MP-40 vs MP-44

[Puff the Magic Dragon]

I wonder why the MP-44 has a smaller firepower value (34) then the MP-40 (36). I think the MP-40 should have significant smaller value, even on short range.

The MP-40:

caliber = 9mm

Vo = 380 m/s

cadence = 400 rounds/min

ammo = 32 rounds

The MP-40 is in several sources described as relative unreliable. Problems with gunlock (early models) and especially the ammo feeding (I hope it's the right term) that was never solved.

The MP-44:

caliber : 7.92mm

Vo = 685 m/s

cadence = 500 rounds/min

ammo = 30 rounds

The MP-44 is described as very reliable and precise, and the soldiers were very contented with it.

Well, I don't know what is all included in the CM firepower value, but it appears to me that the MP-40 is a bit overpowered? Okay, it has a slightly bigger caliber - of course I have not tested if a 7.92 makes significant bigger hole in my bum then a 9 mm - but is it the only important criteria?

Of course I'm no expert, but I'm sure someone here knows more about it.

[ February 08, 2002, 06:25 PM: Message edited by: Puff the Magic Dragon ]

[Patgod]

well the 7.92 was a shortened rifle round, so it should have more hit in it. expecially at longer range.

[Determinant]

You would seem to have a point. The MP40 is a SMG (shudder) while the MP44 is an assault rifle. Daddy of the AK-47 I believe. I know which one I would rather have in a tight spot. And it's not the one that fires pistol bullets.

[Iron Chef Sakai]

The Mp-40 was a solid smg. Any gun that fires that many rounds per minuit is going to jam once in awhile.

In tight spot i would rather the MP-40 only because if it's compact size and light wieght, making it easier and faster to put it's barrel where you need to. You also do not need as much room to use the MP-40.

In house to house fighting these are a few reasons why I would assume the MP-40 would be the better choice. Oh, and the MP-40 probably had less kick then the MP-44 allowing you to spray more bullets with more accuracy at close range.

[Iron Chef Sakai]

Originally posted by Determinant:

You would seem to have a point. The MP40 is a SMG (shudder) while the MP44 is an assault rifle. Daddy of the AK-47 I believe. I know which one I would rather have in a tight spot. And it's not the one that fires pistol bullets.

Yes, Kalishnakoff pretty much copied the MP-44.

[Puff the Magic Dragon]

This is my impression, too.

BTW, I have forgotten

The MP-40 ammo: 9x19mm, bullet weight 8g

The MP-44 ammo: 7.92x33mm, bullet weight 6.95g

This is also a bit smaller, but with the higher speed a much higher kinetic power (seen from an amateurs point of view, of course).

[ February 08, 2002, 06:50 PM: Message edited by: Puff the Magic Dragon ]

[Gpig]

Well, who designed the MP-44?

(I'd just like to know.)

Gpig

[Puff the Magic Dragon]

Originally posted by Gpig:

Well, who designed the MP-44?

(I'd just like to know.)

Gpig

Hugo Schmeisser

[Puff the Magic Dragon]

Iron Chef Sakai - the MP-44 had also a 'relativ small' recoil.

[Tiger]

Actually the correct name for this weapon is the Sturmgewehr 44 (assault rifle 44). Albert Speer had to hide the development of this weapon from Hitler, who did not like this new rifle at first, so they gave it the pseudo-name MP-44. It was the first ever (iirc) assault rifle that allowed three modes of fire: single, a three-round burst, and full-auto. The sturmgewehr 44 fired a 7.92mm x 33mm kurz (short) round. Pistolen-Patronen 43m.E ammo.

-john

[RMC]

I think the CM system favors "weight of fire" which the MP40 has in abundance at short range. The beauty of the MP44 was not that it was more powerful than the MP40 at close range. It was that it had good firepower up close but also had decent accuracy at rifle ranges and was thus very versatile.

[ February 08, 2002, 07:38 PM: Message edited by: RMC ]

[Mr. Johnson--]

Man, I wouldn't be caught dead with an MP-40 when I could have taken an STG-44 into battle.

[Kwazydog]

Heya Guys,

I dont pretend to know too much about this, but I have read an article comparing the 9mm round to a 7.62, which stated that the 9mm actually has more stopping power at short range than the higher powered 7.62mm round, which will tend to pass straight through its target. This 9mm round will often be stopped by the target with them recieving all of the impact and will also leave the projectile in its victim.

Something I do know more about though...the MP-40 is a much more controlable weapon than the MP-44. Its slower ROF and smaller cartridge means that you can fire long bursts without loosing control of the weapon, something which isnt possible on the MP-44 and thus you need to fire short bursts. And yes, Im am talking from personal experience there

If I had my choice of weapon for a short ranged battle Id take a SMG any day as this is what they are designed for.

Dan

[The Commissar]

Originally posted by Iron Chef Sakai:

Yes, Kalishnakoff pretty much copied the MP-44.

LOL. Here comes ICS with his "factz".

