Its still perfectly viable today. One free or uninjured arm and the minimum presented profile makes perfect sense unless you are wearing a bulletproof vest or rifle plate. When you consider the pistol as a purely defensive weapon for a gun crew or officer in unexpected close contact, it makes sense to train in pointing your arm at the threat but turn your body to start running if need be. The Weaver and Iso stances both have a much more offensive mindset that suits the pistol as the primary weapon, as is the case for LEOs. That said, I think the Army analyzed WWI and early WWII accounts and determined any pistol killing the enemy in combat was rather few and far between, hence the M1 Carbine.
@James Harding In the words of a old Marine... "Pistols are tools of convenience, not of effectiveness." Better a handgun than nothing when that primary arm jams or runs out of ammo.
@James Harding Better at everything except for convenience to carry. If you're say, a machine gunner, it's far easier to carry a pistol as a backup than an SMG or carbine.
1953: Recruit new soldiers via informative film demonstrating army weapons. 2011: Recruit new soldiers via violent video games demonstrating army weapons.
If you think about it the M1Carbine was the old school M4, weighed 5 pounds (the M4 weighing 4-6 depending) and fired in semi and automatic. while being fed from a 30 round magazine. (I think you can also use the 15 round ones aswell but not sure) Honestly wish there was more of the M1 carbines out on the market.
South Korea wanted to send us 770,000 of them. Which would have been a new flood of arsenal M1 carbines for the CMP... and Obama had them banned because he thought they were "assault weapons".
@Splitskirts Well, they were actually automatic rifles. In order for them to be assault rifles, they needed to be in intermediate, less powerful calibre.
well assault rifles were around long before the StG, the Russians came up with the idea in 1916, but didnt capitolize on the concept, because it was deemed "untraditional"...but the StG revolutionized the concept, brought it back and introduced the platform we all know today, you could say it reinvented the assault rifle
The Fedorov was not an assault rifle. It fired 6.5 Japanese and the recoil was quite intense. It was likely harder to control in full auto than the BAR due to the reduced weight and short recoil system. Likewise, it was meant to be a crew served support weapon with loaders and ammo carriers. Capable of firing accurate single shots at long range, and capable of full auto in the trenches and for suppression. If the Fedorov counts as an assault rifle, so does the BAR. They both used a full size rifle cartridge, they're crew served, and they're both capable of firing out to long ranges and sweeping trenches/bunkers. The Fedorov may fire a smaller cartridge, but it's not that small, and unlike the BAR it isn't gas operated like every majorly successful assault rifle. That short recoil system is gonna give you problems firing in bursts with any accuracy. BAR would probably be better for that purpose if you're strong enough to carry it. Now yeah the Fedorov predates the BAR, but my point isn't to say the BAR is an assault rifle, it's to say that neither is. There's a reason people who dedicate their lives to this topic like Ian say that this is an automatic rifle not an assault rifle, and call the STG 44 the first assault rifle to be produced en masse. Burton rifle doesn't count because there were only a couple made.
Second point I didn't think of before as well, the Italian Cei-Rigotti was made in 1900 and it used the 6.5 Carcano cartridge. That cartridge is weaker than the 6.5 Arisaka, while at the same time capable of full auto fire as well as being gas operated. Not only does it fit the definition of assault rifle better than the Fedorov, it predates it by two decades. It would have been much easier to control in full auto than the Fedorov or the BAR. Third point: the American Winchester 1907 fired .35 sl, a cartridge with a similar energy to the 8mm Kurz of the German STG44. It was a light and handy carbine with a moderate amount of recoil due to it's blowback system. Not as good as gas operation, but better than being recoil operated. Not all of them were select fire but there were more of them than the Fedorov's and were used by multiple countries primarily for balloon mounted troops. None of these things are assault rifles. They're just automatic rifles/carbines. What defines an assault rifle more than any one attribute is it's capabilities, really the sum of many attributes. Assault rifles are the result of the realization that small arms need not engage further than a few hundred yards. By reducing the capabilities of each individual bullet, they can greatly increase the functional volume of fire. A true assault rifle being developed relies on an existing understanding of this doctrine. Each part of the weapon has to be crafted with this in mind. The pistol grip, length, handguard, sights, magazines, ergonomics, it all has to be made for the purpose of usability in close range full auto. The Fedorov is an absolute pike of a gun with a long barrel that recoils with every shot. The drop stock and sights don't really help. Now this isn't an insult to Vladimir Fyodorov, the concept of an assault rifle hadn't been developed yet so it wouldn't really have been possible for him to make, but that's really my whole point. If he had made an assault rifle, I doubt the military would have been interested. Armies at this time were still focused on putting a bullet 1,000 yards away with enough force to kill a horse. Anything you could really call an assault rifle can't do that. Really the doctrine of the time made an assault rifle impossible. Consider that even after WW2 the US made everyone adopt 7.62 because they still didn't get it. Going back to WW1, such a revelation would have been totally beyond the current doctrine which is why you see so few things that even resemble an assault rifle.
