Sten vs MP40
Вставка
- Опубліковано 6 жов 2024
- This is a table-top review and comparison of two of the most recognizable SMGs of WWII: the Sten and the MP40. We will start by laying out the historical foundation of the two and then move through a point-by-point comparison. Which one would you have carried in WWII?
Photo Sources:
Wikipedia
German War Machines
Britanica
USHMM
wikimedia
guns fandom
MarksmanTV is a registered trademark owned by Marksman Shooting Sports, LLC. It offers its content to its viewers free of charge. Content shared on this channel is distributed strictly for informational, educational and entertainment purposes only. MarksmanTV encourages its viewers to follow all state and Federal laws. Nothing MarksmanTV publishes should be considered as legal advice.
Fun fact: 12000 STENs were produced in bicycle workshops, using material from hospital beds, by the Polish underground.
I've read that the Poles said they made some improvements . I would believe them .
I've always liked the fact that the Sten can be fired in a prone position without requiring you to be a contortionist.
That was a BIG plus, as with its predecessor the Landchester.
and it’s sister weapon the Owen gun which made jungle fighting much easier
@@djlewis5149 Yes. The Owen was a good gun. Probably better than the Sten but not so cheap, easy and quick to manufacture, the qualities that made Sten the right gun for Britain. Might be interesting to see a comparison of the Owen and the Sten Mk5 the late war version of better quality; MP40 vs Sten MK5 also.
The sten solved a problem for a financially stressed British govt. The thompsons they purchased from the US pre war were expensive. So the Brits looked into producing a sub machine gun that would get the job done at a low cost to mass manufacture. And here you get the Sten. Which, did its job. It wasn't meant to be pretty, or finely crafted. It fired when you wanted it to, it was easy to maintain, and cheap to produce.
Very crude. The grease gun was a better alternative
@@crypticreality8484 The grease gun was comparable to the sten but not superior . Also it used 45 ammunition which was generally unavailable in Europe and ran out on the gun too soon . The 9mm was in common use and was extremely effective although smaller than the US ammo . I would not want to face either of them .
Quality detail mate. But MP40 has done some awful things and it’s German design
The Sten was designed in 1940. Before Pearl Habour and lease lend was not in place at the time. The grease gun is a copy.
@@crypticreality8484the Weird thing about the Greaser was that it looked like a relative of the MP-40!!!! But w/ a Bigger Round!!!!;);)
Its like comparing a BIC razor to an electric shaver. The sten was meant to be cheap and nasty.
Apropos of nothing at all the Bic razor gives a much better shave than an electric so it really is a good comparison.
The sten was meant to be cheap and nasty....and jam.
@@chuckschillingvideos Everything that I've read about it says that used properly it was reliable . The magazine could be jammed like the German M40 or the Thompson big magazine.
@freebeerfordworkers I've heard that too . I think basically there were some simple rules and it worked reliably like most machine guns . It don't think the sten is recognised for the major contribution it made for the allies .
Germany ultimately copied the Sten and made other last ditch weapons because they finally realised (way too late) that lots of no-frills machine guns is better than making a handful of more sophisticated machine guns. It's kind of funny that the US, Great Britain and Russia all made stamped metal guns out of the wazoo while Germany kind of dithered.
The later versions of the Sten worked pretty well and mostly solved the jamming issues. The Canadian versions were supposed to be pretty good as well. Just don't hold it by the magazine!
The German version of the STEN was the MP3008 and the magwell was in the vertical position. It used the MP40 magizine.
Irony... Brits copied the Germans, Brits become desperate and make a cheap version, Germany gets desperate and then copies the Brits.
You can also use MP-40 magazines in a Sten, but not Sten magazines in an MP-40. They doesn't fit, they are a little bit wider. I have tried, I own an MP-40 and 4 Sten's. The MP-40 is a BNZ-42 and the Sten's are two Mk2's, one Mk3 and one Mk5.
@@WhattAreYouSaying That's probably because the STEN was originally designed for resistance warfare... to allow using the enemies ammo in occupied territory.
@@WhattAreYouSaying I never knew that. STEN mags were always the Achilles heel. When I had malfunctions with my STEN they were always mag related. MP-40 mags are generally more reliable.
@@babalonkie They probably had that in mind when the Sten was desgined. So they could use captured MP-38/40 magazines if necessary. The Sten magazine was derived from the Lanchester magazine, which was a clone of the German MP-28. It is very likely that MP-28 magazines can be used in a Sten also. Lanchester magazines can be used in a Sten, and the Lanchester is a copy of the MP-28, including the magazine.
The original concept of the MP38/MP40 was to arm the squad leader with a higher rate of fire weapon to support the MG 34/42. The 98K armed rifleman and the sole MP38/40 were there to do that and provide the attacking formation. The battle unit concept early in the war centered around the LMG.
I wish he had also included the Amerikan M3 "grease gun" submachine gun in the comparison.