While I don't pretend to be a gun wiz, I do remember there was a significant technical reason that proves Kalashnikov did nothing of the sort. Ill just wait until a real grog posts that reason, but Ill be laughing at you while I do so. Hyuk-hyuk-hyuk

[Lee]

The MP-40 is given a higher rating at close range in CM because of it's excellent

ability to deliver precise controllable firepower in large volumes, especially

in a close quarters firefight where it would be very quick to be brought on target,

even in very tight situations.

I agree with the superior rating at close range. The MP-40 handles like a dream

and is deadly accurate and quick to employ in well-trained hands. And I

would expect it to have an advantage in many close-in situations.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Before you guys get too much further into this, you may want to read the following thread:

MP-44 vs SMG discrepancies

The FP values for the MP-40 and MP-44 in CM are not quite the same that first shipped with the game. They were changed in one of the patches and it was the above discussion that led to the changes.

[BloodyBucket]

Kalishnikov may have gotten the concept of the AK-47 from the MP-44, but the operating system is different enough to make it unfair to say he copied it.

Original cartridges for the MP-44 are almost unknown today, as they were not made with the usual brass case, and most have corroded to a useless state. A reloader with the right tools could resize brass to make it "fit" but that would be a work intensive, expensive proposition.

The U.S. army once did a study to determine the "perfect" cartridge for the service rifle and LMG, in the late 70's or early 80's. They put all the data into a computer, and after factoring in terminal and external ballistics, recoil, weight of ammo, etc. the design that got spit out was remarkably like a commercial .243 Winchester or military 6.5 Swedish Mauser round. They never adopted it, as it was deemed to spendy to rechamber the current inventory.

The "puny" 9x19mm lives on, almost a century after it was introduced. The 7.62x51mm NATO round is really a modified .30-06, that more or less dates back to 1903. Even the "modern" 5.56 NATO of M-16 fame is a child of the 1950's. It seems the nature of flesh and bone does not require much of an upgrade in ballistics technology to defeat it.

[Warmaker]

I'll agree that Kalashnikov may have gotten the idea of the AK from the StG-44 but he certainly didn't copy it. Gonna have to sift through books though...

Anyhow, the MP40 is superb for CQB. Lightweight, more controllable than the StG-44, good ROF, etc. However, past those short ranges, any SMG loses alot of its effectiveness.

If I had to make a choice between the two, give me the StG-44 anyday. With lots of ammo!

[Puff the Magic Dragon]

Originally posted by KwazyDog:

Heya Guys,

I dont pretend to know too much about this, but I have read an article comparing the 9mm round to a 7.62, which stated that the 9mm actually has more stopping power at short range than the higher powered 7.62mm round, which will tend to pass straight through its target. This 9mm round will often be stopped by the target with them recieving all of the impact and will also leave the projectile in its victim.

Something I do know more about though...the MP-40 is a much more controlable weapon than the MP-44. Its slower ROF and smaller cartridge means that you can fire long bursts without loosing control of the weapon, something which isnt possible on the MP-44 and thus you need to fire short bursts. And yes, Im am talking from personal experience there

If I had my choice of weapon for a short ranged battle Id take a SMG any day as this is what they are designed for.

Dan

KwazyDog Are you talking about the 7.62x51mm? This is the modern NATO rifle ammo. I'm not sure if can be compared with the 7.92x33mm.

BTW, I guess my bum is not really interested if the bullet walks through or sticks in it, but maybe the bum behind me?

Well, I just wonder what a firepower the Soviet PPSch-41 will have:

The PPSch-41:

ammo = 71 rounds 7.62x25mm, bullet weight 5.5g

Vo = 500 m/s

cadence = 1000 rounds/min (!!!)

A firepower of 50-60 per MP? Goodbye Fritz! :eek:

Usually described as the best MP of WWII, even the Germans prefered it if they had enough ammo for it.

[Ben Galanti]

Originally posted by Vanir Ausf B:

Before you guys get too much further into this, you may want to read the following thread:

MP-44 vs SMG discrepancies

The FP values for the MP-40 and MP-44 in CM are not quite the same that first shipped with the game. They were changed in one of the patches and it was the above discussion that led to the changes.

Dang... I was hoping to be the old timer to bring up that thread The issue is discussed in depth in that one...

Ben

[Charlie Rock]

Well, if someone can authoritativeky say that the AK was an original work, I'd like to hear it.

Kalashnikov was a WWII vet (I think armored corps). He probably saw STG44s around.

Sturmgewehr:

7.92x33mm round 120 grains with 32 grains propellent.

Previous weapons in German Army using this cartridge: None

banana shaped 30 round magazine

weighed approx 11 lbs

tangent leaf rear sight

muzzle velocity 2250 fps

overall length 36 3/4 inches, barrel 16 in.

safety and magazine catch on left side

Operation: Gas operated, selective fire with the barrel below the operating rod

Internal:

gas piston, operating rod, operating handle, spring guide, bolt camming and locking units are two units

bolt is an independent unit

STG breaks open through a hingre pin, like a double barrel shot gun or M16

AK47

7.62x38mm round 122 grains with 25 grains propellent.

