@UKGameMaster Next to the German 1918 tank gewehr that had no recoil absorption features, and frequently injured its shooters, the Boys had the least favored recoil, which did cause bruises, and occasional dislocations dispite having several recoil reducing features.
@HeirofGojira91 well, a .22 is lethal at 1.5 miles, so at a thousand yards, with a bullet the size of your middle finger, in a gun designed to go through walls, yeah, I'd guess it could kill a rhino, seeing as rhinos heads are slightly less solid than armour plating.
Little known fact that the USMC made use (albeit in tiny numbers) of this rifle in WWII. The NRA publication American Rifleman did an article on it several years ago.
Years ago I found the ammo box for this thing in a thrift store for $25 and re-sold it for $125 on evilbay!
@nagmashdriver i doubt thay used it as this is a british/canadian rifle and i'll tell you the ammo is about $45 a round for the standered stuff and can run up to 4150 a round
@camerl2009 It sounds like you yourself might be British or Canadian, so I will elucidate: The NRA is the National Rifle Association and is considered the last word when it comes to the history of guns, among many other gun-related subjects.
Their monthly magazine, The American Rifleman regularly has interesting articles on specific guns.
@nagmashdriver im a canuck and just so happen to be buying a boys AT rifle right now
and yes i know what the NRA is (i too get that mag)
the boys anti tank rifle was short lived as RPG type rockets where now being used the boys anti tank rifle was still being used by us for light armor but was under powered for most german tanks
im a canadian gun nut and a ww2 buff not once have i heard the USMC using them although the place im getting mine from does have one thats US marked
@camerl2009 The MK2 (IIRC) Rifle was made by the firm of John Inglis,in a lend lease contract, and was marked Property of the United States. Although I am not a Boysophile, Wikipedia does mention that some were used by the U.S. Marines in the Phillipines against the Japanese. But I do not recall that they were ever officially used by U.S. forces.
They had a gun similar or the same (Can't remember) that was on skis and used by the germans against tanks by one man but it never caught on because the recoil kicked the shit out of your arm in full auto.
@hugh705 The Lahti had a crew of 2 men, it was produced , and used by the Fins. Germany may have gotten some of them, but had their own at rifle,the Solothurn S18-1000. it used the same cartridge, but was very different from the L-39 Rifle. The Solo S18-1100 was selective fire, the L-39 was semi auto only, though there were 400 or so converted to full auto for A.A. use. Neither the L-39,39/44 nor the S181000/1100 had a very bad recoil, it was less harsh than the Boys.
too bad they were practicaly useless after 1940 on tanks as most had armour thickness of 30mm upwards. after that they were only effective against armoured cars
@nick21sammy Haha - I was just joking about - but I'm wondering - given the Boys AT rifle was designed to puncture no more than say 23.2mm of armor at 100 yards - would the Boys AT actually be capable of stopping something say the following: Large Saltwater Croc, Elephant (African Bull), Kodiack Bear, Honey Badger (not joking here given they are said to be capable of withstanding light bullets) or say finally a Rhinocerous at approximately 1000 yards? Apologies for this question - just curious
My mistake. "Boys" is correct. I always thought there was a "e" in the name. It was developed by BSA - the Birmingham Small Arms company, who also made motorcycles.
@SpiroHrvoje1989 Funny, originally it called the Stanchion Rifle, for the mount it had. It was changed after the death of one Capt. Boys who headed the weapon's design team.
Jojoa20727 USA is the land of the free home of the brave so for you to say that to a c/capt in army jrotc I'd say fuck you I'm gonna help with the war once I'm out of collage btw c/capt means cadet/captan asshole hell I may not have real rank in the real army but at least i show pride for my country and also who the fuck says we can't shoot a 1937 30mm boys anti tank rifle because if so we will point this kick ass rifle at themm
usa is so crazy. u get in jail if u go naked on streets, u cant show tits in a newspaper u can drive a car if u r 16 but alcohol if u r 21 but u can shot with a anti tank gun,. what a stupid world or othe crazy weapons from war. i dont want to live in that country
@Lonewolf15100 13.9x99mm .55 caliber in the US/Imperial systems. The case aside from its reinforcing belt , is nearly the same as the U.S. 50BMG (also 99 mm in length, just needs the neck opened up to hald the larger bullet.