@adriandagangster Yea my father was in WW2 and got to bring home his 30-06 Garand and he got a m1 carbine which was a friend of his in war,semi only.Plus he purchased a 1911 from the Army depot fresh out of battle.Like you, I have found alot of people don't know the difference between the 30 cals.
ever held a greasegun!:P I truly doubt the stock is too much better :P, wire stocks never have worked out well imo. Had an amd for awhile, it did ok. The m1 thompson weighed in at 10.5lb. If the grease gun weighed 5lb- ok, im sold. But with a 2lb difference, give me the thompson, lock, stock, and smoking cutts compensator
I have. Its a really heavy wire like a bolt shank and it attaches on both sides of the receiver rather than folds out from only one side. It didn't strike me as too springy, although I wasn't able to shoot it. The difference, I hear, is the rate of fire. The Thompson is simply too fast to control while the M3 deliberately fires slow enough you can maintain accuracy. I think the fact they never gave them compensators or other muzzle devices and they served into the 1990's with no upgrades is a testament to that.
Laxhutt95 is correct, it was not made in Germany, it was made in Russia by a man named Mikhail Kalashnikov. Now days the AK47/47u.... is being manufactured in the US by Wasr. If you really want a German Firearm, look at HK(Heckler and Koch) they created to G36/C/K, USP.45, PSG-1, MP5/5K/SD, UMP and more. Check out there site for more firearms.
The British made a special carbine called the De Lisle carbine in 1943 for commando(spec ops) use. It uses .45 ACP and is similar in function to a Thompson M1A1 also with an integrated suppressor.
@Vukashin88 u must know nothing about the m1/m2/m3 carbines, because if u did, u would know that they use an intermediate cartridge. Just because the m1 garand and the m1 carbine both shoot a .30 caliber bullet, doesn't mean it's the same bullet. The .30 refers to the diameter only. The garand shoots a 63mm long cartridge and the carbine shoots an intermediate cartridge, that's 33mm long. It's called ".30carbine" and was meant to be weaker than the garand's .30-06 and stronger than the .45 pist
Yeah, basically even out of a longer barrel you'd still only get about 125 yards effective range before bullet drop becomes severe. I've had the .357, .44mag (which are more powerful) and 45 Colt (which is pretty similar to 45 acp) lever actions with barrels between 16 and 20 inches, all saw significant drop beyond 100- 125 yards. So in those ranges bump (single) firing the M3 probably would have been just as effective.
Hahhahahhaha why the hell your video gots pertuguese subtitles??? I am a portuguese native spaker and the subtitles have nothing to do with what the man is saying
It's a comparison of personal defense weapons. issued to guys who weren't traditional riflemen, ie artillery crews, tankers, bazooka ops, and other guys who are carrying too much kit to carry a full size rifle.
Why the U.S.Went to 9mm?i'm still scratching my head,I know I hear this NATO-BS.But if they changed the pistol,go with a different style 45,Glock-21 for instance.And remember I'm talking FMJ only here.
One handed standing and getting a grouping like that with a 45 ,hats off to him lol
It's not that hard I've done it most of my life and so has my father and cousins all were Army or Marine corps
Haha I love the old way of firing a pistol, back before they adopted the Weaver stance.
