MG-34 vrs MG-42 - The Firearms Forum

Ursus · 09-08-2006, 06:01 PM

What are the differences between these two machine guns? The MG-42 seeem to be better, but I dont know why?

Pistolenschutze · 09-08-2006, 10:36 PM

There really isn't a great deal of difference, Bear. The Maschinengewehr 34, first operational in 1934 as the name implies, was designed as a multi-purpose, highly reliable machine gun with an extremely high cyclic rate of fire and it performed admirably in this role. The Maschinengewehr 42 was not greatly changed in design EXCEPT it utilized stamped rather than milled parts, making it much faster and less expensive to produce during wartime. Both designs were air-cooled which meant that the barrels heated up rather quickly with sustained fire. The Krauts compensated for this by making the barrel extremely easy to change out.

southernshooter · 09-08-2006, 10:38 PM

They are both fun

Ursus · 09-09-2006, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pistolenschutze

There really isn't a great deal of difference, The Maschinengewehr 42 was not greatly changed in design EXCEPT it utilized stamped rather than milled parts, making it much faster and less expensive to produce during wartime. Both designs were air-cooled which meant that the barrels heated up rather quickly with sustained fire. The Krauts compensated for this by making the barrel extremely easy to change out.

So ease of manufacture, (no a better performance) was the real reason why the MG-42 was a bit more common, right?

LIKTOSHOOT · 09-09-2006, 03:48 PM

Yes stamped parts and speed of manufacture were important, but barrel swapping wasn`t the safetest or fastest on the 34. The 42 vastly improved this feature and could not only be done faster-it could be done without gloves and without exposing your body.

42 had higher rate of fire-----nearly 400rpm`s faster than the 34.
Very scarey sound, KNOB CREEK will verify that, I cannot imagine, knowing I had to charge the dirrection of one.

LTS

Ursus · 09-09-2006, 06:10 PM

Those are good reasons LIKTOSHOOT. Thanks.

Pistolenschutze · 09-09-2006, 06:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LIKTOSHOOT

Yes stamped parts and speed of manufacture were important, but barrel swapping wasn`t the safetest or fastest on the 34. The 42 vastly improved this feature and could not only be done faster-it could be done without gloves and without exposing your body.

42 had higher rate of fire-----nearly 400rpm`s faster than the 34.
Very scarey sound, KNOB CREEK will verify that, I cannot imagine, knowing I had to charge the dirrection of one

True, LTS. The barrel swapping feature of the 42 was one of its strongest attributes, and very, very necessary with the rate of fire possible with that weapon. Compared to the .30 Browning machinegun--both air and water cooled versions, our primary MG of WWII--the Maschinengewehr was a far more efficient design. The problem the Krauts had with it toward the end of the war though, was that it went through a lot of ammo very quickly, and supplying the 7.92 x 57 rounds it needed came to be something of a problem.

polishshooter · 09-09-2006, 11:41 PM

PS, I have read, recently, that the MG 42 was nowhere near as accurate as the Brownings, (Granted, it threw a HECKUVA "beaten zone...) or the MG 34 and coupled with the rate of fire, it used WAY too much ammo for similar missions...PLUS you throw in the fact that the Germans were MG "Heavy" in their platoons, and cosidered all other infantrymen to be "MG Support," instead of the other way around, it caused a logistical nightmare...

And with the pivoted trigger,the 34 could be fired semi-automatically by pulling the top of the trigger, F/A by pulling the bottom

Pistolenschutze · 09-10-2006, 12:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polishshooter

PS, I have read, recently, that the MG 42 was nowhere near as accurate as the Brownings . . .

That could be true, Polish, I honestly don't know, but I don't see that it is relevant when we are talking about machine guns. The purpose of an MG is to lay down LOTS of fire, not achieve pinpoint accuracy. That is for the riflemen. The Brownings were good, reliable weapons, no doubt about that, but they were really obsolete by the time WWII broke out. Changing out a barrel on one of those critters--and yes, I have helped do it on a similar weapon, the M2 .50--was both time consuming and a pain in the butt. The cyclic rate of fire on the Browning was also rather under par, at least when compared to the 34 or 42 Maschinengewehr. Ballistically, both weapons were pretty close to equal--30-06 v. 7.92 x 57--but the German weapon was a far better design overall.

