@GordonFrohmon Not as many as when the enemy saw you take the magazine out of your Thompson, or BAR or used the 1-2 second delay between shots when using a bolt action to kill you, all weapons have a fatal flaw when they run out, M-1 is no different
I've heard stories that the German/Japanese troops learned what that ping sound was. So whenever they heard that sound, they would stand up and open fire because they thought their opponent was reloading. And the Americans had the bright idea of just throwing an empty enbloc on the ground for the same effect. And when they did that, it would make the ping and the enemy would pop out of cover only to be shot.
@dv8nxs944 They'd actually look for it to pop out, if their eyesight was good enough, since you cant hear it in the extreme noise of battle further that a foot or two, its not audible really at all, especially when everyone has the same rifle and theres clips ejecting all over, its just kinda pointless to try and listen, better to look for it to pop out instead
@dv8nxs944 yeah in extreme close quarters in certain circumstances it was a flaw, and did get some troops killed, but when compared to how many times any other weapon runs out and the enemy sees you remove the mag and you get shot because they know youre defenceless, the M-1 is just another random rifle thats flawed when the bullets run out, wheather its a visual que, or audio que, all guns are flawed when the last shot is fired in battle
@ForgotteMemories101 It was also a trap, americans would drop their empty mags on purpose so the enemy would pop their heads out and Boom! Cheap haircut
@LuyenDarkness still though, i'd rather not have a rifle that givesaway when its empty... Sure it can be a clever trap but i'd rather not risk it... Do that trick too much and others'll start to wisen up....
@ForgotteMemories101 Every rifle gives its position away, they'll see you take the magazine out, and know you're defenseless, or wait for you to take a shot with a bolt action rifle, and line you up when youre in cover cycling the next round, then kill you when you pop back up to take another shot, the Garand is no more flawed than any other weapon when empty, only you saw the clip pop out automatic, rather than see the soldier manually remove the magazine, or cycle the bolt
@ForgotteMemories101 Yeah it is a giveaway, just as long as the enemy is within 10 feet of you, you're shooting on a solid surface (concrete ect) and theres no battles going on, or intense sounds
@blackninja1597 in the heat of battle with weapons and boombs going off around you its hard to hear a lil ping even when it was just a small firefight when the enemy heard the ping they poped up and got shot.
@hummerskickass You're very right, as a combat reenactor, and an interviewer of WWII veterans, I can say that the sound has been WIDELY blown FAR out of contrast to what it was in reality in battle, no veteran I've talked to said they were concerned about the clip ejecting sound in typical battles, it just wasnt heard. It was like whistling, obviously you can hear yourself whistle, now whistle standing next to a running power lawnmower, can you hear your whistling now?
@blackninja1597 its not a little fucking ping if you have a company of soldiers in the normandy country side shooting across grass lands you idiot and the germans would listen out for this
@blackninja1597 You make it sound like everyone's rifle simultaneously ejected their clips and the sound is heard for miles around, haha, clearly you've never been in combat with the Garand, if you had, you'd see how laughably quiet a ping sound really is, especially on grass or dirt, all you see is it pop out with no sound. In reality the Germans could care less if 1 man in 20 or so was out, it meant nothing
In your description it says The sound that Won world war 2?.......but it wasnt just all the Americans that did it all , United Kingdom and Russia had something to do withit to....
@jackster11997 actually Russia lost more than all combined. 20 million Russian troops dead. The war was staged and the wealthy bankers of the day made billions while the rest died.
Strange everyone points that out, considering how utterly rare it was, yet, nearly half of all troops armed with bolt action rifles were killed in the 1-2 second bolt cycle time in between shots (when he was defenseless), you wait for him to shoot, then (if he's out of cover cycling it) pop out and shoot him, or, if he's behind cover, aim where he'll pop back up, and when he does, you nail him.
@babbler254 eventually during WWII GI'S would flick these in the air without shooting while a scout/sniper would pick off the Germans who would look up and aim in that general direction of the sound. But your right before that it was the cause of death.
@ZZ4Z5 Only in extremely rare instances, like when clearing out houses, but outside, on a battlefield, it cannot be heard, even by its own shooters, just too quiet, and combat is just too loud.
That dam ping got so many people killed..on both sides When a gun pinged out of ammo the enemy jumped up and took there chance but we got smart and carried extra empty cliped through them down *ping* other guy jumped up to find loaded guns
@PRHusky Saw a documentary the other day and a WW2 vet was saying that to fool the enemy, they would carry a few of them mag springs and let them go as they were firing their 1st shot. Foe would think you're empty, get out of cover to shoot and... Well, you get the picture! Clever trick!...
@MrKabDrivr It was, but it was very rarely done, since the ping is near impossible to hear in the midst of battle, though they wouldnt actually "get up" since they'd still be killed by the others, and the clip sound was only audible in close range, plus the Germans knew 1 man is 10 or 20 was no reason to attack, they'd be all killed immedietly. It was more of a 1 on 1 trick, however the Germans quickly caught on to it and largely ignored the ping sounds.
@xbox7436 What? Nope. I'd go with steel. Regardless of material, the clip was not made of the same substance of the cartridges. The bullet itself would be copper-jacketed steel and the casing would be made of brass, none of which are aluminum or steel.
The tactics the Russians used was very simple: Waste as many lives as possible until the other side is either bored of the conflict or out of resources.
However, the Russian wanted the honor of taking Warsaw with limited fighting. US and UK on the other hand let the French resistances and army to be first in the parade in Paris.
@g2g4m10 Dude, I don't hate the Garand. I actually think it's a great rifle. That's what these people disagreeing with me seem to be missing. I just don't think it was the BEST. I'm making my argument from that point of view.
You NEVER shoot at a body of water! The bullet can ricochet off the water similar to a skipping rock and cause property damage, personal injury, or death. This is the kind of unsafe behavior that gives shooting sports a bad name. Know your target and what is beyond.
You NEVER shoot at a body of water! The bullet can ricochet off the water similar to a skipping rock and cause property damage, personal injury, or death. This is the kind of unsafe behavior that gives shooting sports a bad name. Know your target and what is beyond.
@ko6918 -- If they don't have enough land to shoot the thing, then floating targets in water is the best option. I wouldn't want one of these rounds to travel to its potential (more than a mile) and cause damage to someone or something, would you? I'd rather look a little bit uncool than kill one of my neighbors.
@MainTightSqueeze exactly thats what I was talking about the only issues is at that angle its a sure richochet. So yeah it is going to travel its whole potential
I'm not going to start a fight, but I will argue that the sound of the M1 Garand's clip ejection was used to the advantage of the Axis forces, because when they heard the trademark PING sound, they knew that the soldier was out of ammo, and would pop up and shoot the soldier...
@KamahkaZi Thats why some soldiers carried empty clips and dropped them on the floor. The German would pop up thinking that they where out of ammo and try to shoot them but the American would be waiting with a fully loaded gun!
@tankcommander94 Just not in combat though, since gun fire erases the little pinging sound, even at a few feet distance, its almost impossible to hear.
