Your Favorite P-08 Luger - Page 3

Doubs · 08-12-2003, 10:53 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Big Norm:
Doubs, you are right, the Garand gave us a great advantage in the war. But Roosevelt was interested in defeating Hitler first and then the Japanese. So the army got the Garand first. Then the marines in the Pacific. Don't think that for a moment the marines were happy with this situation.
Big Norm<hr /></blockquote>Norm, it's been awhile since I've researched the Garand but as I recall - always open to question - the Marines were offered the Garand about the same time the Army adopted it and rejected it for several reasons. It wasn't accurate enough. It wasted ammunition. And, it was an Army development which made it inferior. In truth, the Marines were hide-bound to keep the Springfield and improved their version with a better front sight and other minor modifications. It took actual combat for them to see the light and admit that their decision wasn't a good one.

I'd have to do a little research to verify it but after the Guadalcanal campaign I don't believe that the Marines conducted any major action with the Springfield as their primary weapon. Once the decision was made to convert, I think the Marines received the Garand pretty quickly.

Heydrich · 08-12-2003, 11:19 AM

Superb reference mm. Let me clarify, for those who didn’t understand the core meaning of my first post in this thread. I was strictly referring to that one crucial psychological issue of the leading National Socialists. Not non sequiturs like economics, cowboys and Indians, cartoons, or what light machine gun might be in an inventory.

Both Speer and Van Manstein wrote of Hitler’s strong romanticism. If anyone gets a chance, look up Hitler’s infatuation with the medieval crackpot conspiracy he swallowed from the notorious forgery, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Goering I have discussed. Himmler was easily the biggest romantic fool of them all. He injected a kind of medieval mysticism into the SS, reportedly believed in sorcery, and it’s true that he built a kind of King Arthurish round table in one of his castles. (What’s your explanation for this Norm?) Hess lived in a romantic fantasy world that is best not discussed. If anything, Germany ushered the world into the modern age despite all these people. There is one account were Hitler once wanted to cancel the V-2 program simply because he had had a bad dream the previous night.

To the moderators, I apologize for injecting this overall OT topic, but this psychological issue had a very strong effect on the German small arms of WW2. (Including the 1941 and 42 Lugers.) If it had been up to Hitler, every typical German soldier also would have been issued a rifle till the end of the War; they literally had to sneak the MP44 by him. He also initially sneered at the Scheisser. Both these issues are facts, not something from the Cartoon Network.

By the way, Goering wasn’t addicted to coke (it was morphine), that observation by Speer on Hitler’s strong romantic pinings was an early war one (not late), and the Wolfschanze was nicknamed the “Wolf’s Lair”. Who needs to realize they missed sometime in their history lessons?

Jimbo · 08-13-2003, 02:39 AM

So am I the only one whose favorite Lugers are the Krieghoffs?

I have a particular fondness for any and all garden variety military Mausers as the workhorses of the Third Reich. That heritage as the sidearm of our formidable enemy makes them somewhat intriguing and special. I am partial to the WWII Lugers. So far and away, the quality of the Krieghoffs makes them my favorites.

PANZERSOLDAT · 08-13-2003, 10:11 AM

Jimbo, I too am fond of the WWII Lugers, especially the Mausers. The Krieghoffs are nice but few of us small collectors can afford to have all the Krieghoff variations due to rarity and price. Mausers are still reasonably affordable and available. It is still possible to collect all the Mauser variations, my Krieghoff is a sole representative piece in my collection.

mm · 08-15-2003, 01:00 AM

Doubs,

Re: SVT-38 & SVT-40. You are right "Millions" were not manufactured, but well over ONE MILLION were put into service including sniper variations. But I am correct in that it was a regular service rifle of the Red Army (albeit issued to NCOs) because it was not "Peasant Proof" like the MN. Did you know that the Germans prized the SVT-40 and even had inventory names and numbers for the large number that were captured and re-issued to German and Axis troops. Well over a million qualifies it as a mass-issued semi-auto of WWII. Yes it was fragile, but so was the M-16 in its first few years of issue. mm

trigger643 · 08-15-2003, 06:33 AM

The SVT-38 & SVT-40 were fragile weapons, but compared to the G and K-43 and G-41 the germans had been issued it was arguably a superior weapon and this would explain the german infantryman's desire to have one. I've never owned an SVT, but have had several dozen g and k-43s. They are, IMHO, junk and I fail to see the allure of them, my own infatuation having worn off two decades ago.