Its still perfectly viable today. One free or uninjured arm and the minimum presented profile makes perfect sense unless you are wearing a bulletproof vest or rifle plate. When you consider the pistol as a purely defensive weapon for a gun crew or officer in unexpected close contact, it makes sense to train in pointing your arm at the threat but turn your body to start running if need be. The Weaver and Iso stances both have a much more offensive mindset that suits the pistol as the primary weapon, as is the case for LEOs. That said, I think the Army analyzed WWI and early WWII accounts and determined any pistol killing the enemy in combat was rather few and far between, hence the M1 Carbine.
Man, that guy with the 1911 is a good shot! :D
I wish I could have a sub-machinegun for "personal self-defense".
That voice is the robot voice from back in the day...
Its always my fav.
@MR. PLAYER Transatlantic accent
*remember switching weapons is faster than reloading*
1911 such a legend, saved so many GI lives on the island of Okinawa, Iwo Jima, and Chon-sin Lake Reservoir!
@James Harding In the words of a old Marine...
"Pistols are tools of convenience, not of effectiveness."
Better a handgun than nothing when that primary arm jams or runs out of ammo.
The Americans pistols were he most futuristic and modern looking compared to German or Japanese pistols.
@James Harding Better at everything except for convenience to carry. If you're say, a machine gunner, it's far easier to carry a pistol as a backup than an SMG or carbine.
Back when shit was simple and done right
And, Im assuming the reason the M1 didnt move the plate as much as the .45 is because of penetration
rkrzbk yeah, the bullet moved faster and therefore made a cleaner hole
I replied to this 3 years ago? Wtf I have no memory
is it me or the buzzy noise sounds good.
Sounds like nice rain
Who else thought that a Looney Tunes cartoon was about to show?
These video are bad ass my gramps served WW2
M3A1 Grease gun it’s a cool gun!
1953: Recruit new soldiers via informative film demonstrating army weapons.
2011: Recruit new soldiers via violent video games demonstrating army weapons.
I wish they still made these things.
Same
Training films?
I bought a M3-A1 .45 semi automatic "Grease Gun" a few years ago.
The M1911 .45 will never go away !!
@@u.s.paratroops4633 give
@@hyperpotato1197 ??
:D.
Yknow, I dont believe Ive seen a single game with a grease gun in it and thats ashamed.
COD WWll
COD Finest Hours, COD 2 Big Red One, Heroes and Generals, et cetera.
Cod ww2 try me bitch
Fallout: New Vegas.
It’s not common but it’s great to see
Never knew how to work the grease gun, I do now
with one hand all in ten??? I think he is not the terminator.....
@Ben Finny thanks for the salt
Sorry about that. It should be fixed now.
If you think about it the M1Carbine was the old school M4, weighed 5 pounds (the M4 weighing 4-6 depending) and fired in semi and automatic. while being fed from a 30 round magazine. (I think you can also use the 15 round ones aswell but not sure) Honestly wish there was more of the M1 carbines out on the market.
South Korea wanted to send us 770,000 of them. Which would have been a new flood of arsenal M1 carbines for the CMP... and Obama had them banned because he thought they were "assault weapons".
@Splitskirts Well, they were actually automatic rifles. In order for them to be assault rifles, they needed to be in intermediate, less powerful calibre.
Many People who watched the original video are no more in this world.
Mr. Shlock My bad. yeah original one.
well assault rifles were around long before the StG, the Russians came up with the idea in 1916, but didnt capitolize on the concept, because it was deemed "untraditional"...but the StG revolutionized the concept, brought it back and introduced the platform we all know today, you could say it reinvented the assault rifle
The Fedorov was not an assault rifle. It fired 6.5 Japanese and the recoil was quite intense. It was likely harder to control in full auto than the BAR due to the reduced weight and short recoil system. Likewise, it was meant to be a crew served support weapon with loaders and ammo carriers. Capable of firing accurate single shots at long range, and capable of full auto in the trenches and for suppression.
