Why the MP40 is WAY BETTER than the Thompson 💔 in 1 Min
Вставка
- Опубліковано 25 сер 2024
- Sorry Thompson fanbois. Know that I'm right there with ya 😔
Full MP40 vid here 👉🏻 • MP40 | Hitler's Grease...
Full Thomson vid here 👉🏻 • Thompson M1 SMG | Top ...
-
BOOM DIGGITY MERCH! www.bunkerbran...
-
SOCIALS
-
Instagram: / arm.and.gun
Facebook: / armandgun
-
DM ME
-
/ armandgun
-
DISCOUNT CODES
-
My CODE is always ARMANDGUN
25% off AccuTac
10% off ADM (American Defense Mfg)
10% off Bolt Action Coffee
5% off all IR/NVG/etc Gear at Cold Harbour Supply
-
AFFILIATE LINKS
-
Mira Safety (Gas Masks/Respirators) | alnk.to/esSChrl
Right to Bear (Firearm Liability Insurance) | alnk.to/31nmvW4
Sofhold (Super Handy Gun Magnets) | bit.ly/3xJ3Bcz
Black Arch Holsters | www.blackarchh...
-
CHANNEL PARTNERS
-
(I get nothing from your purchase, these companies support the channel with gear for use in content)
Safes: Rhino Metals | rhinosafe.com/
Gun walls: Gallowtech | www.gallowtech...
Clothing: UF PRO | ufpro.com/us
Hiking: Hill People Gear | hillpeoplegear...
Clothing: Qilo Tactical | www.qilonyc.com
Flannels: Dixxon | USA dixxonquality.... Canada dixxon.ca/
Cases: Air Armor Tech | www.airarmorte...
AR 550 Targets | tatargets.com/
Plate Carriers: HRT Tactical | hrttacticalgea...
Books: Vickers Guide | www.vickersgui...
Gloves: Fist Handwear | www.fisthandwe...
-
#armandgun #mp40 #shorts
I can allready FEEL the war in the comment section
There is literally no war why do y’all keep saying that😂
Wtf did you just say about .45 acp!!?
Where are all the patriots in the comment section at. Stand up for your gun!!!!!!!!.
The M-1928 Thompson was over engineered garbage, end of story.
It would have been great in the trenches of France during WW-1, but by 1940 it was COMPLETELY & IRREVERSIBLY OBSOLETE.
@@alexbioshock7632 Oh, our Sub Machine Gun was the M-3A1 Grease Gun.
Mp40 got that "chukachukachuka" fire rate
Lmao why is this so accurate
Nice one
A fast fire rate is nice, but it’s so satisfying to have a slower, controlled rate of fire.
I think it is more like 'Chatatatatata'.
Does it fire on chu or ka ?
No matter what side of the debate you're on, you must admit that these are both works of art.
art ? Thompson. ease of functionality? MP40
Very true
Quality of firearm? Thompson.
To be fair with the Thompson, it was a design dating back from WW1, while the MP40 was the end design of a long series of submachine guns running from the same period. In software terms, it had more development than its American counterpart.
In other words
German engineering > American engineering
Your welcome
@@jpjp280they lost
@@bobskywalker2707 but they could have won if hitler wasn't a self-centered megalomaniac and they had introduced the stg44 assault rifle 2 years earlier
@@bobskywalker2707 yes they lost with help of the world all against 1, hence the word world war 2. Your welcome honey bun
@@filipepadilha3057 they still would have lost
That awkward Thompson reload had strong infomercial energy. "Has this ever happened to you?" lol
weak ass Thompson reload like a bitch lol. bias opinion
💯
Lmao definitely
😂
Uggh.. sooo hard
Well in order for the Thompson to be liable you have to be dressed like a mafia leader then the weapon grants you 15% Charisma and an extra 20% speech and intimidation. Love walking around in my gangster outfit
That is the reason why i prefer thompson over mp40
Also the wooden foregrip and drum mag
@koffie & cohiba 🤣😂 whos gonna disagree lol
And huge mag so you don't reload at all within a full 2 hour long movie
1940s Atlanta/Italian mafia accent: “Look at this guy readin books, got his head in the clouds!”
That drum magazine for the Thompson is the $hit though
It jammed like crazy
@@Avarisz So did the original MP 40 mag go figure...
@@Avarisz yeah but I found that when using it if you didn’t have the drum mag it you ran out of ammo quite quickly
@Tarandus the drum mag of the ppsh 41 is not reliable and it take a lot of Time to reload it ( i was in a combat simulation with it and its hard to reload it with the soviet mag pouch)
The magazine of the mp40 is reliable i have a book about it.
Drum mags had many drawbacks, regardless of the weapon.
MP40 - This is brilliant.
Thompson - But I like this.
Chicago citizens:”tf you say?”
He’s canadian he doesn’t know what he’s saying
Now he’ll say something about the M1 Garand or Ross Rifle
They had two different jobs. The Thompson’s better because it fit the job description. Clear multiple targets fast up close. Its fire rate and “useless” 45acp with a nice stock got that shit done. Especially in urban warfare
@@dahshendrick2566Yes, as a Chicago resident I cam confirm the Thompson is very effective in its role of urban warfare
@@DriverTheInternurban/street warfare
"She runs like a machine." Bro, it is literally a machine.
some machines are just subpar.
Well it seems its doing well the job
Dude, you totally burned him! I bet he feels like an idiot now, huh?
He said "like a machine...gun!"
It’s an automatic firearm smartаss
I worked in a war museum in the early 80’s. The 82nd and 101 jumped in my area during operation market garden. Quite a few jumpers told us that they dumped their Thompsons and took an mp40.
Lighter and especially more avbl ammo. They also said that it was quite precise, reliable and easy to use. German defenders also visited us and funny enough they liked the little 30m1 and the sten. The wonderful world of war and availability of weapons.
False! More available ammo??? US had ZERO 9mm guns and so had ZERO 9mm in its supply lines.
Snatching an enemy gun for a trophy or to use temporarily is not a problem, but no, USGI’s did not discard their Thompson’s for MP40’s, because they’d have no way to resupply ammo for it.
Yes it’s better, and 9mm is more accurate at further distances, but that doesn’t automatically make the Thompson bad. They’re still both SMG’s and mainly used for suppressing and close quarters. German troops probably sprayed and prayed as much as USGI’s did.
I get that you heard it from veterans, but as someone who’s father is a Vietnam combat veteran, not everything a combat veteran says is true.
My dad, and most other grunts, thought the M60 and AK fired the same round because they’re both 7.62 caliber, but completely ignorant that they have different case lengths and are NOT interchangeable.
