Jump to content


Photo

What is your favorite


  • Please log in to reply
82 replies to this topic

#1 Bank Vault

Bank Vault

    BANNED

  • Banned
    • Member ID: 1,216
  • 1,748 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Colorado

Posted 07 September 2007 - 01:58 PM

What is your favorite military long gun and favorite military pistol.

I have to say I love the Arisakas and the 1911.

#2 robinb

robinb

    MODERATOR

  • Moderators
    • Member ID: 61
  • 5,184 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Turner, Oregon

Posted 07 September 2007 - 04:24 PM

I'm partial to the M1903 Springfield rifle.

#3 bfryar44

bfryar44
  • Members
    • Member ID: 90
  • 782 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tennessee

Posted 07 September 2007 - 05:27 PM

M1 Garand & M1911A1, hands down my favorites. http://www.usmilitar...tyle_emoticons/default/thumbsup.gif

On a side note, love the M-60 as my favorite full auto belt fed.

Bryan

#4 militariacollector

militariacollector
  • Members
    • Member ID: 289
  • 265 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manitoba

Posted 07 September 2007 - 07:11 PM

M1 Carbine and the Walther PPK.

#5 Greg Robinson

Greg Robinson

    Deceased Forum Co-Founder

  • IN MEMORIAM
    • Member ID: 4
  • 3,404 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Georgia USA

Posted 08 September 2007 - 03:43 AM

The Browning M2 .50 machine gun, the M1918 BAR, and the M1911 service pistol are all tied for being my favorites. I've fired all three of them.

Greg

#6 Jeeper704

Jeeper704
  • Members
    • Member ID: 157
  • 6,393 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgium

Posted 08 September 2007 - 04:23 AM

M1911A1 (I owned and fired a Springfield 45 which is similar) and M1 Garand (fired it too a few times).

#7 MAS36

MAS36
  • Members
    • Member ID: 778
  • 430 posts
  • Location:California

Posted 10 September 2007 - 11:18 AM

M16 as used in Vietnam with the original triangular hand guards and three pronged flash hider

and the US M1911 / M1911A1 .45 automatic pistols

Posted Image

Posted Image

#8 IMPERIAL QUEST

IMPERIAL QUEST
  • Members
    • Member ID: 1,000
  • 3,923 posts

Posted 10 September 2007 - 11:25 AM

M1911A1 (I owned and fired a Springfield 45 which is similar) and M1 Garand (fired it too a few times).



I'll second your choices.

#9 solcarlus

solcarlus
  • Members
    • Member ID: 241
  • 1,026 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pinard land

Posted 10 September 2007 - 12:22 PM

Hello.

;)

http://www.usmilitar...?showtopic=4394

regards sol.

#10 teufelhund

teufelhund
  • Members
    • Member ID: 1,337
  • 931 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ETO

Posted 10 September 2007 - 12:29 PM

My (First) 1903 Springfield and my( first) M1 Garand I acquired some 35 years ago, when I still was a college boy.
I used to work during 1 full month as a job student in order to be able to pay for it.
Both weapons are , of course, registered and owned according our Belgian laws
Posted Image
T

#11 Bank Vault

Bank Vault

    BANNED

  • Banned
    • Member ID: 1,216
  • 1,748 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Colorado

Posted 10 September 2007 - 01:29 PM

Good choices, am I the only Japanese Arisaka fan in here? They are highly under rated in my personal opinion.

#12 MAS36

MAS36
  • Members
    • Member ID: 778
  • 430 posts
  • Location:California

Posted 10 September 2007 - 01:57 PM

Good choices, am I the only Japanese Arisaka fan in here? They are highly under rated in my personal opinion.


I saw a nice Arisaka with bayonet & scabbard at the gun shop but the mum was ground off, they wanted $300

the store owner said it was on consignment, and was told it was brought back after WWII by a vet, he said the USN ship had a whole stack of them and the sailors were allowed to take one home as a souvineer

Edited by MAS36, 10 September 2007 - 01:59 PM.


