 million remaining.So only something like 3-6% actually HAD a PPSH-41! A much more common sight was the Mosin Nagant rifle(Which I believe deserves some mention as well, there were so many of them they had to have some kind of impact!) or the TT Pistol. All in all I don’t think it was the absoloute best SMG in the Second World War, with so few made compared to the vast Red Army, it can’t have done much but scare the pants off those crazy Nazis! As the war progressed, many more Russian soldiers actually carried MP-40’s as opposed to PPSH-41’s anyway, preferring reliability over power.

So sorry I have to end this post but I have to go to bed! I will probably add to it later so don’t get ahead of yourself when replying!

Cheers and hope I’m welcome to be back lol!

EDIT: My reply continued:

I will now move on to bigger and better things, like tanks! I believe your choice of best tank to be correct. The T-34 was the best hands down; sloped armor, large calibre, and maneuverability, etc., all make this tank the perfect candidate for the winner’s circle. However, do you mean all T-34 variants or the T-34/76? I think the T-34/85 was a much better variant.

As for the Tiger 1 Heavy Tank. I don’t think it was the best tank of the war, but it is definatley up there! I know quite alot about the Tiger 1(Although I’m sure I’ll be corrected on a few things). With its 88mm high velocity gun(which fired both AP and HE rounds), it could blow just about anything off the face of the battlefield when it was first introduced. It had 2 MG-34 machine guns mounted in a ball mount in the front glacis and coaxially with the main gun. Originally it had 2 pistol ports mounted on the rear of the turret, these were for the commander and loader to fire the MP-40’s at the dubious enemies who made an attempt at boarding this 68 ton monster. Being that it was 68 tonnes, it was difficult to control because the standard engine was underpowered. The weight also contributed to steering failures and breakdowns and engine fires were common. These tanks were also gas guzzlers, and often had to be refueled. This turned out to be a problem because the Germans were often cut off from their supply lines, so no gas was coming in, nor any ammuntion or medical supplies. This in turn, eventually forced the German’s to blow up their then top secret Tigers, for fear of Allied capture. More Tiger’s were actually lost due to abandonment and demolition, or engine fires or breakdowns, than to Allied forces.

I’ll post some more later. Thats enough for me for tonight!

12

To HeavyArty: Yea, sorry about it. I thought about posting in Odds and Ends but decided here because there’s alot of armor and there are also alot more WW II fans here! Besides, I like to see just what everyone here in armor thinks of my list and their own opinions and favorites (yea, I know this probably will start some flamming discussion but I’m just curious. I already got my flame suit on [:D] ).

To Espins1: OPS!!! Yea, Typo. Silly me! Yea, later on the T-34 changed to a 85mm gun. It wasn’t called a T-34/85 for nothing! [:P]

To Comet/Treadwell: I didn’t forget about the Hurricane. Yes, I know the Hurricane and it’s efforts in Battle of Britain. Many people now said that without the Hurri, the Battle of Britain might not be won because the Spits are badly needed to counter the German fighters while the Hurries go after the criticle targets, the bombers. However, remember I’m also judging from the perspective of a weapon’s TOTAL cumulative effect on the war! Yes, the Hurricane’s effect on the early war years was critical but in the end, it just got superseded by fighters like the FW-190 and P-51. That’s why I decided to left it off my list.

And thank you very much for your support Comet! [:)]

P.S. To Treadwell. The B-26 is in my list as an honorable in the medium bomber section.

To Tigerman: Yes, the argument againsts the MG-42 is also very strong. It’s massive firing rate meant frequent waste of ammo and frequent overheating of barrel (solved somewhat with a quick barrel change device). But again, the CUMULATIVE effect of the MG-42 IMO was greater than the MG-34 and it’s effect on after war weapons can still be felt in weapons such as M-60 and MG-3 (a rose by any other name, a MG-42 designed to fire NATO standard .30 cal rounds!).

To granddadjohn: Yea, the MG-34 and MG-42 is really argueable on which one was the best. It won out on my list because of it’s cumlative effect on weapon design and on the war itself, especially on ally soliders who had to face it. As one solider in Steven Ambrose’s Citizen Solider said when he heard about the critisim of the gun he said, “yeam well, tell that to the guys who had to face off against it!”

To Montonacowboy: The Tiger wasn’t so slow on the road. But it’s SLOW when moving about cross crountry. Also, the biggest point that holds the tank back is it’s reliablity issue, which is one of my critiria and Cumulative effect on the war. The Tigers mechanical problems and it’s small numbers is what held it back on my list.

13

Thanks for your comments Tigertankman! I enjoy it. Here are my response

First to the B-26 pic, Well, the B-26 was known as a “widow maker” because it has a nasty habit of killing any poilt not too familar with it. This was because the original requirement called for a bomber that can go up to a maxium speed of 300 MPH, which was tough for a medium bomber at the time. Martin solved this problem with a smooth thin and very short wing for the bomber. The problem was this created a extremly high wingloading for the bomber. This translated to somewhat unstable and EXTREMLY high landing speeds for the B-26. This end up killing many pilots not too familar with it’s quirks or crashes as you seen in that pic!

Second, sorry about the K98, I know it was either K98 or K38…Not to familar with German rifles…

Yea, I know of Gewher43. In many ways it’s greater than the M-1. But remember I’m also judging a weapon based on it’s CUMULATIVE effects on the war! In this case the nod goes to the M-1 because it equiped the WHOLE U.S. army while the most of the German army by the end of the war still carried the K98. If I’m just judging on performance, the nod has to goto the Sturmgehwer 44. But again, because its cumulative effect on the war was practically non existant, it falls out of place.

