Well, "The greatest implement of battle ever devised." would be the M1 Garand of course.
The M14 was a horrible weapon in full-auto so it was basically an under-powered Garand.
2007-05-28 12:17:51
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋
Despite General Patton's often quoted remark (and there is a lot of doubt that he ever actually really said it), the M1 Garand was badly flawed before it ever entered service and obsolete before it was just a few years old.
Oh, the Americans carried it to victory over unquestionable evils in WWII and it served well, but the enbloc 'clip' system was a horrible bit of engineering, the 8 round capacity was even smaller than the British Enfield bolt action and damn, that rifle is heavy.
My vote goes to the Mauser G98 and later modification to carbine in the K98.
The Mauser 98 action, even a century later, is the best rifle action ever developed and is still the basis for every great bolt rifle since. For the half-century 1900-1950, the Mauser dominated.
The US 1903 Springfield rifle served a lot longer and better than the M1, from the early 1900s to Vietnam...and guess what? It's a 98 Mauser clone!
The AK will probably be around another 50 years or more and it's certainly the greatest battlefield rifle of the last half century.
2007-05-28 22:07:55
·
answer #2
·
answered by DJ 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
In my opinion, if General Patton had ever held an M-14 in his hand, he'd have changed his tune about the M-1 Garand.
However, I will specify the M-14 in semi-auto version. I am a staunch proponent of aimed fire, not spray and pray. After all, one can not miss often enough or fast enough to win a firefight. Only hits count, and a hit with a 7.62 NATO does a lot more damage than the M-16 or M-4 poodle shooters' anemic .22 caliber bullet.
Don't let anyone blow smoke up your bum, the AK-47 is a great fighting rifle. It is butt ugly, and it is not a target rifle, but it is tougher than dirt, and more dependable than it has a right to be. And I trust an automatic .30-30 more than a .22 automatic.
Doc Hudson
2007-05-29 03:17:24
·
answer #3
·
answered by Doc Hudson 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
They are all wonderful weapons. Each one had its time in history and was tried and tested. The absolute best weapon on the battlefield is no the rifle but the rifleman. The rifle is only a tool used by the mechanic.
There is an old saying "Beware the man who only has 1 rifle because he knows how to use it."
2007-05-28 22:57:47
·
answer #4
·
answered by dirtydan2 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
M1 Garand, based on use. M4 carbine chambered for 6.8 SPC might be, if used in numbers, but who knows? And even better might be an M4- type built on a platform intermediate in size between the AR15 and AR10 recievers, and chambered for the 7mm round developed by Enfield in the post-WW II years that eventually lost out to the 7.62x51 NATO in the fifties.
2007-05-28 22:02:44
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
G36
G3A3
AK47
M1 Garand
K31 (for its accuracy alone)
Mosin Nagant M91/30(For it's durability and simplicity)
NIC-700 Class 5 Plasma Rifle with high yield tachyon burst.
L2A2
Mauser K98 (Best bolt action)
2007-05-28 22:24:46
·
answer #6
·
answered by boker_magnum 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Its all a matter of opinion, of course, but I like the FAL and M-14. Both are 7.62x51 NATO, great stoppers and long range rifles.
H
2007-05-28 20:18:53
·
answer #7
·
answered by H 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
M1 Garand. ........ don't let no one tell u that crap AK is. ...... Only reason it's still in use by so many is it's all they can produce in mass and afford. I shitt you not. and the M14 couldn't be handled enough in full auto for any one to shoot. yea I know the M1 wasnt a full auto, don't know much on the Fal.
2007-05-28 21:09:32
·
answer #8
·
answered by frankcujo89 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
H & K G36, utterly reliable, long range, high rate of fire
2007-05-28 21:54:05
·
answer #9
·
answered by bobgorilla 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
I prefer the M-14.....
2007-05-28 15:59:11
·
answer #10
·
answered by dca2003311@yahoo.com 7
·
3⤊
2⤋