Whilst this is entertaining and R Lee Ermey is in top form, the shoot off between the Garand & Lee Enfield is nonsense. The Lee Enfield is capable of a much higher rate of aimed, accurate fire than is demonstrated here. The basic standard required from British soldiers was 30 aimed shots in 60 seconds, many could achieve 40+. Search on YT for 'Lee Enfield 10 rounds in 9 seconds,' a great demo of the awesome potential rate of fire of the .303.
John C. Garand was raised an American throughout the majority of his life, he was taught by Americans, in thus, leading him to be able to design the Garand and he died on American soil.
The Garand is an American gun and an American design.
a 100yd grouping concludes nothing in terms of expecting 200-300yd accuracy.
A 1 MOA group at 100 may not even be 2 MOA at 200
4 MOA at 300 is very positive even for match grade accuracy from a service rifle w/o optics.
Everything becomes irrelevant, even barrel and ammo quality if youre working with antiquated 19th century u or v notch sights. It simply doesnt spell accurate
@drummertilldeath1 The English invented the fucking slouch hat you stupid inbred Aussie nugget. English troops were wearing slouch hats in the early 1600s. Just because faggy crocodile dundee wears a slouch hat doesn't make it Australian.......nugget.
@nenos88 Springfield Armory closed in 1968, and the 1903 last produced by Springfield in 1940, no one would pay license for something they hadn't made in 26 years, two years before closing. Mauser's lawsuit was filed Feb. 1905. royalties were paid from Nov. 1905 until April of 1917 when the US entered ww1. From "the History of the m1903" from the National Firearms Museum. Where are your "facts" from?
@nenos88 Before you say something stupid like; "but Springfield still makes guns.." The company called Springfield Armory now is a private company unrelated to the Springfield Armory US Government arms manufacturer that George Washington founded in 1777. I don't know where you got your "info" from, by 1966 Springfield was all but defunct, m14 production having been taken over by TRW. The US Govt. would not have some 50 year old retroactive guilt enough to pay for something FAR obsolete
Some of that is tru and some things are not.... But that is not subject, it is important that M1 wasnt the only one, and especialy wasnt the best.....
@nenos88 have you ever shot an svt-40? I've had two of them, both were extremely picky about ammo. If you read up on the svt-40 you will find the Soviets also had problems with the svt's reliability. That's why the bolt carrier handle has the loop, so you can stick a casing in for extra leverage yanking a jammed casing out. That also why the 91-30 stayed in production throughout the war. The M1 is a far superior semi-auto
@nenos88 and the mouser copied the flint lock...... Who gives a shit another who copied who game. I don't see anyone who produced a semi automatic rifle as successful as the M1 garand for that time
@nenos88 "M1 Garand is ........" More durable Than the SVT, More reliable than the SVT and had more innovations with upper receiver. It also had much more sturdy form of construction
The SVT has a fixed bolt while the Garand had a Rotating Bolt, it was also more reliable in mud and dirt.
The Iron sights couldn't be beaten for it's time, Especially for how easy they where to operate with a big clicky rotating knob
The 40 also had numerous problems with it's gas operating system.
@tehatemachine I've owned two SVTs, They are plenty "sturdy", but they are extremely picky about ammo. They seem to run alright with non-laquered steel cases, but I've had brass cases expand and seize in the breech to the point the rear of the casing ripped off. As far as I've found, the SVT was mostly issued to non-frontline units(guard units, artillery..ect). By the Battle of Berlin, I've NEVER heard of combat infantry using the SVT, most reds carrying a 91-30/M44 or SMG
@tehatemachine The SVTs gas system is nearly identical to the FALs gas system. I've never had a problem with it, and I think, while not as beefy as the M1 gas system, it has the benefit of an adjustable gas valve where the M1 does not. As far as sturdy construction, the SVT has no reason for shame. There is not a single "fragile" part of the SVT, and the weapon will make a fine club all day long. I'm not saying it's stronger than the M1, but the ruskies do built strong guns
@cannabotany I was aware of the SVT's late service. But indeed they are comparable. The M1 has a Rotating bolt, The SVT's Is fixed. The interesting thing though about the SVT is it's clip. It's like a piece of machine steel.
@tehatemachine While comparable, I'm agreeing with you about the M1 being the better weapon, however, the SVT has a tilting bolt, not fixed. I believe the magazines for SVTs are extrude formed, and yes, very robust. What I found interesting about the SVT was that it was only issued with one mag, like the SMLE, and would be reloaded using the same 5 round stripper clips the m91-30 uses. A select fire model was also produced in small numbers that I think would've been scary to fire
"...and after that company brought suit, the U.S. government was forced to pay royalties to Mauser Werke." After some bitching from the Germans, the US paid for a LICENSE. Payment started in 1905, so I think NINE YEARS later, when world war ONE started, Mauser was fine with the 1903. Anything else, fuckstick?
You racist bastard. "nothing great about great Britain"... apart from the fact that it was Britain that was a superpower far earlier than America and had an empire that the sun never set on. Wanker
2; The whole "sun never sets" claim started to lose it's meaning 200 years ago,when a rag-tag bunch of rebels won a war against said superpower, and became fully meaningless when Canada won it's "independence" by whining
3; Rome used to be a superpower, now they're a history lesson on what not to do.
4; Like the man said, it's his show, don't like it? Get your own show, or a sense of humor, they're less effort
@cannabotany Ancient Egypt lasted longer than that. I admire America, don't get me wrong but the French also helped with the revolution. It was still impressive to defeat and gain independence from the most powerful empire at the time.
R Lee Ermey is a ignorant fuck. I love the episode where they have the M16 vs AK-47 and the Ak clearly wins. But Ermey, tho defeated in every corner of that competition except accuracy claims victory and run's off with his tail between his legs. Just like the USA in NAM.
OHHHH BULL SHIT IT IS THE GREATEST RIFLE EVER MADE. forgot about gewehr 44? or what about ak-47. fuck that american arogance. this makes me so mad. u can throw a ak into mud and itll still fire. having fun cleaing ur m1 for an hour first.
@DerrikRose1991 Oh, JUST SHUT THE FUCK UP kindly. your stupidity already astounds me. Chinese suck. THIS IS AMERICA. have fun working your fingers to the bone for a buck a year.
