I think the reason why the US Army Ordinance didn't change the BAR design was because they have a strong tradition of resisting change until it is absolutely necessary to do so, and then wait a couple more year. I do believe the BAR to be the better weapon of the two to a certain degree, but it is just not as good as fulfilling the role of the Bren gun for the US troops.
It's also a breath of fresh to finally hear someone not trash the firearm, saying its terrible, because it's a damn good rifle. I'd deffinately take a BAR over an M16 any day of the week.
As a Brit, I've always surprised myself in that, i like the BAR more than the Bren gun. I understand its deficiencies, that ergonomically the Bren is superior but i cant help but prefer an automatic rifle. And i actually like the weight of it, i think its makes much more controllable. Only problem is that bloody 20 round mag, i heard there was an incredibly small number of 40 round mags produced, but I've only ever read anything which points to that once or twice. Anyway! That's just my opinion
Just wondering have any madsons every come on to the market i know i have seen one in a musem in France and i have read about it a bit in a book i have however i dont really know much about it.
Ted, one of my collector books talks about how the Americans captured a few MG42s in North Africa, and took them back to the US for study. We were impressed, and a contract was given to reverse engineer it for our own use. The company was not named in the book, but they copied it exactly. When it was tested for the Brass, it turned into a jam-o-matic because the designers copied everything, to include the 7.92mm chambering which obviously did not work with the 30.06. Thus, the 1919A6 was born.
Unfortunately America has always been behind the curve in machine guns. The BAR was used even in Vietnam, only to be replaced by the even worse M14E2. The 1919A4 was a dated design even in WW2, and the Germans showed the future in the Mg42. It took the US 20 years before they tried to catch up with the M60 though it is a failure compared to the older MG42. Designs ahead of their time were constantly passed over in the LMG area by the US. We were the rifle leader in WW2 but MGs have always lagged
the BAR is in my opinion in the same class as the STG 44 because the STG 44 was like the german automatic rifle(yes the stg is an assult, but it was the german automatic rifle.). The Bren is a light machine gun, it is in my opinion in the same class as the M1919 and Mg42 and Mg34s.
@506PIR101Airborne The problem about the BAR being considered in the same class as the STG 44 assault rifle is that the STG 44 fires intermediate rounds 7.92x33 while the BAR fires a full .30-06 rifle cartridge. In order for a gun to be classified as an assault rifle, it must fire an intermediate round. Plus the BAR is too long for it to be an assault rifle. I think despite its low magazine capacity of 20 rounds, it belongs in the same category as the M60 which replaced it.
@marine9588 yes its tricky, but the brits really had no lmg, so the bren fufilled this position. The germans and the us had lmgs, so a small portable rifle or assult goes in the same class in my opinion. The m60 didnt replace the BAr it replaced the 1919. The Bar and STG is like what all soldiers in the US carry today an automatic assault M4, or an automatic rifle M14. There really is no semiauto rifles used today like the garand, now we have assults, lmgs, hmgs, shotguns and auto rifles.
@506PIR101Airborne Yeah you're right. However there are semiauto rifles still in limited use. A lot of sniper rifles are semiauto. And I think the modern M14s don't really have a full auto option anymore since they are used for long range engagements. The M60 actually replaced BOTH the M1919 and the BAR although both of them continued to be used into Vietnam. That's what the M60 was designed for: to replace as many MGs in the US arsenal as possible with one solid design.
Ted I believe you claimed the M1 garland was the best infantry rifle of the war by a country mile. I'm not disputing that, I'm just curious as to what exactly made it superior to the Lee Enfield SMLE and the K98. Look forward to your feedback.
@John031989 Well, I know I rather clear a building with a M1 Grand if my other choices were bolt-action rifles. What I have gathered from different people is it comes down to the rate of fire of the M1 Grand.