The Sten might be *easier* than the MP40 for maintenance, but the MP40 is still *easy* to disassemble and maintain. It is also much more accurate and comfortable to shoot, so I always find it weird when people say they prefer the Sten.
Thank you! At last someone with some common sense. The sten was made to be quick, easy, and cheap to produce. It wasn't made to be a good gun. It couldn't be with the main focus of its design brief. Tbh it's a miracle it was as functional as it was considering the speed of its RnD.
@christskingdomiscoming5964 I guess. Just from all reports of people who shot both, the MP40 pretty much wins unanimously as the better gun to shoot. Making it the better gun. When you start taking into account logistics and manufacturing times and easy, the sten is the clearer winner. And you see the sten get progressively upgrades in its fit n finish as the allies have time and money to do so. They knew it was a flawed gun compared to the MP40.
@christskingdomiscoming5964 but it is poor design, having that magazine side mounted was not a good choice. We KNOW this to be true, the Germany's knew this, the Americans knew this - both ahead of us in SMG production and R&D at the time (probably still are tbh lol). Don't get me wrong sten did the job it needed to do at the quickest and cheapest way it could but it was compromised because of this. It was not a good SMG it just was good enough, and that's all it had to be. Compare it to an MP40 or even the Thompson it was just lacking. We just copied an older German SMG design with a side magazine because it was better for trench warfare. But WW2 saw little of that compared to WW1. The sten was out of date before it was even made.
Sure it was easier to fire from prone because of the side magazine, but a feature not all that useful in a gun made to quickly sweep though buildings and alike going prone with it would have limited use and function. At the ranges SMG were effective going prone really wouldn't have helped you all that much. Running to good hard cover would be often the better choice. Going prone and returning fire with a rifle at 200+ meters sure that could makes sense but at such ranges an SMG is all but useless, except for maybe suppression - getting people to duck n cover. But magazine capacity and accuracy would make it poor at that, that's what guns like the BAR and Bren were for. And the could reliability hit n kill at that range too which is why they were far better at it. All in all the sten was a good little gun in that very small and unique situation in history. Otherwise it's garbage.
@christskingdomiscoming5964 I get what you're saying but it's inaccurate at best disingenuous at worst. We know bottom fed magazines are the best when we are talking about a simple in line feeding magazine. Side mounted unbalances the gun creating unpredictable and harder to control recoil. Top fed obscures aiming down sights and interferes with fire from the left shoulder (assuming sights are set up for right hand shooting), which is desirable when taking corners aiming right - you can do it without shifting shoulders but is not the best way to tackle such an obstacle. Also top loading guns are typically gravity fed limiting rof - not necessarily and issues but a side effect that might not be desirable.
The best way for a gun to be fed is from the bottom, if we are going with simplicity. You can have top loaded rotating feeds like on the FN P90 for example but it is much more complex, and therefore more expensive and harder to maintain. There is a very good reason why modern day SMG, pistol, assault rifle, battle rifle, DMR, sniper rifle etc are all bottom magazine fed weapons, or by in large - sure there are a few curve balls about like the aforementioned FN P90, but let's be honest that doesn't see much service.
Bottom feeding magazines are simply the best all round way to feed a gun ammo, some other systems may have a niche advantage in a particular situation or use, but when you add upon all the pros n cons it's a well known fact bottom fed magazines is the way to go.
Obviously back in 1920/30/40 this might have not been so obvious... but it was pretty much an accepted fact. By the 50's it was forgone conclusion. God knows why we went with the sterling. I can only assume for ease of use as a lot of our people had been trained on a very similar weapon. So kept cost down after a war that we were very much feeling the financial burden of.
An obvious caveat here is belt fed weapons but I hope that really should go without saying :)
@christskingdomiscoming5964 At no point have I claimed or denied the magazine feeding issues. It's not something I've committed to directly. This is something you keep talking about. And I have said things like 'I agree with you but...' Or 'I get what you're saying but...' I don't think at any point I made any claims about feeding issues. You seem to think my dislike of side-mounted magazines stems from the belief in feeding issues with them. It doesn't. It's all about function and how it offers nothing of value to a gun but issue, for a very minor advantage in going prone.
You state that side-mounted magazines don't affect a weapon balance 'much' but it does affect balance, and it does make the recoil less predictable.
Not much IS something and the further out you shoot the bigger that 'not much' becomes - that's a fact. Also, it makes the weapon bulkier, and the magazine is more likely to snag on things with a side-mounted magazine, again most likely 'not much' but it IS more likely. It makes it harder to store, something they knew even with the sten. When you have thousands of guns that IS a big issue. Adding more complexity to a weapon to get around this. When you can just mount the mag a different way.
'We' that includes you as I am now 100% sure you are being disingenuous. We know bottom fed magazines are overall best - as stated before sure some other magazines fed system may have a niche advantage in some situations. Still, nothing ticks as many boxes for over all best use than bottom-fed.