@DerrikRose1991 It shows that it's amazing if you can't figure out how to use a better gun. The Ak's round is heavy, inaccurate, and often poorly made. The recoil from the bolt is huge, it's unbalanced, inaccurate, and designed in 1947. Most guns built today are better
@D13fledermause the ak-47's round is far less weight than a .303 or 30-06 (i don't know what he said so im just guessing:) inaccurate clearly you have never even shot a gun or even know about them they are around if you are a good shot you can get around 2 moa with them and the recoil does not come from the bolt it comes from the weight of the bullet which is a .30 caliber and all guns today are designs of guns built over 100 years ago
@D13fledermause and of course rifles today use the best bolts barreling triggers stocks sights rifling crowning countoring fluting all that shit and did not mass manufacture them as were these rifles and yet these rifles STILL can beat modern rifles today remington 700 SPS tactical without aftermarkets help just plane old elbows or a bean bag probably .80 moa to 1 moa rifles in ww2 or capable of .50 to 1 moa without help and surplus ammunition (with the right shooter)
I surely hope you didnt just claim a surplus rifle is capable of 1 MOA....
There is absolutely no chance in hell a barrel that has had over 4,000 or so rds through it will hold half inch groups at 100yds as you claim. The right shooter isnt even a fucking variable if your throat has eroded. The right primer...bullet wt and powder with the right burn is more of a variable than the right shooter.
@USMarineRifleman0311 seems to me you don't know shit about the capabilities of ww2 weaponery i guess you're the ones who thinks it has to be some modern rifle to perform well even though the finnish (example) going through factory were STRICTLY 1.5 moa and below using a bench you can accomplish 0.75 moa with ww2 rifles of course with a proper bench and a fine shooter you should learn something about ww2 weaponry you're little remington 700 would be the way it is
offcourse not I dont know jack shit about anything. Ive only been competing with M1s and M1903s for years now.
To you a good variable is a steady bench and not the fact that the chamber is eroded and rifling coroded....
4,000 rds is the mark at which benchrest and hi power shooters always rebarrel their match rifles. Its the mark comp shooters since 1919 would agree on to do a barrel change.
@USMarineRifleman0311 or even any rifle what so ever of the modern era as there are almost all based on the mausers action and i doubt anyone would sell a rifle with the rifling all torn up and if you think out all the 100m rifles out there every single one was had 4k rounds through it ? not at all and whoever asshole told you that should slap themselves for making such an ignorant biased person to believe such a thing
@D13fledermause also no round is innacurate it's the way the rifle is built you can have in your case a shitty 7.62x39 chamber it to lets say a lobave SVL and you can get a EASY sub moa probably even at it's accuracy with reloaded ammuniton 0.3 moa
@USMarineRifleman0311 no one would ever say the capabilities of these rifles are 0.75 to 1.5 moa with of course the proper bore and rifling if it was not true of course a mosin or any rifle with no rifling and a bad bore and terribly rifling and a extremely tight barrel (you know what i mean the bands holding the stock barrel and hand guards together) and only a fucker would believe so but a clean bore and rifling with a bench and a good shooter 1 moa for those rifle is easy
a good bench? Do you realize how much wobble there is in a Mosin or K98's elevating slide rear sight? The tolerance is low and 1 MOA isnt even remotely consistent.
A steady hold isnt a variable..Good consistently loaded ammo, good barrel, good barrel harmonics and adjustable rear sights are variables that add up to 1 or sub 1 MOA accuracy.
@USMarineRifleman0311 these are ww2 rifles they are not modern rifles were today there to much of a cunt to exept a 3 pound trigger pull and a cock on open control fed bolt without there little mcmillian glass bedded stock and a crowned muzzle and a harris bipod which is not equipped with modern technology but yet the fact that it's simple tech it's amazing accuracy now actually fire a ww2 rifling without blaming the rifle but yourself
@USMarineRifleman0311 wrong twist rate are you referring to that fucker remington 700 SPS with a 1:12 twist for a 100+ grain bullets are you saying that is proper as in ww2 rifles are correct to the twist 1:9 im sure if you add on to that bullshit they put on to todays rifle fucking mislpec 5r barrel or a krieger glass bedding a-4 stock and all that shit you will have the same results as todays rifles 0.5 moa a bad shooter can have an the best rifles and get shit groupings
The best I was able to achieve with my 1903 (non A3) after it was accurized (still iron sighted) was 1 1/2 MOA at 200yds (meaning under 4 inches)
and 3 MOA at 350yds. Prone - unsupported.
I tried the same with handloaded ammo in Mosin and German Mauser rifles and couldnt even come close. The best I did with an early war 98k was 3in @ 100yds occasionally.
I stopped wasting my time on shitty sighted rifles with no windage.
All three are great rifles in their own right. The 1903 is a great rifle but the action was practically stolen from the Mauser. The Lee Enfield had 10 rounds, which gave a huge battlefield advantage. The Garand was the biggest game-changer by being the only standard-issue semiautomatic rifle of the war. When everyone else has mostly bolt actions and you have mostly semi-auto rifles, it makes a Hell of a difference.
@Mr2ndAmendment The 1903 is so similar to the 98 action because it's a licensed copy, slightly modified. Back then, the US cared about it's foreign relations, so the US actually paid Mauser for the rights to produce the 98 action. The Remington 700 series rifle is the most produced copy of the 98 action
@cannabotany There is nothing at all similar between the 98k (and copies ie yugo 24/47). The 98k has a split bolt lug for a receiver affixed ejector, claw extractor, and open-to-the-bottom bolt. It's receiver is milled square with an integral recoil lug, firing pin safety that triples actions as a bolt lock, and the bolt release is external. The barrel torques against an internal torquing shoulder.
@cannabotany The R700 has a sear-block safety, tubular receiver, modular recoil lug, closed bolt face, c-ring extractor, bolt mounted spring induced ejector, and its barrel torques on the receiver rim.
I believe you are thinking of the pre-70 winchester which shares the milled square bottom receiver with integral recoil lug, open-to-the-bottom bolt (CRF), receiver affixed ejector, and 3-position type bolt safety.
@foxfyre841 No, I believe I was thinking of the R700. Despite the minor design differences you've mentioned, the R700 is a 98 type action, the Winchester M70 is too. The bolt is cocked on the upturn of the bolt handle, three locking lugs, controlled feed. There really are only three major bolt action designs; Mauser, Lee-Enfield, and The Mosin-Nagant. All modern bolt actions are derived from one of these actions
@cannabotany Hmmm, you are correct. It should be noted that the mauser system that was copied was the two fixed (to the bolt) locking lugs located at the head of the bolt. That third lug doesn't make contact and isn't really necessary when you don't split the one of the two main lugs to fit an ejector passage-way. The cocking system was not as revolutionary as it was just a reversal of the camming surface in already engineered rifles; coo/coc - which is better is still debated.