Ursus · 09-10-2006, 09:53 AM

I've always have the MG-42 as the best WWII MG design. If it was tactically best, could be debatable. I lean to favor it. Maybe germans would had did better arming most of theirs platoons with MG-42, and G-43 or STG-44, instead of Mausers? What do you think, gentlemen?

Pistolenschutze · 09-10-2006, 10:40 AM

I think the Germans made a basic mistake--as did the Brits and the Russians--in not developing a good, reliable semi-automatic rifle for battle use as we did with the Garand. Instead, they relied on the slower bolt-action system that had not changed significantly since World War I. The Germans and the Brits certainly had the technical expertise to do precisely that. So did the Russians for that matter, but they had manufacturing and time-constraint problems that would have made that impractical.

polishshooter · 09-10-2006, 03:40 PM

I always wondered what would have happened had the BRITS adopted the Garand, and WE would have adopted the BREN? Talk about Infantry firepower!

The BAR did well, and was loved by GIs, but actually was just a heavier M1 with a bigger mag, not REALLY a LMG...while the BREN was...

But I think MAYBE the Brits were just a little better off...the Enfield rifle was the CLOSEST thing to a Semi Auto battle rifle of any B/As of the war....and the BREN had it ALL OVER the BAR.....at least for sustained fire....

Ursus · 09-10-2006, 06:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polishshooter

But I think MAYBE the Brits were just a little better off...the Enfield rifle was the CLOSEST thing to a Semi Auto battle rifle of any B/As of the war....and the BREN had it ALL OVER the BAR.....at least for sustained fire....

Agree with you on that.

Monk1544 · 01-20-2011, 03:56 PM

Forgive my ignorance on this question, but does anybody know what class of license would even be required to own or shoot either one of those guns?

Jim K · 01-20-2011, 07:21 PM

The Germans considered the MG.42 to be expendable after so many rounds, pretty much a "throwaway gun", cheap to make but not very durable. I think most of the machinegun fans would advise against buying an MG.42 if you are going to do very much shooting, and buy an MG.34 or a Browning instead. A lot more durable and parts for the Browning are available.

No Federal license is required to buy or own a machinegun. To acquire one, first make sure machineguns are legal to own in your state/locality, and that the chief law enforcement officer will sign a Form 4. Then locate a legally registered and transferable gun that is for sale and you can afford. Then you fill out a Form 4 to apply for permission to transfer the gun, get it signed by the CLEO, and send it to BATFE along with a couple of passport photos and a check for $200. In about 30 days (or more) they will approve or disapprove (the background check itself is little more than the normal NICS check); if they approve, you pick up the gun and pay the man money - lots of it.

Jim

Monk1544 · 01-21-2011, 07:54 AM

Thanks jim... Im sure you can tell I am new on this site.thanks for your time. I was thinking that if someone had one of these guns,or any world war machine gun, they probably inherited it from a family member or something and it wouldnt have had any paper work, being so old.what would happen then?

Jim K · 01-21-2011, 01:08 PM

Assuming you are in the U.S., any machinegun that is not registered with the federal government is contraband, and illegal to own, period. There is currently no way, repeat no way, that such a gun can be made legal or that the owner will be allowed to keep it.

The only feasible and legal action would be to abandon (surrender) the gun to BATFE. I would not advise involving the local police; BATFE is quite familiar with the "found in the attic" scenario and will handle things in an appropriate and professional manner. The chances of prosecution are nil if the owner is actually an innocent party.

It is like moving into a house and finding a kilo of heroin someone left in the closet. You can't legally use it, sell it, parcel it out to your buddies, have a big shootup party, save it for your kid's college expenses or do anything else except turn it into the authorities.

(Guys, please don't get started on the museum donation stories, or how your friend got permission from some Barney Fife deputy to keep his unregistered machineguns, or how if you get a tin badge from a magazine ad you can have all the machineguns you want, etc. I have heard all those stories and they are BS.)

