"If the Lee Enfield Rifle No. 4 Mk I could lose a couple of pounds it would be S teir" We call that Rifle No. 5 Mk I and yes they did serve in WW2 ( only Just but it did)
@@jameswaterfield That is not 100% trueGun Jesus has looked into this and is more inclined that the Bad reports on the No.5 we exagerated to ensure money was spent on the EM-2 ( which the army realy wanted)
@@Jackthgun Lol, a friend of mine used to say something along the lines of that. “The Americans brought a target rifle, the Germans brought a hunting rifle, the Brits brought a battle rifle, and the Russians… well they just brought a rifle
Excellent tier listing. No bias detected and all of your points were justifiable. I appreciate the point of including “when they were new” in reference to the carcano.
@@Grandizer8989 Basically only the US say aluminum. Aluminium is how its spelled in British English, and is the spelling recognised as the international standard. Sooooo....
The 1903A3 wasn't delivered until December of 1942. The Guadalcanal Campaign started in August 1942. Therefore, the Marine Corps was armed with the 1903A1 for the beginning of the campaign. By the time the 1903A3 was delivered, M1 Garands were already becoming available. Edit: IN Addition to being the Springfield 1903's bolt catch, and a fairly simple one at that, There is an explanation as to why they left the magazine cut off in the design, they were the best candidate for a grenade launcher spigot. You could leave the magazine loaded, then single feed the grenade launcher blanks to launch grenades and be able to switch to your standard rifle with the flip of a switch on quick notice. The Garand was more clumsy as a grenade launcher by comparison, attaching the Grenade Spigot effectively turned the Garand into a single shot weapon, as the spigot redirected the gases to not engage the op rod, so to switch back to using your M1 as a standard rifle, you would have to remove the spigot AND load a clip into the magazine. The Springfields spigot could be left on, and the switch flipped to start use as a standard rifle. Granted accuracy would be hindered by leaving the spigot attached, but that's a small price when you can quickly start slinging lead at the enemy at the flip of a switch. I feel you did it dirty by ranking it in C tier. The Army Rangers were also known for opting for the 03A3 because it disguised their firing signature to sound more like the bolt gun wielding Germans and Italians. They also recognized the finer front sight as being more precise. The 03A3 is capable of 1 MOA, so I definitely hold it in higher regard. I feel it should be at least B tier if not low A tier One characteristic you left out about the Mosin Nagant is that it excelled in the freezing environments Russia is famous for, something the Garand is infamous for performing poorly in. It's not going to affect my opinion of your ranking, but it is worth noting.
IIRC Springfield and Rock Island gave the 1903 production machinery to Remington. Along with rifle spare parts. Remington started production along with finding ways to simplify the rifle
With the shortage of Garands that the US military had at the outset of WW2, they also equipped the Marine Corps with the Johnson M1941, the main competitor of the M1 Garand. But so few people own these that I can totally understand why it wasn't featured here. It had a 10 round 30'06 internal magazine that allowed loading on the fly. It apparently acquitted itself well in the Guadalcanal Campaign and many Marines were reluctant to see it go. It is my #1 Grail Gun and I am forever looking for one!
Excellent Video, sound analysis, and well done. A personal anecdote may spark comment: In January 1973 our old Canadian Militia Regiment ran its annual deep cold winter outdoor shoot with WW1, WW2, & Korea Vets all turned out, many with their old personal Rifles (and the odd 1910 Canadian Militia Colt New Service 5.5" barrel .455s with 240 gr propelled by long-colt full charge propellant. Another time. Crazy Canuks ...) A number of our serving Senior NCOs and Warrant Officers brought various personal weapons including many of those you have reviewed. Our training Platoon of 18 - 22 year old kids were shocked to watch old men with WW1 & WW2 Lee-Enfields shoot respectable groups of 30 Rounds a minute at 600 yards. The Mad MInute is now and always has been real. About 5 years ago, a friend then a Regular Army Colonel, ran the Connaught shoot in Ottawa. A sub-section of Canadian Rangers using WW2 Longbranch No. 4 Lee-Enfields shot respectable groups of 30 Rounds a minute at 600 yards. My friend and the JTF snipers were shocked. The Rangers and the old vets NEVER took their eye off the target when cycling the Bolt. The Old Sergeants-Major slapped 2 5-round clips into the Mag faster than I can cycle my Mauser. They all started with 10 in the Mag + 1 up the spout. That + 2 re-loads = 31 rounds. Check out our Aussie & Kiwi cousins with their Lee-Enfields. Some have hit 40 a minute. My own Israeli K-98 7.62 Conversion is great target or hunting Rifle. But it is a clunker - you have to reacquire the target after every bolt cycle. Not so with the brilliant Lee-Enfield BELOW THE SIGHT Bolt. Hence the view that the Lee-Enfield No. 4 and the Garand are almost certainly the 2 greatest battle rifles ever made. Our Aussie cousins WW2 Lee-Enfield has it's proponents; and its performance in the Aussie campaigns of WW2 is shockingly under-reported and shamefully largely ignored. Field Marshal Bill Slim's 14th Army scrounged every Indian or Aussie Lee-Enfield they could lay hands on. Mr. Garand's brilliant USArmy Rifle was designed and tested to beat the Lee-Enfield. Garand was a Canadian native who moved South for work, and became a proud and loyal American. Garand bench-marked his self-loading rifle design to beat the Lee-Enfield No. 3 he had cut his teeth on. On many if not on most temperate days the Garand does beat the Lee-Enfield at volume of aimed rounds on target at moderate ranges; especially at 200 yards or less. For 8 rounds at close range in the Assault - the Garand clearly wins. But in the extreme heat of Kohima, or the deep cold of an Afghanistan Plateau in Winter, or aimed shots at 300 - 600, a good Lee-Enfield outshoots a good Mauser 2 to 1. A good Korean vintage USMC Gunnery Sergeant out there can probably out-shoot many modern snipers with any modern sniper rifle with his old perfect Garand out to 6 or 700 if not more. Hey - it has always been at least as much the Rifleman or woman as much as the Rifle. in pace paratus.
No better rifle than Lee Enfield. Wounded more game in Africa than any other due to FMJ bullets. Smoothest fast action out there. I find the bore grind/machining very interesting, as it expands then reduces again.
The Enfield rifles, both had a short action with the bolt, therefore, the rifle didn't have to be taken off the shoulder to reload. This led to a practiced soldier being able to fire 35 well aimed shots, even when the magazine only held ten rounds. The practice was to hold the bolt between index finger and thumb, pulling the trigger with the middle finger. Ath the battle of Mons in 1914, the German army believed that the BEF were armed with machine guns...
You can cycle rounds (without taking them off your shoulder) in any of the rifles that have somewhat smooth actions by using the cupped hand method. I have sporterized versions of 03 Springfield., a Kar98, and a SMLE No1 III and have taken whitetails with all of them, I wholeheartedly agree that the Enfield is the fastest by far. My Springfield, which I purchased from a bait and tackle store in the late 70s, was set into a home, carve yourself stock that was darkened from years of accumulated gun oiling and sported an old Weaver 2X scope. I was worried the barrel was shot out, to my great surprise it turned out being genuine sub MOA rifle, I of course changed nothing on it. It's more accurate than my two overly expensive accurized Rem 700 ADLs that I owned, one was chambered for 30-06 the other for Win .300 Mag, I sold them a few years ago as I don't hunt any more. The old adage about those three rifles holds true. The 03 Springfield was best target shooting rifle, the Kar 98 was the best hunting rifle, and SMLE was the best battlefield rifle.
Enfield rifles go back a long way. There are M-17 Enfield rifles that are WWI production but too late to have been used in that war. I'm not sure if they were used in WWII or not, but if 03A3 Springfields were used then it stands to reason that the M-17 saw action too. It is a .30-06 version of the Pattern 14 Enfield that was chambered in .303 British.
@@rantanplan178 ok, so explain the German losses during the battle of Mons WW1. When the BEF were forced to retreat due to the overwhelming numbers of attacking Germans, who thought that the defending British troops were armed with machine guns. Not to mention that I, using a single shot rifle, when only 15 years old, could achieve two 1/4 inch five shot groups in less than a minute. Just because you can't shoot, does not mean nobody else can. Oh and btw, a Mauser action is far too slow to achieve this rof, which is why the No. 3, aka P14, was not accepted, a very slow action.
@@jameswaterfield Dude, what are you even talking about? Can you sound even more history channel like plz? Yea, in British historical writing the Battle of Mons has almost mythical status, but at some point you really need to get back to reality. 10 shots in one minute are still far far away from 35 "well aimed" shots per minute. The Smelly Mk.III with its Lee action is for sure the fastest repeating rifle of WW1. No one is doubting that. Still there is no need to exaggerate it into fantasy world.
Yes you have forgotten the biggest advantage of both Lee-Enfields: the Lee bolt rotation is only 60 degrees and the bolt is rear locking, which had the advantage of being far quicker to cycle than any other action but also allowed the shooter to cycle the bolt whilst still keeping the sight picture. Also if the person who was firing the No.4 had done that on a range that I was on, he would have been throw off as he drops the rifle down to cycle it when it should be cycled with the butt still in the shoulder! Remember that with a Lee Enfield you could fire c30 rounds a minute accurately and you would be lucky to fire 15 with a Mauser type action. Another advantage with the .303 cartridge was that it was designed to be very slightly tapered, which meant the cartridge only fully engaged when the bolt just about to be fully closed - straight cartridges meant that if the rifle was hot a cartridge could get jammed in and this happened at the end of the war with the Mauser and some of the “last ditch” 7.92 non brass ammunition.
@@davidwhite9159 yep my dad was train to fire Lee Enfield by the British Army the way he show me was as you are recovering from the recoil you work the bolt and and get back on target . I seriously bet my dad could have got off 10 aimed shots from a Lee enfield as quick or quicker then most to get off 10 from an M1
Studiously ignored later standard rifles. So I have to assume you meant circa 1941, and not wwii as a whole. Pity as you missed some serious contenders such as both the German and soviet semi autos and the mosin nagant 1944.
The Enfield action has another slight but possibly significant advantage: the striker is cocked when the bolt is pushed back forward after being fully opened rather than being cocked as you open the bolt and extract the cartridge. If you've got some of that dodgy last ditch "brass" that little extra force could make the difference between extracting the case and jamming.
SVT-40? It officially replaced the Mosin and over 1.5 million were made and issued. The Mosin did see far more used but the Soviets did coincider the SVT-40 as a standard issue.
Yeah but i think he only took the most prevelent. If you want every rifle then the list would be different, i mean there where many greate rifles in WW2.
The SVT-40 suffered from horrific accuracy problems and was removed from service after 1943 by the Soviets. Watch the Forgotten Weapons video on the rifle.
@@stitch626alohahowever SVT was loved by the Soviet Marines, it was weapon they prefered instead of Mosin, because in Soviet Navy service was longer than in the Army and Navy was recrtuiting a lot of boys with technician education and skills, so a lot of Marines knew how to maintain SVT, if you know your weapon, it will be good in your hands
SVT was also semi automatic, had two more rounds and detachable magazines, plus could be easily topped up with clips or singles, making it better than the M1 in several departments.