Ted what would soldier do in combat if what happened to you in the vid happened to them? E. g. what is the IA drill for "barrel stuck"? How would you prepare your Bren pre-combat so that you'd NOT have the barrel catch jam? Interesting vid!
I read an Interview with Wal Ehlers. He is the last surviving MOH awardee from the Normandy campaign. He carried a Garand the entire war, even as an officer. He said that he almost never cleaned the barrel, but the chamber is what needed cleaning most on the Garand. Apparently carbon would build-up and create stoppages. He said he would just scrub the chamber out and keep going. He also said they almost never adjusted the rear sight in combat. Wasn't enough time. Set it a zero and go.
My thing I want to propose to everyone. What do you all think of the Marine Corps moving to the M27 IAR from the M249. It seems like it would have the same drawbacks as the BAR in that role. Any other input?
@whitfan27 The IAR is a better weapon for urban warfare, it is lighter, and uses the same magazines as the M16 and M4. It's also more accurate than the M249, or even the M16/M4. Another reason is that during ambushes, the bad guys target the SAW gunner first, to reduce the firepower of the fire team. This weapon looks enough like the M4, so the enemy doesn't know which Marine to target first. I know the SAW has some advantages over the IAR, and you can feel free to say them.
@TheAKgunner See I get the lightness part, or making yourself a target, and it is big to lug around in tight areas(buildings etc). accuracy would be silly though. I thought you really wanted a high RoF suppressing weapon where accuracy wasn't really that important. I just don't see how you could get the same suppression out of a mag fed heavy rifle. I guess the brass decided that wasn't as important as the benefits you outlined.
@whitfan27 The M27 can hit a man-sized target at 500 yards with a three-round burst, it would take the M249 half a belt to hit the same target. In the mountains of Afghanistan, the SAW just can't suppress target as well as rifles and carbines can. Another part of the IAR's introduction is the fact that the Red Army's not a problem anymore. The SAW was to give patrolling rifle squads a chance to escape from Soviet Army human wave attacks, and get within range of the big gun and tanks.
Alright I see your point, and thanks for making this video it clarifies a lot of questions I had. I think the main reasons why we Americans never introduced a better LMG was
1. We had the mindset of "John Browning is awesome, so we don't need anything better"
2. Most soldiers on the battlefield, and many veterans that I have talked to were extremely fond of it. It works so it's the best tool for the job. Like you said, it's an excellent Rifle, but when compared, the BREN has the advantage.
The 1919 originally was a weapon mounted on armored vehicles; that's why it's so damn unwieldy. The horse cavalry didn't have BAR's in their TOE so the 1919 was put on a tripod and adapted to be LMG for them, and then for the infantry.
The US military should have started from scratch on that problem.
It is quite clearly visible. The amount of firepower avaliable per squad is about the same with bren&lee and bar&garand. Why waste money developing a new SAW if not needed.
What did the Americans think about the 1941 Johnson LMG? With only 9000 being made I would like to know whether they thought if it was a good machine gun or not.
It's difficult for me to criticize any J.M. Browning firearm, but I agree with your take on the Bren vs. BAR from the perspective of a SAW. My understanding is that the BAR was a hastily designed replacement for the horrendously designed French Chauchat. I don't know why the US went to the French instead of the Brits when it came to a SAW. Another great video!
rather bar the magzine on the undercarriage and 30-06 sells itslef but then again im amercian an heard of the legend of this rifle tipycal flaws i heard from gis i have talked to are maginze switch out and weight along with the bipod was usally thrown away
Thank's for taking the time to post .... Thank You for sharing your Collection .... I have been a Military Collector for over 25 years .... It is always nice to see other peoples Toy's :) I myself have always been a big fan of the MP40 ... The Weapon"s on this Video are awesome ... Take care .....V V
The A6 wasn't THAT bad. It was certainly extremely heavy and awkward (and was awful compared to its German counterparts), but for paratroopers it was Jesus Christ resurrected compared to the BAR (which had all of the deficiencies associated with an automatic rifle) or the 1919A4 (which required the services of two valuable soldiers to properly deploy in the field). Plus it was an important step towards developing a true light/medium machine gun.