@foxfyre841 Look, I understand you wanting to strut your gun knowledge, but nothing you have said has been news to me. The Mauser cocking system was adapted from the Mosin Nagant bolt system. It is not a reversal of the cock-on-close, as that system doesn't have any cocking cam, the sear simply catches the striker upon the bolt returning to battery
@cannabotany I'll take that as a compliment, of sorts. I guess all I was trying to say was that the R700 design is fairly removed and improved (debatably) from the old 1898 design that I think it unfair to call it a copy of mauser action. By the 60's, fixed lugs on the bolt head and COO was just how it was done with but very few and only mildly received platforms. It's like griping about how tissue paper infringes kleenex's products: sandpaper just didn't work as well as tissue.
@foxfyre841 have you ever even looked at both of the bolts there quite similar especially knowing there bolt cock on open and the extractor firing pin and spring does not make a huge distant :/
@MrDip02 Like I said, the "copied" portion regarding the r700 is that it cocks on opening and bolts lugs are attached to the head of the bolt sleeve. The firing pin is not original to mauser and was itself a copy of previous generations. The "copied" part is the cocking mechanism and bolt sleeve. All other mechanisms are so different that calling the R700 a "copy" is disingenuous. And no, a mauser in military configuration will lose against modern BR rifles.
@foxfyre841 haha wow now the comments work and i never said a mauser beating a BR of course a BR would the only reason is because there just remington 700's or savages modded to there full extent without after markets help i believe you can get a good competition between the two to be honest. But like i said before nobody is really comparing the remington and mauser as they would with a springfield and mauser they know there are differences and there similarities
Pity that some who have commented about this video don`t share the same sense of humour as Gunny Ermey and Gary,people take things too seriously.Great video,even though I am a Brit.HaHa.
I actually found this really amusing. All great guns, and a rather amusing script to boot. God save the queen and all that, but god bless you yankees too. Not that I believe in god, but then that's the saying old boy.
@ImperatorZor Both armies took more casualties fighting the Germans who had nearly no food, and no air force. American and British army struggled so bad against Germany.
Germans were a threat, but that lot of Idiotic Racist barbarians were no match for the Arsenal of Democracy or the Iron Resolve of the people of the Soviet Union. They did alot of damage, but they could have avoided it by simply not going to war in the first place. Eternal Glory to the Victors who rid the world of the Nazi Scum
@ImperatorZor Were a threat? How come Hitler offered peace to Britain 3 times alone. How come no one declared war on the Soviet Union for invading Poland as well, or even Finland? How come the States claimed to be neutral but lended the allies 50.1 billion dollars? How come the US gov. blamed the katyn forrest massacre on the Germans which could have showed that Poland's threat was Stalin, not Hitler?
One of the interesting things here that always gets in the way when people want to talk about "which is better" is the technological progression. IMO, a later weapon SHOULD be better. So a 1907 rifle should be better than a 1903, and a 1936 rifle should be better than BOTH simply because, when you're looking at an older weapon, you should be aiming to be equal or better in quality.
To those of you in Europe who claim to hate our arrogance fear not. We are rapidly following your example of socialistic mediocrity. I wonder what will happen when you no longer have the "big dumb brute" Americans to fight your wars for you. I don't think Europians have even thought about that. What happens when we are gone? Who is gonna pick up that slack? England? Germany? France? You are alot closer to the middle east then we are. Keep that in mind my Europian friends.
How would England ever speak German??? How old are you man? Did you sleep through history class when they discussed WWII? Either way, doesn't matter. I'll leave you with this. United States 2 England 0. And if you can't figure out why it's 2 then look up the war of 1812.
@engliscwarrior Answer a question with a question. Look, I'm not trying to get into an argument here. I just threw down 3 posts here in response to your "education" comment and all I get back is "did you get educated by a dustbin?" My academic petagree shouldn't be in question here. I am simply wondering if you are up to date on your world history, especially when it concerns WWII. Maybe they don't teach that in public schools in England?
@T2003Cubs This guy is obviously a troll, I mean no one could believe that. If h has been educated as well as he says he has then he would not think this. Also I love how you said that Europe is "a lot closer to to the middle east" than America. So you're suggesting that the middle east is going to successfully invade Europe without American help? Good one. You do amuse me.
@TheBigOddOne No, I'm saying that the middle east is an absolute mess and it will spread to Europe faster then it will spread to the U.S. simply due to geographical location. That's all. We can pull all our boys home. Successfully secure our borders and know that we have an ocean between us and them. If the U.S. takes an isolationist standpoint Europe will be left to deal with the middle east and Israel.
I'm glad the French didn't weigh in on this video. Hell, the French didn't even help us get Hitler out of France! I do like the Brits though, seem to be the only ones in the world that have our back.
@engliscwarrior World History man. Do you not remember Hitler trying to take over all of Europe? What language did he speak? Even your boy Churchill had the decency to admit what role we played in saving Europe.
LOL, the song Yankee Doodle, was made up by people who lived in England to make FUN of Americans... you know the lyrics "...Stuck a Feather in his hat & Called it Macaroni"?! You ever wonder why in the hell he called it Maccaroni? "Maccaroni" was 18th Century (1700's) English slang for a guy who was a Homosexual of like Richard Simmons proportions & the thing that pissed the Britt's off worse than ANYTHING, is US Colonists were like "That's Catchy, I LIKE IT!!" & made it into THE US Sing-Along
Whilst this is entertaining and R Lee Ermey is in top form, the shoot off between the Garand & Lee Enfield is nonsense. The Lee Enfield is capable of a much higher rate of aimed, accurate fire than is demonstrated here. The basic standard required from British soldiers was 30 aimed shots in 60 seconds, many could achieve 40+. Search on YT for 'Lee Enfield 10 rounds in 9 seconds,' a great demo of the awesome potential rate of fire of the .303.
LIVERPOOLSCOTTISH 1 day ago
the british dude cracked me up
K3yB04dG000n 1 day ago
nice canadian gun the m1 garand lol
Scotchegz 2 days ago
@Scotchegz
John C. Garand was raised an American throughout the majority of his life, he was taught by Americans, in thus, leading him to be able to design the Garand and he died on American soil.