@@dylanhealy8126 well operation market garden was in the Netherlands wich was under nazi control. And the germans had way more ammo then the US paratroopers, so there was more ammo for the MP40 then there was for a thompson
@@dylanhealy8126they would capture enemy ammo from retreating Germans
Nobody asked
When you said the 45 is not that much better then the 9mm. I could physically hear the 45rs cry out in anguish 😅. Also, hey, some of us might like them thick.
Buddy, you use a Thompson not to kill a person quickly, but to keep him alive until he runs out of dance moves.
Underrated comment 😂
You know your Thompson👍
Bruh 💀💀💀
You win 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Now keep the change ya filthy animal
the thompson just has that gangster-drive by energy
But isn't gangsta.
@@klauslehrmann3906 the only thing not gangsta is your unbased opinion
@@aspenmangamingwt5403 Your ignorance shines through. The Thompson is not a gangstergun.
@@klauslehrmann3906 well that depends on which gangster you're talking about lol, The 1920s and 30s mobsters were the original gangsters
@@Supersonicspyro It was not made to be used by gangsters.
.45 ACP was a lot more effective at range. 9mm wasn't what it is today as a cartridge. I'd take a Thompson due to the known issues with the MP-40 mags.
Never heard of that. What were the ballistics back then?
@@bracoop2Think of it like how the M1 garand is considered the weakest 30-06 ever.
This just straight up isnt true. The me08 bullet out of the mp40 was a 124gr bullet going 1400fps. The thompson shot a 230gr bullet going 930fps. Thats 540ft.lbs vs 447ft.lbs. During ww2 the germans had spicier compounds than we did. A 9mm bullet travelling 1400fps has a substantially flatter arc than a 230gr .45 bullet travelling at 930fps. The marginal difference in BC makes no difference here.
@@josephpeters7076 Thats due to the .30-06 loadings for the springfield and BAR being too violent for the garands action, not because they couldnt make hotter loads (which they kept for the springfield).
😭 someone who doesn’t know history trying to talk
Im currently playing Mafia 2 and this is so relevant to my experience right now
The 9mm vs .45 war is heating up again.
You can carry twice the number of 9x19 for the same weight of .45 AARP
@@TheSundayShooter Yeah winners carry the .45.
The debate was valid in the 20th century. Now 9mm is king, no debate needed
@@brucecampbell4528 atleast thats what the losers say
I used to like fuddy five AARP, but still respected 9mm, now i say if you want "stoppa powa" and don't mind a slightly larger gun, get a 10mm, better ballistics and more capacity than that slow moving antique
Additionally 9mm aged better, imagine both of them as catapillars, 45 may have had the advantage at first, but it stayed as a slow moving larvae for much of it's time not thinking of advancing (lack of better loads and handguns with higher capacities all because of complacency of their fans) while 9mm made it's cocoon (wider adoption of doublestacks) and sprouted as a beautiful butterfly or moth (better bullet technology applied) while the 45 tried to get somewhere in 2007 with the FNP/FNX but continued to stagnate again, to only only get swooped by a bird as it slowly squirmed to it's place it planned to make a cocoon
"9mm kills the body but 45acp kills the soul. You gotta make sure they don't come back as a lich" - The Russian Badger
Was just thinking about the same quote
A 9mm will "blow the lung out of the body." Uncle Joe told me.
Thank you I needed that quote
See he gets it
he is a professional gamer 💀
I feel sorry for anybody who somehow accidentally tries to break into armguns house.
He’s not allowed to fire the machine guns due to Canadian law. He’s essentially a custodian.
I don't, they'll have a literally armory to steal and fence lmao
Having fired both weapons the MP-40 is my preference too.
There’s an un-measurable cool factor that the Thompson has. Any machine gun with wood furniture is top notch in my book.
Same I love the look of wood on guns, the Thompson definitely one of my favorites
So you also like the mp38? And the mp18?
@@williamthehuntsman they are also amazing and cool looking, so yes I do indeed like them
@@aceofthewest5884 My man! The MP38 is my personal favorite. It's an mp40 with WOOD! Not just any wood though! German oak! So beautiful.
@@williamthehuntsman yes I love the look of it, I love the m40 too but the wood stock just makes it look even better
The real question is...mafia boss or evil German James bond villain
Square Jawed Nazi killing God fearing GI
Stick Al Capone and any of Hitler‘s right hand men including Hitler himself in a room, hand each a 4 inch stiletto. tell me which one you think is going to walk out of that room five minutes later.
@@kenwaid8239 I would assume after having a certain amount of people in a room against one person (Capone), Capone would be out numbered. However, I wasn't alive to know what he was like or how many times he's won in fights where he was outnumbered and only armed with a stiletto
@@kenwaid8239 ehhhh idk man, i might put my money on Hitler. Hitler was a decorated, combat hardened veteran. Capone was just a mobster.
The MP-40 lacks the “Rattle em’ boys!” Energy.
I still love both but cannot deny the power of German Engineering
I can't deny the power of rattling 'em.
lol out of all the stuff the germans engineered the mp40 is your example? the thing was a sheet metal pos made to be cheap
@@KreacherServesyou cheap as if its bad. Both cheap, reliable, and accurate. Stamped metal saves production time, Cheap=less money spent reliable=less time and money spent on the gun and there you have it ,the perfect wartime gun both cheap and reliable
@@Willing_Herold except it wasnt reliable lol hence the piece of crap part. it was cheap in both price AND quality
@@KreacherServes the Soviets valued the mp 40 more than their ppsh 41 which had almost twice as more fire rate and could take drum magazines that could take twice as more ammunition. Soldiers opinion no matter from which sides or whether their preferences should be taken more seriously than a comment section 80. years after the war. I would like to ask you where you got your sources as every one i have come across similiarly states that the mp 40 was generally well liked for its accuracy, ease of use and reliability with many enemies picking it up and the only real problem with it was the somewhat troublesome 32 round magazine which was the reason many soldiers thought it would be much better to use a drum magazine similiar to that of the ppsh 41
Guys, he's Canadian. He doesn't know he's wrong.
Hahahaha now it makes sense.
Oh… that makes sense.
How does he have either of these? He would have had to get the prohibited license before it got removed and grandfathered
@@joethepsycho2123 Getting them in America is one thing, getting them in Canada would be tough
So very very wrong.
When he started talkin shit about the 45 ACP, I could feel ww3 starting in the comment section.
I love the Thompson for being the OG weapon in like cod 2, but the MP40 makes sense
I’ll take the Thompson. 45 cal and reliable. I have never heard anything bad about it. Other than the cost. GI’s loved them during WWII.
Expensive, but the quality is worth the cost. Exceptionally high quality firearm
Its fucking heavy. Way too heavy.