@nzww2buff Oh my lord, youre an absolute mind reader! I was gonna ask if you were ever gonna do a vid about the B.A.R and the Bren. I was also Watching that Lock and load 2 days ago. Great stuff! :)
The original French Mle1915 8mm Chauchat wasn't appalling it worked pretty, the magazine let it down with its massive cut out allowing dirt in.
It gets the reputation from the Mle1918 (30-06 version) the US used, they were made with incorrect chamber measurements and were rushed into production as the US didnt have anything in the way of a LMG or rifles for that matter.
The Germans paid a bounty to any solider who captured a Chauchat, if it was appalling they wouldn't have.
@F4Wildcat That video isnt worth the bandwidth its being played on... so many errors Id have shot the researcher for it. Couldnt get the calibre or range right ffs.
It is the American view on them that has given the idea they are a load of scrap metal. I wouldn't be surprised if the some problems are down to user error/improper care as the Americans didn't really get much of a chance to train with them. They came rather under equipped, France and Britain kitted most of them out and trained them.
@F4Wildcat I've read that some Doughboys were armed with Krag rifles being the lines to free up M1917 and M1903s as they didn't have enough for front line troops. Most US soldiers were armed with the M1917 anyway as there wasn't enough M1903s in reserve
Dispensing with bipod to make lighter. that kind of indicates that it isn't being used in the same role as BREN, but more as an early Squad Automatic Weapon.
I'd like to reoffer my position that the BAR's service life as logistical bureaucracy, not that it was bad or good, but we may have discovered a shortfall in the company level firepower overlap, as discussed at 12:00 at the cost of squad level fire support. Based on current doctrine, infantry has in fact evolved, we have just spotted the missing link as it were.
Ted did you ever have any experience with the 7.62 L4 Bren and how it was employed? It's curious the Bren survived for so long in British Army service even after the introduction of the L7. Converting to a rimless cartridge must have helped the Bren quite a bit.
A6 looks a little red jackety, i guess it goes to show sometimes you have to make something work, standard case of "this hammer's too small, where is the 10lb sledge"
correct me if im wrong Ted but Browning First made BAR for only semi automatic not full auto, they did that later.
They wanted a gun that fired the 30-06 and could go full auto.
Kinda like the M-14 turned out to be.
What I find funny is we (Yanks) look at everything made in WW2 as the best lol Yea look at out Tanks they did a good job at blowing up, and I think its kinda the same thing here, we could have made a better gun but we made hundreds of thousands of them and they had to be used.
14th! Love these WWII weapon's vid's, and the tactics vid's are excellent as well, keep it up Ted!! Think I'd take the BREN if I was in WWII, if I'd had a choice (I WOULD'NT HAVE!!). The BAR's not bad, but the lack of any barrel change really put's it into a 'rifleman' 'Heavy' rifle role, not a LMG role like the BREN.
@reeseman67 It'd be great to have the weapons' videos include ballistics. I think a lot of people enjoy the extra info, and it make's a significant difference in the effectiveness of the performance of the weapons shown.
one advantages of the BAR over the Bren was
there were more of them per squad then any other light machine gun/automatic rifles in the war.
If I'm wrong don't kill me.
bravowhiskey223 2 days ago
I think the reason why the US Army Ordinance didn't change the BAR design was because they have a strong tradition of resisting change until it is absolutely necessary to do so, and then wait a couple more year. I do believe the BAR to be the better weapon of the two to a certain degree, but it is just not as good as fulfilling the role of the Bren gun for the US troops.