In addition, a ping sound is no reason to poke your head up, a ping sound means 1 soldier is out, but what about all his friends still loaded and shooting at you?.
@tankcommander94 Yeah, 1 in every 100 clips. Not really anything worth mentioning. But dont try to change history by saying the ping sound was a problem in combat, because it wasnt, nobody cared if there were a few ping sounds, it meant nothing.
@LoneWolf051 Your statement was 'not in combat'. They did do that in combat so you are wrong. For example type M1 Garand into Youtube and click on the video that says Top Ten Combat Rifles. Watch that and your mind will be put at ease!
@tankcommander94 Yes, I've seen it a million times, that show is incorrect, ever since it aired, this big ping myth came out and is now changing history, I'm sticking to what I've experienced first hand, and what the veterans of the war have said, none of them ever complained about the pinging noise being a problem, in battle, the noise and tension completely erases a small metal pinging sound, even then, a ping noise is no reason to poke your head up, nobody is that stupid in reality.
its funny that you said that it eas the sound that one world war 2, becouse, after a while the nazis and japs actually learned that the "ping" meant that a soildier or marine was out of ammo. but i get what you were saying, the m1 is a great rifle!!
...and while we're on the subject of WW2, I find it a little annoying that in the synopsis of this video, it says "this is the sound that won WW2". Gentlemen, if any sound won it (in my opinion) it was the sound of the Russians shouting "Urrah!" as they charged the Germans. Reason: More Germans were eliminated by the Russians than by all of the other Allies put together. I hear about 80%. So, let's get our facts right fellas. Without the Russians, there may not have been a victory.
@ThunderCracker26 I do appreciate your viewpoint. However, my statement was not an attempt to make claims regarding World War II. Instead, it was a hyperbole, and should only be interpreted as such.
@macguyinnc Fair enough mate, if that's how you intended it. No offence meant to you. I've just heard comments like that made in the past by people who don't actually know much about the war. They tend to be flag-waving, overpatriotic folk. I'm something of a historian myself, so just like to point some facts out now and then!
@ThunderCracker26 and the Russians couldn't have killed so many Germans without American trucks and locomotives (and a lot of other Lend/Lease aid) to get them into battle in the first place.
@ThunderCracker26 and the Russians couldn't have killed so many Germans without American trucks and locomotives (and a lot of other Lend/Lease aid) to get them into battle in the first place.
@ThunderCracker26 and the Russians couldn't have killed so many Germans without American trucks and locomotives (and a lot of other Lend/Lease aid) to get them into battle in the first place.
@davidcduarte Are you saying that all those Germans were run over by screaming Russians driving American Trucks and Trains? Lol. Ok, lend-lease did help. Though you have to remember that the Russians would have carried on fighting even without them. Plus, even when they had no weapons at all (one rifle per 2 soldiers at Stalingrad anyone?) they still fought with their bare hands. The Americans contributed alot in terms of materiel. The Russians contributed alot in terms of blood.
@davidcduarte As per my previous comments, I'm dead against anybody from any nation saying their particular country won the war. My point is that it was an ALLIED victory, though I still say Russia contributed more that any other nation. You know I'm right. No other country, even the US, could have lost so many men and carried on. On one occasion, the Germans took more than 600,000 Russian prisoners in one go. That was on top of those killed. Could the US have absorbed losses like that? No.
@davidcduarte For comparison, the bloodiest all-American battle of the war was Iwo Jima, when the US lost 30,000 men. Doesn't sound so bad when compared to the Russians, does it? I hear that the Russians lost in the region of 20 million civilians and soldiers in that war.
@ThunderCracker26 Not disagreeing or anything, but the Americans had far less casualties because they werent fighting on their own soil, and they had some of the best training and best equipment in the world for their troops. The Russians on the other hand, were fighting on their own soil, mixing it all with civilians, plus horrendous leadership and next to no training for its military, of course the Russians lost the most during the war.
@ThunderCracker26 Well you also need to take into account, the M1 Garand rifle was also the main rifle in the PTO. Your only counting the Germans. Start expanding some more. The M1 also continued service into Vietnam. Kill ratio has not much to do with it. The .30-06 Cartridge is superior to the .303 Trajectory etc. And I'd rather have a round that can take someone down with one round instead of 3 and the person is still coming at me... I dont have much writing space but yes the M1 is better.
@ThunderCracker26 lol. That the sound that won WW2 in Western Europe and Asia. Also, don't forget Japan was in WW2 too. So beating German mean only 50%. USSR was too weak to fight on two fronts. US eliminated 80% of the Japanese military in the Pacific. USSR didn't fight the Japanese; until, US was clearly winning and the Chinese army had seriously weaken the Japanese army.
@916ppl No, it isn't the sound that won WW2 in either Europe in either Western Europe or the Pacific. You see, what alot of Americans seem to forget is that there were others fighting on the Allied side, too, some of whom lost more men killed than the US. So I'm sorry, but you're wrong. Russia lost many times over the number of men against the Germans. If they hadn't made the sacrifices they did, there might not have been any victory. The Garand was only the most successful in your opinion.
@FromFinlandDude They got the biggest army in the world. That pretty much it. Their airforce is even with the German on air control but better at dogfight. Navy, well it crap considering their ships are still WW1 era. Also, the Russian used the most basic tactic compare to the other Allies. Bum rush the German until they were exhausted. USSR lose millions of soldiers. They also tend to let their buddies suffer. Polish fighters weaken the German in Warsaw; they were hoping for Russian help.
@916ppl Your'e right about navy, and indeed, they used old and you could say "stupid" tactics in ground warfare but their armour was extremely powerful (my grandad witnessed this, IS-2 tank) and quickly produced. And yes, they let their "allies" suffer, I know this Warsaw happening. Another fact that weakend the Red Army, just before WW2 started Stalin killed almost 80-90% of his best officers.
@916ppl Actually, you're wrong. After the initial disasters, when the Russians finally began to push the Germans back, the Russian army used some ingenious tactics. These were devised by such excellent Marshals such as Zhukov, Konev, Rokossovsky, Timoshenko and others. Yes, they also used large frontal tactics, but never underestimate their skill. For example, operation Little Uranus, in which the Russians encircled and destroyed the German 6th army at Stalingrad, was a stroke of genius.
Not the best rifle. Reason: a full-powered rifle round is too powerful for most combat ranges. The Germans did a study, and found that most combat took place at less than 300 m with the majority within 200 m. Full-power rifle cartridges were excessive for the vast majority of uses for the average soldier. Full powered rifle rounds are best fired one at a time, to maintain accuracy, hence the reason they are now almost exclusively used in sniper rifles. A better rifle was the British Lee-Enfield.
@ThunderCracker26 The Enfield was certainly a great rifle, though at that time, bolt action rifles were slowly losing favor due to the rising accuracy and dependability of semi-auto rifles.
I wouldn't mind owning an Enfield myself, actually. Have one for sale?