Look at USA and USSR from the 50's both making gas blowback bottom fed assault/battle rifles, the British bought the FN-FAL to be there battle rifle and started work on their own idea of a bullpup bottom fed assault rifle EM1 EM2. W Germany used the FN-FAL, E Germany StG 44. The list goes on post WW2 you see side mounted magazines just vanishing until they are just not used.
Now if bullet technology was flipped on it's head tomorrow and we could make bullets that were caseless, or didn't have to be round, or that had as much power as a standard bullet with 1/2 the propellant - or anything else like that or a combination of the above... Then maybe we might want to look at other feeding methods for guns - but as it stands with current bullet technology bottom fed is the best all round feeding
system.
I like Ian MuCollum but he's not a weapon designer/engineer. He is extremely knowledgeable on gun engineering and history but he still is not a gun designer or engineer. I'd take Brenden Herrera's word over Ian's on this - he's actually a gun designer and engineer as well as a fully qualified and registered gun smith. That would be IF I was going to take one man's opinion to form my own opinion...
I don't take the words of one man. I listen and look at many... The gun market shows unequivocally that you're wrong, side fed magazines are NOT as good as bottom feeding. Now you can rant on at me all you like but I know the facts as seen by the market of weapons and milliraty weapon adoption. The wealthiest nations who spend the most money on military spending all have bottom fed weapons.
That's my historical reference literally the history of weapons design and manufacture at a international military adoption level. Hell, I could broaden that to military weapons tested and still be pretty confident no side-mounted magazine weapons have even been considered by modern militaries.
Even looking at the civilian market the results bear out the same as well. We don't see any side-mounted magazine weapons being used at competition level ether - were getting every last little advantage out of your gun can and will be done - arguably this is the most telling field for how your love of side mounted magazines is ill-placed.
You can live in you little niche part of the internet that thinks otherwise, that's up to you but you are wrong.
Having tried both, the MP40 is MUCH nicer to shoot...
having owned many of each the canadian sten was more fun to shoot the mp40 is much cooler looking and can buy 5 sten for a mp40 and were getting sten mags for $3ea when mp40 were $69 now you can't get sten mags in canada but mp40 mags will work in stens
@@vaughanerwin7195
But we aren't talking about NOW. It's is the MP40 better then the Sten MK II.
@@kirkstinson7316 never used any in a war but the sten was more fun to blast away with and it matters who made it British stens would misfire etc a lot, the Canadian you could mag dump all day and they had a finger guard, barrel was pined to the barrel nut more accurate. FA sten are not legal anymore in Canada everyone has one of course;) mp 40 has mag well issues and the spring /buffer assy did not like sand so canadian sten over mp40, mp 40 over british sten, at the time I take the mg34 it a tack driver any idea what the U was cut in the mp40 mag well for? they say ad hoc mag loader or to help un jam the mag? what you think
The Sten gun answered the requirement for a cheap fairly lightweight weapon for CQB and Commandos, hence the side magazine. The UK was not the only country with side Magazines, Germany also had them in the MP 18, FG 42 and MP 3008 but they fell out of favour. Side magazines allow the user to get closer to the ground and engage almost flat. The Sterling L2A3 Sub machine gun also had side magazines and it was a pretty good weapon for what it was designed for. The UK already had a sub machine gun in the likes of the Lanchester, but like the Thompson machine gun it was expensive to produce and also used some wood in its construction and wood was very much a material in demand in aircraft still. Gravity also plays a part in having a side magazine as well, not just the magazine falling out but how it is fed.
So for what it did and the requirements placed on its manufacture and cost it fitted the bill, even if it was very rudimentary and not the prettiest weapon going it did the job more or less. America also had the same problem and thus came up with the M3 sub machine gun (Grease Gun) which at the time cost $15 to make, the Sten cost $10 to make. The Thompson at the time cost around $45 to make and sold for around $200.
Can’t remember the source(sure it was YT), but that hook-like object under the muzzle was a stop to prevent the barrel from sliding off the top of a half track and firing directly into the armor and then ricocheting inside the passenger compartment.
Not sure how accurate that version is. Just food for thought.
yep , essentially a hook so you could fire on the move from vehicles. nothing to do with barrel protection!
Gotta love the Germans.
Even when they are building a "cheap" mass-producible gun, it's still over-complicated.
I wonder what it's like to live in a world that cares that much about quality....
I grew up in the US, all our shit comes from China.
They build quality firearms 👍
They say that due to the high exact tolerance on German weapons ,that was a big drawback fighting in the sub zero temps in Russia as the guns sometimes refused to fire .
Russian weapons more crudely produced kept firing .
German military small arms were not overcomplicated.
The cheapest Sten Guns were produced in Northern Ireland for 12 shillings and six pence at the time $3 and 6 cents. Also a toy designer and manufacturer one the Lines Brothers helped to simplify the design before it went into manufacture.
My late Mother worked at Lines Brothers in Merton, South London. She ended up as a Line Supervisor, but rarely talked about it.