Re: 03 A3 - Remember that while the mag cutoff was useless in this version, it was very useful in the 03 A4 Sniper model, which, of course could no be loaded with stripper clips. If one is limited to loading with loose rounds, the ability to hold the magazine in reserve could be very important.
@@Dominic1962 How? I have a couple of Mauser 98s, and they only feed from the magazine. You certainly could hold 4 rounds in reserve, open the bolt, put one in the top of the magazine, and close the bolt.... but unless I am missing something, it's nowhere near as easy as switching off the magazine and then just dropping rounds in one at a time.
@@vincewarde The magazine cutoff makes the whole action more complicated. The 1/1000 of a sec more it takes to pop a round in the mag verses put it in the mag well is inconsequential. Plus we are talking sniper rifles, so even less consequential. I’d say it’s better to have the mag ready to go without fiddling with a cutoff because of quick follow up shots.
@@Dominic1962 You make some very good points. I have never used the mag cutoff on an 03, so you may be ahead of me on that count... As far as a sniper now needed to fire multiple shots in short order, if I were a WW2 sniper armed with an A4, I would certainly have a plan for rapid fire, as other than maybe a 1911, that's my only weapon.
@@vincewarde It’s also one of those things, even with lots of trading, it’s a fiddly bit that gets forgotten in the heat of things. I’d hate to rack my bolt and get a click, remembering I forgot to flip the cutoff switch. The soldiers that had m1903s practically never used it in combat, just left it off and only time they’d move it was to remove the bolt from cleaning. With the A4, it would definitely help to have a pistol or something since it doesn’t have any iron sight back ups. What I had in mind was more like if you take a shot at longer distance and miss or another target pops up out there after the first. Those sorts of instances in just makes sense to be feeding from the mag so a follow up shot is quick and natural.
I'm not all that interested in your subjects, but having said that you are an EXCELLENT presenter! Super knowledgeable and very LIKABLE! One of the best videos I've seen in a long time. Best of luck to you!
I used to have most of these rifles in my collection, and I don’t disagree with any of your rankings. I just love how quirky many rifle designs used to be at that point in time.
Love the content man but, we gotta add SVT40 at 1.3 mil made, or G43 at 400k. only about 200k mas 36’s were made before invasion. Just busting your chops man seriously one of my favorite channels!! Keep it up
I had an SVT and I kinda hated it. But if I was going to war I rather have it over the 91/30 but the M38 and M44 would be my choice over. I have and had all these at one point but the SVT was cool it was fun but it’s kinda crappy and parts are expensive. If anything would have broke I would have been screwed but I bought it back in 2012 for $750 at the time. I got my Mosin’s back in 2008 and 2012 for $75 and $100. The M38 and T53 were both around $325 back in 2011. My M44 Romanian 1955 I got for $430 in great shape
@@canadaisdecent1635 ever fired steel case and it gets stuck 🫠 sometimes if you pull back the firing pin it sometimes helps open the bolt but sometimes you have to beat the hell out of the bolt to get open.
Loved your video! I think your ranking is very reasonable. Wouldn’t dispute it, especially for the more known WWII service rifles. I particularly agree with the high ranking of the M1 Garand as “S-tier” and the Lee-Enfield No. 4 MK 1 as an “A-tier”. I really didn’t know much about the French MAS36 and will try to learn more so thanks for that. Your ranking of the Japanese Type 99 rifle in “A-tier” above the German Kar98k in “B-tier” caught me by surprise, but I think you gave a reasonable and pretty solid explanation to your ranking. Excellent video!!! Thank you!
The 1903A3 was absolutely NOT the standard arm for the Marines early on. They didn’t use the A3 at all, and instead used rebuilt rock island and Springfield made 03s. Matter of fact, the A3 was rarely even used by the army throughout the war
That's not true that the Army didn't use them, the army utilized them as grenade launchers and the Rangers were known to use them for their precise sights AND because they disguised their fire report to sound more like their adversaries
@dobridjordje damn right he did the A3 dirty, not only did he take his reference for their use from "The Pacific" but he down played the sights and the significance of the cut off switch when it came to it's use as a grenade launcher
@@danielhess1082 I don't even know how can he say that any rifle with tangent sights can beat aperture sights which are paramount. M1903A3 is the best bolt action of the war right after the No 4. mk 1. And guess what both have aperture sights. Not to mention how incredibly smooth M1903A3 bolt is and incredible accuracy, I like 98k and type 99 but they are inferior to the A3.
@@danielhess1082that’s why I said rarely, which fits your description in the comment. Regardless, the video is of the main service rifles and their secondaries for the most part (even though it’s not clearly defined in the video criteria). And the Garand and standard 03, not A3, would fit the description of this video. This would be like me classifying the M96 Swede used by the Finns on the same level as the finn mosin program and the standard rifles they used.
I hate to burst your bubble but the Germans hated the G43 because it sucked so badly and the SVT-40 had a lot of issues do to the action was more complicated than it need to be and there production quality had a lot of short comings during the war. The post war versions are very good tho
@@rf2958 That is true G43 was a needed upgrade to G41, However given that when the Japanese and Germans re-armed the fact that they both reached for the M1 Garand first and not for there own production semi-auto rifles is Telling. For clarification the Japanese semi-auto rifle was called the Type 4 it’s a clone of the M1 Garand.
M1 was not the best rifle in WW2 it was miles to heavy, and the mag could not be topped up. It was also not as reliable as you said. Why did German snipers use Russian rifles during WW2 if they were not accurate?
The Carcano Model 38 is an excellent choice if, for any reason, you need to get 3 shots off in under 7 seconds and get two hits including a head shot on a moving target about 75 yards away. Of course to take advantage of its excellent properties you need to be a proficient marksman, trained by an organization like the USMC that takes rifle marksmanship seriously.
One feature of the SMLE Mk4 Lee Enfield was the ability to short cycle the bolt to allow the British infantry standard 'Mad Minute' using the thumb and forefinger to work the action.
The Ukko-Pekka M39 with it's previous Finnish version were fitted with/for a specific cartridge as well, making it by far the most deadliest infantry main battle rifle of the time. The usability, endurance and reliability far surpassed the Soviet models and other rifles during WW2.
You left out Greece, Yugoslavia, Belgium, Poland and Hungary. There's also Czechoslovakia but that'd just be the VZ24 again. Kudos to you for including China, Finland, and Romania though. They're often forgotten.
@@christianschlogl6295 The 35M had a different action and bolt than the M95. And we heard about every single Kar 98 version so in the interest of considency, the 35M should get mentiond.
Sad to see the 1917 Enfield wasn’t on the list. The Army used them in the early stages of the Pacific Campaign and African Campaign. Mostly to Mortarmen and Artillerymen as a stop gap for shortages of M1 rifles and 1903s.
The BAR was a "Squad" automatic Rifle. Not a machine gun. Your re totally reclassifying the weapons purpose. A squad machine gun in WW2 was a 3 man crew in a 12 man squad. The BAR was the automatic rifle fitting into the smaller field squad of about 7 men to support the smaller squad. And no doubt the M1 garrand was the class of the infantry rifle.
@@63grandsport11the ordinance board basically reclassified it when they removed semi auto, added a bipod and carry handle, replaced the exceptionally good 1917 style aperature with an open notch, and made it 22lbs
@@vista8863most BAR gunners took that stuff off tho. Its main role was to help achieve fire superiority and it was able to do so cuz it was alongside the Garand. They could travel lighter and have more rifles at the ready cuz of it too. US tactics and doctrine didnt require the BAR to have 2-3 man crews like the Germans and British. It was a lesser “machine gun” no doubt but it worked well in semi-auto rifle squads
A really fascinating (and mercifully quick) run through of a great range of firearms. You have a remarkable collection there sir. I enjoyed your focus on "human factors" sights, weight, ease of loading. So many comparisons fuss over issues like muzzle velocity and rifling twists without considering whether the poor old infantryman can line up an elusive target at 200 yards. Thanks, it was really informative.
My dad (a just post World War 2 British Army solider) could put aimed shots out the. no.5 Lee Enfield I own almost as fast as a semiauto. The Lee Enfield is the last word in bolt action battle rifles
I was in the UK Combined Cadet Force in the early 1980s and we were issued with Lee Enfield no.4 Rifles, which were fantastic. Regular British Army soldiers just receiving their brand new, but flawed, SA80s at the time were probably jealous of us kids!
Running a semi-auto when everyone else had bolts was an incredible advantage. We learned during the civil war just how important an increased rate of fire could be.
Top contenders would be M1911 at the top, Hi Power, P38 in that order. All of them have there strong suits. 1911 as a design is still the standard that pistols are held against, along with the Glock 17. BHP and P38 probably would be in a tier below 1911 much like how Garand was above the rest here. BHP was not in widespread use compared to two other designs. Magazine disconnect and a trigger that is worse than it's predecessor. It's the handgun that made its mark during the cold war. Great handgun overall and is in many ways equal or better to it's older brother. P38 has a lot of modern features on it such as DA/SA, Decocker and loaded chamber indicator. Smooth action that the Beretta 92 was "Inspired" by. Great handgun, but not on 1911's level for WW2.
1911 was the best WW1 pistol. The hi power was way better in WW2. You claim the 1911 had a better trigger? We're comparing stock 1911A1, not modern 1911's. And don't forget about the miniscule sights on the 1911A1. P38 was also better than the 1911, as proved by the 1911 getting replaced by a copy of the p38.
“In my opinion, the M-1 Rifle is the greatest battle implement ever devised.” - General Patton. Good enough for me although I personally prefer the M-1 Carbine.
You're not alone, McArthur said this about the M1 Carbine "one of the strongest contribution factors in our victory in the Pacific". Now, I haven't found a direct source for that quote, but I agree with it, for the purpose it was built for, and what it was pushed into, it worked damn well.
@@holgernarrog962Not in good enough amounts, and due to the fact that both of them would experience getting bombed heavily, I imagine production quality would overall be worse than garands.
@@natebox4550 There were several hundred 1000 of G43 manufactured more than a todays army requires. Rifle manufacturing took place in small towns like Oberndorf that were not bombed till close to the end. The G43 profited from the experience of the soviet semi automatic weapons. I did not shoot an M1 nor a G43 that`s why I will not rate them.
I was under the impression that during the early pacific campaign the marines were using 1903s, 1903A1s, and 1903 MK1s. I thought the 1903A3 was more of a stop gap to get as many rifles out there as possible until M1 production could catch up with recruitment and was mostly relegated to reserve, navy, and nasty guard units.
Lmao no 5.56 weapons were only adopted in the 60´s and the ak-47 (which was intended as an SMG replacement) was mechanically inspired) by the M1 Garand, the only thing the soviet took was the intermediate cartridge that they found in 1942 It didn’t revolutionize anything and they never made enough of them regardless.
@@me67galaxylifethe StG44 was essentially the inspiration for standard issue select fire rifles, the M14 or the FN Fal are both undeniably inspired by its effectiveness note that the AK being intended as an SMG replacement is not accurate, it was meant to replace all SMGs, but also all rifles in elite units (and wasn't considered as a replacement for all rifles in all units only because the Soviets expected it to be too expensive for that)
@@Mike-ukr Hm yes because an M14 and a FAL in full caliber round can undeniably be used the same way and are very related (no) We can also know from official documents that indeed the soviets did not consider the AK-47 the same way the germans did consider the STG-44 and only wanted to give the AK-47 to everyone once they realized that
Yes Garand was better than any bolt action, but what about the STG44 or the Tokarev? If you include MAS36 you need to consider them too. Really like the channel.