Jim

Monk1544 · 01-21-2011, 02:34 PM

Ok.so if I or anyone else wanted to purchase one, it would have to be from a buyer who had registered it correctly a long time ago, and would have to apply for the permits you mentioned..etc.. Otherwise if there are any still in existence, they would be illegal for anyone to own. I understand now, and I can see why you emphasized A LOT OF MONEY! I imagine if you had an mg you could ask a pretty penny for it .thanks again for sharing your knowledge. I know I would never be able to afford such a gem!

09-08-2006, 06:01 PM	#1
Ursus Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: El Salvador, Central America. Posts: 1,030	MG-34 vrs MG-42 What are the differences between these two machine guns? The MG-42 seeem to be better, but I dont know why? __________________ SI VIS PACEM, PARABELLUM. -->

09-08-2006, 10:36 PM	#2
Pistolenschutze Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Colorado Posts: 13,094	Re: MG-34 vrs MG-42 There really isn't a great deal of difference, Bear. The Maschinengewehr 34, first operational in 1934 as the name implies, was designed as a multi-purpose, highly reliable machine gun with an extremely high cyclic rate of fire and it performed admirably in this role. The Maschinengewehr 42 was not greatly changed in design EXCEPT it utilized stamped rather than milled parts, making it much faster and less expensive to produce during wartime. Both designs were air-cooled which meant that the barrels heated up rather quickly with sustained fire. The Krauts compensated for this by making the barrel extremely easy to change out. __________________ --Pistolenschutze (Pistol Shooter)

09-08-2006, 10:38 PM	#3
southernshooter Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Deep South Mississippi Posts: 5,943	Re: MG-34 vrs MG-42 They are both fun __________________ Only you can see this

09-09-2006, 03:48 PM	#5
LIKTOSHOOT Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 9,367	Re: MG-34 vrs MG-42 Yes stamped parts and speed of manufacture were important, but barrel swapping wasn`t the safetest or fastest on the 34. The 42 vastly improved this feature and could not only be done faster-it could be done without gloves and without exposing your body. 42 had higher rate of fire-----nearly 400rpm`s faster than the 34. Very scarey sound, KNOB CREEK will verify that, I cannot imagine, knowing I had to charge the dirrection of one. LTS

09-09-2006, 06:10 PM	#6
Ursus Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: El Salvador, Central America. Posts: 1,030	Re: MG-34 vrs MG-42 Those are good reasons LIKTOSHOOT. Thanks. __________________ SI VIS PACEM, PARABELLUM.

09-09-2006, 11:41 PM	#8
polishshooter Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Indiana Contributor Posts: 7,860	Re: MG-34 vrs MG-42 PS, I have read, recently, that the MG 42 was nowhere near as accurate as the Brownings, (Granted, it threw a HECKUVA "beaten zone...) or the MG 34 and coupled with the rate of fire, it used WAY too much ammo for similar missions...PLUS you throw in the fact that the Germans were MG "Heavy" in their platoons, and cosidered all other infantrymen to be "MG Support," instead of the other way around, it caused a logistical nightmare... And with the pivoted trigger,the 34 could be fired semi-automatically by pulling the top of the trigger, F/A by pulling the bottom __________________ The problems we face today are there because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.

09-10-2006, 09:53 AM	#10
Ursus Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: El Salvador, Central America. Posts: 1,030	Re: MG-34 vrs MG-42 I've always have the MG-42 as the best WWII MG design. If it was tactically best, could be debatable. I lean to favor it. Maybe germans would had did better arming most of theirs platoons with MG-42, and G-43 or STG-44, instead of Mausers? What do you think, gentlemen? __________________ SI VIS PACEM, PARABELLUM.