Line Bros manufactured the Mark III Sten, which was even more simplified. The magazine well was fixed as was the barrel, so when it wore out, you might as well throw the entire gun away.
She described it as “a piece of rubbish!” The Mark III Sten was definitely, much inferior, to the Mark II, (which was the most produced, and popular Sten model and was the one shown in this video.)
The later Mark 5 Sten was the Rolls Royce version of the Sten with a wooden butt stock, and fore grip and much better sights.
Unfortunately the wooden foregrip tended to break, so it was quickly deleted from later Mark 5 models. Mark 5 Stens were used at Arnhem and there are quite a few pictures of Paras carrying and or using them.
Dad said they cost 7s6d and if they jammed they were thrown away.
For historical context, the Stop Order which allowed the British to assemble and evacuate at Dunkirk was following the battle of Arras in which British Matilda Mk I and ii tanks engaged the Wehrmacht and although didn't halt the advance, they did delay the advance and make Hitler have concerns over the level of resistance to come. He didn't want his spearhead troops to advance to far ahead of the follow up troops and get cut off so he ordered a Halt. This allowed time for the evacuation. Without this the British might have lost 350,000 men killed or prisoners, which could have been the end of the war right then. Not a massive battle in terms of numbers but gigantic in terms of historical impact, effectively enabling the British, and commonwealth and free French allies, to continue to fight on, and the rest as they say is history.
seems some brits are in urgent need of bravery tales. The BEF simply ran faster than the germans could follow it, leaving the french alone to fight .Later on some brits dare to call the french cowards.fun fact later on the brits tried to "liberate" Madagascar. its no fun to have britain as ally(:-)
@@michaelpielorz9283 Gee, so the French 2nd and 9th armies didn't collapse and put the BEF at risk, which forces it ti withdraw? And the Vichy regime didn't collaborate with the Nazis? Good to know. Thanks.
@@michaelpielorz9283 Bollocks. The French crumbled, as did Belgium , the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Denmark and Norway. The British had no option but to GTFO. Without this tactical withdrawal the entire continent of Europe would have been under Nazi control .
Could I possibly surmise that you have a very dodgy understanding of history due to the fact that you are American?
@@michaelpielorz9283I see you're no fan of the Brits! Maybe they should have made peace with Hitler and left you and the Germans to it?
@@michaelpielorz9283 that is some exceptional bullshit. Are you saying there wasn't a stop order? Also, you ever looked up how many French troops were evacuated on British ships? And finally, you realise Vichy France were allied with the Nazis?
A downside of the STEN not mentioned is the lack of a good place for the shooter's left hand. The perforated barrel shroud was intended for off hand, unfortunately, the entire gun heated up quickly, particularly the area from the mag well forward to the muzzle. Troops were tempted to use the magazine as a handhold, but that practice provoked misfeeds and jamming. This problem wasn't fixed until the Mark VI version equipped with a wooden foregrip was issued in early 1944.
My grandad loved his mp38/40.
he vaz onlee obaying orders.......ja
There is no advantage in having a fire selector. Firing a single round (in full auto) is easy, even for a beginner, just by immediately releasing the trigger. The time for the second round to load is significantly longer than between the succeeding rounds. On the Carl-Gustaf (Swedish K) we were taught to fire two round bursts (aim low - barrel rises slightly for the second round) which is doable but requires practice as there is a shorter interval between the second and third round as the bolt picks up speed.
Having the magazine on the side might seem like an advantage, but in practice you need to put your head up to see above grass and other obstacles - so in practice there would be little difference. And a fully loaded magazine would add significant torque.
The "hook" on the barrel of the MP40 was for preventing the barrel to recoil back into a vehicle if you were firing through an opening. Firing from the inside of a vehicle is not a great idea - lots of noise and hot brass...
If you would prefer the Sten over the MP 40 in combat, you have never fired a Sten or been in combat.
Yea. An extremely crude weapon
The magazine is and was the downfall of the MP40, but it's still a fantastic sub gun
I have used a Sten. And did not encounter any problems! You sir, are talking bull!!!
@@DerekLangdon I noticed you avoided the other half of the equation.
If you’re a country in war, and have to arm your army as quickly and as cheaply as possible, so you can fight, you’ll choose the STEN.
I trained with the Sten. It was crude and prone to jamming. Hold by the mag it would jam. Drop it and it would misfire. But it was cheap, easy to operate and got the job done if its deficiencies were understood and respected.
Mythical bulls***ers seem to be out in force!!
My grandfather was a Royal Marine Commando and founding member of the SAS... He hated the STEN.
It had one saving feature.
It was available in numbers.
@@julianshepherd2038 my grandad said he would always swap his Sten with a new rifle from a fresh Private under him... For many reasons.
thats why they gave them a dagger aswell...
@@julianshepherd2038 Yep. A bit like Shermans or T-34s. It didn't matter if they were only a tenth as good as a Tiger - if you could manufacture and field 100 times as many. 🤔
@@jimbokilo
Threaded muzzle for a blank firing adaptor for training.