The Mas 36 was a bolt action, unlike the STG44 and Tokarev. Afterall, its a rifles tier list. If he were to include a semi-automatic rifle from Germany, it would've ben the Gewehr 43.
@@gearxrust Point was that Mas36 was short lived and never equipped the whole army, like the other two I mention. The Garand is a semi auto, not bolt. But fun video.
@@ogilkes1 the rifle lasted until the fifties, so I wouldn’t say short lived, but I understand. What he should’ve included were rifles like the Swiss k31, or other Mausers. No Turkey was interesting. Didn’t necessarily see combat from the Swiss but it would’ve been interesting to see how he’d rate a rifle like that compared to the others.
@@BigMek456 yes, I don’t know which comment I made would suggest other wise. That rifle doesn’t fit in with the others, as the stg 44 wasn’t the Germans standard issue rifle. The mas36 for the French on the other hand, was.
You completely forgot the SVT40 which was the new Soviet standard when they got involved in WWII; 2 million of them were made and field and so they are not a niche or limited weapon. It is S tier, and even better than the , because it had detachable magazines and a full 10 rounds capacity. Enfields should have been A tier and S tier for the fast action and double magazine capacity. Run them in comparison to any Mauser and you will immediately understand why. Styer deserved B tier for the fast straight pull action.
If the SVT40 was as excellent rifle as you claim, why did the Soviets bother to adopt the SKS & AK47 after the war? Why not continue with the SVT, as the Americans did with the M1 or try to develop it, as the Americans attempted with the M14? From what I know about the rifle, it suffered a lot of issues with reliability and accuracy. It's interesting to note that, despite 1.6 million being produced, they were seldomly seen in use after WW2. That said, with the numbers produced during the war & the fact it was intended to be the standard issue service rifle or the Red Army, it probably should have made the list. I think it would be lower A-tier. Without the reliability & accuracy issues, it would be S-Tier.
@@mantis23101988 If the SVT was such a good weapon, why not simply downscale it to fire the new round? Why did Siminov not develop his own design & instead begin work on a completely new weapon only a few years after the SVT was supposed to be the new service rifle? The answer is clear. The SVT had issues & even the designer could see it was not good enough.
@@Rooster---ooo Because the Americans have this bizarre obsession with long range marksmanship oweing to a national mythos from poorly taught history. The Russians are pragmatists. They realized most fighting was shortrange and winner mostly determined by who shot both first and then more importantly fired more rounds. So they made weapons for this. Given the assault rifles all around the world, the Soviets were right. Technology had surpassed the SVT and M1 plainly by around 1943.
I was shocked to see the prices of mil surp rifles today. I haven’t looked in years, but I remember when they were the inexpensive reliable rifle you could buy at any gun show. Mosin’s were $100, SKS $200, garand or carbine for $700. Spam cans of .30 for next to nothing.
I would love to have an M1. I was looking at the surplus rifles offered by the Civilian Markmanship Program. To get a really nice one its just too much money. The local pawn shop has a beat up M1, I may look at that and put some work into it.
@@steveyi2859 The Norwegian campaign is unfortunately often overlooked. Much of the reason for this is that English, French and Polish forces had to fail their Norwegian brothers in arms, and retreat in the middle of the battle. Therefore, this is not a part of the war that the victors like to talk about. It may seem strange, when you know that Norway was the nation that fought the longest against the strong Wehrmacht after being occupied. The fighting lasted for three full months, giving us the first important Allied victories over the Nazi forces. Most famous is the victory in Narvik. But also the first victory over German paratroopers in Gudbrandsdalen. Both Norway and Denmark had Krag Jørgensen as a service rifle at the time. Yes, it was an old design. But not older than several of the other rifles mentioned in this list. (Mosin Nagant, and Mauser for example.) During the Norwegian campaign, Norwegian soldiers equipped with the Krag Jørgensen gained a reputation for being dangerously accurate by Mauser equipped Germans. So don't underestimate either The Norwegian campaign, Norwegian Riflemen, or Krag Jørgensen rifles.
@@larserikertzgaardringen7426 ww2 pretty much ended bolt action rifles and transitioned to automatic and battle rifles. this was the end of old single shot rifles
@larserikertzgaardringen7426 the last time I heard krag jorgensen was the Spanish American war in 1898 in any significant numbers. Thats why I said 19th century
I reckon you should have also chucked the SVT40 in there. It was adopted as the next standard issue rifle by the Soviets and millions were cranked out, then they reverted back to the 91/30 in the desperate early days after the German invasion.
Also while it's not a rifle it's 100% worth mentioning that the Soviets were really the first major power to actually issue SMG on a massive scale effectively using them as a replacement for standard infantry rifles. The Soviets produced more SMG than most of the other powers combined, and it was a common sight, particularly later in the war to see entire squads and even platoon level elements almost exclusively armed with SMG. It's why the AK program was so important to them later on. The Soviets at this time spearheaded and largely invented aggressive modern infantry assault tactics that we think of later in the cold war. (with a honorable mention Finland who really started this trend first and whom the Russian's adapted their very effective close range combat tactics from) From 1938-1945 the Soviets produced around 6 million Submachine guns, compared to the USA's 2 million, or Germanys 1.2 million.
If you are going to list the M1 Garand as "S" tier, you need to add the Gewehr 43, STG 44, SVT 40, M1 Carbine etc. Comparing a semiauto with bolt action rifles is like apples and oranges. To my understanding, this video was made to make the M1 look like the best rifle from WW2 because of favoritism.
He's comparing standard service rifles. This comparison is not only fair but also practical, as all the fancy german weapons were moot considering their limited use in the field.
@@calincampbell5637 The issue is that its a largely irrelevant question as it lacks context. The garand is the best standard issue rifle but its operating with the BAR and frankly, the existence of the garand held up american adoption of better infantry section doctrine. You cant bring up rifle 4 and the kar98k without bringing up bren and mg38/42 as the role of the rifles in the section were to cover the setup of the section machine guns. So im afraid i disagree with the claim of practicality, it only works for a one man on his own comparison and in the british case, thats actually a comparison between garand and bren, since if you were the last man alive in the section, you would be expected to take over the bren since thats where the firepower of the section is.
@@calincampbell5637 Not even 1/10th of the rifles were given to snipers, the poor production quality in the last month of the war even prevented the use as a DMR and many rifles had their defect scope mounts ground off instead of being scrapped. The Gewehr 41 already was supposed to become the new standard issue rifle of the Wehrmacht, but only the G43/K43 was accepted into service as such.
Excellent video! Had hoped you'd have the Norwegian Krag Jørgensen M1982, M1986 or the M1998. last of which also came in a Carbine. While I know Norway was only a minor faction in WW2, these rifles were also used by Denmark (which only saw a small skirmish with them, Norway fought for 9 weeks with them). I'd still have loved to see the Krag Jørgensen included. Would you consider doing a short on a Krag Jørgensen if you get the chance and adding it to the tier list in a post-video? It would probably not rate very high as a combat rifle, though in 2005 or 2006 there was a sharpshooter competition with only Kar98 and Krag Jørgensen allowed, held between the Norwegian and Swedish army, where the winner actually used a Krag Jørgensen. (Sweden used Kar98 and Norway Krag Jørgensen). If not, no big deal :) Nice video.
Agreed 100% on the K98. Hands down the best design of the war in terms of reliability, but the sights absolutely do not match the high standard set by the rest of the rifle. The 03A3 though, oh man, one of if not my absolute favorite rifle. The magazine cutoff was essentially flipped to on and forgotten about, and the Marines I do believe were using the first variant of the 1903 rather than the A3 through the early pacific campaigns. A3s really didn’t begin to show up until ‘43 onwards where they were grenadier rifles in front line use and then second line rifles. I do have to say the No4 Mk1 by far has a more complex and fiddly rear sight than the 03A3. Not the Mk1*, but the first iteration. Also, for the 03A3 front sight, swap that factory blade out for a repro USMC #10 blade. It’s a hell of a lot thicker and makes those sights wonderful.
I have a bring back Carcano TS Carbine. Its light, handy and accurate. The only issue I have with them is the clip system. Its not the most reliable system I found that certain clips don't work at all and others work ok. I'm not sure how reliable these were with the Italians but for me I would rather use a Mauser. I think the Mausers sights are really good for fast target acquisition shooting at closer ranges. Its really easy to pick up the big Mauser front sight blade in low light. With that I would rate the Mauser K98 and VZ-24 at a A.
Nah, it's exactly where it should be. It's a well made rifle (Early war examples) however 8x57 is too powerful for the kind of war it was fighting in. 5 round clip fed rifle shooting in excess of 3k ft.lb cartridges. The reason its below the others: Arisakas shoot a lower powered round with the strongest action of ww2, these rifles are accurate and are absurdly overbuilt. Excellent sights overall. SMLE has a 10 round capacity and one of the smoothest actions ever in a bolt gun. .303 brit is a nice middling full powered cartridge. Excellent sights as well. M1 Garand, yeah it shoots 30.06 but it is semi auto fed by enbloc clips. Best main rifle of the war by a mile. Fast reloads, good capacity, great sights, low recoiling, reliable. K98k Good action using the tested Mauser design, Fires the very powerful 8mm Mauser. Not a particularly fast long action, high recoil and sights that are serviceable. Well made weapon just not top tier. It's a step down from the three mentioned above. It's the weapon that conquered western Europe, so it can't be all that bad.
@@bobjackson4287 The weapon that conquered France and the Low Countries was the MG34. Not the Mauser. One could also say the Luftwaffe and the Panzer Corps with radios in every tank had a lot to do with it.
@@sullathehutt7720 Along with BF109, JU87, PZ II,III,IV, sd.kfz 251, and many many more weapons. The infantry rifle is still a critical item and one of the most important weapon systems of any army. You don't win nothing without infantry. At the end of the day you need a solider with a rifle to hold ground and take ground were other weapons cannot operate. They are called the queen of battle for this reason; their unparalleled flexibility and mobility just like the queen in chess.
Just ran across this, excellent work! I inherited an Arisaka 99 chrysanthemum intact from my dad who got it while on Iwo shortly after they took the island. Excellent rifle, got a real kickback to it.
The fact that you think the enfield is a better rifle than the Mauser is a bit odd. All enfield rifles have some pretty serious design flaws compared to the Mauser. The large ring Mauser is the best bolt action design ever to see military adaptation. Also, who taught you how to load a garand? That video was painful to watch.
I agree. K98k should be A tier hands down. Enfield I can see being a S tier due to the short bolt and 10 rounds, you can lay more firepower down with the enfield faster than you can the k98k, if I want a infantry bolt action if picking the enfield but if I want a sniper rifle I'm picking the k98k
I thought his take on Finnish mosins was honestly way out there, M27, 28, and 28-30s were all superior rifles to the 91/30 in every way, to see them put in the same category made me raise an eyebrow, same with the Enfield over the Kar98k
The Brits usually used the Enfield with 5 rounds. They are certainly decent, but I don’t see why they are considered so much better than other bolt guns. The vast majority of conscripts couldn’t do anything near a “magic minute” so in actual use they weren’t any better than anything else.