Third. On the subject of submachine gun, the minute it came down to the MP-40, Sten, PPSH and M-1 Thompson, I knew no matter what choice I made, it’s gonna start a firestorm! Both of these guns have their own pros and cons and it’s just way too hard to judge objectively! In the end it just came down to personal tastes and opinions and I gave the nod to PPSH. You points are valid but again, this is just my choice! Everyone else will also pick different ones because each of these guns has their own merits. WE can probably argue night and say and not convince eachother!

And can’t wait to see your opinions on other subjects, especially what you think of the T-34 winning in the best tank catagory and what’s your opinion on the Tiger lol being that you are a “Tigertankman” and all. [:P]

P.S. Nice to have you back! [#welcome]

14

Sorry guys on digging up old my old thread. I could’ve gotten back earlier but work and gearing up for Nintendo’s Wii launch has gotten me down. Anyway, to answer Tigertankman’s question.

Well, if you have to force to chose a version, then yea, the T-34/85 is a “no brainer” but the thing is, I found myself at a quandry at chosing which version is the best. Even though the T-34/76 later on got overshadowed by the Panthers and Tigers, earlier on however, the shock given to the German forces have to be seen to be believed. Heck, some germans said that the best way to conter the T-34 is simply copying captured variant and then produce them in German factories! That’s how much impact the T-34/76 had! And when Panthers and Tigers showed their faces, the T-34 was adaptable enough to be fitted with a larger turrent mounting a 85mm gun! This just goes to show you how well and sound the basic design was! AGain, one on one, I would actually take a panther, not tiger over a T-34. But if you are talking about a war winning weapon, something you want to ride into a battle and survive to live another day, then T-34s, no questions asked!

As for the Tiger, it’s not a bad tank by any strech of the imagination but really, the amount of fear it generated really does not equal the tank itself! YEs, the tank is incredibly powerful and had good armor but again, anyone who read up on the Panther will realize that later variants of the Panther actually had more frontal armor than the Tiger and its 75mm gun is actually more powerful than the Tiger’s 88! Tiger’s biggest problem however, is still its poor reliability! The Maybach engine is actually quite reliable but when the desingers first designed the engine, they never imagined it would go and asked to power a tank weighting 55tons! (another question, I think the 68 tons for the Tiger I is wrong. I know that the King Tiger weighted 69 tons…Unless you are using metric…). Much less a King Tigers at 68 Tons and the JagTiger at over 70 tons!!! The end result was the engine was badly overworked and gave out quickly. It isn’t the engine’s fault. Compare a King Tiger to the modern M-1A2 SEP Abram. The Abram uses a 1,500HP turbine engine while the King Tiger still uses the same basic Maybach that powers the Panther at 45 tons!!! That means trouble!! The Maybach is actually designed for tanks that weight in the ranges of say a Sherman or Mark IV. With an under powered engine, it lead to a whole host of problems because the tank also taxed it’s drive train, transmission, suspension to the max and more. The Tiger is great in “denfesive fighting positions” such as the hedgegrows (SP?) in Normandy, where it could just sit there in the middle of a cross road and blow shermans to bits at range. But on the offensive, it gets bog down cause of it’s weight, speed and reliability and of course, its range.

Looking to hearing more from you :slight_smile:

15

Wow, thanks for posting man, that was a great read!!
But, I think the Corsair should have being higher up on your list, it played a big part in the War in the Pacific and was an excellent all round fighter. and I definitley agree with what others have said about the Hurricane. At the beggining of the Battle of Britan, the ratio of Hurricanes to Spits was something like 3:1. Just my 2 cents

Will

16

I can not agree with your selection of a second place battle rifle. The Mauser Model of 1898 is still being built, in one configuration or another. Other more modern, proven designs use many of the Mausers design in them. It is still the basis for uncountable custom rifles and it far outshot the SMLE in my opinion, based on having fired several of both. A stronger more robust design that has fought in how many wars?
Love the SMLE. But I love the Mauser more.

Also, on your post dated 10/17/06 at 0314 hours, you said, “Not too familiar with German rifles.” So how can you profess to have an educated opinion of them? I win. :wink:
I agree on the M1 Garand. We both win.

-60

17

I agree on the Mauser 98 bolt design. Works great, reliable and everywhere!

18

#1: there’s a book about this exact subject:

give it a shot, it’s a great read. makes some of the same conclusions as well.

#2: you say that the t-34 was the best thing since sliced bread but you don’t even mention the Yaks. (or do you, maybe i just skimmed it…) they were built on the same principles as the t-34, ie quantity over spit-polish, and over time evolved into something quite good.

#3: i have some seriously strong doubts about the japanese calling anything “whistling death.” sounds like absolute propaganda. if you were sitting in a trench somewhere in the pacific would you make up dramatic names for stuff that’s shooting at you? i’ll buy something like “night witches” since it’s an insult and “Van’usha” is what the russians called the german missile launchers as a play on Kat’usha but the whistling death sounds like something some guy in the publicity department came up with…

19

Several things held the Corsair back though. First, it’s higher landing speed, set-back cockpit and large nose initially made carrier landings somewhat of a hazard, so it first ended up being on land with the Marines. It’s still a good fighter but really did not make it on to the carrier decks till 1944. By then the Hellcats had already established itself.

As for the Hurricain, I already explained that. It ended up as an honorable mention though. Hurries were badly needed because it took almost ALL of the RAF’s Spitfire just to counter the Me-109s. Without the Hurricains, then the bombers would have escaped unscathed to bomb its targets.

20

Picky, Picky!

As I’ve said to Tigertankman on the question of submachine guns, it all came down to personal opinion. Yes, I profess I don’t know enough about german rifles, at least compared to American or British ones but its enough to form a personal opinon and IMO, the SMLE wins because of its faster and smoother operation. Again, personal opinons. Some would prefer SMLE, others like you and cookie monster, the K98