"I have never heard anything bad about it" recoil? low fire rate? bullet falls like it's begging for an early grave?
The Tommy was just a decoy for the fact we built automatic rifles in .30-06 while everyone else in the war was still bolting their rifles like PEASANTS
not to mention the .30 Carbine beast our paratroopers used.
Likely cause your factories weren’t getting bombed
Well the yanks did use bolt actions too but weren't the majority.
While the rest used bolt actions but on the later part of the war semi auto did become more common. Had the factories not been bombed to kingdom come all the time, the germans might have gotten their semi autos out in the field in greater mass.
Though bolt actions worked like a charm for what it was intended for, also the germans were focused around the mg anyway so.
@@dragonstormdipro1013 We showed them what happens when they bomb an island with a few boats, imagine if they bombed a few factories in the mainland
I agree my fellow American
Well, the Germans did make the first ever assault rifle....
Aesthetically, I prefer the Thompson
It's easily one of the most beautiful smg's ever made
@@armandgun yeh totally. It’s wild to think that was available and in use during ww2.
@@armandgun You didn't explain how 45 isn't that much better than 9mm though.
@@East_Coast_Toasty_Boy he mentioned that, but UA-cam shorts can only be 1 minute so can’t really go in depth on each point.
@@East_Coast_Toasty_Boy you can carry lot more ammo for the same weight.... its prooven in pretty much every war that amunition carry capacity is way more important than stopping power especialy if the difference is so small like 9mm vs 45.acp.... 9m also has better balistics with better medium range accuracy, easier to shoot and control, less recoil, and iam sure there are more benefits..... even the fact that 9mm is far more popular cartrige around the world for both hand guns and sunmachine guns clearly shows its a superrior cartige....
Man MP40 is just a quality weapon hands down. Not trashing the tommy but you can’t deny German engineering..
idk man the mp40 had a ton of quality problems
Actually I can and often do deny it because the Germans are notorious for over-engineering weapons and vehicles, making them unnecessarily complicated
My grandfather didn’t talk about the war that much but he did say that the mp40 was a very fun gun to shoot.
This guy knows his COD zombies
@@jfd9616 IRL wall gun argument amongst the infantry
@@earlofill2580 im a long time cod zombies player but im still very confused
@@earlofill2580 why hasnt this guy pap'd any oh his guns yet? That could be a beautiful afterburner but noo
@@jfd9616 He’s joking about WaW zombies on if you preferred the Thompson wall buy or the MP40 wall buy.
More like towards waw multiplayer
MP-40 much easier to mass produce, easier to field strip & lighter to carry. He also forgot to mention the multiple leaf- sights on the 40.
@Steve Turner Yes Steve I'm pretty sure everyone knows that 😉
The M3 grease gun was easier to produce than the MP 40.
@@craigthescott5074 Definitely- less parts.
Good thing they didn’t get right the first time with the MP38 could’ve made the Allie’s lives hell.
@Steve Turner dude, u ok?? xd
A better comparison would be MP40 to M3 grease gun. It would still have the drawback of ammo weight for marginally better performance but it has a similar fire rate to the MP40 and better ergos than the tommy.
The 1928 has a disconnector though, so it doesn’t run away like the mp-40 can- strong advantage to the thompson in that a burst doesn’t have to be the whole magazine randomly when you don’t want it to be.
The MP-38/40 is a second generation smg. The Thompson M-1928 is a 1st generation.
The MP-38/40 used stampinings and was the first to use polymer furniture (the lower is aluminum and Bakelite) and has a pneumatic buffer / enclosed recoil spring in the bolt assembly.
The 1928 is actually the second gen of main production and the third gen overall
@@plack_benis382 He's talking about the generational difference of SMGs as a concept;
First Gen SMGs were all milled from forged blocks, basically hand made, and exquisitely finished.
Second Gen was the age of mass production and cost cutting. Stamped sheetmetal, minimal finish work.
After WW2 though, the Generation Lines get a bit....blurry. Because there is not much of a significant difference between an MP40 and an MP5.
Some might consider the rise or polymer to be Gen 3, or Gen 2.5.
Then there's the current prevalence of rifle-actions, like the AR-15, and AKM being scaled down to pistol calibers.
I'd consider MP40 a third gen submachine gun. Wasn't first gen like the thompson or mp18, where they didn't know what they were doing and it wasn't the super high quality feature rich designs of the interwar period that mark the second gen guns like the suomi. It trimmed down on a lot of the fancy features and economized production, making third gen like the M3 grease gun, Sten, and the pps 43.
They are also designed for two different fighting styles. The mp40 is for point defence and flanking with European Urban warfare in mind. The tommy gun is for suppressive fire during an assault. The philosophy difference is what made them so different. Tommy needed drums, mp40 didn't, tommy needed a drop stock to be tucked under the arm for when hosing things down on the move, mp40 needed accuracy and to be compact for use by tankers, thompson needed to have more weight to better control recoil from the hip, etc... They fundamentally do not fight the same nor were they ever meant to.
Its not about generations, the MP40 was developed with the priority of producing it as cheap as possible, while the Thompson was not developed during war times. The M3 would have been a better comparison
Oh, I take option 3, the PPSH-41.
Where the mags often don’t fit and you’ll be out of ammo in a really short time?
The PPSH really wasn't as good as it is made out to be. The rate of fire is the only thing going for it
Making drum mags weren't cheap and that they wouldn't fit it's why they'd stick with 30 round mag sticks instead even more so they swapped out the ppsh for other smgs anyways lol.
@@koreancowboy42 drum mags also aren’t reliable and often have issues.
@@luggy9256 you might be out of ammo, but the enemy will be out of men by the time you're finished firing
Red Army vets also wrote the Landlease Thommygun was a meme. Very low speed ammunition you have to aim 2 meters higher.
What the actual russian kremlin dictated nonsense of a fuck is this comment?
Yeah. Soviets would've been annihilated with out lend lease. By the damn finns alone.
And only SMG available was the tommyu since they chucked them into the smelt because stalin knew better ans told them to.
Yeah, combine Russians and Vodka and you will most likely end-up with imbeciles trying to use an SMG as a rifle and engage beyond 100m.
Sure. Very slow ammo. Totally need to aim 2m over at distance of 50m and less. Suuurrree.
@@Meton12765 But with the PPSh and the Mp40, strange things didn't happen.
The ppsh41 chuckles from a distance
A weapon designed in 1940 outperforms a weapon designed in 1918? Well color me shocked!
You would be surprised how many hail the Thompson as a superior smg.
The 1911 is still better than lots of much newer pistols
@Certified Fresh the 1911 is objectively obsolete. Its a nice pistol. but stop with your bs if you think the 1911 can still keep up with a modern western military firearm.