#13 Bank Vault

Bank Vault

    BANNED

  • Banned
    • Member ID: 1,216
  • 1,748 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Colorado

Posted 10 September 2007 - 03:25 PM

I saw a nice Arisaka with bayonet & scabbard at the gun shop but the mum was ground off, they wanted $300

the store owner said it was on consignment, and was told it was brought back after WWII by a vet, he said the USN ship had a whole stack of them and the sailors were allowed to take one home as a souvineer


That is a good price if all the numbers match. Mine, for a half shot out military rifle, is a tack driver. Very under rated for sure

#14 Troy13

Troy13
  • Members
    • Member ID: 1,304
  • 666 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lone Star State

Posted 10 September 2007 - 04:00 PM

I love my Garand. :D (Running a close 2nd is the 98k). Pistol wise, the 1911 is a classic.

***Me and my Garand (slung) on our first hunting trip***

P1010008_edited.JPG

#15 Bank Vault

Bank Vault

    BANNED

  • Banned
    • Member ID: 1,216
  • 1,748 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Colorado

Posted 10 September 2007 - 07:26 PM

Two garand clips, how many deer did you plan on killing? Just kidding. I myself hunt elk with my 30-06, I have a picture of one in my profile.

#16 shrapneldude

shrapneldude
  • Members
    • Member ID: 1,424
  • 8,157 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:OHIO

Posted 11 September 2007 - 03:31 PM

Good choices, am I the only Japanese Arisaka fan in here? They are highly under rated in my personal opinion.



I have an Arisaka Type 99, toyo kogyo arsenal, with the Chrysanthemum ground off. Looking for a bayonet for it that isn't wildly overpriced (seen them for $175 and up...is this what they actually sell for, or just over-ambitious sellers? Anyway, the Arisaka is definitely a decent bolt-action, worthy of praise. Not quite a 1903 or a M1 Carbine though!

#17 MAS36

MAS36
  • Members
    • Member ID: 778
  • 430 posts
  • Location:California

Posted 11 September 2007 - 10:06 PM

I have an Arisaka Type 99, toyo kogyo arsenal, with the Chrysanthemum ground off. Looking for a bayonet for it that isn't wildly overpriced (seen them for $175 and up...is this what they actually sell for, or just over-ambitious sellers? Anyway, the Arisaka is definitely a decent bolt-action, worthy of praise. Not quite a 1903 or a M1 Carbine though!


Arisaka bayonets with scabbard usually sell for around $75 and up, you should be able to find a decent bayonet for under $100

#18 Bank Vault

Bank Vault

    BANNED

  • Banned
    • Member ID: 1,216
  • 1,748 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Colorado

Posted 12 September 2007 - 08:10 AM

I second the last post.

#19 Alonzo

Alonzo
  • Members
    • Member ID: 1,470
  • 596 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Southern Alberta

Posted 13 September 2007 - 07:29 PM

M1 Garand & M1911A1, hands down my favorites. http://www.usmilitar...tyle_emoticons/default/thumbsup.gif

On a side note, love the M-60 as my favorite full auto belt fed.

Bryan



I have ro agreem with this.
My shooting Garand is a long range match winner in local events.
I have used a m1911 based comp-gun for over 15 years...it has always functioned not matter what I would do with it.
Without doubt...two of the most relaible firearms around are th M-1 Garand and the M1911 45 acp.
Cheers

#20 cpatrick

cpatrick
  • Inactive
    • Member ID: 548
  • 851 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NYS

Posted 13 September 2007 - 08:50 PM

I have to say the MG42, and the MP40. Awsome fire power....

#21 USMCRECON

USMCRECON
  • Members
    • Member ID: 1,107
  • 4,490 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 14 September 2007 - 05:17 AM

I rather prefer the Stoner weapon system that we field tested in Vietnam. It fired the same round as the M-16 except that it didn't jam like the 16. Further, from one basic receiver group we could make any number of weapons by swapping barrells, stocks, feed cover, and pistol grip, etc. It had great utility. On one patrol our guy carrying the Stoner belt-fed MG was shot in the hand. The bullet tool off his finger and the trigger of the gun. As I remember, we took the pistol grip assembly from one of the Stoner rifles, and swapped it for the damaged one on the M-G and we had a functioning M-G again. The picture below was taken on Hill 452 with Rodriguez at left, "Gator" Thielen holding one of the Stoner rifles, Bell, Triana, and just the top of my head behind Triana. By the way....there was comment about "duck hunter" camo in a uniform thread. Here you see Triana wearing the trousers of his set while Roddy and Gator are wearing the tiger stripes and Bell is wearing standard jungle utilities.