Previous weapons in Russian Army using this cartridge: None

banana shaped 30 round magazine

weighed 10.58 lbs

tangent rear leaf sight

muzzle velocity 2329 fps

overall length 34.25 in., barrel 16.34

Operation: Gas operated, selective fire with the barrel below the operating rod

Internal:

bolt carrier and operating rod is an independent unit

recoil spring and guide rod is an independent unit

bolt is an independent unit

AK doesen't break open, the cover in the back comes off and parts are pulled out through the back.

Safeties, operating handles, magazine catches, are different, and usually less practical in every respect.

Right handed firers have to take their hand off the trigger to cock, operate the safety, and load the weapon.

I think the piston on a STG is different from an AK. Pictures of STG internal components look so close to AK components that if there is a fundamental difference in operation it is of significance only to a gun maker. I have heard something about a "piston" on a STG44, whil an AK has a solid piece of stainless steel as the oeprating rod. IMHO Kalashnikov may have made a cruder version of the STG operation to simplify production, and the trigger mechanism is probably different and more crude than the German weapon.

[ February 09, 2002, 02:22 AM: Message edited by: Charlie Rock ]

[Kwazydog]

Puff, yes, I was talking about the nato round and I am well aware of the difference in power of the two projectiles *but* the principle is the same, just to a lesser excent.

Anyways, I think this question has been answered many times before as pointed out above, so no need to spend more time on this one.

Dan

[ February 09, 2002, 04:52 AM: Message edited by: KwazyDog ]

[Determinant]

If the SMG has such advantages against the assault rifle then it would seem strange that almost all the world's armies use assault rifles in preference to SMGs except for very specialised functions.

It reminds me of a game of chance played in the wilder British cavalry regiments on drunken mess nights. There are two players: the shooter and the target. Both players (and any spectators) must be very very drunk. The shooter has a disassembled 12 bore shotgun and a handful of birdshot cartridges. The target has a bicycle, a thick waterproof coat (a barbour in UK parlance - one of those heavy weight Filsons jobs in US terms) and is wearing a helmet.

At the signal to begin play the target begins to furiously pedal as fast as possible away from the shooter (losing a chain would be very bad at this point). The shooter meanwhile assembles his shotgun and as soon as he is done opens fire at the retreating back of the target. The target invariably escapes unscathed (unless the spurs on the targets mess kit knock his chain off).

Masses of fun for all! That's how you build an Army: tradition and heavy drinking.

Anyway here's the question: would you be prepared to play the game with an SMG? I have a suspicion that given a small lead - say 75 metres - you could be confident of escaping as the target against an SMG weilding shooter.

I would never play the game against an assault rifle. Ever. Let's drink some more port and discuss the odds...

[Slapdragon]

The problem with the assault rifle / SMG discussion is that first, there are indeed cases when a SMG is more useful than an assault rifle despite the fact that an assault rifle is generally superior, and second, the red herring of stopping power.

In combat, stopping power is often discussed, but research shows that most soldiers, with a few medal winning exceptions, quit actively participating in fighting when hit by any bullet or shrapnel in the chest. This means that, except for penetrations, the differenve between an assault rifle round and a pistol round in the CM scale is not that great. rate of fire, controllability, ammo weight, and other factors all are more important that stopping power, since almost any bullet hit will end a soldier's active participation in fighting.

Next, there is a distinct advantage of WW3 SMG over assault rifles that is maintained today, and that is recoil from firing makes the average SMG easier to fire than the average assault rifle in full automatic mode. This is why police forces around the world use SMG for close in fighting today, they are much eaier to control, and they can get much better suppression at close range. At longer ranges (75 meters +) the assault rifle is much better for its suppressive power, but at close range SMG are more deadly and cause greater suppresion.

The assault rifle, as shown by the MP-44, was better than a SMG overall because it could engage enemy out to all useful ranges, had full-automatic fire for emergencies, and a large capacity magazine. But by being good at all three, it game up being great at any one. This is wahy the SMG keeps a niche even today, although even more advanced assault rifles based on small ammunition and low recoil gas greatly diminished some of the SMG advantages.

[Kwazydog]

Slappy, interesting, and I would tend to agree.

Ive actually dug out the old article for interests sake that I was referring to and it is actually about SWAT teams and the weapons they use (5.56, not 7.62), and Id think that this example is very different from a combat situation with trained soldiers as they are obviously talking about civilians.

Determinant, fun game, hehe. Im guessing you may not have seen an SMG in action though ? Before June this year, neither had I, but having witnessed their use and firing several myself I can assure you that you wouldnt want anyone shooting at you with either at under 100m. A trained marksman could drop you very quickly from 75m and to be honest I think I probably could with next to no experience with automatic weapons, as they are quite stable and controllable.

Over 100m - 150m, yup, then Id rather the SMG! Hehe, Id rather the shotgun though.

Dan

[ February 09, 2002, 07:58 AM: Message edited by: KwazyDog ]