@@edthebumblingfool 😂 So saving the world doesn't count? What about all of the lend-lease equipment we, the USA, supplied to our allies, that doesn't count either? 😂
Great video. I have had all of these guns come and go over time. Recently I have purchased a few Carcano's because they are so cheap. I love them. They are light and nimble as can be for a truck, ATV gun. I'm not saying I would go to war with it but what a handy ranch gun. Your right the rate of fire wins the war !
@@mikect500 ah, I mean I’ve seen someone hunt an Elk with a 1903 Springfield before. Ages ago. Most folks obviously use more modern bolt rifles but it can be done. I get what you’re saying though. Cheers!
The Finnish m39 deserves a higher ranking. You don’t own one so you don’t know. The Finn’s put on a very nice barrel, sights, stock, and a 2 stage trigger. It still has the mosin action but those rifles are one of the most accurate rifles of ww2
The ten round magazine for the Enfield is meaningless as the did not issue extra mags. So it loaded from a 5 round stripper clip. Best hunting rifle - any Pennsylvania deer hunter will tell you it is a 30/40 Krag. Target rifle - no windage adjustment. 1903 is a better target rifle.
@@erikschultz7166I think you missed the point, the Lee Enfield is a battle rifle. It's designed to put rounds down range fairly accurately very rapidly. The Lee Enfield action allows you to maintain sight picture unlike the mauser action. Try doing a "mad minute" on a mauser action rifle.
I'm no expert when it comes to weapons of the war, but I do know one thing about the Lee Enfield which cements it as the GOAT of service rifles for me. And this is a WWI story more than a WWII one, but I remember hearing about how the Germans were often tricked into thinking that there were more Brits than there were, or that they had more machine guns than they did, because of the superior fire rate. the 10 round magazines meant that they didn't have to reload as frequently meaning more time shooting, but also because of the bolt action itself. It was designed so that the bolt could be pulled back without having to move your head away from the sights. So whilst the enemy was wasting time trying to relocate their target with every shot, the British just kept their eyes down the sights, fired off 10 rounds and then reloaded. It made the fire rate so much quicker and thus made the Germans think that the British army was bigger and better equipped than they were. As a proud Brit, I love this detail and whilst I will submit the M1 Garand was better, for me, as a bolt action, the Lee Enfield is a superb second best to the Garand and stands proud as the top bolt action.
Apparently when the German infantry attacked mons the Germans reported back to high command that the British army had took to the field with a new experimental self loading rifle because they didn’t believe the weight of fire laid down could come from a bolt action
Sweden Switzerland were both neutral.. and the krag was almost an 80 year old antiquated design... to the point the British gave the resistance British small arms
@@andrewsmith1655 G43/K43 was accepted as the service rifle of the Wehrmacht but production didn't keep up with the demand. They were supposed to produce 100.000 rifles per month and only managed to produce 500.000 in roughly 2 years.
Several of the arms collecting clubs I have belonged to here in NZ used to run Enfield vs Mauser competitions including the well known "mad minute" from British WW1 era training. Needless to say the Enfields won this every year, even when the shoot was widened to include Nagants and other rifles of the period. Many ex NZ army rifles were sold to the public and we're the first deer rifle of many of my generation and performed well in NZ hunting conditions. The smooth action and placement of the bolt handle made it a rifle that was easy to get away the second shot provided that the shooter was gripping the bolt correctly between thumb and forefinger and not dropping the barrel which I observed most of those demonstrating in your video doing, which meant that the rifle could be reloaded at the shoulder, maintaining the point of aim. I still own an immaculate number 4 Lee Enfield and get more pleasure shooting this piece of history than any of my more modern fire arms.
Like the other guy said, he probably mispoke. Plus if memory serves, the Steyr M95 is chambered in 8x56R, so it's possible he got them confused for a second there.
You got the Garand correct. I loved that you gave the Type 99 it's due. It actually irritates me how dealers shit all over them, riiiiiight up until it's time to sell them and then jack the prices up. God forbid it has an intact mum, then it's a mortgage payment. I put all the French rifles in "S" tier, but the "S" stands for.......Well, you know lol
The Mannlichers were still used by the hungarian army in large quantities, although the more modern 35M Rifle entered service in 1938, it couldnt be produced in the needed numbers.
Good vid, though I can't see the Type 99 being graded above the K98. The Type 99 while effective, it was a very crude weapon. Sights would easily rate below that of the K98 and the Type 99 owes it's strength to the mauser 98. Also a straight bolt and who could forget that sketchy safety, operated with the palm of your hand that may or may not work for you on the first try.
Early type 99s in my experience are more accurate. Faster to cycle, and have better sights than k98ks. The last ditch ones on the other hand kind if feel like mosins.
Type 99 was far, far from crude. The bolt action is smooth as butter, 3 times simpler to maintain, the 7.7 cartridge is hard hitting without causing shoulder pain, and the bores were chrome lined. Frankly, the Arisaka was the ultimate evolution of the bolt action/Mauser action through WW2.
I wish you had included the Soviet SVT-40, the Russian Garand. They had a lot of them at the beginning of the war but the Germans overran the factories, so Russia had to downgrade to the Mosin-Nagant 91-30 for much of the remainder of the war. Also in the closing months of WW2 they introduced the SKS, and that intermediate cartridge really helped out in the close-quarters combat realm, whereas the 91-30 was very much a long range cartridge. Loved the video!!
Don't be dismayed by good-byes. A farewell is necessary before you can meet again. And meeting again, after moments or lifetimes, is certain for those who are friends.
Yea, there is quite a few countries you omited, like Poland, Norway, benelux countries, baltic states, Greece and Yugoslavia, and also a can of warm that would double the lenght of the video - Etiopia. Also there are some riffles from countries you mentiones that was less prevelent, but does in fact become standard issue, equal to more common ones, like Soviet SVT40 or German STG44
Have fired both, the Arisaka action feels like butter. The Lee Enfield, not so much. Only advantage I see in the LE is the 10 round internal mag. Arisaka action and unbelievable durability are second to none. I would be willing to bet you have never fired the Arisaka. Try it before you have a legitimate opinion. The Type 38 Carbine was absolute perfection due to its length. 6.5 mm is what everyone is going to now in 2024. Well ahead of its time. Btw, all I did in my statement is condense what this TH-camr stated in an extended manner.
M1 is the only semiautomatic service rifle widely used by a military. The Germans and Russians both had excellent semiautomatic rifle but they weren't widely issued.
"If the Lee Enfield Rifle No. 4 Mk I could lose a couple of pounds it would be S teir" We call that Rifle No. 5 Mk I and yes they did serve in WW2 ( only Just but it did)
@@lurch8111 It also kicked like a mule and wasn't as accurate! Which is why the SMLE was preferred
Yeah so maybe 5 guys used it in actual combat
SMLE is widely regarded as the best rifle of world war 2, unless ur from the country that 'won ww2 on its own'
@@steveyi2859 Like other rifle in the show witch got an honrable mention, but the No 5. did not. and it fitted his requirments
@@jameswaterfield That is not 100% trueGun Jesus has looked into this and is more inclined that the Bad reports on the No.5 we exagerated to ensure money was spent on the EM-2 ( which the army realy wanted)
You should do one of these tier lists for all the WW1 rifles
Bottom line The Yanks when the war with an Target Rife the Germans took a Hunting Rifle , The British Empire took a Fighting Rifle
@@JackthgunThe brits would still be in the trenches to this day 😂
@@Jackthgun Lol, a friend of mine used to say something along the lines of that.
“The Americans brought a target rifle, the Germans brought a hunting rifle, the Brits brought a battle rifle, and the Russians… well they just brought a rifle
@@LiamMartlew my dad could put aimed shots out of (now ) my No.5 like it was a semiautomatic . The Lee Enfield is just plain awesome
*Brings rifled Browing A5 auto shotgun with slugs for WW1 grading.
Excellent tier listing. No bias detected and all of your points were justifiable. I appreciate the point of including “when they were new” in reference to the carcano.
Very happy that the type 99 got what it deserved. It’s a great rifle and very underrated.
Thanks for that.
It’s a great deer rifle too!
@@brian24981 I wish he would have mentioned the Breakdown version used by Japanese paratroopers
I've heard folks complain about the safety, but it's one of the easiest to disengage in this group😊
Weebs
My inner Brit is crying at the cycling of the bolt on your leg 😂 keep it in your shoulder lad. Can't do a mad minute like that
Say the word aluminum out loud for us
Say water...
@@Grandizer8989 Basically only the US say aluminum. Aluminium is how its spelled in British English, and is the spelling recognised as the international standard. Sooooo....
@r4fken I'll never understand why the Americans insist on "aluminum". Going by their own logic, I'm expecting them to say "Plutonium" as "Plutonum"
Its not just you man, its a huge peeve for me as well keep the weapon shouldered
The 1903A3 wasn't delivered until December of 1942. The Guadalcanal Campaign started in August 1942. Therefore, the Marine Corps was armed with the 1903A1 for the beginning of the campaign. By the time the 1903A3 was delivered, M1 Garands were already becoming available.
Edit: IN Addition to being the Springfield 1903's bolt catch, and a fairly simple one at that,
There is an explanation as to why they left the magazine cut off in the design, they were the best candidate for a grenade launcher spigot. You could leave the magazine loaded, then single feed the grenade launcher blanks to launch grenades and be able to switch to your standard rifle with the flip of a switch on quick notice. The Garand was more clumsy as a grenade launcher by comparison, attaching the Grenade Spigot effectively turned the Garand into a single shot weapon, as the spigot redirected the gases to not engage the op rod, so to switch back to using your M1 as a standard rifle, you would have to remove the spigot AND load a clip into the magazine. The Springfields spigot could be left on, and the switch flipped to start use as a standard rifle. Granted accuracy would be hindered by leaving the spigot attached, but that's a small price when you can quickly start slinging lead at the enemy at the flip of a switch. I feel you did it dirty by ranking it in C tier. The Army Rangers were also known for opting for the 03A3 because it disguised their firing signature to sound more like the bolt gun wielding Germans and Italians. They also recognized the finer front sight as being more precise. The 03A3 is capable of 1 MOA, so I definitely hold it in higher regard. I feel it should be at least B tier if not low A tier
One characteristic you left out about the Mosin Nagant is that it excelled in the freezing environments Russia is famous for, something the Garand is infamous for performing poorly in. It's not going to affect my opinion of your ranking, but it is worth noting.
IIRC Springfield and Rock Island gave the 1903 production machinery to Remington. Along with rifle spare parts. Remington started production along with finding ways to simplify the rifle
@Idahoguy10157 correct, however, the 1903A3 was not developed and produced till later, it wouldn't see service until December 1942.
Love my A303. I can hit an 8” plate consistently at 200 yards with irons. It does kick like a mule if you don’t load for it.
With the shortage of Garands that the US military had at the outset of WW2, they also equipped the Marine Corps with the Johnson M1941, the main competitor of the M1 Garand. But so few people own these that I can totally understand why it wasn't featured here. It had a 10 round 30'06 internal magazine that allowed loading on the fly. It apparently acquitted itself well in the Guadalcanal Campaign and many Marines were reluctant to see it go. It is my #1 Grail Gun and I am forever looking for one!