Both have same rate of fire at 550rpm. Between the two I would go with the Sten for the same reasons you gave. The Israeli Army or IDF manufactured and used the Sten extensively before they developed the Uzi SMG.
Hello. I have been to Normandie 26 times for the D-DAY CEREMONIES. British Commando, Paratrooper, and other British veterans told me many times, that they traded their STENs for captured MP-40’s,
Several Germans at Arnhem used captured stenguns (MKV) during and after the battle. They liked that it could be used in the prone position. Probably a case of the grass is greener on the other side. Although also met veterans who liked the stengun. Could be that the MKV stengun was a more refined, better finished gun from factuary level.
From what I read is that due to house to house fighting at the bridge is the reason Germans traded their K98Ks for a STEN!
@@genegarren833 rEAD WHERE?
Bulls*** bud, absolute Bulls***!!!
Another piece that would be interesting to match up would be the American M3 "Grease Gun." I am a big fn of German arms, and the MP40 is a beautiful piece of equipment. Having said that, I agree with the assessment of the advantages offered by the Sten.
Yes, because when I am in a trench expecting a huge enemy assault, the foremost thing on my mind is, "Gee, I'm sure glad my gun was easy and cheap to produce"
@@mattclements1933fine, you can have a bolt-action rifle that fought in the last war then!
@@kristianhartlevjohansen3541
The British began WWII with the SMLE (Lee Enfield number 3) but later went on to the Number 1 Mark 4 which was a bit lighter and had better sights. It was considered the best Lee Enfield with the smoothest action.
Many Canadian soldiers carried an SMLE right through the war. My Father was in the Canadian Lorne Scots and he carried one in Italy.
@@mattclements1933 it could very well be my bayonet will be good enough lol
Otto Skorzeny liked very much the Sten, and asked for something similar to be produced for German army, but was not taken seriously. So he used a british cipher to ask for some boxes of Sten submachines pretending he was a partisan, and british army pleased him launching them by parachute.
A true Mark Felton "nonfictional" story. next week he will uncover "The german most wanted copy of british firearms!!
@@michaelpielorz9283you know him so well🤣
Once heard a strange story about the threads on the mp 40. Supposedly they had a grenade launcher kit consisting of a little cup discharger with rifling about 26mm diameter inside like a flare gun they would fire a blank with a small mostly bakelite grenade. You see the grenades occasionally they're a pointy usually brown bakelite cylinder with precut rifling and pointed nose but The launcher cups ard incredibly rare nowadays
MP-40 for me. At least till the Sterling comes.
Errors in the design history:
1) The Lanchester was design started in 1940 (not pre-war) and is in fact a reverse-engineered MP28, which was a improvement of the original MP18.
2) The Sten was designed as a way of simplifying the Lanchester and making it cheaper to produce.
3) The British stopped buying Thompson SMGs mainly due to the cost - they needed their money to buy things before Lend-Lease was passed and expensive SMGs were not on the list.
4) The side feeding magazine started with the MP18 using the only available magazine, rather than design one from scratch, which was the snail magazine that fitted a Luger. It was NOT so you could lie down easier!
5) Yes the double stack single feed magazine was a problem that was solved then the British adopted the Stirling SMG as that had a double stack double feed magazine with rollers. It was probably the best magazine ever designed & the Stirling was designed as an improvement on the Sten.
There's no evident problem mounting a snail magazine vertically. It was mounted that way in the Luger. I think the side mounting in the MP18 was precisely about firing from prone. The Thompson apparently was designed to fire standing. The MP38 had a vertical mag because it was designed to collapse into a small flat package for convenient storage in vehicles.
@@defenderoftheadverb The MP18 was expected to be used from a trench firing position over the parapet as well as storming into an entrenched position so wanted to be no higher than a rifle.
Excellent video, thanks. I've spoken to three people who had used the STEN in actual combat. 1st person: It was adequate - barely, but you could soon get something better. 2nd person: It was treacherous - it would go off at the wrong time - even if just left propped up against a wall. 3rd person: it wasn't as good as the American or German guns, but, oh yes, it WAS an effective weapon [said with a murderous glint in his eyes].
You made that up though.
@@snowflakemelter1172nah sounds about right. Sten was fucking shit SMG. BUT it did the job it needed to do with an insanely short RnD turn around, as well as speed and ease of production. That was the focus of the sten. Not to be a good gun, to be a quick, cheap and easy gun to make... because of this, it was NOT a good gun. It was good enough... just lol.
@@snowflakemelter1172you mean you think he didn't just run into 3 people who fought with the sten in battle 😂
@@andymaciver1760 when people make up these stories they all read the same , post war myths they read online woven into a fake story to pretend it has authenticity.
The bolt slams forward after the last round on both weapons. The Thompson M1A1 bolt looks back after the last round is fired.