@macguyinnc Sadly not. I'd love to own one. Living in the UK, getting a firearms licence is far harder than it is in the states. One day, when I'm feeling up to it, I'll try, and see what happens. Don't get me wrong, the Garand was good, though I've always wondered why it was semi-auto. Seemed a little excessive to me, especially when reliable, fully automatic weapons were on the rise. I think it got obsolete very quickly. Hence the reason it wasn't in service long, compared to the Lee-Enfield.
@EZIOelliot I'm British and proud, you ignorant little boy. You're just the sort of dumb, abusive troll I was aiming my comments at. Go to hell yourself, and, while you're there, shove a Garand where the sun don't shine.
@ThunderCracker26 Lol,I actually dislike the fact I was born in the U.S.A.In my opinion,most of the people are over-patriotic and do stupid things~My origins relate to the United Kingdom and I sincerely wish I could've been born there.The people are nice,there is beautiful landscape and it just seems like paradice to me~
@Renegader51 Well, we can't all be perfect Lol : ] Seriously though, the UK does have its problems: Overcrowding in the cities (65 Million people in a country about the size of Oregon), a crisis as to whether or not to join Europe fully, high fuel prices, a shaky government (only just been elected in, yet to find its feet) etc. Yet I'm very proud, as I believe it's a great nation. America has alot to be proud of too. Remember, you also live in a great nation. Ever thought of visiting the UK?
@ThunderCracker26 Kind of similar to U.S.A,lol.Thanks for explaining a bit more about modern U.K x: Best of luck in your possible discoveries of history...Lol.Your responce is very much appreciated :D
@ThunderCracker26 The Enfield was a good bolt action rifle, but it was not a better rifle than the m1 garand. Also your statement on full sized rifle rounds being overpowered is more of an opinion than anything. In real combat the ability to shoot through cover is always a plus and that is what the heavy hitting full sized rifle rounds allow. All switching to these smaller rounds did was cut cost and weight.
@Master7770 I wasn't expressing an opinion, I based that statement on fact; that being the German research I mentioned. The same research which led to the development of the STG44, which was a more effective weapon at combat ranges than either the Lee Enfield or the Garand. Look at how effective and overwhelmingly popular the AK47 is now, for example: it, too, borrowed from the SGT44's design.
@ThunderCracker26 if most fights were from 200m to 300m,(according to germans) why use a bolt action gun- slow rate of fire,+ power= sniper rifle.
M1 Garand- semi auto matic, 30 cal.= power, heavy body and decent and simple iron sights equal high rate of fire, accuracy, and simplicity, plus better reload time
now the german rifle, not a british lee enfeild was the karabiner 98, which came in various model was again , a bolt action. In the battle feild i would go for powerful, and efficient
@mikethenascarfan Ah, you're referring to my point about the German study into optimal combat ranges. You'll notice that, in that comment, I added that their conclusion was to use a medium calibre round, and develop a weapon (the STG44) around it. The first Assault rifle. So you answered your own question there: No, if most combat takes place under that range, you don't need a rifle at all. My point was, that being the case, why go for semi auto fire in a rifle?
@ThunderCracker26 I'm trying to state the Mauser kARABINER 98 variants are an inferior rifle in combat, not necisarly inacurate, just not the best when the subject of actaul warfare takes place, you know, the unpredicable side. So in WW2, the M1 garand was the most produced, and caused the most causualties of any rifle, making it the best rifle, you said it wasn't, thats what im disagreeing with
@mikethenascarfan Oh, come ON! You're really trying to tell me that the Garand was more produced and killed more people than any rifle? Where on earth did you hear that? That's clearly wrong. What about the standard Russian rifle, the Mosin-Nagant? I would be willing to bet my house that that rifle killed more people than the Garand many times over. Any what about the Lee-Enfield? In production half a century before the Garand. It had already been through WW1. Use hard facts!
@ThunderCracker26 I am not saying it killed tyhe most people than any other WEAPON, I am saying, overall causualty wise it had killed the most people; surely more than the lee enfeild, and defently more than any axis rifle, including all those rediculas kar98 variants, where the hell are you getting your facts, yes the leeenfeild had gotten many more kills, in world war 1 and the years before, but the M1 Garand was the most succesful firearm of WW2 and thats a god damn fact, they still
@mikethenascarfan Mike, you can't possibly tell me that the Garand killed more than the Lee-Enfield, or the Kar98k, or the Mosin Nagant. All 3 of these rifles were in service long, long before the Garand. And all 3 of those rifles would have killed thousands of men before the Garand even existed. Add to that the fact that all three then served in WW2, and I believe that adds up to far, far more kills than your Garand. Stop plucking figures out of the air.
@ThunderCracker26@ThunderCracker26 I am not saying it killed tyhe most people than any other WEAPON, I am saying, overall causualty wise it had killed the most people; surely more than the lee enfeild, and defently more than any axis rifle, including all those rediculas kar98 variants, where the hell are you getting your facts, yes the leeenfeild had gotten many more kills, in world war 1 and the years before, but the M1 Garand was the most succesful firearm of WW2 and thats a god damn fact,
@mikethenascarfan Oh? Is that alot? Try 37,000,000 Mosin-Nagants produced, 17,000,000+ Lee-Enfields produced, and 14,643,260 Kar98ks produced. Your Garand is a drop in the ocean compared to these. Check these figures, they are correct. Would you like to tell me that the Garand has killed more men now? Listen, I'm not trying to do your rifle down, it's a great weapon, but you have to face facts and refrain from making unrealistic claims. There are rifles out there which outstrip it.
@ThunderCracker26 it does nbot matter, those guns did not kill more people, do you honestly think that historians can count the number of people killed in war by each weapon accuratley, and the lee enfeild and mosin nagnant and the kar 98 were being produced years before world war 2 even began, the m1 garand started production as the war stARTED
@mikethenascarfan And, if you keep resorting to insults to make your point, then I'll just stop taking you seriously, ignore you, and you can continue your prattle on your own. I'm into serious debate, not flaming.
@mikethenascarfan I wasn't comparing the Mosin-Nagant with the Garand. I was stating a bald fact. That rifle killed far more Germans than your Garand ever did. I hear that the Russians were responsible for around 80% of all combat losses suffered by the Axis in WW2. As the Mosin-Nagant was the standard Russian rifle at the time, it would have contributed significantly to that death toll. The Garand doesn't even come close.
@mikethenascarfan Finally, you might want to check these vids out on YouTube- "Top Ten Combat Rifles- M1 Garand" and "Top Ten Combat Rifles- Lee Enfield SMLE". You'll notice the Garand comes in at number 4, while the Lee-Endield comes in at number 3. And listen to the stats for numbers produced, too.