If the Fedorov counts as an assault rifle, so does the BAR. They both used a full size rifle cartridge, they're crew served, and they're both capable of firing out to long ranges and sweeping trenches/bunkers. The Fedorov may fire a smaller cartridge, but it's not that small, and unlike the BAR it isn't gas operated like every majorly successful assault rifle. That short recoil system is gonna give you problems firing in bursts with any accuracy. BAR would probably be better for that purpose if you're strong enough to carry it.
Now yeah the Fedorov predates the BAR, but my point isn't to say the BAR is an assault rifle, it's to say that neither is.
There's a reason people who dedicate their lives to this topic like Ian say that this is an automatic rifle not an assault rifle, and call the STG 44 the first assault rifle to be produced en masse.
Burton rifle doesn't count because there were only a couple made.
Second point I didn't think of before as well, the Italian Cei-Rigotti was made in 1900 and it used the 6.5 Carcano cartridge. That cartridge is weaker than the 6.5 Arisaka, while at the same time capable of full auto fire as well as being gas operated.
Not only does it fit the definition of assault rifle better than the Fedorov, it predates it by two decades.
It would have been much easier to control in full auto than the Fedorov or the BAR.
Third point: the American Winchester 1907 fired .35 sl, a cartridge with a similar energy to the 8mm Kurz of the German STG44. It was a light and handy carbine with a moderate amount of recoil due to it's blowback system. Not as good as gas operation, but better than being recoil operated. Not all of them were select fire but there were more of them than the Fedorov's and were used by multiple countries primarily for balloon mounted troops.
None of these things are assault rifles. They're just automatic rifles/carbines.
What defines an assault rifle more than any one attribute is it's capabilities, really the sum of many attributes.
Assault rifles are the result of the realization that small arms need not engage further than a few hundred yards. By reducing the capabilities of each individual bullet, they can greatly increase the functional volume of fire.
A true assault rifle being developed relies on an existing understanding of this doctrine. Each part of the weapon has to be crafted with this in mind. The pistol grip, length, handguard, sights, magazines, ergonomics, it all has to be made for the purpose of usability in close range full auto.
The Fedorov is an absolute pike of a gun with a long barrel that recoils with every shot. The drop stock and sights don't really help. Now this isn't an insult to Vladimir Fyodorov, the concept of an assault rifle hadn't been developed yet so it wouldn't really have been possible for him to make, but that's really my whole point. If he had made an assault rifle, I doubt the military would have been interested. Armies at this time were still focused on putting a bullet 1,000 yards away with enough force to kill a horse. Anything you could really call an assault rifle can't do that.
Really the doctrine of the time made an assault rifle impossible. Consider that even after WW2 the US made everyone adopt 7.62 because they still didn't get it. Going back to WW1, such a revelation would have been totally beyond the current doctrine which is why you see so few things that even resemble an assault rifle.
... You got it!
@Splitskirts Oh, I'm sorry, I wasn't aware it was about the M1 carbine. I somehow overlooked it. Once again, I apologize.
@adriandagangster Yea my father was in WW2 and got to bring home his 30-06 Garand and he got a m1 carbine which was a friend of his in war,semi only.Plus he purchased a 1911 from the Army depot fresh out of battle.Like you, I have found alot of people don't know the difference between the 30 cals.
When did they start training infantry to fire with 2 hands? When the Beretta was adopted, before, or after?
Probably whenever body armor was first used
The date shown in Roman numerals at the begining of the film says 1953 not 1954.
Sgt rock brought me here 🇺🇸
So to recap m1911, M3 grease gun, M1 carbine, M1 garand
M2 carbine actually a step up from the M1 carbine
M3A1 grease gun
I wish they would've stuck with the better quality black & white film
ever held a greasegun!:P I truly doubt the stock is too much better :P, wire stocks never have worked out well imo. Had an amd for awhile, it did ok. The m1 thompson weighed in at 10.5lb. If the grease gun weighed 5lb- ok, im sold. But with a 2lb difference, give me the thompson, lock, stock, and smoking cutts compensator
I have. Its a really heavy wire like a bolt shank and it attaches on both sides of the receiver rather than folds out from only one side. It didn't strike me as too springy, although I wasn't able to shoot it. The difference, I hear, is the rate of fire. The Thompson is simply too fast to control while the M3 deliberately fires slow enough you can maintain accuracy. I think the fact they never gave them compensators or other muzzle devices and they served into the 1990's with no upgrades is a testament to that.