Excellent video,as a side note in addition to the Lend-Lease arms that the US provided us with after Dunkirk the American public also made a contribution by donating their own private firearms resulting in the appearance of Winchester,Marlin and Savage rifles and an assortment of pistols and revolvers that were issued to the Local Defence Volunteers aka the 'Home Guard'.
I can only imagine that finding the correct ammunition for such a variety of calibres must have been a logistical nightmare.
I’ve fired both in full auto form and the MP 40 handles better and stays on target.
I’ll take the Sten mostly because I own one. Great smooth shooting SMG.
Schmeisser held the patent for the MP-40's double stack, single feed magazine, while Vollmer held the patent for the telescoping mainspring hosing. Royalties were paid on each gun and magazine produced.
Personally I'm fond of the aesthetics of the sten but both are awesome.
Sten for the win!
(MP40 for resale/investment value)
10,000 Stens were dropped into France by the British during WW2 and only a few were handed in after the war ended.
Sometime in the 1980's a British Parliamentarian demanded of the French President- "What are you going to do about all those Stens under people's beds"?
The French President responded "They are there for next time"!
Viva Le France!
Cheers for that, it was a very interesting and informative take on two very iconic WW2 weapons.
As I understand one of the faults of Mp was you couldn’t use it prone.
Sorry to add a second comment...Allegedly, according to 3 of my uncles who served in WWII, the term "Schmeisser" was due to magazines being stamped thusly on guns that had been captured. It appears that Hugo Schmeisser wanted credit for his contribution of the magazine design...likely a royalty on them as well.
Basically any light engineering firms in Germany were making these; Schmeisser, Erma, Haenel, Steyr and Pfaff (who were - and still are - otherwise famous for making sewing machines)
Those must have been pre war productions then right? Cause I got some WW2 german army stuff and it all has a 3 letter code instead of company stamp so if it gets captured, it doesnt come with a return adress for allied bomb delivery.
Very good video! I own both an MP-38, MP-40 and 4 Sten's. The MP-38 is made by Erma in 1941, the MP-40 is a Steyr 1942. The Sten's are two Sten Mk2's, one Mk3 and one Mk5. They are very interesting guns.
The Sten will be forever known as the gun that jammed during the Renard Heydrik assassin !
the Sten will be forever know as the gun of the good that fought the evil that used the MP40
@@DarrenMalin It's nothing but a silly piece of dirt cheap yet somewhat functional scrap...
That's why they carried grenades, and let the bastard expire slowly.
The sten could be produced in huge numbers like the Sherman tank and that's what was needed to win the war...
" Never mind the quality feel the width"
@@lookandlisten5740 The Forgotten Weapons channel is analysing all 4 versions of the sten.
Ian (gun Jesus) who presents the channel, has figures on production rate and order size.
This is from memory (Could be mis-remembered).
Contracts for 500,000 per order.
Production of 1,000 per shift.
That's a lot of Dakka.
I'm awestruck by the quantities of ammo that must have followed.
Excellent review. Very informative.
The problem with the magazines was the cost. A complete set of 8 magazines could easily cost more than the actual weapon so they did not put so much effort on the magazines. The Sten is actually the MP28 simplified to the extreme. That explains the similarities like the side magazine and the single shot option.
The STEn and the MP38/40/3008 magazines were interchangeable and of the same design, early STEn magazines were considered to be of inferior quality. Might have been worth a mention.
I have had the privilege of fireing both of them in my life and i must say i enjoyed it alot, the only down side was it took longer to load the magazine's then it did to empty them!
Did you go rent them, or did you know someone?
I been thinking about going to a rental place to shoot some of these historic guns.
@@deejayimm i knew a guy, i also knew another guy that had a tec9 and a uzi i got to play with that was fun as well but even back when ammo was cheep it got expensive rill fast
Nice presentation. The Sten is actually a very robust and reliable SMG. Lots of bad urban legend lies about it. I too would pick it over the MP40 to use.
while playing in the Kindergarten .
Equiping battlefield soldiers with a Sten appears to me like a war crime
Stens were produced by aToy company during the War. Making a Pressed Stamped Toy Lorry (Truck) wasn't that far from the Presses Stamped Furniture on Sten Gun. Also Churchill remarked on the creation of the Sten " now set Europe a blaze" a nod to the Resistance.
This is a quite superb upload, from the history, details and everything in between I’m sincerely impressed and I have subscribed just now. I’m English and obviously we’re not schooled in weapons or especially firearms and I have been getting exhausted looking for the necessary information on whatever weapons I come across during my reading and streaming simply because there’s too many channels that specifically focus on certain variants such as equivalents, gun details but far too much details for my needs and so on but I’m really looking forward to trawling through your videos and I wish you the very best. Dave, Liverpool, England.🇬🇧🙏🇺🇸📚👍
There are lots of photos of British and Commonwealth troops in Normandy using battlefield pickup MP40s instead of their "Tuppenny Woolworth" guns.
conversely I have not heard of German soldiers using captured sten guns
@@WagesOfDestruction MP3008 - they made their own copy (Just with the mag pointing down)
@WanderlustZero my point was have you ever heard of a German soldier armed with a MP40 taking a sten to use? Surely this said something as we do know British soldiers with armed with sten taking MP40 to use
@@WagesOfDestruction counterpoint: Have you ever heard of the British copying the MP38/40? No but I have heard of the Germans copying the Sten.