09-10-2006, 10:40 AM	#11
Pistolenschutze Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Colorado Posts: 13,094	Re: MG-34 vrs MG-42 I think the Germans made a basic mistake--as did the Brits and the Russians--in not developing a good, reliable semi-automatic rifle for battle use as we did with the Garand. Instead, they relied on the slower bolt-action system that had not changed significantly since World War I. The Germans and the Brits certainly had the technical expertise to do precisely that. So did the Russians for that matter, but they had manufacturing and time-constraint problems that would have made that impractical. __________________ --Pistolenschutze (Pistol Shooter)

09-10-2006, 03:40 PM	#12
polishshooter Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Indiana Contributor Posts: 7,860	Re: MG-34 vrs MG-42 I always wondered what would have happened had the BRITS adopted the Garand, and WE would have adopted the BREN? Talk about Infantry firepower! The BAR did well, and was loved by GIs, but actually was just a heavier M1 with a bigger mag, not REALLY a LMG...while the BREN was... But I think MAYBE the Brits were just a little better off...the Enfield rifle was the CLOSEST thing to a Semi Auto battle rifle of any B/As of the war....and the BREN had it ALL OVER the BAR.....at least for sustained fire.... __________________ The problems we face today are there because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.

01-20-2011, 03:56 PM	#14
Monk1544 Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 5	Re: MG-34 vrs MG-42 Forgive my ignorance on this question, but does anybody know what class of license would even be required to own or shoot either one of those guns?

01-20-2011, 07:21 PM	#15
Jim K Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 6,408	Re: MG-34 vrs MG-42 The Germans considered the MG.42 to be expendable after so many rounds, pretty much a "throwaway gun", cheap to make but not very durable. I think most of the machinegun fans would advise against buying an MG.42 if you are going to do very much shooting, and buy an MG.34 or a Browning instead. A lot more durable and parts for the Browning are available. No Federal license is required to buy or own a machinegun. To acquire one, first make sure machineguns are legal to own in your state/locality, and that the chief law enforcement officer will sign a Form 4. Then locate a legally registered and transferable gun that is for sale and you can afford. Then you fill out a Form 4 to apply for permission to transfer the gun, get it signed by the CLEO, and send it to BATFE along with a couple of passport photos and a check for $200. In about 30 days (or more) they will approve or disapprove (the background check itself is little more than the normal NICS check); if they approve, you pick up the gun and pay the man money - lots of it. Jim

01-21-2011, 07:54 AM	#16
Monk1544 Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 5	Re: MG-34 vrs MG-42 Thanks jim... Im sure you can tell I am new on this site.thanks for your time. I was thinking that if someone had one of these guns,or any world war machine gun, they probably inherited it from a family member or something and it wouldnt have had any paper work, being so old.what would happen then?

01-21-2011, 01:08 PM	#17
Jim K Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 6,408	Re: MG-34 vrs MG-42 Assuming you are in the U.S., any machinegun that is not registered with the federal government is contraband, and illegal to own, period. There is currently no way, repeat no way, that such a gun can be made legal or that the owner will be allowed to keep it. The only feasible and legal action would be to abandon (surrender) the gun to BATFE. I would not advise involving the local police; BATFE is quite familiar with the "found in the attic" scenario and will handle things in an appropriate and professional manner. The chances of prosecution are nil if the owner is actually an innocent party. It is like moving into a house and finding a kilo of heroin someone left in the closet. You can't legally use it, sell it, parcel it out to your buddies, have a big shootup party, save it for your kid's college expenses or do anything else except turn it into the authorities. (Guys, please don't get started on the museum donation stories, or how your friend got permission from some Barney Fife deputy to keep his unregistered machineguns, or how if you get a tin badge from a magazine ad you can have all the machineguns you want, etc. I have heard all those stories and they are BS.) Jim

01-21-2011, 02:34 PM	#18
Monk1544 Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 5	Re: MG-34 vrs MG-42 Ok.so if I or anyone else wanted to purchase one, it would have to be from a buyer who had registered it correctly a long time ago, and would have to apply for the permits you mentioned..etc.. Otherwise if there are any still in existence, they would be illegal for anyone to own. I understand now, and I can see why you emphasized A LOT OF MONEY! I imagine if you had an mg you could ask a pretty penny for it .thanks again for sharing your knowledge. I know I would never be able to afford such a gem!