@@theduke7539 it can keep up with some because of the lose tolerances and simple parts make it easy to clean and maintain, the biggest issue is really the single stack mag.
@@luggy9256 single feed, its a double stack single feed mag
I think it's worth mentioning that WWII spec ammo loads are very different from modern loads. 9mm wasn't as fast back then, so the heavier .45 projectiles gave it a significant ballistic advantage. Of course modern 9mm is so much faster, so the kenetic energy is the same as .45, but with increased range and increased mag capacity.
And what’s .45 like now vs then?
@@brileymitchell2632 Well, you can get super sonic .45 loads now that you couldn't then. So...
@@brileymitchell2632 exactly sir 😉
@koffie & cohiba yeah he got lucky, bullet placement lol. Just one clean .22lr to the heart or brain and a human is dead. You could take 9 .45 shots to the leg and live. Its always about bullet placement, always have been and always will be. When deer hunting you dont go and grab the biggest caliber humanly possible, you grab a moderate cartridge and place a good shot into vital organs.
@@gmoder100 12.5 .... Cm maybe the shot placement won't matter that much
I like the Thompson more, not only because it looks cooler but because its a somewhat more robust design that even 30+ years after its initial development held up well.
I like how he just casually sh*ta on 45 acp like that lol. The man is based
That's the funny thing though he actually really didn't. He said it's a lot heavier while it's only a little better. Well I guess the Americans were willing to go with the little better. Quite frankly I would be willing to go with the little better if it's going to kill better.
Get of reddit
@@ashes2ashes863If you wanted something that'll kill better you'd want a 7.62 round like the Tokarev. You're already dumping 10 bullets into someone's chest in a fraction of a second, might as well make sure the gun shoots flat and can actually be used even if you're not indoors.
@@ashes2ashes863except wound channel analyses comparing fmj 9mm vs fmj .45 acp have clearly shown that 9mm is equivalent to the .45. So you're not even getting an advantage for your substantially worse recoil and bullet arc.
You make several good points. My only counter argument, is that the Thompson, in particular the M1921 and M1928 are really a first generation Submachine gun. Lots of expensive milled parts, complicated sights, lots of heavy wood. The Second World War brought a need to simplify manufacturing. An example of this is the MP40 used a stamped receiver while it’s predecessor the MP38 used a milled one. I like your content, keep it up!
But the Thompson was still mass produced during WW2 even if it was outdated and expensive, so the comparison is kinda fair. And the Thompson still saw use till Vietnam, so someone clearly saw value in it (or was too cheap to replace it)
@@luggy9256 Kinda. Looks like he has a 1928A1 model in the vid. (Don’t quote me on that I’ve been wrong before) The 28/28A1 models to a degree were 21 models with a few changes. I know the 28A1 had a horizontal hand guard instead of a pistol grip. I can’t remember quite what the difference between 21 and the 28 was off hand. Largely it was the same gun though. Thompson really didn’t get “simplified” until later in the war with the M1 and M1A1 variants. Went from about $200 a unit to ~$70 a unit.
@@PsychopathicV2 even the simplified versions were still complex and expensive compared to other smgs
@@luggy9256 the latter. The US Army had tons of SMGs in storage so why bother buying new ones when they're a rear echelon/vehicle crew weapon anyway?
@@luggy9256 and that's why the US went to building the M3 which was about $20 per gun, and the even simpler M3A1 that shaved another five bucks off.
Video games: I’m about to destroy this man’s whole career
Cod 5 disagrees
@@fkev4751 who calls WaW cod5
World at War moment
@@samrogers5090 i sometimes
@@samrogers5090 OG’s do
There’s something about the metal finish on WW2 guns that I love.
The MP-40 is probably the winner because of production alone. The Thompson was always a very expensive beast. This combined with not being a scrap tube like the Sten or M3 made both the PPS-43 and MP-40 the best standard SMG's of the war.
The M3 was a damn fine SMG. If it wasn't, the US would've issued M1 carbines to vehicle crews in Vietnam instead.
I don't like the videos reason of the MP-40 being better than the Thompson. Biased reasons he gave. Yes they are both considered submachine guns but they're very different guns. But the fact that submachine guns main thing was supposed to be easy to manufacture and cheap the MP40 was way better. I love both guns but as an American I'd rather have a Thompson though I'd love to have both.
Pps was and still is garbage, unreliable junk. Actually ALL the automatic sub guns sucked back then
@@alexjaaa very true. Thought really good for the cheap guns that they were and the ease to mass produce them.
Straight fax right there, PPS takes it in my eyes with it being the slimmest and lightest of the bunch and still incredibly robust and cheap. But I feel bad lumping the M3 in with the horrid sten gun
You forgot to add and in most situations there tend to be 'unlimited' quantities of MP40 ammo by just picking up from the numerous dead bodies as one progress through the game 🤣
lol 😆
like wolfenstein
COD 2
WW2 smgs are really just the pinnacle of making you really appreciate AR-15 ergonomics
MP40’s bolt is also less complicated, cheaper to produce, and easier to manufacture
The MP-40 magazine was more prone to jamming, thanks to it's double column staggered feed. Troops were trained not to apply pressure to the magazine while firing, as this misaligned the feed lips, causing feed failures. Instead, they were trained to hold on to the handguard, much like the Thompson.
While the MP40 was shorter, thanks to it's folding stock, the stock was less robust than the wood stock of the Thompson, sometimes breaking under hard combat use.
The .45 vs 9mm debate will go on until phasers are developed (and will still go on just because we're stubborn), but generally the .45 had the edge on penetration and wound diameter.
Two interconnected subjects made the MP40 better than the Thompson: manufacturing ease and cost. The Thompson was a first generation SMG, made using the production methodology of the day. All machined parts (no stampings at all) and a good deal of hand fitting were involved, which naturally increased it's cost ($225/1941 or $3550 in 2020 equivalents).
The MP40 could be consider a 2 generation or even 2.5 generation, going from a primarily machined parts production to primarily stamped steel. Since tolerances were wider, little hand fitting was required, thus lowering manufacturing times and cost. In 1940, the MP40 cost 57RM, or $60, for today's equivalent, $268. For the price of one Thompson, you could buy nearly 4 MP40s.
That price comparison for the Thompson. Geez inflation is bad. After Ww2 is where that all really started too
The Thompson design was simplified the last models costing about $40
The drum barrel with 50 rounds and the forward pistol grip allowed Gangster’s to literally sweep away their enemies. These are hell in CQB because the knockdown power and the typewriter sound on steroids are a serious psychological factor. If you can control the tommy gun from rising and staying on target, enemies are going to be casualties.