DrDaveArson 3 weeks ago
It's also a breath of fresh to finally hear someone not trash the firearm, saying its terrible, because it's a damn good rifle. I'd deffinately take a BAR over an M16 any day of the week.
teeeeeey 4 weeks ago
As a Brit, I've always surprised myself in that, i like the BAR more than the Bren gun. I understand its deficiencies, that ergonomically the Bren is superior but i cant help but prefer an automatic rifle. And i actually like the weight of it, i think its makes much more controllable. Only problem is that bloody 20 round mag, i heard there was an incredibly small number of 40 round mags produced, but I've only ever read anything which points to that once or twice. Anyway! That's just my opinion
teeeeeey 4 weeks ago in playlist More videos from nzww2buff
The ZB is Czech Ted not french.
whylie74 1 month ago
@whylie74 Yeah, Thanks. I was thinking about the Czec gun while looking across at the M24/29. I should use notes..
nzww2buff 1 month ago
Fantastic! Video!!
Thank You Very Much!
God Love and God Bless You and Yours!!
JWnFL 1 month ago
Just wondering have any madsons every come on to the market i know i have seen one in a musem in France and i have read about it a bit in a book i have however i dont really know much about it.
topguntopcat 1 month ago
@topguntopcat Yes, they pop up from time to time. I could have brought one at auction 3 years ago, and am kicking myself that I didn't.
nzww2buff 1 month ago
@topguntopcat It is called a Madsen, it is a Danish gun.
There is a Madsen for sale on gunbroker right now. It is a Never version than the one that is shown in the video
Onemanwonder123 3 weeks ago
Ted, one of my collector books talks about how the Americans captured a few MG42s in North Africa, and took them back to the US for study. We were impressed, and a contract was given to reverse engineer it for our own use. The company was not named in the book, but they copied it exactly. When it was tested for the Brass, it turned into a jam-o-matic because the designers copied everything, to include the 7.92mm chambering which obviously did not work with the 30.06. Thus, the 1919A6 was born.
strangelovemap 1 month ago
Unfortunately America has always been behind the curve in machine guns. The BAR was used even in Vietnam, only to be replaced by the even worse M14E2. The 1919A4 was a dated design even in WW2, and the Germans showed the future in the Mg42. It took the US 20 years before they tried to catch up with the M60 though it is a failure compared to the older MG42. Designs ahead of their time were constantly passed over in the LMG area by the US. We were the rifle leader in WW2 but MGs have always lagged
Mongo63a 1 month ago
the BAR is in my opinion in the same class as the STG 44 because the STG 44 was like the german automatic rifle(yes the stg is an assult, but it was the german automatic rifle.). The Bren is a light machine gun, it is in my opinion in the same class as the M1919 and Mg42 and Mg34s.
506PIR101Airborne 1 month ago
@506PIR101Airborne The problem about the BAR being considered in the same class as the STG 44 assault rifle is that the STG 44 fires intermediate rounds 7.92x33 while the BAR fires a full .30-06 rifle cartridge. In order for a gun to be classified as an assault rifle, it must fire an intermediate round. Plus the BAR is too long for it to be an assault rifle. I think despite its low magazine capacity of 20 rounds, it belongs in the same category as the M60 which replaced it.
marine9588 1 month ago
@marine9588 yes its tricky, but the brits really had no lmg, so the bren fufilled this position. The germans and the us had lmgs, so a small portable rifle or assult goes in the same class in my opinion. The m60 didnt replace the BAr it replaced the 1919. The Bar and STG is like what all soldiers in the US carry today an automatic assault M4, or an automatic rifle M14. There really is no semiauto rifles used today like the garand, now we have assults, lmgs, hmgs, shotguns and auto rifles.
506PIR101Airborne 1 month ago
@506PIR101Airborne Yeah you're right. However there are semiauto rifles still in limited use. A lot of sniper rifles are semiauto. And I think the modern M14s don't really have a full auto option anymore since they are used for long range engagements. The M60 actually replaced BOTH the M1919 and the BAR although both of them continued to be used into Vietnam. That's what the M60 was designed for: to replace as many MGs in the US arsenal as possible with one solid design.
marine9588 1 month ago
Ted I believe you claimed the M1 garland was the best infantry rifle of the war by a country mile. I'm not disputing that, I'm just curious as to what exactly made it superior to the Lee Enfield SMLE and the K98. Look forward to your feedback.