Excellent Video, sound analysis, and well done. A personal anecdote may spark comment:
In January 1973 our old Canadian Militia Regiment ran its annual deep cold winter outdoor shoot with WW1, WW2, & Korea Vets all turned out, many with their old personal Rifles (and the odd 1910 Canadian Militia Colt New Service 5.5" barrel .455s with 240 gr propelled by long-colt full charge propellant. Another time. Crazy Canuks ...)
A number of our serving Senior NCOs and Warrant Officers brought various personal weapons including many of those you have reviewed. Our training Platoon of 18 - 22 year old kids were shocked to watch old men with WW1 & WW2 Lee-Enfields shoot respectable groups of 30 Rounds a minute at 600 yards. The Mad MInute is now and always has been real.
About 5 years ago, a friend then a Regular Army Colonel, ran the Connaught shoot in Ottawa. A sub-section of Canadian Rangers using WW2 Longbranch No. 4 Lee-Enfields shot respectable groups of 30 Rounds a minute at 600 yards. My friend and the JTF snipers were shocked. The Rangers and the old vets NEVER took their eye off the target when cycling the Bolt. The Old Sergeants-Major slapped 2 5-round clips into the Mag faster than I can cycle my Mauser. They all started with 10 in the Mag + 1 up the spout. That + 2 re-loads = 31 rounds. Check out our Aussie & Kiwi cousins with their Lee-Enfields. Some have hit 40 a minute. My own Israeli K-98 7.62 Conversion is great target or hunting Rifle. But it is a clunker - you have to reacquire the target after every bolt cycle. Not so with the brilliant Lee-Enfield BELOW THE SIGHT Bolt. Hence the view that the Lee-Enfield No. 4 and the Garand are almost certainly the 2 greatest battle rifles ever made. Our Aussie cousins WW2 Lee-Enfield has it's proponents; and its performance in the Aussie campaigns of WW2 is shockingly under-reported and shamefully largely ignored. Field Marshal Bill Slim's 14th Army scrounged every Indian or Aussie Lee-Enfield they could lay hands on.
Mr. Garand's brilliant USArmy Rifle was designed and tested to beat the Lee-Enfield. Garand was a Canadian native who moved South for work, and became a proud and loyal American. Garand bench-marked his self-loading rifle design to beat the Lee-Enfield No. 3 he had cut his teeth on. On many if not on most temperate days the Garand does beat the Lee-Enfield at volume of aimed rounds on target at moderate ranges; especially at 200 yards or less. For 8 rounds at close range in the Assault - the Garand clearly wins. But in the extreme heat of Kohima, or the deep cold of an Afghanistan Plateau in Winter, or aimed shots at 300 - 600, a good Lee-Enfield outshoots a good Mauser 2 to 1. A good Korean vintage USMC Gunnery Sergeant out there can probably out-shoot many modern snipers with any modern sniper rifle with his old perfect Garand out to 6 or 700 if not more. Hey - it has always been at least as much the Rifleman or woman as much as the Rifle. in pace paratus.
It 767
Really enjoyed the thoroughness used in describing each rifle in this video!
No better rifle than Lee Enfield. Wounded more game in Africa than any other due to FMJ bullets. Smoothest fast action out there. I find the bore grind/machining very interesting, as it expands then reduces again.
The Enfield rifles, both had a short action with the bolt, therefore, the rifle didn't have to be taken off the shoulder to reload. This led to a practiced soldier being able to fire 35 well aimed shots, even when the magazine only held ten rounds. The practice was to hold the bolt between index finger and thumb, pulling the trigger with the middle finger. Ath the battle of Mons in 1914, the German army believed that the BEF were armed with machine guns...
You can cycle rounds (without taking them off your shoulder) in any of the rifles that have somewhat smooth actions by using the cupped hand method. I have sporterized versions of 03 Springfield., a Kar98, and a SMLE No1 III and have taken whitetails with all of them, I wholeheartedly agree that the Enfield is the fastest by far.
My Springfield, which I purchased from a bait and tackle store in the late 70s, was set into a home, carve yourself stock that was darkened from years of accumulated gun oiling and sported an old Weaver 2X scope. I was worried the barrel was shot out, to my great surprise it turned out being genuine sub MOA rifle, I of course changed nothing on it. It's more accurate than my two overly expensive accurized Rem 700 ADLs that I owned, one was chambered for 30-06 the other for Win .300 Mag, I sold them a few years ago as I don't hunt any more.
The old adage about those three rifles holds true. The 03 Springfield was best target shooting rifle, the Kar 98 was the best hunting rifle, and SMLE was the best battlefield rifle.
Enfield rifles go back a long way. There are M-17 Enfield rifles that are WWI production but too late to have been used in that war. I'm not sure if they were used in WWII or not, but if 03A3 Springfields were used then it stands to reason that the M-17 saw action too. It is a .30-06 version of the Pattern 14 Enfield that was chambered in .303 British.
It's very well the fastest mauser action but calling ripple firing 35 rounds "well aimed" is "a bridge too far" my friend :)
@@rantanplan178 ok, so explain the German losses during the battle of Mons WW1. When the BEF were forced to retreat due to the overwhelming numbers of attacking Germans, who thought that the defending British troops were armed with machine guns. Not to mention that I, using a single shot rifle, when only 15 years old, could achieve two 1/4 inch five shot groups in less than a minute. Just because you can't shoot, does not mean nobody else can.
Oh and btw, a Mauser action is far too slow to achieve this rof, which is why the No. 3, aka P14, was not accepted, a very slow action.
@@jameswaterfield Dude, what are you even talking about? Can you sound even more history channel like plz? Yea, in British historical writing the Battle of Mons has almost mythical status, but at some point you really need to get back to reality. 10 shots in one minute are still far far away from 35 "well aimed" shots per minute. The Smelly Mk.III with its Lee action is for sure the fastest repeating rifle of WW1. No one is doubting that. Still there is no need to exaggerate it into fantasy world.
Love the short history/ run down of each before grading them .
Yes you have forgotten the biggest advantage of both Lee-Enfields: the Lee bolt rotation is only 60 degrees and the bolt is rear locking, which had the advantage of being far quicker to cycle than any other action but also allowed the shooter to cycle the bolt whilst still keeping the sight picture. Also if the person who was firing the No.4 had done that on a range that I was on, he would have been throw off as he drops the rifle down to cycle it when it should be cycled with the butt still in the shoulder! Remember that with a Lee Enfield you could fire c30 rounds a minute accurately and you would be lucky to fire 15 with a Mauser type action.
Another advantage with the .303 cartridge was that it was designed to be very slightly tapered, which meant the cartridge only fully engaged when the bolt just about to be fully closed - straight cartridges meant that if the rifle was hot a cartridge could get jammed in and this happened at the end of the war with the Mauser and some of the “last ditch” 7.92 non brass ammunition.
@@davidwhite9159 yep my dad was train to fire Lee Enfield by the British Army the way he show me was as you are recovering from the recoil you work the bolt and and get back on target . I seriously bet my dad could have got off 10 aimed shots from a Lee enfield as quick or quicker then most to get off 10 from an M1
Studiously ignored later standard rifles. So I have to assume you meant circa 1941, and not wwii as a whole. Pity as you missed some serious contenders such as both the German and soviet semi autos and the mosin nagant 1944.
@@familyhelpdeskhelpdesk270 Standard service rifles.
Dude you need to get laid… and there I was thinking im a nerd
The Enfield action has another slight but possibly significant advantage: the striker is cocked when the bolt is pushed back forward after being fully opened rather than being cocked as you open the bolt and extract the cartridge. If you've got some of that dodgy last ditch "brass" that little extra force could make the difference between extracting the case and jamming.
SVT-40? It officially replaced the Mosin and over 1.5 million were made and issued. The Mosin did see far more used but the Soviets did coincider the SVT-40 as a standard issue.
Agreed... he totally dropped the ball on that one.
Yeah but i think he only took the most prevelent. If you want every rifle then the list would be different, i mean there where many greate rifles in WW2.
The SVT-40 suffered from horrific accuracy problems and was removed from service after 1943 by the Soviets.
Watch the Forgotten Weapons video on the rifle.
@@stitch626alohahowever SVT was loved by the Soviet Marines, it was weapon they prefered instead of Mosin, because in Soviet Navy service was longer than in the Army and Navy was recrtuiting a lot of boys with technician education and skills, so a lot of Marines knew how to maintain SVT, if you know your weapon, it will be good in your hands
SVT was also semi automatic, had two more rounds and detachable magazines, plus could be easily topped up with clips or singles, making it better than the M1 in several departments.
Re: 03 A3 - Remember that while the mag cutoff was useless in this version, it was very useful in the 03 A4 Sniper model, which, of course could no be loaded with stripper clips. If one is limited to loading with loose rounds, the ability to hold the magazine in reserve could be very important.
You can do that with any Mauser type bolt gun.
@@Dominic1962 How? I have a couple of Mauser 98s, and they only feed from the magazine. You certainly could hold 4 rounds in reserve, open the bolt, put one in the top of the magazine, and close the bolt.... but unless I am missing something, it's nowhere near as easy as switching off the magazine and then just dropping rounds in one at a time.
@@vincewarde The magazine cutoff makes the whole action more complicated. The 1/1000 of a sec more it takes to pop a round in the mag verses put it in the mag well is inconsequential. Plus we are talking sniper rifles, so even less consequential. I’d say it’s better to have the mag ready to go without fiddling with a cutoff because of quick follow up shots.
@@Dominic1962 You make some very good points. I have never used the mag cutoff on an 03, so you may be ahead of me on that count...
As far as a sniper now needed to fire multiple shots in short order, if I were a WW2 sniper armed with an A4, I would certainly have a plan for rapid fire, as other than maybe a 1911, that's my only weapon.
@@vincewarde It’s also one of those things, even with lots of trading, it’s a fiddly bit that gets forgotten in the heat of things. I’d hate to rack my bolt and get a click, remembering I forgot to flip the cutoff switch. The soldiers that had m1903s practically never used it in combat, just left it off and only time they’d move it was to remove the bolt from cleaning.
With the A4, it would definitely help to have a pistol or something since it doesn’t have any iron sight back ups. What I had in mind was more like if you take a shot at longer distance and miss or another target pops up out there after the first. Those sorts of instances in just makes sense to be feeding from the mag so a follow up shot is quick and natural.
"We're not going to talk about carbines. Now this here carbine..."
I think he meant less commonly used dedicated carbines, rather than carbine models of existing standard issues
I'm not all that interested in your subjects, but having said that you are an EXCELLENT presenter! Super knowledgeable and very LIKABLE! One of the best videos I've seen in a long time. Best of luck to you!
I used to have most of these rifles in my collection, and I don’t disagree with any of your rankings. I just love how quirky many rifle designs used to be at that point in time.
Great video
Love the content man but, we gotta add SVT40 at 1.3 mil made, or G43 at 400k. only about 200k mas 36’s were made before invasion. Just busting your chops man seriously one of my favorite channels!! Keep it up
I had an SVT and I kinda hated it. But if I was going to war I rather have it over the 91/30 but the M38 and M44 would be my choice over. I have and had all these at one point but the SVT was cool it was fun but it’s kinda crappy and parts are expensive. If anything would have broke I would have been screwed but I bought it back in 2012 for $750 at the time. I got my Mosin’s back in 2008 and 2012 for $75 and $100. The M38 and T53 were both around $325 back in 2011. My M44 Romanian 1955 I got for $430 in great shape
The mosin also has an interrupter so rimlock is not an issue
@@canadaisdecent1635 ever fired steel case and it gets stuck 🫠 sometimes if you pull back the firing pin it sometimes helps open the bolt but sometimes you have to beat the hell out of the bolt to get open.