@@MarineCorpsSergeantTollens drum mags were very rarely if ever used in the military, only by gangsters and civilians. It was heavy, rattles, and was simply overall inconvenient. Usually 20 or 30 round stick mags were used instead.
Also, it doesn’t really sound like a typewriter, that’s just it’s nickname partly named so because of it’s firerate.
Still, I’d personally rather use an M1A1 Thompson (later model, with no finned barrel and a horizontal front grip) than an MP40.
I would however, rather use an MP40 over an M1928 Thompson (finned barrel, vertical front grip).
Also, in a few different instances the vertical M1928 grip was known to break, as it was not as sturdy as the horizontal grip.
I’m bored because I’m stuck on the couch from a bad knee and can’t do much. Have a good day
@@Engieman909 you're forgetting that there's also 3 different iterations of the Thompson the 1928 which was what the gangs used (50 drum mag) the M1A1 which is what the police used and the military (20 stick mag) and I forget what the other is but it's similar to the M1A1
IIRC the Thompson was designed to clear trenches in WWI so accurate and comfortable shoulder firing probably wasn't high up on the priority list since it was expected that the soldier using it would be spraying it at hip level into a trench right in front of him.
The MP40 was designed later when the ideal for submachine guns had evolved with the concept of warfare so it was more suited for a modern battlefield at the time.
Still, I'll take a Tommy Gun any day. Nothing against the 40, I just love the Thompson more.
MP38 was probably even better. Always wanted one of these.
The stock argument is ridonculous…
And thanks for watching. Next week we’re comparing a Cessna 182 and a F-22.
oh come on. German SMGs and US SMGs are practically apples to oranges
Cessna 182 wins no diff, it can even travel to space
@@Squid-Game with an additional 10 pound or so difference. To be fair a M3 Grease gun vs a Mp40 would have been a more fair comparison.
@@LostShipMate The M3 is less iconic tho, so it's iconic German SMG from WW2 vs iconic American SMG from WW2
@@Squid-Game Apples to Onions my friend...
Well, it's not surprising, considering that
a) Thompson's basic design is from the early 1920s.
b) Unlike the MP 40, Thompson wasn't initially designed to be issued to the masses, but to be a high-end, special gun for law enforcement and limited military units like stormtroopers.
So even though the initial design was simplified, it was still practically a first-generation heavy and expensive SMG. And this is not to say that the design is bad, it was just somewhat obsolete.
its not even early 1920's. The prototypes that would become the Thompson were designed all the way back in 1917, during ww1.
@@charleyhowarth5742 Well yeah, you're right. But the final gun would be manufactured from 1921(?) onwards.
The drop in the stock was to make instinctive fire with the weapon tucked under the shoulder and looking over the top easier. Try shooting it this way and you can see why it was the weapon you wanted to clear out pillboxes.
.45 ACP vs 9mm... this debate... this debate will never end...
.45 ACP, any time, any day.
@@BradanKlauer-xh3hm 9mm is the one true God and religion
There's as much debate about that as maggots debate eagles.
Vs 380 vs 5.7mm vs 357 magnum vs 45 colt vs 44 magnum vs 357 sig vs 10mm, plenty more
Bigger is always better.
The M3 Grease Gun would have been a better comparison.
this
I mean, I get where you're going with this, as they are more similar in terms of manufacture cost and speed, but the M3 has even worse handling and ergonomics than the thompson, so it'd be an even bigger w for the mp40. + The M3 just doesn't have the style the MP40 and Thompson have.
@@jojomaster7675 You're just straight up lying. The M3 is probably the steadiest shooting SMG we've ever had.
@@supergoodadvice853 And it's also essentially a modified tube which doesn't even have a charging handle. All while being about as reliable as a sten. Yeah, I'd much rather have a thompson or mp40.
@@jojomaster7675 you obviously have never shot a Grease gun because you have no idea what your talking about Chief. And the WW2 guns did have a charging handle. And they are very reliable.
When presented with both in a weapons market in 1967, my pop bought a Thompson as an advisor. He said .45 spoke the truth in the jungle.
Your pops had first-hand experience
A weapon with wooden parts in the jungle is not ideal
@@chainz8573 unless you're a Marine and maintain your weapons. Guerrillas and rebels have a different set of issues, like those you mentioned.
I dont believe you.
@@Le_Petomanewhy not
One thing I've seen people talk about is the fire rate but honestly the thing is the Thompson is really made to be burst fired and in real military combat nobody just sprays the entire magazine normally
The one plus for the .45 was it’s stopping power. And ready ammunition for American military with the 1911 handgun in wide use.
The "goofy" mag change lever on the Thompson allows for left or right hand operation. Just lift with the thumb of the right hand while frantically "grabbing and slapping" a mag under the stress of fire and not having to grip the mag at the top by necessity.
You also have to realize the Thompson was designed for a specific task. It used the same, .45ACP round as the 1911 which was brought about because the .38 was ineffective against an enemy that was hopped up on opiates and didn't feel the pain and impact of the light round. The .45 was much more likely to drop the enemy with fewer hits, drugged up or not. With the Thompson in hand and a vest filled with MK1, "pinapple" grenades to clear the corners, the Thompson was designed to move forward and clear the trenches of WWI with bullets that are more likely to drop a target with one hit and 50 round drums for the firepower. It wasn't designed as a general purpose, lighter firearm for all of the troops to cary and have a weapon and ammo to wield all around.
Is the Thompson heavy? Yes. Effective? Yes. Cheap(er) to make? Reasonably so.
The MP40 is more of a "do all," lighter weight battle weapon. They're really apples and oranges and each are effective for their original purposes.
The Thompson was a bit too late to see service in WWI bit it saw lots of service in WWII and was definitely effective. Thought tends to rise straight up when sustaining fire, it doesn't pull left or right off target and it's accurate. As long as you know what's coming and brace with the proper stance, the Thompson is a devastating weapon.
So, comparing them "head to head" when there is such divergence in their original purpose and design, really isn't fair.
I want both!!
I can definitely tell you dont have much first hand experience on a thompson. The grip is so large that using your thumb to pop the mag release requires you to completely take your hand off the grip unless you have super long fingers. And no, 45 is not some magical man stopper. There has never been a man to take a round to the pelvis and keep walking. regardless of caliber. The Thomspon was 20 years out of date when the MP40 stepped on the field and both were used exactly the same. So yeah, comparing them head to head is fair.
Also, the original Thompsons sucked because the Blish Lock is nonsense that doesnt work, and the top charging handle is absolute dog shit. m1a1 finally figured out how to make a decent chargin handle only to make the rear sight complete crap.
And cheaper to make? The Thompson was the single most expensive small arm mass produced in ww2. Only mounted machineguns were more expensive, and even some of them were cheaper. The M1928 Thompson was 230 dollars. The M1A1 which was super simplified was stil 63 dollars. the MP40 was a damn tube with a plastic trigger housing.