John031989 1 month ago
@John031989 Well, I know I rather clear a building with a M1 Grand if my other choices were bolt-action rifles. What I have gathered from different people is it comes down to the rate of fire of the M1 Grand.
tobeaSEAL 1 month ago
Ted what would soldier do in combat if what happened to you in the vid happened to them? E. g. what is the IA drill for "barrel stuck"? How would you prepare your Bren pre-combat so that you'd NOT have the barrel catch jam? Interesting vid!
rylan76 1 month ago
Ted, why did they not go with the lewis gun? the brits had it and a yank designed it...
burger1690 1 month ago
sorry ted, had that last comment sent before i seen the end of ur vid
burger1690 1 month ago
I read an Interview with Wal Ehlers. He is the last surviving MOH awardee from the Normandy campaign. He carried a Garand the entire war, even as an officer. He said that he almost never cleaned the barrel, but the chamber is what needed cleaning most on the Garand. Apparently carbon would build-up and create stoppages. He said he would just scrub the chamber out and keep going. He also said they almost never adjusted the rear sight in combat. Wasn't enough time. Set it a zero and go.
mindeloman 1 month ago
Good god I love the bren, shame we got rid of them in 2005. Probably all peace pipes or some shite now.
kieranfitz 1 month ago 3
Excellent vid.
badbudgie100 1 month ago
If you write a book on weapons of war am telling you now i will buy it you Analise well
wufwufwufwuf 1 month ago
@wufwufwufwuf Kiwis always Analise well, its in their blood
ExiledOzi 1 month ago
My thing I want to propose to everyone. What do you all think of the Marine Corps moving to the M27 IAR from the M249. It seems like it would have the same drawbacks as the BAR in that role. Any other input?
whitfan27 1 month ago
@whitfan27 The IAR is a better weapon for urban warfare, it is lighter, and uses the same magazines as the M16 and M4. It's also more accurate than the M249, or even the M16/M4. Another reason is that during ambushes, the bad guys target the SAW gunner first, to reduce the firepower of the fire team. This weapon looks enough like the M4, so the enemy doesn't know which Marine to target first. I know the SAW has some advantages over the IAR, and you can feel free to say them.
TheAKgunner 1 month ago
@TheAKgunner See I get the lightness part, or making yourself a target, and it is big to lug around in tight areas(buildings etc). accuracy would be silly though. I thought you really wanted a high RoF suppressing weapon where accuracy wasn't really that important. I just don't see how you could get the same suppression out of a mag fed heavy rifle. I guess the brass decided that wasn't as important as the benefits you outlined.
whitfan27 1 month ago
@whitfan27 The M27 can hit a man-sized target at 500 yards with a three-round burst, it would take the M249 half a belt to hit the same target. In the mountains of Afghanistan, the SAW just can't suppress target as well as rifles and carbines can. Another part of the IAR's introduction is the fact that the Red Army's not a problem anymore. The SAW was to give patrolling rifle squads a chance to escape from Soviet Army human wave attacks, and get within range of the big gun and tanks.
TheAKgunner 1 month ago
Alright I see your point, and thanks for making this video it clarifies a lot of questions I had. I think the main reasons why we Americans never introduced a better LMG was
1. We had the mindset of "John Browning is awesome, so we don't need anything better"
2. Most soldiers on the battlefield, and many veterans that I have talked to were extremely fond of it. It works so it's the best tool for the job. Like you said, it's an excellent Rifle, but when compared, the BREN has the advantage.
