I was flipping through a weapons magazine yesterday and one page had an m1 garand and k98 cartriges side by side and the m1 round (30-06) was heavier,taller,wider and looked like it would pack a bigger punch.. knowing that, it shouldin't even be a contest,the k98 has a little more accuracy but the m1 must be far superior to a k98 because its semi automatic

whats your thoughts?

quote:

Originally posted by Dori1234: the m1 must be far superior to a k98 because its semi automatic

in what way could it be "FAR" superior?
1. in a 1 vs 1 used on what distance?
ie. long range: the K98 can shot you a precise 3rd nosehole at a range of almost 1 mile so when you come along with your c rappy m1 your dead before you have even seen where it would have been coming from.

2. if the K98 would have been in anyway bad the germans would not have owned all nations in ww2 till 42 (in the begin of ww2 the K98 was the standart for the german soldier). ie the Brits which where useing the semiautomatic Rifle "enfield"

3. in a modern combat?
both guns would be more then useless, modern combat distance is about 50 - 150m Meters/ 55 - 164 Yards and fast paced. Both guns do not fullfil in anyway those needs.

I mean like a squad with all k98's and a sqaud with all m1's fighting to the death

1.an m1 rifle was very accurate but just not quite as accurate as a k98 becuase of it being semi automatic... but personally Id pick a semi auto over a little less accuracy.

2.The enfield was not semi automatic and the germans never in the course of the war "owned" the british,they never blitzkrieged the united kingdom. all they did was send v1's and v2's (1944)

3. I can see the k98 being useless in modern warfare but the army and the marines use the m1 garand in some cases still today heres a pic... I talked to the guy holding the m1 about it

http://img131.imageshack.us/img131/3108/m15ek.jpg

http://img131.imageshack.us/img131/3598/94055225l7gz.jpg

4.It wasn't really due to the k98 that the germans "owned" (blitzkrieged) Europe in 42' it was more due to suprise,superior manpower,tanks,and fast paced

It is incorrect to match the two rifles, because they two completly different type of weaponry. They are different classes of rifles.
Everybody knows that the best, most accurate, and most reliable bolt-action rifle is the Mauser Karabiener '98, no doubt. And also everybody knows that the best most accurate and reliable semi-automatic rifle is the M1 Garand.
Personally i wouldn't match the two on a contest. A good contest would be M1 Garand vs a Karabiener 43 (we already know the winner ) or a K98 vs a Enfield or Nagant or Springfield.
Dorry isnt the pic u display an M21 Sniper Rifle? It doesnt look like a Garand to me

he told me it was a garand and i guess your right; it would be stupid to compare them but one thing.

1. Why isn't the springfield 03' hailed as better than the k98; ok the k98 was easy to handle but the springfield had more punch...I think the 03' has a better tradeoff

No other way:
1 sq vs 1 sq, both squads are on the same skill level....the german squad would win.

whats your reasoning for that?

)The Karabiner 98K has a bigge rpunch than the M1 Garand. There is no way you can ever find one of the 2 superior over the other.

There is actually one thing that makes the Garand better (superior has no place in this discusion anymore (imo) ): the Garand can be used for about 10 days in dusty, shallowed, difficult terrain without cleaning the interior of the rifle. (Maybe this info is wrong, I learned it form sombody else .)

The Karabiner is bolt action, yes, but the Garand had to be replaced in the 50's because of the 'ping'sound which betrayed his owner . BTW: The governement siad this, we all know there is no continuous ping, many times yuou don't hear it because of the others who fire.

I only prefer he K98K because it's German and ..... it is beautifull (which is actually the same for the Garand in my opinion )

Sorry to butt in but this is a curious debate...

You can have a great weapons system or weapons platform. But the weapons are only as good as the men using them.

Sure, soldiers need confidence in their weapons.
But weapons don't win wars.
Soldiers with the will to win do that.