The Garand is an American gun and an American design.
Cozmolyne 1 day ago
Finally, characters I care about.
I own all those rifles.
tnekkc 3 days ago
Could watch Ermey all day. It's almost like watching Full Metal Jacket the reality show. Fun, but kinda surreal at the same time.
Rekaert 3 days ago
that guy was in texas chainsaw massacre. awsum movie.
cornholio119 5 days ago
a 100yd grouping concludes nothing in terms of expecting 200-300yd accuracy.
A 1 MOA group at 100 may not even be 2 MOA at 200
4 MOA at 300 is very positive even for match grade accuracy from a service rifle w/o optics.
Everything becomes irrelevant, even barrel and ammo quality if youre working with antiquated 19th century u or v notch sights. It simply doesnt spell accurate
USMarineRifleman0311 6 days ago
@USMarineRifleman0311 yes i know what moa is it's not the sights it's you
MrDip02 6 days ago
@MrDip02
please show up to the vintage rifle match at camp perry this spring.
Its all shot from the prone, you can teach all of us. According to you, a 300-30x score is entirely possible...but none of us have yet done it.
USMarineRifleman0311 5 days ago
Its more like the soldier vs the sniper
8TheManWithNoName8 1 week ago
"waiting for a korean" LOL
8TheManWithNoName8 1 week ago
I'd say it was more of a tie than a win.
sokkaizcool 1 week ago
Comment removed
ShadowSniperMaster 1 week ago
lmao #1 you love your teeth...
sHAd0W11591 2 weeks ago
More like TF2 Soldier beats the TF2 Sniper. Typical USA vs UK
Gabelogans 2 weeks ago
yeke doodle went to town riding on the pony !!!
ljuljzi 2 weeks ago
Why no .50 CAL????
MySniperRifle 2 weeks ago
1. Turn on Captions
2. Click Transcribe Audio
3. Laugh your tits off.
microscar 2 weeks ago 19
@microscar bound for men and whining XD
MrDip02 1 week ago
@microscar rofl Had to go back and watch it all again without captions.
BonesTheCat 1 week ago
@microscar lol, i was dying!
drughello 1 week ago
Sniper never got backstabbed.
applejax89 3 weeks ago
actually the 30-40 krag was the first smokeless round
danthman114 3 weeks ago
okay the other guys a pom...... WHY THE FUCK IS HE WEARING MY BELOVED SLOUCH HAT THIS IS PURE BLASPHMEY!!!!!!!!!!!
drummertilldeath1 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@drummertilldeath1 The English invented the fucking slouch hat you stupid inbred Aussie nugget. English troops were wearing slouch hats in the early 1600s. Just because faggy crocodile dundee wears a slouch hat doesn't make it Australian.......nugget.
RupertEricshin 2 weeks ago
@MrMafiaSniper And the German K98k
MuchoFunkie 3 weeks ago
a canadian built and desiged the m1
dustynas 3 weeks ago
I dont know where you read that but that is only partly true, they payed license in 1966, waay after WW2 happened...... d ic ksu cke r.
nenos88 3 weeks ago
@nenos88 Springfield Armory closed in 1968, and the 1903 last produced by Springfield in 1940, no one would pay license for something they hadn't made in 26 years, two years before closing. Mauser's lawsuit was filed Feb. 1905. royalties were paid from Nov. 1905 until April of 1917 when the US entered ww1. From "the History of the m1903" from the National Firearms Museum. Where are your "facts" from?
cannabotany 3 weeks ago
@nenos88 Before you say something stupid like; "but Springfield still makes guns.." The company called Springfield Armory now is a private company unrelated to the Springfield Armory US Government arms manufacturer that George Washington founded in 1777. I don't know where you got your "info" from, by 1966 Springfield was all but defunct, m14 production having been taken over by TRW. The US Govt. would not have some 50 year old retroactive guilt enough to pay for something FAR obsolete
cannabotany 3 weeks ago
Tf2 sniper is Australian not British.
03oliwri 3 weeks ago
we gave u the langue, OOOOOOOO hh!!!! 10 points too the britt !!!!
MrRoxswe 3 weeks ago
Some of that is tru and some things are not.... But that is not subject, it is important that M1 wasnt the only one, and especialy wasnt the best.....
nenos88 3 weeks ago
@nenos88 have you ever shot an svt-40? I've had two of them, both were extremely picky about ammo. If you read up on the svt-40 you will find the Soviets also had problems with the svt's reliability. That's why the bolt carrier handle has the loop, so you can stick a casing in for extra leverage yanking a jammed casing out. That also why the 91-30 stayed in production throughout the war. The M1 is a far superior semi-auto
cannabotany 3 weeks ago
Dickhead, model 1903 is copy of Mauser, Mauser wanted to sue them for that but WW2 accured and that went off......
nenos88 4 weeks ago
@nenos88 ww1
alcapone796 3 weeks ago
@nenos88 and the mouser copied the flint lock...... Who gives a shit another who copied who game. I don't see anyone who produced a semi automatic rifle as successful as the M1 garand for that time
tehatemachine 3 weeks ago
@tehatemachine Than you dont see that Russia was producing SVT 40 which is great rifle, as M1 Garand is ........
nenos88 3 weeks ago
@nenos88 "M1 Garand is ........" More durable Than the SVT, More reliable than the SVT and had more innovations with upper receiver. It also had much more sturdy form of construction
The SVT has a fixed bolt while the Garand had a Rotating Bolt, it was also more reliable in mud and dirt.
The Iron sights couldn't be beaten for it's time, Especially for how easy they where to operate with a big clicky rotating knob
The 40 also had numerous problems with it's gas operating system.
tehatemachine 3 weeks ago
@tehatemachine The Russian SVT? The German G41 and G43?
