And did you put any in wrong??? 
And did you put any in wrong??? ;)[/quote]
No, I got them all (28 rounds) in correctly, at first try
Jan
Wow! Does this mean that âsherroâ from Australia is wrong about it being a âcurseâ, just like heâs wrong about the calibres of the Chinese Mauser pistols? (they were 7.63 and .45ACP, fyi - SAOTW doesnât mention any Chinese use of the 9mm ones).
Off topic: I spoke German on the phone âin angerâ for the 1st time in ages this evening - booking a Ferienwohnung in Switzerland 
And I didnât lapse into Dutch, although I will admit to using a colloquialism due to it being close to Dutch (beinah, cf. bijna)
can not remember the correct time but at a minute you would have failed :lol:
As a non-military type, as Iâve read this debate, one question in particular keeps occuring to me, for which I would be grateful for an answer.
Ironman wrote :
The BAR could also fire tracer, armour piercing, and incendiary rounds, which were unsuitable in the Bren because of itâs curved magazine.
Could someone, preferably Ironman, since he seems to be the only one making this assertion, please advise me as to the difference between tracer/armour piercing/incendiary rounds, and normal ball ammo, which might make them unsuitable for use in a curved magazine?
From the photgraphs posted of them, they all look externally identical to me.
can not remember the correct time but at a minute you would have failed :lol:[/quote]
Yeah, but I was limited by the number of rounds I can hold in each hand.
Jan
The trick for the test is to have as many as possible in your hand with the bases of the rounds facing away from you and the rest lined up on the floor to your right hand side (if youâre right handed) also with the bases facing away from you. Then lots of quick thumb work. :lol:
Thanks for the tip! 45 seconds now!
:lol:
Jan
See it works :lol:
That was going back a long time to my ACF years ooooooo about 25 years ago :lol: We had to complete the mag loading test as part of our SAA tests for IIRC our 3 Star qualification.
Thanks for that very interesting - Whilst I dont doubt its legitimiacy other users of this forum have previously âdrawnâ their own conclusions.
Have you got a reference for that diagram?
Thank you kindly.
1-he was being sarcastic â it was an ironman reference. The distance for tracer burnout is 900 m plus, dependingâŚ
2-it weighs just over 10 kg.
3-only in that the âENâ in both cases stands for âEnfieldâ.
4-yes and no â the US never adopted a proper light machine gun. The BAR is a heavy automatic rifle, whereas the Bren is a proper light machine gun. The US attempted to fill the gap with the M1919A6 Browning, but that was far too heavy. See threads passim.
I see the BAR as a burden on a soldier, in the sence that they were used as a squad support weapon witch can move with the troops and they have a 20 round clip so its hardly going to supress an enemy without constant reloading and i suppose reloading a weapon like that might take a bit longer than reloading a bren.
I dont agree. I think the BAR was much better than the Bren as its magazines were straight and the bullets didnt have to be bent to fit in it.
Itâs not a âclipâ, itâs a magazine - a âclipâ is what was used to reload the M1 Garand & was ejected as expendable when empty.
I dont agree. I think the BAR was much better than the Bren as its magazines were straight and the bullets didnt have to be bent to fit in it.[/quote]
You actuly think the bullets were bent, ha. It came as a shock when you said that.
The Bren would be easyer to reload than a BAR and Better at supporting troops in terms of accuracy and mag size.
Has ironman hacked your account? Or is this a Wah?
It was the Germans rather than the British who used bent bullets.
They were called âKrumeierâ and specially developed for the Krumlauf of the StG-44.
Known colloquially as a load of âManneier.â