History shows us that soldiers armed with inferior weapons can, and have, beaten enemies having superior weaponry.

Personally, I'm far more scared of a professional squad of hardcore troops armed with pointy sticks than a half-*ssed company armed with autorifles.

that whole, the "ping betrays the owner" deal in nonsence. i mean is it gonna give away your posistion after to kick out 8 30.06 rounds? no. does it tell your enemy that you need to reload? yes, but so what? it takes about 3 seconds to reload it, i know from experience. and if the enemy is close enough to charge you after he hears the "ping" then let someone else next to you shoot at him for 3 seconds, or have a bayonet or sidearm. any more reasons why the ping would betray it owner????

I agree with Dark Autumn, As I am a republican i live by this phrase...

"Guns don't kill people, people kill people"

Well, for my part, I'm Canadian.
So neither Dubya nor Kerry approve this message.

Anywho, just to add to my point:

-Troops who know the strengths and weaknesses of their weapons (and those of the enemy) and know how to the get the most out of them (strategy and tactics) -and also- have the kind of hardcore mentality needed to follow through, those are the kinds of troops who'll win.

quote:

Originally posted by Dori1234:
whats your reasoning for that?

No reasoning..im just kidding...!
Im german and homeland made products are always better!

Garand, period.

I think Lee-Enfield Rifle No. 4 vs Mauser Kar-98(k) (vs Mannlicher M.95 vs Mosin-Nagant vs...) is a better comparison.

quote:

Originally posted by Dori1234:
3. I can see the k98 being useless in modern warfare but the army and the marines use the m1 garand in some cases still today heres a pic... I talked to the guy holding the m1 about it

http://img131.imageshack.us/img131/3108/m15ek.jpg

http://img131.imageshack.us/img131/3598/94055225l7gz.jpg

4.It wasn't really due to the k98 that the germans "owned" (blitzkrieged) Europe in 42' it was more due to suprise,superior manpower,tanks,and fast paced

Wrong and wrong again. actually with the brit gun 3 times wrong

so why do you see a K98 as useless while that cra ppy M1 not? just because you found a pic on the web where a GI did hold that gun?

THINK before you post.
as you can see on the Photo it is a sniper rifle, no gun for CQC. Now THINK! the most and best Sniperrifles are... yes... bolt rifles ... oh yeah right...like the K98.
Sniper rifle... one shot on long range .. for this purpose the K98 is(even you admit) better then the M1...
Conclusion
the K98 would be for this GI on your picture the BETTER and superior Gun then the M1

ad 2 the germany did owned all nations in Europe in ww2 till '42, why else did they beat them?


now tell me
why do I not get rid of the Impression you are one of these typcal completly uneducated US Boys who thinks just because something comes out of the US it is automaticly better then anything else from somewhere. You should get urself better informed, I know that is hard in the US because your education system is on 3rd world level and can not catch up with any country in Europe.. but at least you can try.

opinions, these are just opinions and thoughts of people who were interested

The m1 has a bigger round, bigger punch and a bigger bullet.Have any of you watched black hawk down or read the book? Well the one of the two sniper rifles they were using was an m1 garand, They say the m1 has a perfect caliber projectile with a perfect FPS, Because the m1 fired at a human at distant ranges will lodge in the chest, torso, leg, whatever. Meaning it will go straighthrough there body, the bullet will penetrate and puncture vital organs and be left in the body, some of the other bolt action rifles on the market (excluding a k98) will penetrate right through and leave an exit wound, leaving the soldiers still charging at you with bayonet at hand, (bigger rounds). Now the k98's problem is the shell and the bolt action mechanism. Personally If you want a good squad level in WWII it would be the fast cycling m1 garand. if you want a good medium range sniper rifle it would be a fast cycling yet extremely accurate m1 garand. Its all around a good weapon (excluding weight haha).