@WanderlustZero yes I have heard of the British copying the mp40, the mcem2
When manufacturing a firearm, you have to make a 4-way compromise: 1) easy to mass produce 2) good ergonomics 3) functions well 4) is cheap. The British needed a sub gun to be cheap and easy to manufacture. The Germans focused on ergonomics and engineering.
The original sten was redesigned by Hornby the toy manufacturer that reduced the number of parts and reduced the man hours to build one down to 5hrs and the cost to 11 pounds vs 200 pounds for a thompson
Great video.
I would select the MP 40.
Later in the war. Germany made an EXACT copy of the Sten. Right down to the lettering.They then made a version with a vertical magazine like the MP40.
Did some German soldiers not prefer captured Stens because they could use them closer to cover. Great video by the way.
One was a quality weapon . The sten was created just because the British captured unimaginable quantities of 9mm rounds from the Italians. They needed something to use it.
Is that right...?
@@DarrenWalley not even slightly
When we were kids in the 60's and 70' s we never read about Mp38 or Mp40, in our comics was it not called a " Schmeiser"
The magazine well says MP-38...
(Nice vid btw),,,,👍👍
I prefer the look of the MP4. However, I agree that the Sten is superior as the weapon I would have wanted in the trenches and on the battle field.
Are you high. The sten is probably one of the worst SMG ever made. It was cheap, easy and quick to manufacture and was just good enough to be a functional SMG. As that's what this British need at the time. We did not have the time, money, or resources to make a good SMG after Dunkirk, we just needs a gun ASAP. The sten is what they came up with. It basically did the job, but not much else.
Going prone at the ranges a sten gun is effectively, is almost completely pointless. It had about a 50 m effective range due to how inaccurate it was. Bad sights, heavy bolt, open fire bolt, dismal ergonomics meaning it was hard to aim and control. At the ranges this gun was effective going prone would be a last ditch move. You'd be looking for hard cover, moving quickly from building to building it's a CQB weapon not a battlefield weapon.
MP 40 had the same issues but was easier to control and fire with vastly superior ergonomics, much better sights, and better balance due to the magazine feed from the bottom. The sten design almost exaggerated all the issues of an open bolt SMG, whereas the MP 40 seemed to try and mitigate them.
Absolutely right. I had a lot of time on the range with both, and the sten is as you describe it. A very close range weapon with high probability of mechanical failure. The MP40 is much better designed, of very much higher quality, much more accurate, an excellent submachinegun. Having them both on a table and discussing them is not comparing them. Try them on the range and see the real difference. Compared to an MP40 a Sten is a piece of junk.
The Sten has an easily removable stock meaning it can be very compact and still useable.
Thanks Chris, not everyday to get to see these type of firearms.
One point not mentioned was that the main weakness of the STEN was the magazine. This, as stated, was copied from the German MP 38 but the British version was made from inferior metal. The soft steel used frequently caused the feed lips on the end of the magazine to deform so preventing the ammunition from feeding correctly. This was exacerbated by the habit of banging the end of the magazine after inserting it into the well, presumably to ensure that it was fully engaged. The problem was well known but not really addressed until well after the end of the war. As a result, defective wartime magazines were an issue right upto the weapon's withdrawal from service in the mid 1950's.
He did mention it was a problem, and likewise with the MP40, although I always thought it was more of an issue for the STEN.
personally, I would rather have been issued the Gewehr 43 or the Sturmgewehr or the Garand M1 or the FG42, but if forced, it would be MP40, more reliable. Can I choose the M3 grease gun?
No, sorry you can't. Choose the Thompson instead...😉👍!
@@charlestaylor253 I can't remember when someone has hurt my tender little feelers more. You are a mean man!
My arm aches just thinking about carrying the Thompson M-1.
Wow …thanks for this great comparison.. I hope this format becomes a regular feature Excellent Stuff …!!!
In almost every french post war movie you can see a MP40.
Great review Chris always wondered about the Stein lot of info thanks for all you do
Very interesting. One question. The cost of the Sten has been stated but I didn’t hear how much the MP40 cost and how the prices compare Marks v Pounds.
The Germans make high-precision engineered goods. They are just to over-engineered for the purpose of war. There is, in my opinion, a cultural emphasis in Germany on over-engineering with quality that exceeds requirements; I am sure that there is a historical basis for this. I am not saying it is a bad thing, but when you compare a Japanese car and a German one, Japan took a lot of help and inspiration in their methodology from Britain in the early 20th Century. You can see how that ethos plays out today when looking at the most reliable cars; that ethos is that simple, elegant solutions are the best route. In effect, Occham's razor. I am not knocking down Germany's engineering; it is really excellent. It is also more complex in some cases than it needs to be.