MuchoFunkie 3 weeks ago
@MuchoFunkie the SVT 40 i'm comparing. The M1 has better sights and is much more sturdy in my opinion.
tehatemachine 3 weeks ago
@tehatemachine I've owned two SVTs, They are plenty "sturdy", but they are extremely picky about ammo. They seem to run alright with non-laquered steel cases, but I've had brass cases expand and seize in the breech to the point the rear of the casing ripped off. As far as I've found, the SVT was mostly issued to non-frontline units(guard units, artillery..ect). By the Battle of Berlin, I've NEVER heard of combat infantry using the SVT, most reds carrying a 91-30/M44 or SMG
cannabotany 3 weeks ago
@tehatemachine The SVTs gas system is nearly identical to the FALs gas system. I've never had a problem with it, and I think, while not as beefy as the M1 gas system, it has the benefit of an adjustable gas valve where the M1 does not. As far as sturdy construction, the SVT has no reason for shame. There is not a single "fragile" part of the SVT, and the weapon will make a fine club all day long. I'm not saying it's stronger than the M1, but the ruskies do built strong guns
cannabotany 3 weeks ago
@cannabotany I was aware of the SVT's late service. But indeed they are comparable. The M1 has a Rotating bolt, The SVT's Is fixed. The interesting thing though about the SVT is it's clip. It's like a piece of machine steel.
tehatemachine 3 weeks ago
@tehatemachine While comparable, I'm agreeing with you about the M1 being the better weapon, however, the SVT has a tilting bolt, not fixed. I believe the magazines for SVTs are extrude formed, and yes, very robust. What I found interesting about the SVT was that it was only issued with one mag, like the SMLE, and would be reloaded using the same 5 round stripper clips the m91-30 uses. A select fire model was also produced in small numbers that I think would've been scary to fire
cannabotany 3 weeks ago
@nenos88 About the 1903,
"...and after that company brought suit, the U.S. government was forced to pay royalties to Mauser Werke." After some bitching from the Germans, the US paid for a LICENSE. Payment started in 1905, so I think NINE YEARS later, when world war ONE started, Mauser was fine with the 1903. Anything else, fuckstick?
cannabotany 3 weeks ago
You racist bastard. "nothing great about great Britain"... apart from the fact that it was Britain that was a superpower far earlier than America and had an empire that the sun never set on. Wanker
chucklingchicken 4 weeks ago
@chucklingchicken 1; that's not racist, it's nationalist
2; The whole "sun never sets" claim started to lose it's meaning 200 years ago,when a rag-tag bunch of rebels won a war against said superpower, and became fully meaningless when Canada won it's "independence" by whining
3; Rome used to be a superpower, now they're a history lesson on what not to do.
4; Like the man said, it's his show, don't like it? Get your own show, or a sense of humor, they're less effort
cannabotany 4 weeks ago
@cannabotany Oh boo hoo Rome on lasted 2000 years.
junkietomato 4 weeks ago
@junkietomato so has Egypt. What's your point?
cannabotany 4 weeks ago
@cannabotany Ancient Egypt lasted longer than that. I admire America, don't get me wrong but the French also helped with the revolution. It was still impressive to defeat and gain independence from the most powerful empire at the time.
junkietomato 3 weeks ago
One dislike was Private Pyle..
ThePissyNoob 1 month ago
R Lee Ermey is a ignorant fuck. I love the episode where they have the M16 vs AK-47 and the Ak clearly wins. But Ermey, tho defeated in every corner of that competition except accuracy claims victory and run's off with his tail between his legs. Just like the USA in NAM.
JitteryPickles 1 month ago
Damn R Lee Erry don't fuck around, "Churchill...it's MY show." XD fucking died!
ketegesvaterdegoge 1 month ago
isnt the mosin nagant "the worlds most famous bolt action rifle"??? :o
TheHappyRagequitter 1 month ago
@TheHappyRagequitter Actually I think Mauser 98 holds that title.
Whitehorze 1 month ago
Too bad the Brit wasn't using the Mad Minute shooting technique. He may have put up more of a fight.
LTWW2 1 month ago
this is my rifle this is my gun this is for fighting this is for fun
FastoJetso 1 month ago
plus: the second shooting aint a fair fight. to reload the enfield takes way longer. ARGH FUCK HIM
DerrikRose1991 1 month ago
OHHHH BULL SHIT IT IS THE GREATEST RIFLE EVER MADE. forgot about gewehr 44? or what about ak-47. fuck that american arogance. this makes me so mad. u can throw a ak into mud and itll still fire. having fun cleaing ur m1 for an hour first.
DerrikRose1991 1 month ago
@DerrikRose1991 Oh, JUST SHUT THE FUCK UP kindly. your stupidity already astounds me. Chinese suck. THIS IS AMERICA. have fun working your fingers to the bone for a buck a year.
GreenDub1000 1 month ago
@GreenDub1000 "this is america" ... wow ... that point really got me.
dumbass
DerrikRose1991 1 month ago
@DerrikRose1991 Get the fuck out of here. you clearly have no idea what the hell your talking about, you lifeless troll.
GreenDub1000 1 month ago
@DerrikRose1991 The AK 47 blows unless you're an illiterate soldier
D13fledermause 1 month ago
@D13fledermause for one, it shows u how great the gun is. its easy to use and great.
and for another: that doesnt mean shit
DerrikRose1991 1 month ago
@DerrikRose1991 It shows that it's amazing if you can't figure out how to use a better gun. The Ak's round is heavy, inaccurate, and often poorly made. The recoil from the bolt is huge, it's unbalanced, inaccurate, and designed in 1947. Most guns built today are better
D13fledermause 1 month ago 3
@D13fledermause the ak-47's round is far less weight than a .303 or 30-06 (i don't know what he said so im just guessing:) inaccurate clearly you have never even shot a gun or even know about them they are around if you are a good shot you can get around 2 moa with them and the recoil does not come from the bolt it comes from the weight of the bullet which is a .30 caliber and all guns today are designs of guns built over 100 years ago
MrDip02 1 week ago
@D13fledermause and of course rifles today use the best bolts barreling triggers stocks sights rifling crowning countoring fluting all that shit and did not mass manufacture them as were these rifles and yet these rifles STILL can beat modern rifles today remington 700 SPS tactical without aftermarkets help just plane old elbows or a bean bag probably .80 moa to 1 moa rifles in ww2 or capable of .50 to 1 moa without help and surplus ammunition (with the right shooter)
MrDip02 1 week ago
@MrDip02
I surely hope you didnt just claim a surplus rifle is capable of 1 MOA....
There is absolutely no chance in hell a barrel that has had over 4,000 or so rds through it will hold half inch groups at 100yds as you claim. The right shooter isnt even a fucking variable if your throat has eroded. The right primer...bullet wt and powder with the right burn is more of a variable than the right shooter.