@ThunderCracker26 the lee enfield was used in world war 1 too!, if the damn m1 garand was used in world war 1 too it would be number 1, cant you get it through your damn thick head it was the best rifle used in WW2, and the only one whos production started during the war no 10-100 damn years before it, please, just stop
@mikethenascarfan Look, your american rifle did NOT kill more people. No, historians can't count how many deaths were caused by different weapons. USE YOUR HEAD, however, and you'll realise that if a rifle such as the Lee-Enfield or Kar98k went through WW1 before the Garand was even invented, then, obviously, they had a huge kill advantage even before WW2 started! Admit it! Stop making ridiculous claims. Your rifle's advantage is limited entirely to its semi auto feature. Now be quiet.
@916ppl 916ppl. I'm getting pretty tired of saying the M1 Garand didn't win the war with its pinging sound. That's a typical American thing to say. Neither America nor the Garand won the war. It was an ALLIED victory. In terms of contribution, I'm sorry, Russia wins hands down. In terms of the Pacific? Fine, America did the most work there. The Pacific was America's theatre. Western Europe was Russia's. The Garand is only the most successful in your opinion.
kisftw and BCGamers12 = the same person.
98RamMagnum 2 months ago
littering faggots
kisftw 3 months ago
@kisftw Lol. You funny guy. You come up with that joke all by yousef?
BCGamers12 3 months ago
@BCGamers12 Nah, your mom helped when she was over here blowing me the other day.
kisftw 3 months ago
@kisftw Lol. You funny guy. You come up with that joke all by yousef?
BCGamers12 3 months ago
@BCGamers12 ctrl+c, ctrl+v
kisftw 3 months ago
@kisftw Lol. You funny guy. You come up with that joke all be yousef?
BCGamers12 3 months ago
@BCGamers12 Troll +1
kisftw 3 months ago
@kisftw Lol. You funny guy. You come up with that joke all by yousef?
BCGamers12 3 months ago
@BCGamers12 -
kisftw 3 months ago
The sound that killed alot of soldiers....
GordonFrohmon 5 months ago
@GordonFrohmon Not as many as when the enemy saw you take the magazine out of your Thompson, or BAR or used the 1-2 second delay between shots when using a bolt action to kill you, all weapons have a fatal flaw when they run out, M-1 is no different
LoneWolf051 4 months ago
louder than the other videos
NoirYorkCity 5 months ago
beautiful rifle.
comquatable 5 months ago
I've heard stories that the German/Japanese troops learned what that ping sound was. So whenever they heard that sound, they would stand up and open fire because they thought their opponent was reloading. And the Americans had the bright idea of just throwing an empty enbloc on the ground for the same effect. And when they did that, it would make the ping and the enemy would pop out of cover only to be shot.
dv8nxs944 5 months ago
@dv8nxs944 They'd actually look for it to pop out, if their eyesight was good enough, since you cant hear it in the extreme noise of battle further that a foot or two, its not audible really at all, especially when everyone has the same rifle and theres clips ejecting all over, its just kinda pointless to try and listen, better to look for it to pop out instead
LoneWolf051 5 months ago
@LoneWolf051 Well I got this information from a WW2 vet that saw much action so neither one of us is wrong.
dv8nxs944 4 months ago
@dv8nxs944 yeah in extreme close quarters in certain circumstances it was a flaw, and did get some troops killed, but when compared to how many times any other weapon runs out and the enemy sees you remove the mag and you get shot because they know youre defenceless, the M-1 is just another random rifle thats flawed when the bullets run out, wheather its a visual que, or audio que, all guns are flawed when the last shot is fired in battle
LoneWolf051 4 months ago
@LoneWolf051 Yes I agree completely. It is a blast to shoot though.
dv8nxs944 4 months ago
no this is the sound what killed US soldiers
blackninja1597 7 months ago
@blackninja1597 exactly lol that "ping" is a giveaway. lol when my mosin is empty, its doesn't give itself away...
ForgotteMemories101 6 months ago
@ForgotteMemories101 thanks someone who actually knows what they talking about
blackninja1597 6 months ago
@blackninja1597 no problem...
ForgotteMemories101 6 months ago
@ForgotteMemories101 It was also a trap, americans would drop their empty mags on purpose so the enemy would pop their heads out and Boom! Cheap haircut
LuyenDarkness 6 months ago
@LuyenDarkness still though, i'd rather not have a rifle that givesaway when its empty... Sure it can be a clever trap but i'd rather not risk it... Do that trick too much and others'll start to wisen up....
ForgotteMemories101 6 months ago
@ForgotteMemories101 Every rifle gives its position away, they'll see you take the magazine out, and know you're defenseless, or wait for you to take a shot with a bolt action rifle, and line you up when youre in cover cycling the next round, then kill you when you pop back up to take another shot, the Garand is no more flawed than any other weapon when empty, only you saw the clip pop out automatic, rather than see the soldier manually remove the magazine, or cycle the bolt
LoneWolf051 5 months ago
@LoneWolf051 Glad someone said that.
RFID666 4 months ago
@ForgotteMemories101 Yeah it is a giveaway, just as long as the enemy is within 10 feet of you, you're shooting on a solid surface (concrete ect) and theres no battles going on, or intense sounds
LoneWolf051 5 months ago
@blackninja1597 in the heat of battle with weapons and boombs going off around you its hard to hear a lil ping even when it was just a small firefight when the enemy heard the ping they poped up and got shot.
hummerskickass 6 months ago
@hummerskickass You're very right, as a combat reenactor, and an interviewer of WWII veterans, I can say that the sound has been WIDELY blown FAR out of contrast to what it was in reality in battle, no veteran I've talked to said they were concerned about the clip ejecting sound in typical battles, it just wasnt heard. It was like whistling, obviously you can hear yourself whistle, now whistle standing next to a running power lawnmower, can you hear your whistling now?
LoneWolf051 5 months ago
@blackninja1597 its not a little fucking ping if you have a company of soldiers in the normandy country side shooting across grass lands you idiot and the germans would listen out for this
blackninja1597 6 months ago
@blackninja1597 You make it sound like everyone's rifle simultaneously ejected their clips and the sound is heard for miles around, haha, clearly you've never been in combat with the Garand, if you had, you'd see how laughably quiet a ping sound really is, especially on grass or dirt, all you see is it pop out with no sound. In reality the Germans could care less if 1 man in 20 or so was out, it meant nothing
LoneWolf051 5 months ago
@MrMikey109 he was just showing the ping it makes when it ejects the clip
thegamerking97 7 months ago
Ah, what did that innocent pond ever do to you? ;)
baremu 7 months ago
@baremu It was talking smack, of course! ;)
macguyinnc 7 months ago
I just jizz'ed in my pant..
MrBlako 8 months ago
In your description it says The sound that Won world war 2?.......but it wasnt just all the Americans that did it all , United Kingdom and Russia had something to do withit to....
jackster11997 9 months ago
@jackster11997 You're missing the point of "hyperbole."
macguyinnc 9 months ago
@macguyinnc what does that mean?
jackster11997 9 months ago
@jackster11997 Grab a dictionary.
macguyinnc 9 months ago
@macguyinnc good plan!
jackster11997 9 months ago
@macguyinnc WIN
dertyFilms 8 months ago
@macguyinnc roflz
LtActionCam 8 months ago
@jackster11997 its an exagiaration
mriceman0619 8 months ago
@jackster11997a hyperbole is basically a huge exageration.
gkoz004 8 months ago
@jackster11997 An exaggeration dumbass. I'm 14 and I know that.