Laxhutt95 is correct, it was not made in Germany, it was made in Russia by a man named Mikhail Kalashnikov. Now days the AK47/47u.... is being manufactured in the US by Wasr. If you really want a German Firearm, look at HK(Heckler and Koch) they created to G36/C/K, USP.45, PSG-1, MP5/5K/SD, UMP and more. Check out there site for more firearms.
Didn’t they use the garand as well? Isn’t that an infantry weapon?
Yes, a GI 1911 is a very accurate weapon.
No matter where you point it, you will never miss!
As long as your target is the ground.
Hello from 2021
Pls top my grandfather wont stop throwing grenades in the living room
Would a rifle/carbine that fired .45 pistol ammo be any good? I know that the range would be a bit crap, but...
The British made a special carbine called the De Lisle carbine in 1943 for commando(spec ops) use. It uses .45 ACP and is similar in function to a Thompson M1A1 also with an integrated suppressor.
Oh woops sorry, i was ment to put 74u
there is no ak74u too...
it's the AKS-74U
Lol wrong country and wrong time
@Vukashin88 u must know nothing about the m1/m2/m3 carbines, because if u did, u would know that they use an intermediate cartridge. Just because the m1 garand and the m1 carbine both shoot a .30 caliber bullet, doesn't mean it's the same bullet. The .30 refers to the diameter only. The garand shoots a 63mm long cartridge and the carbine shoots an intermediate cartridge, that's 33mm long. It's called ".30carbine" and was meant to be weaker than the garand's .30-06 and stronger than the .45 pist
I said that......
No hearing or eye protection! Those guys were as hard as woodpecker lips. And deaf as a post.
Why no .45 rifle - you could use the same round for all three guns - or would it be a bit rubbish?
.45 is relatively slow moving so rubbish at range
Yeah, basically even out of a longer barrel you'd still only get about 125 yards effective range before bullet drop becomes severe. I've had the .357, .44mag (which are more powerful) and 45 Colt (which is pretty similar to 45 acp) lever actions with barrels between 16 and 20 inches, all saw significant drop beyond 100- 125 yards. So in those ranges bump (single) firing the M3 probably would have been just as effective.
because were now killing and creating the enemy instead of just killing them
Hahhahahhaha why the hell your video gots pertuguese subtitles??? I am a portuguese native spaker and the subtitles have nothing to do with what the man is saying
@Halobenzene You think this was made to recruit soldiers? That's hilarious.
Now I"m ready for when school opens again
For the people with the IQ of a star fish that was a joke
A Tommy gun operates on the following principle - "ra-ta-ta-ta", and you are screwed.
the AK wasnt made in Germany.....
No battle rifle? (garand obviously)
It's a comparison of personal defense weapons. issued to guys who weren't traditional riflemen, ie artillery crews, tankers, bazooka ops, and other guys who are carrying too much kit to carry a full size rifle.
@@MrDarklord965 this comment is 7-8 years old did you really need to respond lmao
@@coolguy0740 you responded yourself so why did you feel the need to?!
There is no thing as an AK-47u.
And no one seems to realize that you probably mean an East German AK.
I had no idea the grease gun weighed so much! gimme back the thompson!
Enough with the Canadian/Garand stuff. Its getting viral on here.
I carried one as a gunner on the M42duster. Great weapon and fun to shoot.
The Thompson was heavier than the Grease Gun, weighing a little over 11 pounds with a full magazine
We will never have a big ground fight anyway but give me an A.K. Made in Germany.
Funny how he said carbine correctly instead of "carbean" which seems to be how most Americans say it today....
Is this reall
Yes
designed by a canadian
M3's rate of fire!? lol
Most liked the rate of fire slow and acurate ...not blasting everywhere off target
5.45x39
I speak American!, Not English!
Are all these just propaganda?
Why the U.S.Went to 9mm?i'm still scratching my head,I know I hear this NATO-BS.But if they changed the pistol,go with a different style 45,Glock-21 for instance.And remember I'm talking FMJ only here.