Man, I love this channel! You can say it like it is, Hitler let the entire British army escape...
STENs predate the US involvement in WWII and even Lend-Lease, Yes, they were needed to fill the gap left by the Dunkirk evacuation where hundreds of thousands of weapons were left behind, but they were designed in August to September 1940, tested by October 1940 and entered production in December 1940, being issued to units from February 1941.
The STEN had some issues, the magazines were the main one, they could cause stoppages, same as "hitting the dirt" often meant muck got into the mechanism and this could also cause stoppages - both easy to clear and despite what some commentators claim, were not the issue often reported and no different to the problems faced by Germans using MP40s.
It should be noted that STYENs are still produced, no longer by the UK, but they are manufactured and used in numerous nations around the world, in fact, the only weapons with a longer service life are the M1911, M2 .50 Cal and the MG42.
It should be noted that the UK was not as broke as often claimed, we were not as close to collapse as it often touted either. A lot of the stories you hear about this was reverse propaganda put about by the Ministry of Information (The real one not the one from Monty Python!). The RAF had more aircraft than is often reported and understood and we were making aircraft faster than we were losing them - unlike the Germans who were losing aircraft at a rate that was around 4:1 - they lost 4 for every aircraft lost, the UK had a rate of around 1:3, the problem the UK had was trained Pilots, but this was true for Germany too, although not as impacting as it was for the UK. The real issue the UK had was in replacing materials, and that is where things were getting dicy toward the END of 1940, we were losing too much to the bottom of the Atlantic due to the gap in cover out in the middle of the Atlantic and the disgusting and erroneous statements made by the US Ambassor to the UK - Kennedy - yes, father of the JFK - which is why he was eventually recalled and replaced.
I love the old stuff and when you compare its just good shit
Ok thanks let me know
so you are using one of the fancy STENs you should compare it to the Mk3
It's a shame you didn't compare these guns with the Australian Owen
I don't think the simplicity of the Sten warrants the term "crude" - that implies poorly designed or built. - the fact is it is well designed and built, with only the single-feed being the problem.
I want something that goes off when I want it to go off, and doesn't go off when I don't. I love the Sten though, and it could be as reliable as the MP40.
Very good vid. And I was raised in carmel. Much longer than you were in the area though.
*mp40 hands down*
To complete the report it would have been nice to see them both live fired, and be able to compare their rate of fire.
Great job and thank you for the history.
🤔 I don’t understand why you didn’t show how to remove the barrel from the sten? which significantly reduces the length of the weapon when you want to hide it
Given 'same' ammunition, I would favor the MP40 (first shot). Longer barrel. Actually, the MP40 barrel is twice the P38 or Luger.
Im def going mp 40 out of the two. Easy to run, easy to maintain, easy to be accurate with.
Weren't they both selective fire weapons (semi or full auto)?
I'd like to see a range test comparison for accuracy.
One thing that wasnt mentioned was that the British baulked at the cost of the Thompson to them in any case...
My grandfather i believe used thr sten and a thompson during WW2 in British army
Very cool review, thanks
Nice, good detail.
Reading the comment here I think many hare you are talking here of British Stens
During World War II, the quality of the Sten gun varied significantly depending on where and when it was produced. The British designed the Sten gun to be a simple, cheap submachine gun that could be quickly manufactured to meet the demands of wartime.
However, the sten had many variants, and Canadian, Australian, and later IDF guns were better quality than British Sten guns.
Did the different barrel lengths affect velocity at all ?
1.1 Million MP40's
3.7 to 4.7 million Sten's (Wiki).
Took UA-cam 5 days to notify me of this video.
Ps. Mp40 in my opinion rules
It looks cool but you know that baka lite was irreplaceable In action
Thats wrong. The Sten was based off the Lanchester, which WAS based off MP28.
I have the CO2 version of the MP40, maybe they would want to re-do ‘A Christmas Story’ whereby punky boi could shoot his eye out on full auto and smoke all of the striped bad guys in a traumatic, well thought out manner.....just sayin’....
Chris that is a lesson in machine gun 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻☮️ love it 😍
I am currently building a vertical STEN and wish to know what color is the STEN in the picture . .....$100,000 worth of arms on one table !
The British also had the use of Thompson sub-machine gun, which cost around $70 ( $910 in today's money ), whereas a Sten cost $10 ( $110 in today's money ) ... " Do the math " as you Americans would say ! However given the choice, you'd have an MP40 !
It's interesting that the Sten used 19mm bullets used by the Germans, rather than .303 inch used by the British in their Lee Enfield Rifles and Bren LMG. This was to allow the Sten to be dropped to resistance groups all over Europe, so they could use captured German & Italian ammunitions ..
?
Widely accepted PPS 43 is the best submachine gun of WW2 . 3 millions was produced Widely used by PVA in Korean War
How many Stens can be made for the price of one MP40?