Henmo501 8 months ago
@Henmo501 I think i have got the idea. "dumbass"
jackster11997 8 months ago
@jackster11997 Jesus, man....
ManDudeYeah 2 months ago
@macguyinnc it's a metonymy.
InbictaProductionzZ 6 months ago
@jackster11997 so true.. im sick of americans just claming they 'won world war two' because the had a decent semi auto rifle..
LYNCHIE1011 8 months ago
@LYNCHIE1011 Yeah. or just saying they wont world war 2. becuase they dropped a nuclear bomb on japan
jackster11997 8 months ago
@jackster11997 exactly.
LYNCHIE1011 8 months ago
@jackster11997 actually Russia lost more than all combined. 20 million Russian troops dead. The war was staged and the wealthy bankers of the day made billions while the rest died.
KymaticaHealth 7 months ago
@babbler254 Roughly 1 in 50 died from it.
Strange everyone points that out, considering how utterly rare it was, yet, nearly half of all troops armed with bolt action rifles were killed in the 1-2 second bolt cycle time in between shots (when he was defenseless), you wait for him to shoot, then (if he's out of cover cycling it) pop out and shoot him, or, if he's behind cover, aim where he'll pop back up, and when he does, you nail him.
LoneWolf051 9 months ago
Ping = M1's orgasm! lmao
LoneWolf051 9 months ago
Gotta love that PING!
TheFiremansavage 9 months ago
@babbler254 eventually during WWII GI'S would flick these in the air without shooting while a scout/sniper would pick off the Germans who would look up and aim in that general direction of the sound. But your right before that it was the cause of death.
ZZ4Z5 9 months ago
@ZZ4Z5 Only in extremely rare instances, like when clearing out houses, but outside, on a battlefield, it cannot be heard, even by its own shooters, just too quiet, and combat is just too loud.
LoneWolf051 9 months ago
ping at 0:16 PING!
odg1190 9 months ago
ding bullets are done.
RoaringChidori1 9 months ago
That dam ping got so many people killed..on both sides When a gun pinged out of ammo the enemy jumped up and took there chance but we got smart and carried extra empty cliped through them down *ping* other guy jumped up to find loaded guns
maxaslagolis 9 months ago
You mean M1 Grand?
sportguynumber7 10 months ago
@sportguynumber7 its not M1 grand its M1 garand the last name of the man who created this rifle was garand n he named it after himself
johndeereman567 10 months ago
@sportguynumber7 gArand pronounced properly as "gAIRund"
LoneWolf051 10 months ago
how much does this cost. i would gladly buy this gun to protect my property xD
MaxFlared 11 months ago
@MaxFlared For a good shape rifle, about $600-$800
LoneWolf051 10 months ago
i lone that sound *PING!* it lets me know if i need to reload :)
brianthao102 11 months ago
I'm about to buy this weapon and I'm a left handed person : /
coolbeanzs 11 months ago
@coolbeanzs aww , now shels are guna beat ur ass : /
gazzxr 10 months ago
@PRHusky Saw a documentary the other day and a WW2 vet was saying that to fool the enemy, they would carry a few of them mag springs and let them go as they were firing their 1st shot. Foe would think you're empty, get out of cover to shoot and... Well, you get the picture! Clever trick!...
MrKabDrivr 11 months ago
@MrKabDrivr It was, but it was very rarely done, since the ping is near impossible to hear in the midst of battle, though they wouldnt actually "get up" since they'd still be killed by the others, and the clip sound was only audible in close range, plus the Germans knew 1 man is 10 or 20 was no reason to attack, they'd be all killed immedietly. It was more of a 1 on 1 trick, however the Germans quickly caught on to it and largely ignored the ping sounds.
LoneWolf051 10 months ago
I love that fucking sound
KluChz22 11 months ago
whats the sound after the ping 0:16
behemotkiller 1 year ago
@behemotkiller Probably Water.
lXlNismo11lXl 11 months ago
so thats what that sound it in call of duty LOL
chrissept21 1 year ago
@chrissept21 And always just when you need to keep shooting!
boringsermon 1 year ago
zinggggggggg~!!!
zillsburyy 1 year ago
M1 Garand = Beast
21matthew12345 1 year ago
m1 garand is my favourite rifle in the world in my opinion it beats the hell out of the gewehr and carbine. all because of the PINNNNG
123timmers 1 year ago
the ping was from the aluminum that the bullets were made out of
xbox7436 1 year ago
@xbox7436 What? Nope. I'd go with steel. Regardless of material, the clip was not made of the same substance of the cartridges. The bullet itself would be copper-jacketed steel and the casing would be made of brass, none of which are aluminum or steel.
csmybuttt 1 year ago
@csmybuttt yeah your right my mistake my brother told me that but I guess not ha sorry bro or girl
xbox7436 1 year ago
@xbox7436 The clips are made of tin, the shells are copper.
LoneWolf051 1 year ago
during WW2 most germans were smart. they kept their heads down until they heard the ping. lol
trevorandaj 1 year ago
@trevorandaj What did a ping mean?, that a single guy is out? what about all his friends still loaded and locked ready to kill anyone who pops up?
Plus in REAL combat, the ping is impossible to hear outside of 10 yards, and most combat took place around 150-200 yards.
LoneWolf051 1 year ago
@LoneWolf051 jesus christ take a fuckin chill pill cunt
ZigZag1808 1 year ago
@ZigZag1808 Why? I'm as calm as can be.
LoneWolf051 1 year ago
@trevorandaj yeah until we wisened up and tricked em with the ping
kisame00rules 1 year ago
@kisame00rules You cant hear the ping with alot of shooting going on, even at close range, its drowned out the the sound of all the shooting.
When competition shooting, I cant hear the M1s ping sound when in a firing line of other shooters, its just way too quiet to hear.
LoneWolf051 1 year ago
The tactics the Russians used was very simple: Waste as many lives as possible until the other side is either bored of the conflict or out of resources.
milzbrrrrand 1 year ago
@milzbrrrrand worked, didnt it? :D
HullAL09 1 year ago
@HullAL09 Indeed, it did.
milzbrrrrand 1 year ago
Got to Love the sound of that 8Rd go ping out of the M1 Garand
TheSavage169 1 year ago
However, the Russian wanted the honor of taking Warsaw with limited fighting. US and UK on the other hand let the French resistances and army to be first in the parade in Paris.
916ppl 1 year ago
Man...this weapon is legendary.....it would been an honor just holding it.........
ashma05 1 year ago
Thats some epic comments below
g2g4m10 1 year ago
@g2g4m10 mhmmm, I got a stuborn m1 garand hater.....
mikethenascarfan 1 year ago
@mikethenascarfan HOW CAN YOU HATE THE GARAND?! lol
g2g4m10 1 year ago
@g2g4m10 Dude, I don't hate the Garand. I actually think it's a great rifle. That's what these people disagreeing with me seem to be missing. I just don't think it was the BEST. I'm making my argument from that point of view.
