How about the M1911a1 colt. anyone like that side arm.?
Might I point out a quote. Its impact was such that General Dwight D. Eisenhower later described it as (together with the atom bomb, jeep and the C-47 Skytrain transport aircraft) one of the four weapons which won World War II for the allies. The bazooka was one of the first weapons based on the High explosive anti-tank (HEAT) shell to enter service. And it survived to remain in US service during the Korean War.
On the Colt model 1911 it has really good stopping power, although without modifications it has limitations concerning accuracy. I qualified with one when I was in the service before the Beretta was adopted as the standard sidearm.
I knew it!. The bazooka was compared as the next best thing since the Atomic bomb. This is great news. I somehow knew I fancied the bazooka and now that it is compared against the Atomic bomb, I like the Bazooka even more now.
Hi I am new to this forum.
I like the MG 42 especially when mounted with the scope.
My experience of it is limited mostly to a distressing experience when I was about fourteen or fifteen, when I was allowed to fire one smuggled interstate and the possession of which was a criminal offence.
I fired off a disturbingly large amount of lead without causing more than surprised indifference to the tree stump I was aiming at.
I think it would be a very accurate and very destructive weapon in combat at anything up to about ten to fifteen yards in the hands of dummies like me.
Why on earth would you mount an optical sight on a weapon which is designed to operate on the beaten zone principle?
Yours, confused of London 
If you’re accurate with it (OK, accurate enough to hit anyone) at 15 yards you’re a much better shot than me. I could just about hit a figure 12 with 1 shot in 3 from a 9mm at 10m back in September :neutral:
And on a weapon which loses all precise optical sighting after the first round in a burst?
Yours, confused of Melbourne.
There was an optical device on the MG 42 mount of the “heavy MG 42” version.
Well, it’s a long time ago and people were bigger then, while tree stumps were smaller. 
I can say with complete confidence that, using any pistol, I am lethal at a range of about ten feet / three metres.
With a stationary target.
Judging by the picture, there are huge parallax problems in all axes.
Seems more like a ranging device than a firing sight.
Not least because the firer’s shoulder will be about the level of the top optic and his head will be a lot higher.
Yeah, maybe. I’d definately agree if they were 6 feet or so closer, because then you could beat them to death with the blunt end!
well most shot were takin at about 25ys. and that is to close to me. But a gun that i think is a good weapon is a trinch gun a 12.g shot gun.
I know they’re called “trench guns” because of their use in trenches, but why not call them a shotgun? In WWII, there wasn’t much need for a trench gun, because the war wasn’t fought only in the trenches.
Well, maybe there were parallax problems, I surely don’t know. But it was a eavy mg supposed to hit at quite a distance and the frame took away most of t´he recoil.
Yes. It must have been a ranging device. Since it is not so accurate, but with a range of 3000m (hence the sight) and 1550 rounds per minutes it can just spray the hostile area as it had done in the Eastern Front. The Russians like to walk in formation during the early and middle stage of the war.
Definitely good for close in work and you do not need to worry about accuracy.
And any telescopic type sight is mounted to what? Which would cause how much of a problem from recoil? The recoil relief is not from the frame btw that is acheived by the spring on the buffer assembly.
Normally not to a weapon to fire about 1500 rounds per minute theoretically.
The thought at the time was that Shotguns were illegal under the St Petersburg Declaration (the same one that banned explosive/expanding bullets for anything smaller than an artillery piece). Hence the euphamism “trench rifle” being used.
Thank you, for that. I could not have put it beter my self.