@@canadaisdecent1635 It can definitely still be an issue on some Mosins
@@redtra236 yeah mine really has that issue lol
Loved your video! I think your ranking is very reasonable. Wouldn’t dispute it, especially for the more known WWII service rifles. I particularly agree with the high ranking of the M1 Garand as “S-tier” and the Lee-Enfield No. 4 MK 1 as an “A-tier”. I really didn’t know much about the French MAS36 and will try to learn more so thanks for that. Your ranking of the Japanese Type 99 rifle in “A-tier” above the German Kar98k in “B-tier” caught me by surprise, but I think you gave a reasonable and pretty solid explanation to your ranking. Excellent video!!! Thank you!
The 1903A3 was absolutely NOT the standard arm for the Marines early on. They didn’t use the A3 at all, and instead used rebuilt rock island and Springfield made 03s. Matter of fact, the A3 was rarely even used by the army throughout the war
He did A3 dirty, those aperture sights are amazing, that's just his personal preference.
That's not true that the Army didn't use them, the army utilized them as grenade launchers and the Rangers were known to use them for their precise sights AND because they disguised their fire report to sound more like their adversaries
@dobridjordje damn right he did the A3 dirty, not only did he take his reference for their use from "The Pacific" but he down played the sights and the significance of the cut off switch when it came to it's use as a grenade launcher
@@danielhess1082 I don't even know how can he say that any rifle with tangent sights can beat aperture sights which are paramount. M1903A3 is the best bolt action of the war right after the No 4. mk 1. And guess what both have aperture sights. Not to mention how incredibly smooth M1903A3 bolt is and incredible accuracy, I like 98k and type 99 but they are inferior to the A3.
@@danielhess1082that’s why I said rarely, which fits your description in the comment. Regardless, the video is of the main service rifles and their secondaries for the most part (even though it’s not clearly defined in the video criteria). And the Garand and standard 03, not A3, would fit the description of this video. This would be like me classifying the M96 Swede used by the Finns on the same level as the finn mosin program and the standard rifles they used.
The M-1 Garand wasn't the only semi auto battle rifle in WWII, you left out the SVT-40, and the G43
I hate to burst your bubble but the Germans hated the G43 because it sucked so badly and the SVT-40 had a lot of issues do to the action was more complicated than it need to be and there production quality had a lot of short comings during the war. The post war versions are very good tho
And G41, the previus semi auto german rifle. The G43 was the needed evolution of the G41.
@@rf2958 That is true G43 was a needed upgrade to G41, However given that when the Japanese and Germans re-armed the fact that they both reached for the M1 Garand first and not for there own production semi-auto rifles is Telling. For clarification the Japanese semi-auto rifle was called the Type 4 it’s a clone of the M1 Garand.
The SVT and G43 were NOT standard issue
M1 was not the best rifle in WW2 it was miles to heavy, and the mag could not be topped up. It was also not as reliable as you said. Why did German snipers use Russian rifles during WW2 if they were not accurate?
The Carcano Model 38 is an excellent choice if, for any reason, you need to get 3 shots off in under 7 seconds and get two hits including a head shot on a moving target about 75 yards away. Of course to take advantage of its excellent properties you need to be a proficient marksman, trained by an organization like the USMC that takes rifle marksmanship seriously.
I see what you did here :-)
You forgot the most important trait! It's the only rifle that can cause inertia to go the opposite way to bullet entry! Back, and to the left
And it can shoot from three places at the same time.
You got it right. Excellent analysis.
One feature of the SMLE Mk4 Lee Enfield was the ability to short cycle the bolt to allow the British infantry standard 'Mad Minute' using the thumb and forefinger to work the action.
Great video. You did it right.
The Ukko-Pekka M39 with it's previous Finnish version were fitted with/for a specific cartridge as well, making it by far the most deadliest infantry main battle rifle of the time. The usability, endurance and reliability far surpassed the Soviet models and other rifles during WW2.
Cool ranking. Thank you for the video.
You left out Greece, Yugoslavia, Belgium, Poland and Hungary. There's also Czechoslovakia but that'd just be the VZ24 again. Kudos to you for including China, Finland, and Romania though. They're often forgotten.
How long you want the video to be
@@mrchambers31 The longer the better
Hungary would be the M95,
@@christianschlogl6295 I was thinking more along the lines of the Feg 35M
@@christianschlogl6295 The 35M had a different action and bolt than the M95. And we heard about every single Kar 98 version so in the interest of considency, the 35M should get mentiond.
That was quite enjoyable mate.
Can you please do a tier list of WW2 handguns and self loading rifles?
Thanks, greetings from Bavaria, Germany
Sad to see the 1917 Enfield wasn’t on the list. The Army used them in the early stages of the Pacific Campaign and African Campaign. Mostly to Mortarmen and Artillerymen as a stop gap for shortages of M1 rifles and 1903s.
Almost all Philippine Commonwealth troops and many Chinese used 1917s
It introduced Americans to rear apeture sights; downside was that it was originally designed for a hotter round so was heavier than it needed to be.
The M-1 Garand was so good, it almost made up for the weakness of the BAR as a squad machine gun.
The BAR was a "Squad" automatic Rifle. Not a machine gun. Your re totally reclassifying the weapons purpose. A squad machine gun in WW2 was a 3 man crew in a 12 man squad. The BAR was the automatic rifle fitting into the smaller field squad of about 7 men to support the smaller squad. And no doubt the M1 garrand was the class of the infantry rifle.
@@63grandsport11the ordinance board basically reclassified it when they removed semi auto, added a bipod and carry handle, replaced the exceptionally good 1917 style aperature with an open notch, and made it 22lbs
@@63grandsport11Still sucked compared to the BREN.
@@vista8863 Ordinance is a law passed by a city, I think the word you are looking for is Ordnance which means military equipment.
@@vista8863most BAR gunners took that stuff off tho. Its main role was to help achieve fire superiority and it was able to do so cuz it was alongside the Garand. They could travel lighter and have more rifles at the ready cuz of it too. US tactics and doctrine didnt require the BAR to have 2-3 man crews like the Germans and British. It was a lesser “machine gun” no doubt but it worked well in semi-auto rifle squads
Great list mate
21:55 is the Final List.
A really fascinating (and mercifully quick) run through of a great range of firearms.
You have a remarkable collection there sir.
I enjoyed your focus on "human factors" sights, weight, ease of loading.
So many comparisons fuss over issues like muzzle velocity and rifling twists without considering whether the poor old infantryman can line up an elusive target at 200 yards.
Thanks, it was really informative.
My dad (a just post World War 2 British Army solider) could put aimed shots out the. no.5 Lee Enfield I own almost as fast as a semiauto. The Lee Enfield is the last word in bolt action battle rifles
Good list. Covered the major types. Seemed fair for your criteria. Overall, Well Done.
I personally like my enfield no4 mk1 and my m96 swedish mauser.
I was in the UK Combined Cadet Force in the early 1980s and we were issued with Lee Enfield no.4 Rifles, which were fantastic. Regular British Army soldiers just receiving their brand new, but flawed, SA80s at the time were probably jealous of us kids!
Running a semi-auto when everyone else had bolts was an incredible advantage. We learned during the civil war just how important an increased rate of fire could be.
Maybe do a WWII list for pistols?
I like my M1911 and P38 but my P30 was built in the 1960’s
Top contenders would be M1911 at the top, Hi Power, P38 in that order.
All of them have there strong suits. 1911 as a design is still the standard that pistols are held against, along with the Glock 17.
BHP and P38 probably would be in a tier below 1911 much like how Garand was above the rest here. BHP was not in widespread use compared to two other designs. Magazine disconnect and a trigger that is worse than it's predecessor. It's the handgun that made its mark during the cold war. Great handgun overall and is in many ways equal or better to it's older brother.
P38 has a lot of modern features on it such as DA/SA, Decocker and loaded chamber indicator. Smooth action that the Beretta 92 was "Inspired" by. Great handgun, but not on 1911's level for WW2.
1911 was the best WW1 pistol. The hi power was way better in WW2. You claim the 1911 had a better trigger? We're comparing stock 1911A1, not modern 1911's. And don't forget about the miniscule sights on the 1911A1. P38 was also better than the 1911, as proved by the 1911 getting replaced by a copy of the p38.
If your Garand is in good working order and you load it correctly, you will never experience Garand Thumb.
“In my opinion, the M-1 Rifle is the greatest battle implement ever devised.” - General Patton. Good enough for me although I personally prefer the M-1 Carbine.
You're not alone, McArthur said this about the M1 Carbine "one of the strongest contribution factors in our victory in the Pacific". Now, I haven't found a direct source for that quote, but I agree with it, for the purpose it was built for, and what it was pushed into, it worked damn well.
The M1 was not the only semi auto rifle in ww2. Russia and as well Germany fielded semi auto rifles like the German G43.
@@holgernarrog962 Yes, of course. Not forgetting the Sturmgewehr STG44 and the SVT-40.
@@holgernarrog962Not in good enough amounts, and due to the fact that both of them would experience getting bombed heavily, I imagine production quality would overall be worse than garands.
@@natebox4550 There were several hundred 1000 of G43 manufactured more than a todays army requires. Rifle manufacturing took place in small towns like Oberndorf that were not bombed till close to the end.
The G43 profited from the experience of the soviet semi automatic weapons. I did not shoot an M1 nor a G43 that`s why I will not rate them.
We needed this
What about the SVT 40? And the Gewehr 41 and 43?
Great video 👍
If you found it eligible, where would you place the Swiss k31?
I was under the impression that during the early pacific campaign the marines were using 1903s, 1903A1s, and 1903 MK1s. I thought the 1903A3 was more of a stop gap to get as many rifles out there as possible until M1 production could catch up with recruitment and was mostly relegated to reserve, navy, and nasty guard units.
I'l take the StG 44. It revolutionized infantry warfare to the point that just about every military adopted guns based on its concept after the war.
Lmao no
5.56 weapons were only adopted in the 60´s and the ak-47 (which was intended as an SMG replacement) was mechanically inspired) by the M1 Garand, the only thing the soviet took was the intermediate cartridge that they found in 1942
It didn’t revolutionize anything and they never made enough of them regardless.
The only thing that STG allowed to make is MP5
@@me67galaxylife My man spittin facts. Love to see it.
@@me67galaxylifethe StG44 was essentially the inspiration for standard issue select fire rifles, the M14 or the FN Fal are both undeniably inspired by its effectiveness
note that the AK being intended as an SMG replacement is not accurate, it was meant to replace all SMGs, but also all rifles in elite units (and wasn't considered as a replacement for all rifles in all units only because the Soviets expected it to be too expensive for that)
@@Mike-ukr Hm yes because an M14 and a FAL in full caliber round can undeniably be used the same way and are very related (no)
We can also know from official documents that indeed the soviets did not consider the AK-47 the same way the germans did consider the STG-44 and only wanted to give the AK-47 to everyone once they realized that
I envy your collection so much, it's so beautiful
Yes Garand was better than any bolt action, but what about the STG44 or the Tokarev? If you include MAS36 you need to consider them too. Really like the channel.