ThunderCracker26 1 year ago
You NEVER shoot at a body of water! The bullet can ricochet off the water similar to a skipping rock and cause property damage, personal injury, or death. This is the kind of unsafe behavior that gives shooting sports a bad name. Know your target and what is beyond.
ejwejw100 1 year ago
You NEVER shoot at a body of water! The bullet can ricochet off the water similar to a skipping rock and cause property damage, personal injury, or death. This is the kind of unsafe behavior that gives shooting sports a bad name. Know your target and what is beyond.
ejwejw100 1 year ago
lets fire round at still water....what a brilliant idea
ko6918 1 year ago
@ko6918 -- If they don't have enough land to shoot the thing, then floating targets in water is the best option. I wouldn't want one of these rounds to travel to its potential (more than a mile) and cause damage to someone or something, would you? I'd rather look a little bit uncool than kill one of my neighbors.
MainTightSqueeze 1 year ago
@MainTightSqueeze exactly thats what I was talking about the only issues is at that angle its a sure richochet. So yeah it is going to travel its whole potential
ko6918 1 year ago
I'm not going to start a fight, but I will argue that the sound of the M1 Garand's clip ejection was used to the advantage of the Axis forces, because when they heard the trademark PING sound, they knew that the soldier was out of ammo, and would pop up and shoot the soldier...
KamahkaZi 1 year ago
@KamahkaZi Thats why some soldiers carried empty clips and dropped them on the floor. The German would pop up thinking that they where out of ammo and try to shoot them but the American would be waiting with a fully loaded gun!
tankcommander94 1 year ago
@tankcommander94 Just not in combat though, since gun fire erases the little pinging sound, even at a few feet distance, its almost impossible to hear.
In addition, a ping sound is no reason to poke your head up, a ping sound means 1 soldier is out, but what about all his friends still loaded and shooting at you?.
Ping sound being a problem = myth, not fact.
LoneWolf051 1 year ago
@LoneWolf051 Well they did it so you can try and argue with history if you want!
tankcommander94 1 year ago
@tankcommander94 Yeah, 1 in every 100 clips. Not really anything worth mentioning. But dont try to change history by saying the ping sound was a problem in combat, because it wasnt, nobody cared if there were a few ping sounds, it meant nothing.
LoneWolf051 1 year ago
@LoneWolf051 Your statement was 'not in combat'. They did do that in combat so you are wrong. For example type M1 Garand into Youtube and click on the video that says Top Ten Combat Rifles. Watch that and your mind will be put at ease!
tankcommander94 1 year ago
@tankcommander94 Yes, I've seen it a million times, that show is incorrect, ever since it aired, this big ping myth came out and is now changing history, I'm sticking to what I've experienced first hand, and what the veterans of the war have said, none of them ever complained about the pinging noise being a problem, in battle, the noise and tension completely erases a small metal pinging sound, even then, a ping noise is no reason to poke your head up, nobody is that stupid in reality.
LoneWolf051 1 year ago
@KamahkaZi Thats a myth, not reality, I already commented on why its not true.
LoneWolf051 1 year ago
Greatest sound the lord almighty ever made
LuigiFan1457 1 year ago
how much recoil is in that thing?
i can fire a 12 gauge birdshot no problem, will i be able to take in this recoil?
left4party 1 year ago
its funny that you said that it eas the sound that one world war 2, becouse, after a while the nazis and japs actually learned that the "ping" meant that a soildier or marine was out of ammo. but i get what you were saying, the m1 is a great rifle!!
qqdogqq 1 year ago
@qqdogqq i dont think they could really hear the ping over the sound of gun fire.......
acdcgnr100 1 year ago
epic ping :D
yoshishot16 1 year ago
you ever shoot a fish accidentally aiming at something in the pond? lol
joeguy02 1 year ago
"CLING!" Awesome sound man.
PokePackOpener14 1 year ago
...and while we're on the subject of WW2, I find it a little annoying that in the synopsis of this video, it says "this is the sound that won WW2". Gentlemen, if any sound won it (in my opinion) it was the sound of the Russians shouting "Urrah!" as they charged the Germans. Reason: More Germans were eliminated by the Russians than by all of the other Allies put together. I hear about 80%. So, let's get our facts right fellas. Without the Russians, there may not have been a victory.
ThunderCracker26 1 year ago
@ThunderCracker26 I do appreciate your viewpoint. However, my statement was not an attempt to make claims regarding World War II. Instead, it was a hyperbole, and should only be interpreted as such.
macguyinnc 1 year ago
@macguyinnc Fair enough mate, if that's how you intended it. No offence meant to you. I've just heard comments like that made in the past by people who don't actually know much about the war. They tend to be flag-waving, overpatriotic folk. I'm something of a historian myself, so just like to point some facts out now and then!
ThunderCracker26 1 year ago
@ThunderCracker26 No offense was taken. Cheers from across the pond!
macguyinnc 1 year ago
@ThunderCracker26 and the Russians couldn't have killed so many Germans without American trucks and locomotives (and a lot of other Lend/Lease aid) to get them into battle in the first place.
davidcduarte 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ThunderCracker26 and the Russians couldn't have killed so many Germans without American trucks and locomotives (and a lot of other Lend/Lease aid) to get them into battle in the first place.
davidcduarte 1 year ago
@ThunderCracker26 and the Russians couldn't have killed so many Germans without American trucks and locomotives (and a lot of other Lend/Lease aid) to get them into battle in the first place.
davidcduarte 1 year ago
@davidcduarte Are you saying that all those Germans were run over by screaming Russians driving American Trucks and Trains? Lol. Ok, lend-lease did help. Though you have to remember that the Russians would have carried on fighting even without them. Plus, even when they had no weapons at all (one rifle per 2 soldiers at Stalingrad anyone?) they still fought with their bare hands. The Americans contributed alot in terms of materiel. The Russians contributed alot in terms of blood.
ThunderCracker26 1 year ago
@davidcduarte As per my previous comments, I'm dead against anybody from any nation saying their particular country won the war. My point is that it was an ALLIED victory, though I still say Russia contributed more that any other nation. You know I'm right. No other country, even the US, could have lost so many men and carried on. On one occasion, the Germans took more than 600,000 Russian prisoners in one go. That was on top of those killed. Could the US have absorbed losses like that? No.
ThunderCracker26 1 year ago
@davidcduarte For comparison, the bloodiest all-American battle of the war was Iwo Jima, when the US lost 30,000 men. Doesn't sound so bad when compared to the Russians, does it? I hear that the Russians lost in the region of 20 million civilians and soldiers in that war.