@@theduke7539 A, I didn't say the original Thompson was great, I stated what it was designed for. Specifically. I happen to have hands large/long enough to handle the lever, etc. but that's secondary. That was the intent and we all know the best intentions are often never met We learn and make better stuff. I Also said that the Thompson didn't get to go into service for its original intent, as a trench sweeper and it was put into play in WWII and though the second generation was better, it's still not "great" and the MP40 is absolutely better for the purpose they're both used for. That said, the Thompson *was* put to use and was effective in some roles, mostly troops behind the lines, supply transports, jeeps, blah blah.
I also did not say anything about the .45ACP being a "magical round." I stated what it was developed for, which was replacing the .38 rounds they were using in the Philippines. The military requested a round that would "spin a man around and stoo him in his tracks" (paraphrasing) and although it might not be the "end all, be all," etc., it was a damn sight closer than what they had. All of the urban myths about the .45ACP stemmed from that.
They were running into an enemy that was drugged out of their minds and wouldn't stop (I didn't say theyed ultimately survive), even after taking several rounds from a .38. In comparison, the .45ACP is a *much* more effective round, especially when only being able to get one or two rounds on target and "proper shot placement" tends to go out the window when under stress/fire... And it will incapacitate a person much more quickly than a .38.
Of course most people will stop walking if you hit them in a critical joint, whatever the round.
You really should listen to what I was saying and the spirit thereof, i wasn't saying the Thompson was superioror even as good as, I saidthatthey were designed at two different times for two different purposes, not what most people want to imply about the "magical mystery of the Thompson." I was merely stating historical facts about the original purpose and intentions for the Thompson .45. And that's verifiable, not just "my opinion."
You put some words and inferences into my statement that aren't there or, were at least NY intentions but, hopefully this clears up any misunderstanding that anyone could take from my original comment.
As for me, I'm a veteran munitions systems specialist with a combat munitions unit and small arms expert and I have *somewhat* of a clue as to that of which I speak.
I'm not someone who got all their information from internet myths and stories by "those old guy' that like to exaggerate, especially about things of which they don't really know duck about. My father was a WWII, Navy commando who fought the Japanese in the Aleutian Islands with those very Thompsons (when he wasn't on a twin .50) and he called it like it was, good and bad, alike.
I have a govt. 1911, it was my service piece as I was in during the transition and they were pulled them out of service and I know first hand how we reacted to the 9mm Beretta compared to the 1911 and the strengths and weaknesses of both. Although I'd like to have a Thompson as a historical piece, I like them in the improved configuration (as long as im not going into combat with it), I won't pay the stupid prices, even for the new replicas, I DO have a couple of G21s, one of which lives with an M4 configuration of the MechTech upper accessory on top and some 27 round sticks hanging out of the bottom. It's functionality and design are superior to the Thompson with effectively the same "firepower" and I happen to really like it. A lot.
But, it's old tech now (the original and then only way to get a Glock carbine) and there are "better" options and tech available. But, as I say, I like the unit I have, the weight keeps the recoil manageable, it's accurate, reconfigurable with different accessories and, I'm large enough to handle it. It's heavy because it isn't 98% plastic.
Mostly I use it from rested and prone positions to maximize accuracy but, when slung, it's a pretty fun toy to run around with.
But, I digress...
There is historical fact, there are the attempts to fit a square peg in a round hole (Thompsons in a general combat role) and there are the simple truths, the .45ACP isn't a "magical round that will stop a man even if you shoot him inthe palm of the hand " (I know all the old legends, too) but, it's a damned effective round and especially when compared to a standard, .38 service pistol.
So, try not being quite so defensive and listen to the facts and intent of people's comments instead imparting yours upon them.
I do appreciate the lack of name calling and digression into "I know you are... But what am I?" childish crap so prevalent here. An actual, informed difference of opinion and heated debate with adult words is rare and welcomed these days, who's "right" is secondary.
@@Me-yq1fl Once again, you're crossing my statement of the history with some need to infer that I'm saying more about the round and weapon than is fact. Not true. That said, that's the whole reason they have lethality vs stopping power charts and that's a whole other fish to fry.
The two rounds have different properties and effects and purpose of use and preferences are u to the individual using it.
At the time of their development, the .45 was a much harder hitting, superior round to the .38 in service.
Technology has advanced all the way around and 9mm is much better but, so is .45ACP. It's not a matter of "which is better" but which do you need/prefer for your purposes.
Please stop saying that I said something I didn't.
I think you misspelled "amphetamines". Meth specifically
@@Me-yq1flThe 9mm and .45 are perfect examples of the two sides of stopping power. Velocity and mass are both important to stopping power. The argument that one is more important than the other is kind of asinine, when theyre just two sides of the same coin. You need mass to stop something and you need velocity to punch through it. Which is why we have a plethora of calibers that are one or the other or both
Had a chance to try an m1a1, an mp40 and a ppsh41 in full auto. Ppsh41 would be my pick, in short bursts I could get pretty decent groupings at 25m and I haven’t fired many full autos. Mp40 was better at sustained fire, it would get larger groups than ppsh in burst fire but if you held on the trigger and get used to the firing rythm you could literally paint around the target. The thompson was awkward to load and weighted a ton, it does have very low recoil but it “climbed” a lot on my shoulder. I would notice a low push on my shoulder but I would see the sights very quickly misalign and go up and to the right. I guess that’s because it has such a high bore axis + the rate of fire is neither so slow as to allow accurate prolonged bursts as the mp40 and not so fast as to fire 3-4 round burst that landed very close to each other like the ppsh41. The range owner taught me that the best way to fire a thompson is to put it UNDER your armpit, squeeze it hard and point shooting without using the sights. That way i gotta admit it was very easy to keep on target and the extra fire rate was appreciated compared to the mp40, that being said it only works at very close range , wastes a lot of ammo and if you don’t get your “feel” right you could hose a very tight group half a meter off the target (happened to me). I feel like thompsons were meant to be hip fired in full auto and fired semi auto using sights from the shoulder. If you keep the gun on auto the trigger was nice enough to allow for single shots even from someone not experienced like me
Nerd
Cool
half of the time the PPSH would not even work because of how shit the ammo would be. Poor Ivan on the front would have his gun jam every 3 seconds.
Finally some sense of quality over "uh duh 'merica"
Back then .45 acp was a superior round to 9mm because of the available loadings. In modern times now that 9mm+P is a thing, their kinetic energy is about equal.
THAT'S WHAT I KEEP SAYING BUT NO ONE BELIEVES ME!!