The Mas 36 was a bolt action, unlike the STG44 and Tokarev. Afterall, its a rifles tier list. If he were to include a semi-automatic rifle from Germany, it would've ben the Gewehr 43.
@@gearxrust Point was that Mas36 was short lived and never equipped the whole army, like the other two I mention. The Garand is a semi auto, not bolt. But fun video.
@@ogilkes1 the rifle lasted until the fifties, so I wouldn’t say short lived, but I understand. What he should’ve included were rifles like the Swiss k31, or other Mausers. No Turkey was interesting. Didn’t necessarily see combat from the Swiss but it would’ve been interesting to see how he’d rate a rifle like that compared to the others.
@@gearxrust The StG44 is an assault *rifle*
@@BigMek456 yes, I don’t know which comment I made would suggest other wise. That rifle doesn’t fit in with the others, as the stg 44 wasn’t the Germans standard issue rifle. The mas36 for the French on the other hand, was.
Pretty good video. I got my surplus rifles before the market got really crazy.
You completely forgot the SVT40 which was the new Soviet standard when they got involved in WWII; 2 million of them were made and field and so they are not a niche or limited weapon. It is S tier, and even better than the , because it had detachable magazines and a full 10 rounds capacity.
Enfields should have been A tier and S tier for the fast action and double magazine capacity. Run them in comparison to any Mauser and you will immediately understand why.
Styer deserved B tier for the fast straight pull action.
If the SVT40 was as excellent rifle as you claim, why did the Soviets bother to adopt the SKS & AK47 after the war? Why not continue with the SVT, as the Americans did with the M1 or try to develop it, as the Americans attempted with the M14? From what I know about the rifle, it suffered a lot of issues with reliability and accuracy. It's interesting to note that, despite 1.6 million being produced, they were seldomly seen in use after WW2.
That said, with the numbers produced during the war & the fact it was intended to be the standard issue service rifle or the Red Army, it probably should have made the list. I think it would be lower A-tier. Without the reliability & accuracy issues, it would be S-Tier.
@@Rooster---ooo SKS was adopted due to 7.62x39 ammo. It was meant to replace 7.62x54R and 7.62x25 for rifles, machinguns and submachineguns.
@@mantis23101988 If the SVT was such a good weapon, why not simply downscale it to fire the new round? Why did Siminov not develop his own design & instead begin work on a completely new weapon only a few years after the SVT was supposed to be the new service rifle?
The answer is clear. The SVT had issues & even the designer could see it was not good enough.
@@Rooster---ooo SKS was better than SVT, but USSR already had production lines for SVT. It was not too bad to adapt new rifle for 7.62x54r
@@Rooster---ooo
Because the Americans have this bizarre obsession with long range marksmanship oweing to a national mythos from poorly taught history.
The Russians are pragmatists. They realized most fighting was shortrange and winner mostly determined by who shot both first and then more importantly fired more rounds. So they made weapons for this.
Given the assault rifles all around the world, the Soviets were right.
Technology had surpassed the SVT and M1 plainly by around 1943.
I am a Mauser fan and have most 2nd Wwar rifles. Your ratings were honest and well researched
I was shocked to see the prices of mil surp rifles today. I haven’t looked in years, but I remember when they were the inexpensive reliable rifle you could buy at any gun show. Mosin’s were $100, SKS $200, garand or carbine for $700. Spam cans of .30 for next to nothing.
I would love to have an M1. I was looking at the surplus rifles offered by the Civilian Markmanship Program. To get a really nice one its just too much money. The local pawn shop has a beat up M1, I may look at that and put some work into it.
A simply excellent video. Perhaps the best explanation of pluses and minuses I have ever seen on WW2 rifles.
Missing the Norwegian Krag Jørgensen
That's like a 19th century firearm. What's the point
@@steveyi2859 The Norwegian campaign is unfortunately often overlooked. Much of the reason for this is that English, French and Polish forces had to fail their Norwegian brothers in arms, and retreat in the middle of the battle. Therefore, this is not a part of the war that the victors like to talk about. It may seem strange, when you know that Norway was the nation that fought the longest against the strong Wehrmacht after being occupied. The fighting lasted for three full months, giving us the first important Allied victories over the Nazi forces. Most famous is the victory in Narvik. But also the first victory over German paratroopers in Gudbrandsdalen.
Both Norway and Denmark had Krag Jørgensen as a service rifle at the time. Yes, it was an old design. But not older than several of the other rifles mentioned in this list. (Mosin Nagant, and Mauser for example.) During the Norwegian campaign, Norwegian soldiers equipped with the Krag Jørgensen gained a reputation for being dangerously accurate by Mauser equipped Germans.
So don't underestimate either The Norwegian campaign, Norwegian Riflemen, or Krag Jørgensen rifles.
@@larserikertzgaardringen7426 ww2 pretty much ended bolt action rifles and transitioned to automatic and battle rifles. this was the end of old single shot rifles
@ Yes. That’s true! But this video is a list of WWII rifles, and the majority of them where still bolt action rifles.
So my point stands.
@larserikertzgaardringen7426 the last time I heard krag jorgensen was the Spanish American war in 1898 in any significant numbers. Thats why I said 19th century
Really good!! This was great to go thru!!
I reckon you should have also chucked the SVT40 in there. It was adopted as the next standard issue rifle by the Soviets and millions were cranked out, then they reverted back to the 91/30 in the desperate early days after the German invasion.
Also while it's not a rifle it's 100% worth mentioning that the Soviets were really the first major power to actually issue SMG on a massive scale effectively using them as a replacement for standard infantry rifles. The Soviets produced more SMG than most of the other powers combined, and it was a common sight, particularly later in the war to see entire squads and even platoon level elements almost exclusively armed with SMG. It's why the AK program was so important to them later on. The Soviets at this time spearheaded and largely invented aggressive modern infantry assault tactics that we think of later in the cold war. (with a honorable mention Finland who really started this trend first and whom the Russian's adapted their very effective close range combat tactics from) From 1938-1945 the Soviets produced around 6 million Submachine guns, compared to the USA's 2 million, or Germanys 1.2 million.
Skipped to the end just to confirm my M1 bias.
If you are going to list the M1 Garand as "S" tier, you need to add the Gewehr 43, STG 44, SVT 40, M1 Carbine etc. Comparing a semiauto with bolt action rifles is like apples and oranges. To my understanding, this video was made to make the M1 look like the best rifle from WW2 because of favoritism.
He's comparing standard service rifles. This comparison is not only fair but also practical, as all the fancy german weapons were moot considering their limited use in the field.
@@calincampbell5637 The issue is that its a largely irrelevant question as it lacks context. The garand is the best standard issue rifle but its operating with the BAR and frankly, the existence of the garand held up american adoption of better infantry section doctrine.
You cant bring up rifle 4 and the kar98k without bringing up bren and mg38/42 as the role of the rifles in the section were to cover the setup of the section machine guns.
So im afraid i disagree with the claim of practicality, it only works for a one man on his own comparison and in the british case, thats actually a comparison between garand and bren, since if you were the last man alive in the section, you would be expected to take over the bren since thats where the firepower of the section is.
@@calincampbell5637 the G43/K43 was accepted as the standard service rifle of the Wehrmacht, though.
@@matzeh1985 First I've heard of it. To my knowledge they were far too unreliable to equip standard infantry and relegated to sniper duty.
@@calincampbell5637 Not even 1/10th of the rifles were given to snipers, the poor production quality in the last month of the war even prevented the use as a DMR and many rifles had their defect scope mounts ground off instead of being scrapped.
The Gewehr 41 already was supposed to become the new standard issue rifle of the Wehrmacht, but only the G43/K43 was accepted into service as such.
Excellent video! Had hoped you'd have the Norwegian Krag Jørgensen M1982, M1986 or the M1998. last of which also came in a Carbine. While I know Norway was only a minor faction in WW2, these rifles were also used by Denmark (which only saw a small skirmish with them, Norway fought for 9 weeks with them). I'd still have loved to see the Krag Jørgensen included. Would you consider doing a short on a Krag Jørgensen if you get the chance and adding it to the tier list in a post-video? It would probably not rate very high as a combat rifle, though in 2005 or 2006 there was a sharpshooter competition with only Kar98 and Krag Jørgensen allowed, held between the Norwegian and Swedish army, where the winner actually used a Krag Jørgensen. (Sweden used Kar98 and Norway Krag Jørgensen). If not, no big deal :) Nice video.
Well done, I hate seeing the Springfield 1903A3 so low but in reality the points you made are valid.
Australia👍
After watching I agree with your top pick.
Very comprehensive and excellent video
Agreed 100% on the K98. Hands down the best design of the war in terms of reliability, but the sights absolutely do not match the high standard set by the rest of the rifle.
The 03A3 though, oh man, one of if not my absolute favorite rifle. The magazine cutoff was essentially flipped to on and forgotten about, and the Marines I do believe were using the first variant of the 1903 rather than the A3 through the early pacific campaigns. A3s really didn’t begin to show up until ‘43 onwards where they were grenadier rifles in front line use and then second line rifles.
I do have to say the No4 Mk1 by far has a more complex and fiddly rear sight than the 03A3. Not the Mk1*, but the first iteration. Also, for the 03A3 front sight, swap that factory blade out for a repro USMC #10 blade. It’s a hell of a lot thicker and makes those sights wonderful.
Don’t forget to put the Swiss k31 and Swedish Mausers in S tier😉
Neutral countries.
Did not get used in WW2.
@@kaitai5900 There were Swedish volunteers in the Finnish wars. Simo Hahyah has a picture trying a Swedish Mauser.
@@barccy
Yeah but he set his kill record with a Papasha and an M28 Mosin-Nagant.
Norway here: Swedes like to think that they endured WWII even though they did not.
Thanks for the video.
I have a bring back Carcano TS Carbine. Its light, handy and accurate. The only issue I have with them is the clip system. Its not the most reliable system I found that certain clips don't work at all and others work ok. I'm not sure how reliable these were with the Italians but for me I would rather use a Mauser. I think the Mausers sights are really good for fast target acquisition shooting at closer ranges. Its really easy to pick up the big Mauser front sight blade in low light. With that I would rate the Mauser K98 and VZ-24 at a A.
Thank you, great job
Agree that the Garand is undeniably the best rifle of WWII. I think you'll get some gripes about your low rating for the K98k!
Too many wehraboos who don’t live in the real world
Very clear! Very interessant.
Kar98k being B tier is crazy
Not at all. They are very nice rifles, but the sights on them are garbage compared to the rifles he rated higher.
Nah, it's exactly where it should be. It's a well made rifle (Early war examples) however 8x57 is too powerful for the kind of war it was fighting in.
5 round clip fed rifle shooting in excess of 3k ft.lb cartridges. The reason its below the others:
Arisakas shoot a lower powered round with the strongest action of ww2, these rifles are accurate and are absurdly overbuilt. Excellent sights overall.
SMLE has a 10 round capacity and one of the smoothest actions ever in a bolt gun. .303 brit is a nice middling full powered cartridge. Excellent sights as well.
