MG42 Bolt
M60 Bolt
Posted on 04/07/2015 5:48:41 AM PDT by C19fan
Nope, it may have inspired it but they are completely different.
Gimme an M79. Personal artillery.
The only thing the FG42 and MG42 have in common is 1942 and Germany.
The remarkable thing is the amount of truthful human drama that doesn’t involve violence. The way Jimmy’s brother betrayed him really go to me. Just can’t wait for the next season when Jimmy actually morphs into Saul, I suspect.
M60 Bolt
Right after a we had been in a firefight in Nam everyone in my rifle platoon wanted to carry the M-60. Of course as time passed and it got heavier and heavier they would be ready to give it up.
Great weapon with devastating fire power.
Only the Hulk could shoot an MG42 from the hip. Other than that I agree.
M4L
A few oddities about the M60.
1) It was an impressively accurate machine gun, and a good gunner could “write his name” with it at some distance.
2) Prior to its adoption, it would have been classified as a “light” machine gun, since it primarily would operate on an attached bipod. But it could also be mounted on a tripod. And it was also relatively lightweight. But because of its role as a “squad automatic weapon”, it was officially designated a “medium” machine gun, confusing everyone.
3) There are endless arguments about which machine gun ammunition are prohibited by the Geneva Conventions for use against people, but not objects. And this affects the M60 as it could fire not only ball ammo, but tracer and armor piercing rounds.
4) It had many design flaws that were pestiferous, and though some of them required rear area repair, soldiers quickly learned how to do them, so that the gun would be operable until it could be maintained.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M60_machine_gun#Design_flaws
"The .30-06 T44 experimental machine gun, which combined design of FG 42 rifle and feed system of MG 42 machine gun. The T44 served as a first step in development of M60 machine gun." M60
"The real advantage of the general purpose machine gun concept was that it added greatly to the overall volume of fire that could be put out by a squad-sized unit. The US Army took note of this fact and closely examined captured specimens of the MG 42. The tests at Aberdeen Proving Ground in February 1943 impressed the US ordnance personnel attending them. The orders went out to produce two MG 42,... " Small Arms Review
I am not saying that the M60 is the precise replica of the MG42, but they share the same DNA.
Gas operated vs. Recoil operated shares as much dna as a V8 and a Wankel. Their feed mechanisms are similar but they work on completely different principles.
The FG42 was gas operated also.
The U.S. would have been better off adopting the German MG-3; basically the MG-42 in .308 NATO.
Updated. Modernized. Chambered for the NATO 7.62x51 /.308 Win round.
show me the gas tube on the mg42
The MG 34 had more machined parts and was more expensive and time consuming to build compared to the MG 42 which used a lot of stamped parts.
Like the Luger P-08 compared to the Walther P-38.
I recall reading the MG-42 compared to the M-60 “Pig”.
Or vice versa.
GIs described its rate of fire like “tearing a sheet of linoleum” and had about the same respect for it that Germans had for our Browning fifty caliber.
As well as 7,62x53 Rimmed/Russian, [uses Maxim Gun belts!] .303 British [the .303 MG mounted in Battle of Britain Spitfires and Hurricanes] and 7,65 Argentine.
I've also seen M1919A4s set up for 7,62 M43 AK47 ammo and 5.56mm M16 rounds. The former used RPD belts, the latter those for the Stoner LMG, long before the M249 Squad Oddomatic Weapon came out.
The M60 uses a similar feed mechanism, but changed [NOT improved!] from a half-feed movement of the belt with the bolt movement to one in which the fed round in the belt is moved a full cycle as the previously fired round is ejected. Accordingly the M60s feed is jerky and less smooth, and far less suitable for fized mountings as on helicopters and as a tank co-ax gun.
The bolt of the M60 is more like that of the WWI Lewis gun than that of the Stecke-lock MG 42/ MG1/ MG3. I'm surprised that the ordnance committee swiping features from non-Browning designs didn't borrow the gas system and op rod setup of the Colt-Marlin Potato Digger.
But that said, the M60 is not at all the worst MG I've owned/used [and yes, that includes three WWI/WWII CSRG *Chauchat* autorifles, not as bad as some have claimed so long as they're in the original chambering and fed decent ammo.
Worst MG of all time, IMHO? That'd be the M73/M219 tank co-ax in 7,62 NATO. Which replaced the M1919A4 and A5 Brownings on most US tanks, but not on the Israeli ones, which used Browning .30 1919 air-cooled guns rebarrelled to use the NATO round.
Starts about 2:48 Yeah, it's easier with a Gimp/FN MAGgott or M240. Or an M60. But if you keep your bursts short and the ranges close [think letting fly at muzzle flashes at night] it's sort of like a big heavy shotgun.
And then they gave the guy the Medal of Honor....
Go JUST a little further back, to the Savage-built T-24, a WWII rework of the MG42 in .30-06. But the original 7,92x57mm round for which the MG42 was designed was just a tad short for the US .30 M2/ 7,62x61mm round.
Which wouldn't have mattered a decade later as the T44 and M80 7,62 [x51mm] NATO round was under development. All they'd have had to do would have been to blow the dust off the old Savage blueprints and engineering drawings, but they went and reworked what worked, and came up with the M60 instead. Pity. T-24: the U.S. MG42 that might have been.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.