Yeah but .45acp+p is a thing too..😊
@@jhskay556 yes they’re called .45 supers but unlike modern 9mm pistols, most modern pistols in .45 acp can’t handle the pressure of .45 super and you’re gonna damage your gun unless it’s specifically built for that cartridge.
@@cooper9643 Wrong. Most modern .45 auto pistols can shoot +p ammunition without damage or malfunction. Been running Hornady 230g +P ammo through my Sig P-220 for years w 0 problems. Wouldn’t recommend loading a WW2 era 1911 with them tho.
@@cooper9643 really it makes no difference to me if your a .45 guy or a 9mm guy. In my opinion both cartridges could kill ya just as quick as the other. In all reality getting into running 9mm+p or .45+p through your pistol I’d really do some research first bc I’d really hate for someone reading this feels it’s ok to run these hot loads in their grandpas 60yr old guns and something happen
I feel yah.
The main thing the Thomy gun has over the 40 is the style, look and nostalgia of it.
I mean... I would like both if I could
The thompson wins in looks and ammo capacity with the drum mags. It definitely should have been designed with a better stock, but with full auto, you don't really need to use the sights anyway.
Yes. You actually do need to use the sights thats very important. If our army was just spraying this thing without using sights we probably would have lost the war. It may be hard to accept but Nazi Germany were ahead of there times in alot of things, including engineering firearms.
Its worth noting that according to vets and people who used the gun, the MP40's recoil was surprisingly difficult to control.
A PPSH was so fast that it was one smooth pull upwards
A M3 was slow enough it was controllable
But apparently the MP40 was in a horrible middle notch where it wasn't smooth but was also too fast to properly control
yea that’s not really true, american paratroopers have been on recorded saying that they’ve dumped there thomsons or the mp40 because it was lighter, and reliable
Also the Thompson weights a ton, compared to the ultralight mp40
The mp40 isn’t light. Compared to an M1A1 Thompson it’s 0.5kg lighter. That’s like saying the FN FAL weighs a ton compared to the ultra light M14.
@@DefunctYompelvert I held both, and the m1a1 with a drum mag got me surprised how much it weighted, and how difficult to aim was
its actually a double whammy. The Thompson is heavy, being all milled steel, its easily the heaviest submachinegun of the war. Being nearly a kilo heavier than an MP40. But heres the kicker. 1 kilo isnt actually that big of a deal. But the thompson has its pistol grip exactly in the center of mass, meaning your dominant hand holds all the weight while your off hand just aims. this makes the thompson feel even heavier than it actually is.
@@theduke7539 that is something I didn't know and really makes a lot of sense, thanks for taking your time in explaining it!
What is much more relevant than the weight of the gun is the weight of the ammunition itself.
A fully loaded 32 round MP40 magazine weight almost 1 lb, while a 30 round Thompson magazine weight 1.75 lbs.
So a German soldier carrying 320 rounds for his MP40 is toting 10 lbs, while the Yank or Tommy with 300 rounds for his Thompson is loaded down with 17.5 lbs.
That really starts to add up quite a bit into the soldiers overall burden.
If you use the mag release on the Thomson right, it feels much better. Use the thumb of your trigger hand.
Yep
That's what I am saying ..How could someone that supposedly has so much firearm knowledge not point that out ..
Well if he did that, then his "goofy release" comment wouldn't add to his love of German weapons argument
I don't know. All those heavy rounds coming at you from the Thompson has its advantages. It might be intimidating in close quarters. Those heavy rounds would knock you off your feet. But they did need to fix some of the ergonomics of the Thompson.
Thompson’s are in many ways like their .45ACP older brother, the 1911. They live in our hearts. Killed a lot of America’s enemies. Are as classic as a ‘49 Marc or ‘57 Chevy. EVERY gun guy wants one. And they’re expensive. But they’re heavy. They drift up on full auto. Factory mags are exorbitant (priced a Colt 1911 mag lately?) Here’s the rub: no one watching Band of Brothers or the Pacific sees two infantrymen advancing under fire, one with a Thompson, the other with an M3 grease gun or M1 carbine and says “jeez I think I’ll take that caulking gun looking thing.” Or “by golly all those big, bad, brass .45 shells rattling to the ground are a bit too much. Give me the BB gun with a folding stock. The one with two puny mags in canvas on the stock”
Just like that, millions of fudds felt a disturbance in the force.
How dare he disrespect .45 AARP!
Personally their both beautiful weapons to me, it’s hard to choose what i like more.
PPSH-41: *Ah yes, mortals!*
The PPSH was just another WW2 SMG.
A tube with an open bolt, trigger, and a magwell.
@@lockhd_mrtn have you ever SEEN a PPSH-41? Def not a tube. Open bolt? Yeah no shit. The Thompson is and so is the MP40. The PPSh includes a drum mag too. It has a wood body / stock. The PPSh is select fire unlike a lot of SMGs.
Another difference is that the MP40 has a more advanced and simplified SMG while the Thompson was a stopgap to the grease gun and what's a very complicated and expensive first-generation SMG
Both beautiful guns no cap!
No cap
fr fr
When my father fought in Sicily and Italy in WW2. They were part of the British 8th Army and were issued Thompson's. But they found them to awkward in close combat. The American 82nd Airborne had been issued the M3 " grease gun " with the removable wire stock. The Americans loved the Thompson so they would trade their new M3s for the Canadian's worn-out 8th Army Thompson's.
I will say this comes from appearances. The grease gun is every bit as good as an MP40 and is controllable, light and handy. The Thompson is awkward heavy and climbs all over the place. After troops got experience with them and gave them a chance most preferred the M3 to the Thompson.
@@FirstLast-gv1zl Sir, I’ve fired three original, full auto Thompsons and ran several mags through each. Two M1A1s and a 1928 with a cuts compensator, finned barrel and forward pistol grip. All three climbed on full auto. Not like horribly but they weren’t as easy to fire long bursts with as the MP40, M3A1 or PPSH 41 (for that matter the M16A1 I’ve shot was easier to fire in long bursts). Plenty of experts agree with that as well (Ian of Forgotten Weapons comes to mind). Now it is possible that with enough practice with the Thompson platform you can learn to counter it super well. Doesn’t change the fact that those other guns I mentioned are easy to control out the gate. Also lighter and faster to shoulder. So no I’ve had real world full auto experience with original Thompsons.
@@FirstLast-gv1zl I do not understand why you’re up set. You merely have a more favorable opinion of the weapon then I do. The historic record shows it was perfectly adiquate for the US military in WW2. I brought up the M16 not as a contemporary but to show that in my experience I found the M16, an intermediate calibre rifle, more controllable. It wasn’t even a main point.