M1 Garand, yeah it shoots 30.06 but it is semi auto fed by enbloc clips. Best main rifle of the war by a mile. Fast reloads, good capacity, great sights, low recoiling, reliable.
K98k Good action using the tested Mauser design, Fires the very powerful 8mm Mauser. Not a particularly fast long action, high recoil and sights that are serviceable. Well made weapon just not top tier. It's a step down from the three mentioned above. It's the weapon that conquered western Europe, so it can't be all that bad.
@@bobjackson4287
The weapon that conquered France and the Low Countries was the MG34. Not the Mauser. One could also say the Luftwaffe and the Panzer Corps with radios in every tank had a lot to do with it.
@@sullathehutt7720 Along with BF109, JU87, PZ II,III,IV, sd.kfz 251, and many many more weapons. The infantry rifle is still a critical item and one of the most important weapon systems of any army. You don't win nothing without infantry. At the end of the day you need a solider with a rifle to hold ground and take ground were other weapons cannot operate. They are called the queen of battle for this reason; their unparalleled flexibility and mobility just like the queen in chess.
@@bobjackson4287
Machine guns and submachine guns had more to do with the success or failure of the infantry squad in WW2 than the service rifle did.
Just ran across this, excellent work! I inherited an Arisaka 99 chrysanthemum intact from my dad who got it while on Iwo shortly after they took the island. Excellent rifle, got a real kickback to it.
The fact that you think the enfield is a better rifle than the Mauser is a bit odd. All enfield rifles have some pretty serious design flaws compared to the Mauser. The large ring Mauser is the best bolt action design ever to see military adaptation. Also, who taught you how to load a garand? That video was painful to watch.
I agree. K98k should be A tier hands down. Enfield I can see being a S tier due to the short bolt and 10 rounds, you can lay more firepower down with the enfield faster than you can the k98k, if I want a infantry bolt action if picking the enfield but if I want a sniper rifle I'm picking the k98k
I thought his take on Finnish mosins was honestly way out there, M27, 28, and 28-30s were all superior rifles to the 91/30 in every way, to see them put in the same category made me raise an eyebrow, same with the Enfield over the Kar98k
@@jasoncyr5139 the enfield has rear locking lugs and fires a rimmed case, those are huge negatives in my opinion.
10rds and reliable better for battle nothing else needs to be said. S tier
The Brits usually used the Enfield with 5 rounds. They are certainly decent, but I don’t see why they are considered so much better than other bolt guns. The vast majority of conscripts couldn’t do anything near a “magic minute” so in actual use they weren’t any better than anything else.
He stepped gingerly onto the bridge knowing that enchantment awaited on the other side.
M1 Garand for the win.
100%
Saw that one coming!
doesnt count since you entered the war late
@@edthebumblingfool 😂 So saving the world doesn't count? What about all of the lend-lease equipment we, the USA, supplied to our allies, that doesn't count either? 😂
@@jarodcrazyindian Most of that was the US enriching itself at the expense of others, they only joined the war as a last resort.
Great video. I have had all of these guns come and go over time. Recently I have purchased a few Carcano's because they are so cheap. I love them. They are light and nimble as can be for a truck, ATV gun. I'm not saying I would go to war with it but what a handy ranch gun. Your right the rate of fire wins the war !
The Germans went to war with a hunting rifle, the Americans with a target rifle and the British with an Infantry rifle
You can technically use a 1903 Springfield and a M1 Garand as a hunting rifle too lol 😆
@@johnappleseed9290 that's not what I was referring to
Then what else is “hunting” referred too besides a recreational use for it lol
@@johnappleseed9290 as in hunting elk, deer, not opposing force infantryman
@@mikect500 ah, I mean I’ve seen someone hunt an Elk with a 1903 Springfield before. Ages ago. Most folks obviously use more modern bolt rifles but it can be done. I get what you’re saying though. Cheers!
Always like seeing your videos, keep up the good content!
Should have included the K31. Wonderful rifle that shot at both sides.
I guess it's because it didn't see much action.
The Finnish m39 deserves a higher ranking. You don’t own one so you don’t know. The Finn’s put on a very nice barrel, sights, stock, and a 2 stage trigger. It still has the mosin action but those rifles are one of the most accurate rifles of ww2
Reminds me of the true statement … hunting rifle, target rifle, and battle rifle!
The Lee Enfield WINS!
The ten round magazine for the Enfield is meaningless as the did not issue extra mags. So it loaded from a 5 round stripper clip. Best hunting rifle - any Pennsylvania deer hunter will tell you it is a 30/40 Krag. Target rifle - no windage adjustment. 1903 is a better target rifle.
@@erikschultz7166I think you missed the point, the Lee Enfield is a battle rifle. It's designed to put rounds down range fairly accurately very rapidly. The Lee Enfield action allows you to maintain sight picture unlike the mauser action. Try doing a "mad minute" on a mauser action rifle.
@@erikschultz7166🤣🤣🤡🤡🫡🇬🇧
@@erikschultz7166 the saying refers to:
Battle Rifle - Lee Enfield
Hunting Rifle - Mauser
Target Rifle - 1903
@@markmaher4548 ABSOLUTELY!
Good video
I'm no expert when it comes to weapons of the war, but I do know one thing about the Lee Enfield which cements it as the GOAT of service rifles for me. And this is a WWI story more than a WWII one, but I remember hearing about how the Germans were often tricked into thinking that there were more Brits than there were, or that they had more machine guns than they did, because of the superior fire rate. the 10 round magazines meant that they didn't have to reload as frequently meaning more time shooting, but also because of the bolt action itself. It was designed so that the bolt could be pulled back without having to move your head away from the sights. So whilst the enemy was wasting time trying to relocate their target with every shot, the British just kept their eyes down the sights, fired off 10 rounds and then reloaded. It made the fire rate so much quicker and thus made the Germans think that the British army was bigger and better equipped than they were. As a proud Brit, I love this detail and whilst I will submit the M1 Garand was better, for me, as a bolt action, the Lee Enfield is a superb second best to the Garand and stands proud as the top bolt action.
Apparently when the German infantry attacked mons the Germans reported back to high command that the British army had took to the field with a new experimental self loading rifle because they didn’t believe the weight of fire laid down could come from a bolt action
Awesome video
G43? Svt40? What gives?!
And Swedish Mauser , Swiss k31, Norway krag,
Standard issue service rifles. Nearly every Rifleman carried a M1 Grarand, only a select few carried SVTs or G43s.
Sweden Switzerland were both neutral.. and the krag was almost an 80 year old antiquated design... to the point the British gave the resistance British small arms
@@NaNa-rb7ou3 neutral countries?
@@andrewsmith1655 G43/K43 was accepted as the service rifle of the Wehrmacht but production didn't keep up with the demand. They were supposed to produce 100.000 rifles per month and only managed to produce 500.000 in roughly 2 years.
Good job!
Several of the arms collecting clubs I have belonged to here in NZ used to run Enfield vs Mauser competitions including the well known "mad minute" from British WW1 era training.
Needless to say the Enfields won this every year, even when the shoot was widened to include Nagants and other rifles of the period.
Many ex NZ army rifles were sold to the public and we're the first deer rifle of many of my generation and performed well in NZ hunting conditions.
The smooth action and placement of the bolt handle made it a rifle that was easy to get away the second shot provided that the shooter was gripping the bolt correctly between thumb and forefinger and not dropping the barrel which I observed most of those demonstrating in your video doing, which meant that the rifle could be reloaded at the shoulder, maintaining the point of aim.
I still own an immaculate number 4 Lee Enfield and get more pleasure shooting this piece of history than any of my more modern fire arms.
Awesome video RR
First time I have heard of the 7.62x54R referred to as an 8x54R. Where have I been?
I think he misspoke
Like the other guy said, he probably mispoke. Plus if memory serves, the Steyr M95 is chambered in 8x56R, so it's possible he got them confused for a second there.
You got the Garand correct. I loved that you gave the Type 99 it's due. It actually irritates me how dealers shit all over them, riiiiiight up until it's time to sell them and then jack the prices up. God forbid it has an intact mum, then it's a mortgage payment. I put all the French rifles in "S" tier, but the "S" stands for.......Well, you know lol
The Mannlichers were still used by the hungarian army in large quantities, although the more modern 35M Rifle entered service in 1938, it couldnt be produced in the needed numbers.
Good vid, though I can't see the Type 99 being graded above the K98. The Type 99 while effective, it was a very crude weapon. Sights would easily rate below that of the K98 and the Type 99 owes it's strength to the mauser 98. Also a straight bolt and who could forget that sketchy safety, operated with the palm of your hand that may or may not work for you on the first try.
Early type 99s in my experience are more accurate. Faster to cycle, and have better sights than k98ks. The last ditch ones on the other hand kind if feel like mosins.
Type 99 was far, far from crude. The bolt action is smooth as butter, 3 times simpler to maintain, the 7.7 cartridge is hard hitting without causing shoulder pain, and the bores were chrome lined. Frankly, the Arisaka was the ultimate evolution of the bolt action/Mauser action through WW2.
I wish you had included the Soviet SVT-40, the Russian Garand. They had a lot of them at the beginning of the war but the Germans overran the factories, so Russia had to downgrade to the Mosin-Nagant 91-30 for much of the remainder of the war. Also in the closing months of WW2 they introduced the SKS, and that intermediate cartridge really helped out in the close-quarters combat realm, whereas the 91-30 was very much a long range cartridge. Loved the video!!
I love the 1903 and it's sights I would of put it A tier and the stripper clips aren't bad they are just made for 1 time use
Yeah he did A3 dirty, aperture sights, good weight, excellent front sights, it's literally one of the best WW2 bolt actions.
@@dobridjordje The weight alone is S tier, unless you're some poor Marine told to carry more because the rifle weighs less.
Great video! Thanks.
I bloody love the Lee Enfield No4 Mk.1 .
(I’m being heavily biased)
Don't be dismayed by good-byes. A farewell is necessary before you can meet again. And meeting again, after moments or lifetimes, is certain for those who are friends.
Yea, there is quite a few countries you omited, like Poland, Norway, benelux countries, baltic states, Greece and Yugoslavia, and also a can of warm that would double the lenght of the video - Etiopia.
Also there are some riffles from countries you mentiones that was less prevelent, but does in fact become standard issue, equal to more common ones, like Soviet SVT40 or German STG44
As the rental car rolled to a stop on the dark road, her fear increased by the moment.
So, M1 Garand for best all around battle rifle, and Arisaka Type 99 for best bolt action battle rifle of WW2. I agree.
BS 303 Enfield hands down
The Lee Enfield was the best bolt action rifle of the war no question.
Have fired both, the Arisaka action feels like butter. The Lee Enfield, not so much. Only advantage I see in the LE is the 10 round internal mag. Arisaka action and unbelievable durability are second to none. I would be willing to bet you have never fired the Arisaka. Try it before you have a legitimate opinion.
The Type 38 Carbine was absolute perfection due to its length. 6.5 mm is what everyone is going to now in 2024. Well ahead of its time.
Btw, all I did in my statement is condense what this TH-camr stated in an extended manner.
@@kaitai5900 Let me guess you are Japanese right?
M1 is the only semiautomatic service rifle widely used by a military. The Germans and Russians both had excellent semiautomatic rifle but they weren't widely issued.
W take