I used my Sig .45 in the Gulf War and Somalia and am sold on it. The Gov't. Model Colt was OK Beyond the benefit of double-action which allowed it to be carried safely with a round in the chamber and not worry about the safety and an extra round in the mag over the Government Model Colt (which I carried in Vietnam), it feels good in my hand and is a good "point & shoot piece. I also like the knock-down power of the .45 over the 9mm. It may not always kill but every time I hit an enemy with it, the .45 stopped him in his tracks (both with the Gov't. Model and the Sig.

Gator_Stoner.jpg



#22 Greg Robinson

Greg Robinson

    Deceased Forum Co-Founder

  • IN MEMORIAM
    • Member ID: 4
  • 3,404 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Georgia USA

Posted 14 September 2007 - 05:28 AM

I rather prefer the Stoner weapon system that we field tested in Vietnam. It fired the same round as the M-16 except that it didn't jam like the 16. Further, from one basic receiver group we could make any number of weapons by swapping barrells, stocks, feed cover, and pistol grip, etc. It had great utility. On one patrol our guy carrying the Stoner belt-fed MG was shot in the hand. The bullet tool off his finger and the trigger of the gun. As I remember, we took the pistol grip assembly from one of the Stoner rifles, and swapped it for the damaged one on the M-G and we had a functioning M-G again. The picture below was taken on Hill 452 with Rodriguez at left, "Gator" Thielen holding one of the Stoner rifles, Bell, Triana, and just the top of my head behind Triana. By the way....there was comment about "duck hunter" camo in a uniform thread. Here you see Triana wearing the trousers of his set while Roddy and Gator are wearing the tiger stripes and Bell is wearing standard jungle utilities.

I used my Sig .45 in the Gulf War and Somalia and am sold on it. The Gov't. Model Colt was OK Beyond the benefit of double-action which allowed it to be carried safely with a round in the chamber and not worry about the safety and an extra round in the mag over the Government Model Colt (which I carried in Vietnam), it feels good in my hand and is a good "point & shoot piece. I also like the knock-down power of the .45 over the 9mm. It may not always kill but every time I hit an enemy with it, the .45 stopped him in his tracks (both with the Gov't. Model and the Sig.


Yep....it was a shame that the Stoner system was never given a fair chace due to political considerations. It was well thought of by Marines during the '60's although they were never allowed to offically use it. I talked to a SEAL team member who carried the Stoner system in Viet Nam and he raved about the weapon.

I also agree re the SIG SAUER .45. As much as I love the old 1911/1911A1's I'd rate the SIG as second best. Only reservation I'd have re carrying it in combat would be reliability. How does it function once it gets a little mud in it?

Greg

#23 USMCRECON

USMCRECON
  • Members
    • Member ID: 1,107
  • 4,490 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 14 September 2007 - 05:46 AM

If you're talking about weapoons other than rifles and pistols, I carried the M-60 for many months after they forced us to return the Stoners. The "pig" itself was heavy as was the ammo, but it always fired when called upon and the 7.62 round was poweful enough to chop a small tree down. While the ammo was heavy, none of the other patrol members ever griped when I passed out extra belts for them to carry.

The Ithaca 12ga shotgun I carried as a patrol leader was a great ambush-breaker, particularly when loaded with flechette rounds. The only drawback was it was particuarly less effective beyond about 30 yards or so in the jungle but close-in was where most of our combat action took place anyway.

Img267a.jpg


img265a.jpg



#24 USMCRECON

USMCRECON
  • Members
    • Member ID: 1,107
  • 4,490 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 14 September 2007 - 06:21 AM

Yep....it was a shame that the Stoner system was never given a fair chace due to political considerations. It was well thought of by Marines during the '60's although they were never allowed to offically use it. I talked to a SEAL team member who carried the Stoner system in Viet Nam and he raved about the weapon.