R700...all the way.
btw I shoot a 1903 SPRG in competition
USMarineRifleman0311 1 week ago
@USMarineRifleman0311 seems to me you don't know shit about the capabilities of ww2 weaponery i guess you're the ones who thinks it has to be some modern rifle to perform well even though the finnish (example) going through factory were STRICTLY 1.5 moa and below using a bench you can accomplish 0.75 moa with ww2 rifles of course with a proper bench and a fine shooter you should learn something about ww2 weaponry you're little remington 700 would be the way it is
MrDip02 1 week ago
@MrDip02
offcourse not I dont know jack shit about anything. Ive only been competing with M1s and M1903s for years now.
To you a good variable is a steady bench and not the fact that the chamber is eroded and rifling coroded....
4,000 rds is the mark at which benchrest and hi power shooters always rebarrel their match rifles. Its the mark comp shooters since 1919 would agree on to do a barrel change.
USMarineRifleman0311 6 days ago
@USMarineRifleman0311 or even any rifle what so ever of the modern era as there are almost all based on the mausers action and i doubt anyone would sell a rifle with the rifling all torn up and if you think out all the 100m rifles out there every single one was had 4k rounds through it ? not at all and whoever asshole told you that should slap themselves for making such an ignorant biased person to believe such a thing
MrDip02 1 week ago
@D13fledermause also no round is innacurate it's the way the rifle is built you can have in your case a shitty 7.62x39 chamber it to lets say a lobave SVL and you can get a EASY sub moa probably even at it's accuracy with reloaded ammuniton 0.3 moa
MrDip02 1 week ago
@MrDip02
you 1/3 MOA claims are entirely ludicrous.
If you marry up a caliber with the wrong twist rate barrel that right there isnt going to give you even 2 MOA
quit pulling exaggerated shit out of your ass. Youre not the only person who reloads.
USMarineRifleman0311 1 week ago
@USMarineRifleman0311 no one would ever say the capabilities of these rifles are 0.75 to 1.5 moa with of course the proper bore and rifling if it was not true of course a mosin or any rifle with no rifling and a bad bore and terribly rifling and a extremely tight barrel (you know what i mean the bands holding the stock barrel and hand guards together) and only a fucker would believe so but a clean bore and rifling with a bench and a good shooter 1 moa for those rifle is easy
MrDip02 1 week ago
@MrDip02
a good bench? Do you realize how much wobble there is in a Mosin or K98's elevating slide rear sight? The tolerance is low and 1 MOA isnt even remotely consistent.
A steady hold isnt a variable..Good consistently loaded ammo, good barrel, good barrel harmonics and adjustable rear sights are variables that add up to 1 or sub 1 MOA accuracy.
USMarineRifleman0311 6 days ago
@USMarineRifleman0311 these are ww2 rifles they are not modern rifles were today there to much of a cunt to exept a 3 pound trigger pull and a cock on open control fed bolt without there little mcmillian glass bedded stock and a crowned muzzle and a harris bipod which is not equipped with modern technology but yet the fact that it's simple tech it's amazing accuracy now actually fire a ww2 rifling without blaming the rifle but yourself
MrDip02 1 week ago
@USMarineRifleman0311 wrong twist rate are you referring to that fucker remington 700 SPS with a 1:12 twist for a 100+ grain bullets are you saying that is proper as in ww2 rifles are correct to the twist 1:9 im sure if you add on to that bullshit they put on to todays rifle fucking mislpec 5r barrel or a krieger glass bedding a-4 stock and all that shit you will have the same results as todays rifles 0.5 moa a bad shooter can have an the best rifles and get shit groupings
MrDip02 1 week ago
@MrDip02
The best I was able to achieve with my 1903 (non A3) after it was accurized (still iron sighted) was 1 1/2 MOA at 200yds (meaning under 4 inches)
and 3 MOA at 350yds. Prone - unsupported.
I tried the same with handloaded ammo in Mosin and German Mauser rifles and couldnt even come close. The best I did with an early war 98k was 3in @ 100yds occasionally.
I stopped wasting my time on shitty sighted rifles with no windage.
USMarineRifleman0311 6 days ago
@DerrikRose1991 LOL ak-47
8159173 1 month ago
the stuff ermy says makes me mad once more. american arogance is fucking ridic. imma laugh when the chinese kick ur ass
DerrikRose1991 1 month ago
@DerrikRose1991 It's called humor there pal
D13fledermause 1 month ago
no wonder the brits hate most of us
mmi794939 1 month ago
The M-1 was in service from 1936-56 the M-16 has been in service since 1966
sass225 1 month ago
Is he the drill instructor from Full Metal Jacket?
xXCREEKSTARXx 1 month ago
@xXCREEKSTARXx ARE YOU SHITTING ME? GET DOWN ON YOUR FACE MAGGOT AND GIVE ME 30!! OF COURSE HE IS!
tehatemachine 1 month ago
@tehatemachine
I found that out about 20 minutes after i wrote that comment XD
Ok, i did the 30 :/
:D
xXCREEKSTARXx 1 month ago
@xXCREEKSTARXx GOOD! CARRY ON!
tehatemachine 1 month ago
All three are great rifles in their own right. The 1903 is a great rifle but the action was practically stolen from the Mauser. The Lee Enfield had 10 rounds, which gave a huge battlefield advantage. The Garand was the biggest game-changer by being the only standard-issue semiautomatic rifle of the war. When everyone else has mostly bolt actions and you have mostly semi-auto rifles, it makes a Hell of a difference.
Mr2ndAmendment 1 month ago
@Mr2ndAmendment The 1903 is so similar to the 98 action because it's a licensed copy, slightly modified. Back then, the US cared about it's foreign relations, so the US actually paid Mauser for the rights to produce the 98 action. The Remington 700 series rifle is the most produced copy of the 98 action
cannabotany 1 month ago
@cannabotany There is nothing at all similar between the 98k (and copies ie yugo 24/47). The 98k has a split bolt lug for a receiver affixed ejector, claw extractor, and open-to-the-bottom bolt. It's receiver is milled square with an integral recoil lug, firing pin safety that triples actions as a bolt lock, and the bolt release is external. The barrel torques against an internal torquing shoulder.
The R700 has none of that.
foxfyre841 4 weeks ago
@cannabotany The R700 has a sear-block safety, tubular receiver, modular recoil lug, closed bolt face, c-ring extractor, bolt mounted spring induced ejector, and its barrel torques on the receiver rim.