LeverActionStudios 1 month ago
The 1919 originally was a weapon mounted on armored vehicles; that's why it's so damn unwieldy. The horse cavalry didn't have BAR's in their TOE so the 1919 was put on a tripod and adapted to be LMG for them, and then for the infantry.
The US military should have started from scratch on that problem.
sudaev 1 month ago
Bloody Bren Gun......I hate that thing
gusswilliams 1 month ago
Excellent, Sane look at two fine weapons!
RookCAF 1 month ago
It is quite clearly visible. The amount of firepower avaliable per squad is about the same with bren&lee and bar&garand. Why waste money developing a new SAW if not needed.
Arnechk 1 month ago
What did the Americans think about the 1941 Johnson LMG? With only 9000 being made I would like to know whether they thought if it was a good machine gun or not.
CRH114 1 month ago
It's difficult for me to criticize any J.M. Browning firearm, but I agree with your take on the Bren vs. BAR from the perspective of a SAW. My understanding is that the BAR was a hastily designed replacement for the horrendously designed French Chauchat. I don't know why the US went to the French instead of the Brits when it came to a SAW. Another great video!
thebudgetarmory1 1 month ago
rather bar the magzine on the undercarriage and 30-06 sells itslef but then again im amercian an heard of the legend of this rifle tipycal flaws i heard from gis i have talked to are maginze switch out and weight along with the bipod was usally thrown away
kullas924 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Thank's for taking the time to post .... Thank You for sharing your Collection .... I have been a Military Collector for over 25 years .... It is always nice to see other peoples Toy's :) I myself have always been a big fan of the MP40 ... The Weapon"s on this Video are awesome ... Take care .....V V
fangman666 1 month ago
Comment removed
fangman666 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
A lewis gun! i have to say im really jelouse ive got a bren and a no1.mk3* id love a lewis gun.
any suggestions where to get the rear handle for the bren. mine came without one.
plus you should do a tour of your museum/house lol, you've got an awesome collection
donoghue666 1 month ago
Comment removed
donoghue666 1 month ago
The A6 wasn't THAT bad. It was certainly extremely heavy and awkward (and was awful compared to its German counterparts), but for paratroopers it was Jesus Christ resurrected compared to the BAR (which had all of the deficiencies associated with an automatic rifle) or the 1919A4 (which required the services of two valuable soldiers to properly deploy in the field). Plus it was an important step towards developing a true light/medium machine gun.
Thatevilmidget 1 month ago
Oh nice, I was waiting for this one (along with everyone else apparently).
BigBosley 1 month ago
@nzww2buff Oh my lord, youre an absolute mind reader! I was gonna ask if you were ever gonna do a vid about the B.A.R and the Bren. I was also Watching that Lock and load 2 days ago. Great stuff! :)
teeeeeey 1 month ago
The ZB is not French, it's Czech. But mostly accurate and very informative.
TheHandgunhero 1 month ago
plus the yanks had the 1919 A6 witch lend it self to more of a lmg then the A4 although the barrel is not as thick so it will heat up faster
camerl2009 1 month ago
The original French Mle1915 8mm Chauchat wasn't appalling it worked pretty, the magazine let it down with its massive cut out allowing dirt in.
It gets the reputation from the Mle1918 (30-06 version) the US used, they were made with incorrect chamber measurements and were rushed into production as the US didnt have anything in the way of a LMG or rifles for that matter.
The Germans paid a bounty to any solider who captured a Chauchat, if it was appalling they wouldn't have.
Garron88 1 month ago
@Garron88 Well said, and american biased video's made by gunny doesnt contribute to this weapon aswel
The chauchat was an impressive weapon for its day, if only the magazines where made properly it would have been an excellent weapon
also many improvements where made and from 1917 it recieved much credit
Its also better to have an LMG then to not have one. The german troops where very jealous seeing brits with lewis and french with chauchat
Still great video!!