Also “shoot all over the place” is a relative statement. As I said in my last comment, you’d have no problem using it effectively. (The historic record proves that) It’s just relative to the other ww2 SMGs I’ve fired it’s harder to control (and has other flaws like it’s weight, awkward stock etc.) Forgivable given it’s a decades older design then the others but still not perfect.
I am aware that 9mm ball is marginal, however hit someone 5 plus times with and they are still gonna start going down in most cases, but sure it’s not modern to shoot 9mm that slow. I’d still rather have the gun that’s easier to handle lighter and more compact. Or if ROF is a must for you, a PPSH would be a better choice. Easier to control then the Thompson and an absolute hose while being lighter and handier.
I understand the benefits of high ROF but when it comes at such a cost i am not sure it’s worth it. I also need to be able to get the gun up and score hits fast. The stock angle and weight harms that. It seems to me a 3 round burst better aimed and delivered earlier is better then 4-5 deliver that takes a split second longer to deliver and requires more effort to deliver.
But it isn’t an either or situation. You can have both power and light weight and handy in the M3. My personal pick of the ww2 SMGs I’ve fired. You get .45 stoping power in a light weight weapon that doesn’t recoil at all. I blew the center of the target out when firing the M3. It’s a crude but it works beautifully well.
@@FirstLast-gv1zl and that’s totally fair. I also see how in the situation you described the Thompson would be the best choice (landing a couple of shots with one second at 10 yards in that circumstance would be fast and a piece of cake).
However there’s tons of situations in combat that I’d imagine aren’t that situation. Where forgoing the ROF advantage for portability and swift acquisition and control would be preferable. Someone jumps up in front of you and you aren’t already shouldered those lighter weapons with more inline stocks could save your life. Also I would argue the practical accuracy of the M3 or MP40 at range is better then the Thompson (30-50 yards a more precise but less dense burst would have its advantages) So trying to tag someone a bit further out would be easier and swifter (and easy is important when you’re under the stress of combat as I am sure you know better then I do).
Actually 7.62X25 tokarev has stellar penetrative capabilities. It’s one of the things it’s known for due to its higher velocity. Probably the best penetrating handgun cartridge of the Second World War. The PPSH is quite the little buzz saw. The drums had some interchangeability issues but the 35 round mags fixed that issue.
The Thompson is a design from 1928. The MP40 is just that, designed in 1940. Germany really made a breakthrough with the MP43&44 but they were too little too late.
Thompson has advantages. It depends on what you need. One it is more accurate which is function of weight in relation to caliber, ergonomics and barrel length. Second one is possibility to use drum capacity. And lastly stopping power. Like anything in life all have pluses and minuses. It is like comparison of AR15 and UZI.
I agree; I fired the MP40 years ago and it was EPIC to fire.
Lucky!!!
Purposely fumbles the reload of the Thompson " LoOkS LiKe A W FoR thE Mp-40"
I won't purposely. The early Thomsons just had awkward channel grooves for the mag, compared to the much more modern stick in well of the MP40. There's a reason every gun has mag wells like the MP40 and not weird transitional slot wells that were meant originally for drums.
Which is easier:
Push magazine into open hole, or line up guide rails?
Which is going to be easier and faster when you have people actually shooting at you, and trying to kill you?
Why does _every_ modern firearm, that uses a removable magazine, either use a straight push in magazine well, or a rock&lock magazine like the AK? Why does _nothing_ use a system similar to the Thompson?
Because the Thompson's magazine change system is objectively worse. It is more difficult to get right, and it is easier to fumble with when adrenaline is killing your fine motor control.
Be a fan boy, sure, fine; just at least acknowledge the dumb shit about the things you like. Blind loyalty is just stupid.
@@dposcuro Noted. But looked on purpose to me, too.
Also, the weight. I've shot both these weapons, and it's ridiculous how heavy the Thompson is! It makes the .45 cal recoil better, but from a "imma need to carry this around on patrol" mindset, I'd rather have the MP38/40.
Al Capone says otherwise, I'll take the Chicago typewriter any day
I think it’s also worth noting that he’s not comparing the Thompson that saw the majority of use in World War II. That version was the M1 Thompson, and this one shown is an older prewar version. I think it would be much more fair to show the Thompson that was redesigned specifically for the US entry into the war vs a model that had already been around for 13 years. An even fairer comparison would’ve been the MP 40 versus the M3 grease gun considering the M3 and the M1 Thompson were adopted for use within eight months of each other and the mp40 was only designed 2 years prior.
Later Thompson is worse
It would also be more fair to compare the Thompson to an MP 18 instead of a gun that's twenty years newer.
Thompson just feels so much better when you’re firing it in bursts
MP40 is a dream. Other than the mags it's one of the best smgs of the time. You can see why the cold War smg craze happened
the mp40 also have a hydraulic system way ahead its time, nowadays manufacturer like jpe have system like the silent capture spring for the ar series.
We all know the Thompson only functions if your wearing a suit and it has a drum mag.
I prefer the looks of the Thompson, but in an actual military setting, MP40 wrecks
Thats not what the germans said when they lost to america and then got raped by the russians
@@undyneuwu2541 yeah, cause their economics sucked, and they were heavily outnumbered and over powered. The M1 would be more useful than the Thompson, and also, why are you so butthurt? You feeling bad for the poor old n*zis?
Dear John Wick: Its time to polish them bullet casings!
My Uncle handled both. Thompson Submachine Guns were the best in the USA. The MP40 was better overall. Magazine jams are a result of aftermarket magazines. His preference of captured guns was an STG-44. With 2 wars under his belt, I kind of Lean to his way of thinking.
You just can’t dislike german engineering
you can if you're a mechanic.
yea until you're a mechanic doing maintenance on jagdpanther. you have to remove the whole engine upper deck, and remove the engine just for simple maintenance.
@@william3791 who tf is talking about a car. i’m talking about their weapons engineering
@@william3791 you came onto a gun video and talked about cars, what is your thought process
I love simple things being over engineered
Fire rate you say huh?
°laughs in drum magazine°
Drum was worse in every aspect
@@kniazrurik agreed
Drum magazines are shit
The drums had horrific feeding issues
Drums are terrible.
Bro expressing how much he loves a certain Austrian painter 💀💀💀💀
World at war taught me one thing, mp40 and just juggernog and you’re all set to go catch some bodies 😂
The gangster and the war criminal.
Already knew MP40 was going to be the winner, That is one of the best World war 2 submachine guns if not the best.
Hahaha, yeah no. The winner is always, always the Thompson.
@@brucecampbell4528 good argument lol
An excellent competitor would be the MAB 38
@@Shockwave724 We all know what cartridge won the war right?
@@brucecampbell4528 yes its russian and american nuke.