@Lonewolf15100 It can be, most of the old stuff is running low these days. It would be nice if some importer bought up a bunch of ammo for all the old A.T. rifles, it would be nice to get some newer stuff.
@glitchbreaker Yes, it was on par with some of the other 20mm a.t. rifles, but was less powerful than the Solothurn s18-1000, and Lahti rifles. the Type 97's main problems were its weight, which required a 4 man crew to service it, and its severe recoil. Practically speaking it was no better, or worse than the other large A.T. rifles, just less convenient.
@beardo52 Indeed.. reminds me a bit of my days in the Air Force.. but we used a different type of anti-tank weapon at the time, i.e the Pansarskott m/68 or Miniman.. :)
@JaxxDaemon The Stanchion, later renamed the Boys rifle was indeed the product of Britain. The only Boys rifles not made in England itself were those manufactured by John Inglis in Canada for the U.S. on a lend lease contract. These Inglis built rifles are marked property of the United States.
The later PZKIV had very thick add on armor, and the Panther & Tigers had very good armor, but a.t. rifles were never meant for those later, heavier tanks. Most early tanks were fairly slow, 10-15 mph, with the Soviet christy design tanks being the really fast ones, but they too were thinly armored. not enough room here for many details, but a google search will answer most of your questions Once Bazookas, etc, showed up it didnt matter much anymore.
@StrykerKnights Early german tanks were fairly thin in the armor, Pzr I had only 1/2 inch, even the Pzr III had just 5/8 inch max later increased to 1.2inches in the front. They were vulnerable to a.t. rifle fire, especially the high velocity guns like the PTRS-D, the smaller bore rifles of Poland, and Czechoslovackia, not to mention the 20 mm guns.
tanks also used sloped armour that make the armour even more thicker. So they used 1.2 inch of steel plate but because it is sloped the anti tank rifle had to penetrate thicker armour.sometimes it just bounce of because of that. Anti tank rifles were good agains tanks that were created before world war 2, But most tanks that were created or upgraded in world war 2 were immune on all sides for anti tank rifles. the t 34 make good use of sloped armour
@burnout002NL1 Not so much in the early days, research the armor used on Early German tanks, and you will see that they carried very little. Same for the Czech tanks captured by Germany. By the time the T-34 came along, the day of the A.T. rifle had pretty much passed. How many projectile impacts occured at the angle most advantageous to sloped armor. You may find that impact angles due to trajectory were closer to 90 degrees which would mean less protection from sloped armor.
Despite loosing out to thicker enemy armour, Australian infantry found in particular useful in Papua New Guinea and Borneo for winkling out Japanese snipers whilst they did Macarthur's 'dirty work' cleaning out Japanese outposts!
This weapon was a platoon issue support weapon within British Commonwealth units during the early part of the Second World War. It was also carried in Rolls Royce Armoured Cars (1924 pattern) used by the 11th Hussars during Operation Compass in 1940, where it was effectively used against Italian L33 tankettes in particular (The battle of Ghirba) It was also carried in Universal Carriers and Marmon-Herrington armoured cars. ....
Check out my homepage for further experiments using laser. There are several easy to do examples to split the beam, modulate on of the two and then recombine them to produce low frequency beats. These beats should be able to induce currents into the body to transmit sound or steer muscles if used with high power lasers. You dont even need a laser, this can be done with ordinary light and heat radiation as well. The double slit experiment mostly is done with an ordinary light source.