ThunderCracker26 1 year ago
@ThunderCracker26 Not disagreeing or anything, but the Americans had far less casualties because they werent fighting on their own soil, and they had some of the best training and best equipment in the world for their troops. The Russians on the other hand, were fighting on their own soil, mixing it all with civilians, plus horrendous leadership and next to no training for its military, of course the Russians lost the most during the war.
LoneWolf051 1 year ago
@ThunderCracker26 Well you also need to take into account, the M1 Garand rifle was also the main rifle in the PTO. Your only counting the Germans. Start expanding some more. The M1 also continued service into Vietnam. Kill ratio has not much to do with it. The .30-06 Cartridge is superior to the .303 Trajectory etc. And I'd rather have a round that can take someone down with one round instead of 3 and the person is still coming at me... I dont have much writing space but yes the M1 is better.
majorparks 1 year ago
@majorparks thank you pal, that guy is stuborn, check out my comments below and youll understand were on the same side, haha!
mikethenascarfan 1 year ago
@ThunderCracker26 lol. That the sound that won WW2 in Western Europe and Asia. Also, don't forget Japan was in WW2 too. So beating German mean only 50%. USSR was too weak to fight on two fronts. US eliminated 80% of the Japanese military in the Pacific. USSR didn't fight the Japanese; until, US was clearly winning and the Chinese army had seriously weaken the Japanese army.
916ppl 1 year ago
Comment removed
ThunderCracker26 1 year ago
@916ppl No, it isn't the sound that won WW2 in either Europe in either Western Europe or the Pacific. You see, what alot of Americans seem to forget is that there were others fighting on the Allied side, too, some of whom lost more men killed than the US. So I'm sorry, but you're wrong. Russia lost many times over the number of men against the Germans. If they hadn't made the sacrifices they did, there might not have been any victory. The Garand was only the most successful in your opinion.
ThunderCracker26 1 year ago
@916ppl Well according to what I've heard USSR wasn't that weak, especially in the end of WW2....
FromFinlandDude 1 year ago
@FromFinlandDude They got the biggest army in the world. That pretty much it. Their airforce is even with the German on air control but better at dogfight. Navy, well it crap considering their ships are still WW1 era. Also, the Russian used the most basic tactic compare to the other Allies. Bum rush the German until they were exhausted. USSR lose millions of soldiers. They also tend to let their buddies suffer. Polish fighters weaken the German in Warsaw; they were hoping for Russian help.
916ppl 1 year ago
@916ppl Your'e right about navy, and indeed, they used old and you could say "stupid" tactics in ground warfare but their armour was extremely powerful (my grandad witnessed this, IS-2 tank) and quickly produced. And yes, they let their "allies" suffer, I know this Warsaw happening. Another fact that weakend the Red Army, just before WW2 started Stalin killed almost 80-90% of his best officers.
FromFinlandDude 1 year ago
@916ppl Actually, you're wrong. After the initial disasters, when the Russians finally began to push the Germans back, the Russian army used some ingenious tactics. These were devised by such excellent Marshals such as Zhukov, Konev, Rokossovsky, Timoshenko and others. Yes, they also used large frontal tactics, but never underestimate their skill. For example, operation Little Uranus, in which the Russians encircled and destroyed the German 6th army at Stalingrad, was a stroke of genius.
ThunderCracker26 1 year ago
Not the best rifle. Reason: a full-powered rifle round is too powerful for most combat ranges. The Germans did a study, and found that most combat took place at less than 300 m with the majority within 200 m. Full-power rifle cartridges were excessive for the vast majority of uses for the average soldier. Full powered rifle rounds are best fired one at a time, to maintain accuracy, hence the reason they are now almost exclusively used in sniper rifles. A better rifle was the British Lee-Enfield.
ThunderCracker26 1 year ago
@ThunderCracker26 The Enfield was certainly a great rifle, though at that time, bolt action rifles were slowly losing favor due to the rising accuracy and dependability of semi-auto rifles.
I wouldn't mind owning an Enfield myself, actually. Have one for sale?
macguyinnc 1 year ago
@macguyinnc Sadly not. I'd love to own one. Living in the UK, getting a firearms licence is far harder than it is in the states. One day, when I'm feeling up to it, I'll try, and see what happens. Don't get me wrong, the Garand was good, though I've always wondered why it was semi-auto. Seemed a little excessive to me, especially when reliable, fully automatic weapons were on the rise. I think it got obsolete very quickly. Hence the reason it wasn't in service long, compared to the Lee-Enfield.
ThunderCracker26 1 year ago
@ThunderCracker26 Sure, the Germans did all that, but remember this important fact...........America won, not Germany.
HoodDood972 1 year ago
@HoodDood972 no the allies won not america........
acdcgnr100 1 year ago
@acdcgnr100 and america was part of the allies. dur da dur.
HoodDood972 1 year ago
@HoodDood972 ya but you made it sound like america single handedly won it
acdcgnr100 1 year ago
@acdcgnr100 ok you have a point there but ya know i meant the allies.
HoodDood972 1 year ago
@ThunderCracker26 :shut up you ain't american.go to hell you british son of a bitch
EZIOelliot 1 year ago
@EZIOelliot I'm British and proud, you ignorant little boy. You're just the sort of dumb, abusive troll I was aiming my comments at. Go to hell yourself, and, while you're there, shove a Garand where the sun don't shine.
ThunderCracker26 1 year ago
@ThunderCracker26 Lol,I actually dislike the fact I was born in the U.S.A.In my opinion,most of the people are over-patriotic and do stupid things~My origins relate to the United Kingdom and I sincerely wish I could've been born there.The people are nice,there is beautiful landscape and it just seems like paradice to me~
Sincerely,
Holl0WxOrigin a.k.a Renegade51
Renegader51 1 year ago
@Renegader51 Well, we can't all be perfect Lol : ] Seriously though, the UK does have its problems: Overcrowding in the cities (65 Million people in a country about the size of Oregon), a crisis as to whether or not to join Europe fully, high fuel prices, a shaky government (only just been elected in, yet to find its feet) etc. Yet I'm very proud, as I believe it's a great nation. America has alot to be proud of too. Remember, you also live in a great nation. Ever thought of visiting the UK?
ThunderCracker26 1 year ago
@ThunderCracker26 Kind of similar to U.S.A,lol.Thanks for explaining a bit more about modern U.K x: Best of luck in your possible discoveries of history...Lol.Your responce is very much appreciated :D
Renegader51 1 year ago
@ThunderCracker26 The Enfield was a good bolt action rifle, but it was not a better rifle than the m1 garand. Also your statement on full sized rifle rounds being overpowered is more of an opinion than anything. In real combat the ability to shoot through cover is always a plus and that is what the heavy hitting full sized rifle rounds allow. All switching to these smaller rounds did was cut cost and weight.
Master7770 1 year ago
@Master7770 I wasn't expressing an opinion, I based that statement on fact; that being the German research I mentioned. The same research which led to the development of the STG44, which was a more effective weapon at combat ranges than either the Lee Enfield or the Garand. Look at how effective and overwhelmingly popular the AK47 is now, for example: it, too, borrowed from the SGT44's design.