I believe you are thinking of the pre-70 winchester which shares the milled square bottom receiver with integral recoil lug, open-to-the-bottom bolt (CRF), receiver affixed ejector, and 3-position type bolt safety.
foxfyre841 4 weeks ago
@foxfyre841 No, I believe I was thinking of the R700. Despite the minor design differences you've mentioned, the R700 is a 98 type action, the Winchester M70 is too. The bolt is cocked on the upturn of the bolt handle, three locking lugs, controlled feed. There really are only three major bolt action designs; Mauser, Lee-Enfield, and The Mosin-Nagant. All modern bolt actions are derived from one of these actions
cannabotany 4 weeks ago
@cannabotany Hmmm, you are correct. It should be noted that the mauser system that was copied was the two fixed (to the bolt) locking lugs located at the head of the bolt. That third lug doesn't make contact and isn't really necessary when you don't split the one of the two main lugs to fit an ejector passage-way. The cocking system was not as revolutionary as it was just a reversal of the camming surface in already engineered rifles; coo/coc - which is better is still debated.
foxfyre841 4 weeks ago
@foxfyre841 Look, I understand you wanting to strut your gun knowledge, but nothing you have said has been news to me. The Mauser cocking system was adapted from the Mosin Nagant bolt system. It is not a reversal of the cock-on-close, as that system doesn't have any cocking cam, the sear simply catches the striker upon the bolt returning to battery
cannabotany 4 weeks ago
@cannabotany I'll take that as a compliment, of sorts. I guess all I was trying to say was that the R700 design is fairly removed and improved (debatably) from the old 1898 design that I think it unfair to call it a copy of mauser action. By the 60's, fixed lugs on the bolt head and COO was just how it was done with but very few and only mildly received platforms. It's like griping about how tissue paper infringes kleenex's products: sandpaper just didn't work as well as tissue.
foxfyre841 4 weeks ago
Comment removed
MrDip02 1 week ago
@foxfyre841 have you ever even looked at both of the bolts there quite similar especially knowing there bolt cock on open and the extractor firing pin and spring does not make a huge distant :/
MrDip02 1 week ago
@MrDip02 Like I said, the "copied" portion regarding the r700 is that it cocks on opening and bolts lugs are attached to the head of the bolt sleeve. The firing pin is not original to mauser and was itself a copy of previous generations. The "copied" part is the cocking mechanism and bolt sleeve. All other mechanisms are so different that calling the R700 a "copy" is disingenuous. And no, a mauser in military configuration will lose against modern BR rifles.
Also: please punctuate.
foxfyre841 1 week ago
@foxfyre841 haha wow now the comments work and i never said a mauser beating a BR of course a BR would the only reason is because there just remington 700's or savages modded to there full extent without after markets help i believe you can get a good competition between the two to be honest. But like i said before nobody is really comparing the remington and mauser as they would with a springfield and mauser they know there are differences and there similarities
MrDip02 1 week ago
"Churchill, It`s my show"
Lol, I laughed so hard at that part.
CSnakeV 1 month ago 2
Pity that some who have commented about this video don`t share the same sense of humour as Gunny Ermey and Gary,people take things too seriously.Great video,even though I am a Brit.HaHa.
Marlever357 1 month ago
Damn u America my ass!!!! Britain for me!!!! Wooooo
1267harry 1 month ago
He's Britain, not Austrailian.
Scarifar1 1 month ago
BRITAIN
sergeikozin47 1 month ago
Boom... headshot.
roachcoach 1 month ago
*And I love my M16A1
TheChauChannel 1 month ago
And I love M16A1
TheChauChannel 1 month ago
Actually the french invented smokeless gun powder i.e 1886 lebel, Brits are classy, gringos are rejects of Europe
prosig556 1 month ago
I compleatly dissagree with the video title, the lee beat the springfield and the m1 beat the lee that makes it a tie in my books.
gav111223 1 month ago
whats a tf2???
ermaslv44 1 month ago
@ermaslv44 hahaha team fortress 2 they are saying that british guy looks like the sniper from tf2
LTrakinat 1 month ago
i loved this show. This was the funniest episode of Lock n Load! gunny is very entertaining to watch!
jeph4life 1 month ago
Best thing I ever heard Gunny say... "Churchill its my show."
abonynge 1 month ago
actually well trained rifleman can match the fire rate of m1 with the enfield and even the slr which replaced the enfield
janak19771977 1 month ago
Right? RIGHT, your bloody well right ya know ya got a right to say!!
MrChupacabra1995 1 month ago
What a bunch of slanted/rigged BS this video is. Shame on you Gunny.
JimmyG228 1 month ago
gunny is wrong, the 30-06 wasnt the first smokeless cartridge, the 30-30 was, i thought that was common knowledge among shooters
ktktwix 1 month ago
Comment removed
skyisfelling 1 month ago
the lee enfield is a trully gentleman rifle.if you see their lines they are so elegant.
kjsh987 1 month ago
I actually found this really amusing. All great guns, and a rather amusing script to boot. God save the queen and all that, but god bless you yankees too. Not that I believe in god, but then that's the saying old boy.
SergeantJWhite 1 month ago
@SergeantJWhite then how does god save the queen work?
mayson12451245 1 month ago
@mayson12451245 Because that's the saying, old boy.
SergeantJWhite 1 month ago
Now lets not forget the French. If Belgium hadn't fucked up then France would have kicked ass.
Teslabomb89 1 month ago
@Teslabomb89 are you kidding me! the french have pushed every war in the last hundred years theyve been involved in onto the us!
gcg72790 1 month ago
@gcg72790 WW1: The US got involved for monetary reasons, the French played no part in that (barring the fact that they were actually kicking ass).
WW2: Japan attacked, getting the US involved, again France played no part.
French-Vietnamese war: The French never asked the US to become involved, the US entered at the request of the South Vietnamese government.
Try doing some research next time.
plyinglemon 1 month ago
Dum fuck is wearing an AUSTRALIAN slouch hat and the badge on side has the colours of the army cadets.
nixymagoo 1 month ago
"Great Britain my ass" - R. Lee Ermey
MrKoolDom 1 month ago
Lee Enfield and Garand. Both good rifles. Both shoot nazis dead. Thats what matters ladies and Gents.
ImperatorZor 2 months ago 22
@ImperatorZor Both armies took more casualties fighting the Germans who had nearly no food, and no air force. American and British army struggled so bad against Germany.