F4Wildcat 1 month ago
@F4Wildcat That video isnt worth the bandwidth its being played on... so many errors Id have shot the researcher for it. Couldnt get the calibre or range right ffs.
It is the American view on them that has given the idea they are a load of scrap metal. I wouldn't be surprised if the some problems are down to user error/improper care as the Americans didn't really get much of a chance to train with them. They came rather under equipped, France and Britain kitted most of them out and trained them.
Garron88 1 month ago
@F4Wildcat I've read that some Doughboys were armed with Krag rifles being the lines to free up M1917 and M1903s as they didn't have enough for front line troops. Most US soldiers were armed with the M1917 anyway as there wasn't enough M1903s in reserve
Garron88 1 month ago
First rate as usual. Cheers Ted :)
TheBlackSpider82 1 month ago
nice video ted! keep um coming
flipski909 1 month ago
Dispensing with bipod to make lighter. that kind of indicates that it isn't being used in the same role as BREN, but more as an early Squad Automatic Weapon.
Treblaine 1 month ago
Looking forward very much to the individual videos.
TheBoyFromNorfolk 1 month ago
I'd like to reoffer my position that the BAR's service life as logistical bureaucracy, not that it was bad or good, but we may have discovered a shortfall in the company level firepower overlap, as discussed at 12:00 at the cost of squad level fire support. Based on current doctrine, infantry has in fact evolved, we have just spotted the missing link as it were.
lambdog76 1 month ago
Are those all in firing condition?
Maxokll 1 month ago
@Maxokll they are
SamEEE12 1 month ago
@Maxokll yep but he cant fire them in NZ
camerl2009 1 month ago
Excellent! Love the blooper at the end. Murphy's Law right?
C2builder 1 month ago
@C2builder Every Bloody time, Jim! :)
nzww2buff 1 month ago 3
Ted did you ever have any experience with the 7.62 L4 Bren and how it was employed? It's curious the Bren survived for so long in British Army service even after the introduction of the L7. Converting to a rimless cartridge must have helped the Bren quite a bit.
DagaYute 1 month ago
How about the Bar vs. Lewis Gun?
SamEEE12 1 month ago
My grandfather carried a BAR in WWII, he always said it was a great rifle, just not enough capacity
brotherskeepers111 1 month ago
A6 looks a little red jackety, i guess it goes to show sometimes you have to make something work, standard case of "this hammer's too small, where is the 10lb sledge"
SacoreyRugger 1 month ago
Nice.. Nice Blooper too haha ;D
aaadream 1 month ago
My great grandfather was in WW2 and used the BAR and and he hated it lol
He later told me he droped it for a M1 grande because it was too heavy. lol
Love your videos ted keep them up
Odstx17 1 month ago
correct me if im wrong Ted but Browning First made BAR for only semi automatic not full auto, they did that later.
They wanted a gun that fired the 30-06 and could go full auto.
Kinda like the M-14 turned out to be.
What I find funny is we (Yanks) look at everything made in WW2 as the best lol Yea look at out Tanks they did a good job at blowing up, and I think its kinda the same thing here, we could have made a better gun but we made hundreds of thousands of them and they had to be used.
Odstx17 1 month ago
14th! Love these WWII weapon's vid's, and the tactics vid's are excellent as well, keep it up Ted!! Think I'd take the BREN if I was in WWII, if I'd had a choice (I WOULD'NT HAVE!!). The BAR's not bad, but the lack of any barrel change really put's it into a 'rifleman' 'Heavy' rifle role, not a LMG role like the BREN.
reeseman67 1 month ago
@reeseman67 It'd be great to have the weapons' videos include ballistics. I think a lot of people enjoy the extra info, and it make's a significant difference in the effectiveness of the performance of the weapons shown.
reeseman67 1 month ago
I never realised how large the action is on the BAR
cam131313cam 1 month ago
@cam131313cam or how small ted is
morepassionfoo 1 month ago
First.
masterwelder65 1 month ago