ThunderCracker26 1 year ago
@ThunderCracker26 question, when reguarding bolt- action rifles. do you prefer cock on opening or cock on closing.
examples of cock on opening would be a mauser or a mosin-nagant.
a cock on closing would be a lee-enfeild
oktoberfest124 1 year ago
@ThunderCracker26 if most fights were from 200m to 300m,(according to germans) why use a bolt action gun- slow rate of fire,+ power= sniper rifle.
M1 Garand- semi auto matic, 30 cal.= power, heavy body and decent and simple iron sights equal high rate of fire, accuracy, and simplicity, plus better reload time
now the german rifle, not a british lee enfeild was the karabiner 98, which came in various model was again , a bolt action. In the battle feild i would go for powerful, and efficient
mikethenascarfan 1 year ago
@mikethenascarfan Ah, you're referring to my point about the German study into optimal combat ranges. You'll notice that, in that comment, I added that their conclusion was to use a medium calibre round, and develop a weapon (the STG44) around it. The first Assault rifle. So you answered your own question there: No, if most combat takes place under that range, you don't need a rifle at all. My point was, that being the case, why go for semi auto fire in a rifle?
ThunderCracker26 1 year ago
@ThunderCracker26 I'm trying to state the Mauser kARABINER 98 variants are an inferior rifle in combat, not necisarly inacurate, just not the best when the subject of actaul warfare takes place, you know, the unpredicable side. So in WW2, the M1 garand was the most produced, and caused the most causualties of any rifle, making it the best rifle, you said it wasn't, thats what im disagreeing with
mikethenascarfan 1 year ago
@mikethenascarfan Oh, come ON! You're really trying to tell me that the Garand was more produced and killed more people than any rifle? Where on earth did you hear that? That's clearly wrong. What about the standard Russian rifle, the Mosin-Nagant? I would be willing to bet my house that that rifle killed more people than the Garand many times over. Any what about the Lee-Enfield? In production half a century before the Garand. It had already been through WW1. Use hard facts!
ThunderCracker26 1 year ago
@ThunderCracker26 I am not saying it killed tyhe most people than any other WEAPON, I am saying, overall causualty wise it had killed the most people; surely more than the lee enfeild, and defently more than any axis rifle, including all those rediculas kar98 variants, where the hell are you getting your facts, yes the leeenfeild had gotten many more kills, in world war 1 and the years before, but the M1 Garand was the most succesful firearm of WW2 and thats a god damn fact, they still
mikethenascarfan 1 year ago
@mikethenascarfan Mike, you can't possibly tell me that the Garand killed more than the Lee-Enfield, or the Kar98k, or the Mosin Nagant. All 3 of these rifles were in service long, long before the Garand. And all 3 of those rifles would have killed thousands of men before the Garand even existed. Add to that the fact that all three then served in WW2, and I believe that adds up to far, far more kills than your Garand. Stop plucking figures out of the air.
ThunderCracker26 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ThunderCracker26 @ThunderCracker26 I am not saying it killed tyhe most people than any other WEAPON, I am saying, overall causualty wise it had killed the most people; surely more than the lee enfeild, and defently more than any axis rifle, including all those rediculas kar98 variants, where the hell are you getting your facts, yes the leeenfeild had gotten many more kills, in world war 1 and the years before, but the M1 Garand was the most succesful firearm of WW2 and thats a god damn fact,
mikethenascarfan 1 year ago
use the M1 Garand as sniper rifle for police now, 6,000,000 weren't produced for no reason right?
mikethenascarfan 1 year ago
@mikethenascarfan Oh? Is that alot? Try 37,000,000 Mosin-Nagants produced, 17,000,000+ Lee-Enfields produced, and 14,643,260 Kar98ks produced. Your Garand is a drop in the ocean compared to these. Check these figures, they are correct. Would you like to tell me that the Garand has killed more men now? Listen, I'm not trying to do your rifle down, it's a great weapon, but you have to face facts and refrain from making unrealistic claims. There are rifles out there which outstrip it.
ThunderCracker26 1 year ago
@ThunderCracker26 it does nbot matter, those guns did not kill more people, do you honestly think that historians can count the number of people killed in war by each weapon accuratley, and the lee enfeild and mosin nagnant and the kar 98 were being produced years before world war 2 even began, the m1 garand started production as the war stARTED
mikethenascarfan 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mikethenascarfan And, if you keep resorting to insults to make your point, then I'll just stop taking you seriously, ignore you, and you can continue your prattle on your own. I'm into serious debate, not flaming.
ThunderCracker26 1 year ago
@ThunderCracker26 oh and dont you dare compare a mosin nagnant to an M1 garand, there is no comparison
mikethenascarfan 1 year ago
@mikethenascarfan I wasn't comparing the Mosin-Nagant with the Garand. I was stating a bald fact. That rifle killed far more Germans than your Garand ever did. I hear that the Russians were responsible for around 80% of all combat losses suffered by the Axis in WW2. As the Mosin-Nagant was the standard Russian rifle at the time, it would have contributed significantly to that death toll. The Garand doesn't even come close.
ThunderCracker26 1 year ago
@mikethenascarfan Finally, you might want to check these vids out on YouTube- "Top Ten Combat Rifles- M1 Garand" and "Top Ten Combat Rifles- Lee Enfield SMLE". You'll notice the Garand comes in at number 4, while the Lee-Endield comes in at number 3. And listen to the stats for numbers produced, too.
ThunderCracker26 1 year ago
@ThunderCracker26 the lee enfield was used in world war 1 too!, if the damn m1 garand was used in world war 1 too it would be number 1, cant you get it through your damn thick head it was the best rifle used in WW2, and the only one whos production started during the war no 10-100 damn years before it, please, just stop
mikethenascarfan 1 year ago
@mikethenascarfan Look, your american rifle did NOT kill more people. No, historians can't count how many deaths were caused by different weapons. USE YOUR HEAD, however, and you'll realise that if a rifle such as the Lee-Enfield or Kar98k went through WW1 before the Garand was even invented, then, obviously, they had a huge kill advantage even before WW2 started! Admit it! Stop making ridiculous claims. Your rifle's advantage is limited entirely to its semi auto feature. Now be quiet.
ThunderCracker26 1 year ago
@ThunderCracker26 Hard to say that to the many died Japanese and German soldiers killed by a M1 grand from 800 yards to 900 yards.
916ppl 1 year ago
@916ppl ahaha yes another m1 garand person thunder craker is stubborn thanks for the support and knowledge
mikethenascarfan 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@916ppl 916ppl. I'm getting pretty tired of saying the M1 Garand didn't win the war with its pinging sound. That's a typical American thing to say. Neither America nor the Garand won the war. It was an ALLIED victory. In terms of contribution, I'm sorry, Russia wins hands down. In terms of the Pacific? Fine, America did the most work there. The Pacific was America's theatre. Western Europe was Russia's. The Garand is only the most successful in your opinion.
ThunderCracker26 1 year ago