I also agree re the SIG SAUER .45. As much as I love the old 1911/1911A1's I'd rate the SIG as second best. Only reservation I'd have re carrying it in combat would be reliability. How does it function once it gets a little mud in it?

Greg


We kept our Stoners well beyond the required turn-in date. Our Bn. Commander supported us and I understood that it took a direct order from MG Robertson before the Bn commander finally directed that they be turned in. Even after than, we still kept the belt-fed Stoner for another month or so. Below is a picture of Gertie Gugich and another of our Stoners, this one leaning against a rock alongside one of our M-14s (I find very little fault with the M-14 as well http://www.usmilitar...tyle_emoticons/default/thumbsup.gif ). It's too bad Stoner Arms didn't have the money to spread around that Colt Industries had. In the time we used the Stoner, I don't recall one malfunction. In that same period of time, I could fill a book with the number of M-16 malfunctions.

I don't mean to get off the subject but I will make a couple comments about our experience with reliability of the M-16. When we were circling the LZ on final approach, I always had my Recon Marines carrying the M-16 assemble their cleaning rod and slide it down between their back and their rucksack so it would be handy to knock out the inevitable jammed cartridges. Many of our Marines carried AKs, grease guns, and all sorts of unauthorized weapons to the field. I remember in late summer of 67 (after the Bn Cdr took the heat on the Stoners) we were ordered to taker the M-16 to the field. Two of our guys compiled by breaking them down and shoving them in their rucksacks and they then carried an AK and grease gun respectively as their primary weapon. We had almost NO confidence in the M-16. :unsure:

OK, back on the topic of the thread and to your question about reliability: I don't know how the Sig would function in mud since I never had it in a muddy combat environment. I have used it in some pretty dusty and sandy condition, though. I guess I've probably fired 100+ rounds through it in the field overall and never had a problem with it.

Gertie_Stoner.jpg


Edited by USMCRECON, 14 September 2007 - 06:45 AM.


#25 Greg Robinson

Greg Robinson

    Deceased Forum Co-Founder

  • IN MEMORIAM
    • Member ID: 4
  • 3,404 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Georgia USA

Posted 14 September 2007 - 07:12 AM

We kept our Stoners well beyond the required turn-in date. Our Bn. Commander supported us and I understood that it took a direct order from MG Robertson before the Bn commander finally directed that they be turned in. Even after than, we still kept the belt-fed Stoner for another month or so. Below is a picture of Gertie Gugich and another of our Stoners, this one leaning against a rock alongside one of our M-14s (I find very little fault with the M-14 as well http://www.usmilitar...tyle_emoticons/default/thumbsup.gif ). It's too bad Stoner Arms didn't have the money to spread around that Colt Industries had. In the time we used the Stoner, I don't recall one malfunction. In that same period of time, I could fill a book with the number of M-16 malfunctions.

I don't mean to get off the subject but I will make a couple comments about our experience with reliability of the M-16. When we were circling the LZ on final approach, I always had my Recon Marines carrying the M-16 assemble their cleaning rod and slide it down between their back and their rucksack so it would be handy to knock out the inevitable jammed cartridges. Many of our Marines carried AKs, grease guns, and all sorts of unauthorized weapons to the field. I remember in late summer of 67 (after the Bn Cdr took the heat on the Stoners) we were ordered to taker the M-16 to the field. Two of our guys compiled by breaking them down and shoving them in their rucksacks and they then carried an AK and grease gun respectively as their primary weapon. We had almost NO confidence in the M-16. :unsure:

OK, back on the topic of the thread and to your question about reliability: I don't know how the Sig would function in mud since I never had it in a muddy combat environment. I have used it in some pretty dusty and sandy condition, though. I guess I've probably fired 100+ rounds through it in the field overall and never had a problem with it.


After 40 years of talking to guys about infantry weapons I've come to the conclusion that the Stoner system was outstanding, the M60 was an excellent MG, the M14 was a reliable rifle, and the M16 was a problem although it did improve with the adoption of the A1 modifications. And everybody trusted the M1911/M1911A1 service pistol.

I qualified with the M14 at Parris Island in 1967, thought it was a fine rifle, and if I'd been sent to Viet Nam it would have been my choice over the M16/M16A1 and I understand individual Marines were still carrying M14's up until the late '60's.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users