As for Kreighoff, I forgot to add a Ku to my wish list of favorites

08-12-2003, 10:53 AM	#41
Doubs User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Byron, Georgia Posts: 1,671 Thanks: 772 Thanked 1,617 Times in 526 Posts	</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Originally posted by Big Norm: <strong>Doubs, you are right, the Garand gave us a great advantage in the war. But Roosevelt was interested in defeating Hitler first and then the Japanese. So the army got the Garand first. Then the marines in the Pacific. Don't think that for a moment the marines were happy with this situation. Big Norm</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Norm, it's been awhile since I've researched the Garand but as I recall - always open to question - the Marines were offered the Garand about the same time the Army adopted it and rejected it for several reasons. It wasn't accurate enough. It wasted ammunition. And, it was an Army development which made it inferior. In truth, the Marines were hide-bound to keep the Springfield and improved their version with a better front sight and other minor modifications. It took actual combat for them to see the light and admit that their decision wasn't a good one. I'd have to do a little research to verify it but after the Guadalcanal campaign I don't believe that the Marines conducted any major action with the Springfield as their primary weapon. Once the decision was made to convert, I think the Marines received the Garand pretty quickly.

08-15-2003, 01:00 AM	#45
mm User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: SFBAY Posts: 82 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Doubs, Re: SVT-38 & SVT-40. You are right "Millions" were not manufactured, but well over ONE MILLION were put into service including sniper variations. But I am correct in that it was a regular service rifle of the Red Army (albeit issued to NCOs) because it was not "Peasant Proof" like the MN. Did you know that the Germans prized the SVT-40 and even had inventory names and numbers for the large number that were captured and re-issued to German and Axis troops. Well over a million qualifies it as a mass-issued semi-auto of WWII. Yes it was fragile, but so was the M-16 in its first few years of issue. mm __________________ mjm

08-15-2003, 06:33 AM	#46
trigger643 User Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Murfreesboro Posts: 502 Thanks: 0 Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts	The SVT-38 & SVT-40 were fragile weapons, but compared to the G and K-43 and G-41 the germans had been issued it was arguably a superior weapon and this would explain the german infantryman's desire to have one. I've never owned an SVT, but have had several dozen g and k-43s. They are, IMHO, junk and I fail to see the allure of them, my own infatuation having worn off two decades ago. As for Kreighoff, I forgot to add a Ku to my wish list of favorites __________________ "There are three reasons to own a gun: To protect yourself and your family, to hunt dangerous and delicious animals, and to keep the King of England out of your face." Ã¢?? Krusty the Clown

08-12-2003, 11:19 AM	#42
Heydrich Banned Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Oregon Posts: 181 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Superb reference mm. Let me clarify, for those who didn’t understand the core meaning of my first post in this thread. I was strictly referring to that one crucial psychological issue of the leading National Socialists. Not non sequiturs like economics, cowboys and Indians, cartoons, or what light machine gun might be in an inventory. Both Speer and Van Manstein wrote of Hitler’s strong romanticism. If anyone gets a chance, look up Hitler’s infatuation with the medieval crackpot conspiracy he swallowed from the notorious forgery, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Goering I have discussed. Himmler was easily the biggest romantic fool of them all. He injected a kind of medieval mysticism into the SS, reportedly believed in sorcery, and it’s true that he built a kind of King Arthurish round table in one of his castles. (What’s your explanation for this Norm?) Hess lived in a romantic fantasy world that is best not discussed. If anything, Germany ushered the world into the modern age despite all these people. There is one account were Hitler once wanted to cancel the V-2 program simply because he had had a bad dream the previous night. To the moderators, I apologize for injecting this overall OT topic, but this psychological issue had a very strong effect on the German small arms of WW2. (Including the 1941 and 42 Lugers.) If it had been up to Hitler, every typical German soldier also would have been issued a rifle till the end of the War; they literally had to sneak the MP44 by him. He also initially sneered at the Scheisser. Both these issues are facts, not something from the Cartoon Network. By the way, Goering wasn’t addicted to coke (it was morphine), that observation by Speer on Hitler’s strong romantic pinings was an early war one (not late), and the Wolfschanze was nicknamed the “Wolf’s Lair”. Who needs to realize they missed sometime in their history lessons?

08-13-2003, 02:39 AM	#43
Jimbo User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: SF CA Posts: 167 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	So am I the only one whose favorite Lugers are the Krieghoffs? I have a particular fondness for any and all garden variety military Mausers as the workhorses of the Third Reich. That heritage as the sidearm of our formidable enemy makes them somewhat intriguing and special. I am partial to the WWII Lugers. So far and away, the quality of the Krieghoffs makes them my favorites.

08-13-2003, 10:11 AM	#44
PANZERSOLDAT User Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: CLARKSVILLE, TN Posts: 24 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Jimbo, I too am fond of the WWII Lugers, especially the Mausers. The Krieghoffs are nice but few of us small collectors can afford to have all the Krieghoff variations due to rarity and price. Mausers are still reasonably affordable and available. It is still possible to collect all the Mauser variations, my Krieghoff is a sole representative piece in my collection.