I shot the Danish version of the MG-42 long ago. It was an exact copy in 7.62NATO. For a demo, they put the gun on the ground, on a bipod, and buried the ammo belt in dirt, sticks and pebbles out to the side. Then a Dane leaned over and fired the MG one-handed, on the ground. The gun ate the ammo without jamming. Then they did the same trick with another Dane standing on the end of the ammo belt, on the ground. The other guy leaned over again to pull the trigger. The gun dragged itself over to the ammo belt, shooting. I was impressed.
The Germans lost, didn't they?
Seems to me that the FN-MAG (M240) and the Browning M1919 (and the Lewis) were far more successful than the MG42 and its clones in terms of armies winning wars.
The feed tray covers were interchangeable.
WW II TF on the old model at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQwRjZByaok
I’m an MG-42, M-60 guy myself.
I haven’t heard it called the pig gun in a long time
IIRC, the M-60 was influenced more by the FG-42.
I doubt anyone could find a combat vet of the ETO who would question the effectiveness of the MG-42, so I would imagine any replacement which is truly superior - as opposed to being a more convenient expedient or more a politically palatable purchase - would be formidable indeed.
Mr. niteowl77
Now I have a machine gun, ho-ho-ho.
Not sure I care for that, coming from the Germans.
Not really: the Pig is more like an updated Lewis Gun in its design. The MG42 is roller-locked and recoil-operated and has a really clever barrel changing setup. The M-60 is a rotating bolt locking weapon and gas operated.
The M-60 and the MG42 do share the stamped parts design and the double-coil operating spring in their designs but the M-60 used a cheap aluminum and plastic feedcover and lots of plastic elsewhere. I used one a lot and it was always breaking firing pins/chipping bolt lugs when we least needed it to.
Damn "least-bidder" weapon like the M-16.
This is one of those times when the comments here are much more interesting than the original article.