BandOfBrothers25 1 month ago
Germans were a threat, but that lot of Idiotic Racist barbarians were no match for the Arsenal of Democracy or the Iron Resolve of the people of the Soviet Union. They did alot of damage, but they could have avoided it by simply not going to war in the first place. Eternal Glory to the Victors who rid the world of the Nazi Scum
ImperatorZor 1 month ago
@ImperatorZor Were a threat? How come Hitler offered peace to Britain 3 times alone. How come no one declared war on the Soviet Union for invading Poland as well, or even Finland? How come the States claimed to be neutral but lended the allies 50.1 billion dollars? How come the US gov. blamed the katyn forrest massacre on the Germans which could have showed that Poland's threat was Stalin, not Hitler?
BandOfBrothers25 1 month ago
@BandOfBrothers25 they still beat the nazis and that's all that matters
barudzija7 1 month ago
@barudzija7 having more men killed in action is not a victory to me, ground is ground, but you can't replace those humans who lost their lives.
BandOfBrothers25 1 month ago
@BandOfBrothers25 you have a point
barudzija7 1 month ago
@barudzija7 Thank you.
BandOfBrothers25 1 month ago
@ImperatorZor ur a retard. thats a fact ladies and gents
DerrikRose1991 1 month ago
@DerrikRose1991 Says the person who uses UR in place of you are or you're
ImperatorZor 1 month ago
@ImperatorZor You do realize that both the Lee Enfield and Garand killed more Japanese soldiers than they did Nazis...
TforTempleUGoOwls 1 month ago
One of the interesting things here that always gets in the way when people want to talk about "which is better" is the technological progression. IMO, a later weapon SHOULD be better. So a 1907 rifle should be better than a 1903, and a 1936 rifle should be better than BOTH simply because, when you're looking at an older weapon, you should be aiming to be equal or better in quality.
zerstorer335 2 months ago
To those of you in Europe who claim to hate our arrogance fear not. We are rapidly following your example of socialistic mediocrity. I wonder what will happen when you no longer have the "big dumb brute" Americans to fight your wars for you. I don't think Europians have even thought about that. What happens when we are gone? Who is gonna pick up that slack? England? Germany? France? You are alot closer to the middle east then we are. Keep that in mind my Europian friends.
T2003Cubs 2 months ago
How would England ever speak German??? How old are you man? Did you sleep through history class when they discussed WWII? Either way, doesn't matter. I'll leave you with this. United States 2 England 0. And if you can't figure out why it's 2 then look up the war of 1812.
T2003Cubs 2 months ago
@T2003Cubs did you get educated by a dustbin?
engliscwarrior 2 months ago
@engliscwarrior Answer a question with a question. Look, I'm not trying to get into an argument here. I just threw down 3 posts here in response to your "education" comment and all I get back is "did you get educated by a dustbin?" My academic petagree shouldn't be in question here. I am simply wondering if you are up to date on your world history, especially when it concerns WWII. Maybe they don't teach that in public schools in England?
T2003Cubs 2 months ago
@T2003Cubs This guy is obviously a troll, I mean no one could believe that. If h has been educated as well as he says he has then he would not think this. Also I love how you said that Europe is "a lot closer to to the middle east" than America. So you're suggesting that the middle east is going to successfully invade Europe without American help? Good one. You do amuse me.
TheBigOddOne 2 months ago
@TheBigOddOne No, I'm saying that the middle east is an absolute mess and it will spread to Europe faster then it will spread to the U.S. simply due to geographical location. That's all. We can pull all our boys home. Successfully secure our borders and know that we have an ocean between us and them. If the U.S. takes an isolationist standpoint Europe will be left to deal with the middle east and Israel.
T2003Cubs 1 month ago
This is my Rifle! This is my gun! This is for Fighting! This is for fun!
TheRobloxfighter 2 months ago
ermy had more accurate shots with both rifles. is they had the same rifle he still would've won, someone get that man a jelly doughnut!
pyroblade452 2 months ago
Learn how to speak American. Sorry i did not realize that "american" was a language now.
rejuised 2 months ago
OORAH!!!
noble381297 2 months ago
I'm glad the French didn't weigh in on this video. Hell, the French didn't even help us get Hitler out of France! I do like the Brits though, seem to be the only ones in the world that have our back.
T2003Cubs 2 months ago
American arrogance? Let me ask you this: Do people in England speak German? No you say? Well, you're welcome.
T2003Cubs 2 months ago
@T2003Cubs how would people in England ever speak German? some Americans need to get a real education
engliscwarrior 2 months ago
@engliscwarrior World History man. Do you not remember Hitler trying to take over all of Europe? What language did he speak? Even your boy Churchill had the decency to admit what role we played in saving Europe.
T2003Cubs 2 months ago
@T2003Cubs We saved ourselves. It was called the Battle of Britain.
Typhoon10UK 1 month ago
@jci10 50 years? aomeone needs to learn to count "dipshit"
Vyppaaa11 2 months ago
So Lee switches to a more modern rifle that came to be 50 years later and wins. What a major dipshit this marine be...
jci10 2 months ago
@jci10 Wow, how about we fix that little grammar problem before calling a Marine a dipshit.
RABRIDGESusmc1 2 months ago
yeb, and the Duch developed and made the first AR (10) rifle!
I'm not a patriot ; )
delta66able 2 months ago
The TF2 sniper is Australian ¬_¬
inamonianim 2 months ago
No doubt the M1 Garand is superior, but if you put a quicker shooter on the SMLE that final test would of been closer
pintofshite 2 months ago
Team Fortress 2: Meet the Badass
TheJediJeep 2 months ago
neither did the us nor the garand win ww2. :D
TheYounity 2 months ago
@TheYounity Exactly, it was all the Soviets, and the Mosin Nagant. 603 of the 783 division of the Wermacht were destroyed by the soviet union.
woozleification 2 months ago
@TheYounity so if we didn't win the war. how come Nazis are dead and Tojo is dead too?
USSWISCONSIN64 2 months ago
@USSWISCONSIN64 well maybe you just go and ask putin who won the war in europe. he might tell you....
TheYounity 1 month ago
@TheYounity why would i ask him. don't care for putin.
USSWISCONSIN64 1 month ago
LOL, the song Yankee Doodle, was made up by people who lived in England to make FUN of Americans... you know the lyrics "...Stuck a Feather in his hat & Called it Macaroni"?! You ever wonder why in the hell he called it Maccaroni? "Maccaroni" was 18th Century (1700's) English slang for a guy who was a Homosexual of like Richard Simmons proportions & the thing that pissed the Britt's off worse than ANYTHING, is US Colonists were like "That's Catchy, I LIKE IT!!" & made it into THE US Sing-Along
IMaDEM0N 2 months ago