And I was right about the blitzkrieging, sure if the Wearchment didn't have a weapon at all they wouldn't have taken all those countries but they wouldn't have tried tanking over all those countries without weapons that just stupid, are they gonna throw rocks? lol. that takes the rifle out of the category it was due to :

*suprise
*superior manpower
*tanks
* and a fast paced assualt

quote:

Originally posted by Dori1234:
...Now the k98's problem is the shell and the bolt action mechanism...

in what way if I may ask? LOL again you have no clue about what you are talking.
the K98 round is a 7,92x57 or common called 8x57IS round, which almost the same as a Cal. 300 round nowadays (most common round for sinperrifles nowadays)

Personally If you want a good squad level in WWII it would be the fast cycling m1 garand. if you want a good medium range sniper rifle it would be a fast cycling yet extremely accurate m1 garand. Its all around a good weapon (excluding weight haha).

quote:

Originally posted by Dori1234:
And I was right about the blitzkrieging,....that takes the rifle out of the category it was due to :
*suprise
*superior manpower
*tanks
* and a fast paced assualt

WRONG!

there was never any Surprise, for none of the countries that got assaulted.
Poland had serveral actions before and it was clear it would come to a War, they even wanted it (they thought they would beat germany and would march through Berlin within 2 weeks...lol)
now who else surprised? The dutch got informed and had an ultimatum, The French? well after beating the Netherlands in 4 day, you think that Belgium and France where surprised when the germany just go on? I guess even you see you are wrong.

there was nothing such as superior manpower when germany invaded Poland they did it with 25% menpower then the polnish army had. The French Army was double as big as the german, and about Sovietunion we dont even need to talk.

all others had tanks too (France double amount then germany), just not as good as the germans, well nothing germany to blame for, only the polnish, dutch, french, soviet engineers.

a fast paced assault, is how modern warfare is. If other nations then the german back then where to lazy to run or to scared as chicken.. well then it was as it was.

I can either Counteract or reword everything you said was wrong.Im leaving Russia Out of this its eastern europe besides thats another story with there T-34's

1.http://www.kimdutoit.com/ee/images/2005files/8mm-762x54-303-30-06.jpg

^^^^ The Second to the right is close enough to the k98 round, (Id much rather get nailed by that than the more powerful 30-06..But I wouldn't want to get hit by either haha)

2. The m1 Can chamber 8 rounds in a stripper clip.. 8 rounds compared to the k98's 5 less powerful rounds

3. The Germans that blitzkrieged the European Countrys were brainwashed, Some of them SS fanatics They were much better fighters than any other soldiers they faced ( french, polish, norwegian..ect)

4. The Germans had Tigers,Panthers and other highly powerful Tanks, even if they were put up against 2 the amount of prewar model french "rolling sheet metal BB guns" They would take them out with one shot, (I read that in Citizen Soldiers by Stephen Ambrose.)

4.The luftwaffe was ruling the skies at that time period too.

5. The fact is they Took over western Europe, something must have been right with their assualt.

6.The french and Polish Army never stood a chance, they couldn't hold their ground versus Superior SS fantactics on Rolling 88's

7. Okay mabey suprise didn't have much to do with taking over europe especially after the first days of the offensive, "hey ya gotta hand it to the underground."

8.

quote:

a fast paced assault, is how modern warfare is.

It wasn't MODERN warfare this was over a half a century ago although it was EXTREMELY more of a mobile war that that of trench fighting in the great war

ridiculous,
you have no logic in your agumentation chains.
jumping from one to the other, then other way around, just to have right... good god how old are you?
12?
aside that you have no clue about WW2

now again THINK before you post!
when did the war start?
when got T34 into the battlefield? when the Tiger and Panther?
nothing of it has anything to do with beating entired Europe.
There where NO "fanatic superior SS" as fighting troops in the Begin of the war, not even one. Poland, France got beaten up by ordonary Wehrmacht's Soldiers with cr apy K98k.

as for that, i leave this, because i really cant be botherd to talk to someone who acts like a little child and has no understanding of things.