The original tanks where called land ships due to their flat riveted iron sides like a ship. tanks get their name cuz the brits thought germany would never check into a program called "tank". those germans CRAPED THEIR PANTS when they saw their first tank in ww1. there was the willie tank. then the big willie. willie couldnt jump the trenches. willie could. and they only had MG's. look them up! awesome looking!
@jrms999 anti tank rifles predated shaped charge rockets by a number of years. This rifle was first issued 5 yrs before the Bazooka made its debut, 6 for the PanzerFaust, or Schreck. They were all that was available to the worlds infantry at the time.
@jrms999 Well If you meant that ''Boys'' anti-tank rifle was at top in its class you're wrong. Possibly the best ani-tank rifle of ww2 was polish Kbppanc wz.35 ''Ur''. Although its calliber was almost twice smaller than the ''Boys'' it could penetrate up to 33 or 35mm of armour at 100m, Boys had 15-20mm. ''Ur'' for anti-tank rifle was very safe and could be used without a problem by one trooper and even fired from crouch position and just above all it was very very effective
@PolishWingedHussar10 The only reason such rifles were ever built was that the Treaty of Versailles prohibited Germany from building rifles with any larger a bore diameter. So, they took the 13mm TuF cartridge case, necked it down to 7.92mm, and called it an A.T. munition. Which worked on the older designs of the late 20's, and 30's, but was pretty useless against anything thicker than a dumpster. Germany realizing this, later converted some of the wee little rifles to lauch A.T. grenades.
@beardo52 Well that was not the case with polish design. Polish Campaign 1939 was a massive shock for the germans when they had encountered poles armed with with many Kbppanc wz.35 rifles which had no problem what so ever in penetrating armour of german tanks. Its armour piercing ammunition and overall design was so great that even medium tank Panzer IV was very vonrouble to its fire. This fact forced germans to immiediatly increase the armour of all of thier tanks right after the campaign !!
@PolishWingedHussar10 The Polish rifle was kept a secret, and few people were trained in its use. most were un issued, and taken by the Germans, who in turn gave them to the Italians. They were not at all perfect, in particular the barrel life was only 300 rounds before requiring replacement. Performance was 15mm @100 meters in field conditions. The Panzer IV was vulnerable to all of the A.T. rifles in one spot or another until the later IV's were built.
@beardo52 ''Most were unissued'' Probably 1/3 or 1/2 were issued so it wasnt so bad. The performance wasnt a 15mm at 100m but 30-35mm at 100m. Panzer IV Ausf. A to Ausf. F1 versions from 1938-39 had an armour 20-30mm thick at the front so with no problem penetration could be achieved. Out of 210 used panzer IV tanks used 76 were knocked out(completely destroyed or badly damaged) Yes wz.35 rifle had its drawbacks indeed but at 1939 campaign it was a shock for german armoured or motorized units
@PolishWingedHussar10 There was a Gerlich principle version of the Pz.B.35, that tapered from 13mm down to 7.92mm. Had an amazing muzzle velocity of nearly 5,000 Fps. Is this the rifle you are speaking of? The regular Pz.B. 35 was said to be limited to only about 100 rifles deployed of 2,000 produced. There is always the possibility of error in the account I have.
@beardo52 Nope not that one, the rifle Im speaking of is anti-tank rifle wz.35 "Ur", its 7,92 x 107 mm DS ammunition was achievieng muzzle velocity of 1275m per second and could easly slice through 30-35mm of armour at 100m. 6000 were produced and 3500 were possibly used in combat in 1939. The german name of it was Panzerbüchse 35(p). All anti-tank rifles had flaw of massive recoil, very heavy weight but wz35 didnt had these and had a great penetration capabilities for its caliber and ammunition
@jrms999 Well the drawbacks were that at longer ranges over 500m it was surpassed by larger caliber rifles, 300 shot barrel and tacticaly NCO's didnt know how to place a and alocate shooters to the effective use. But its armour penetrating was very good from its times of origins till 1941 then it effectiveness started to pass. It was just as easy to use as ordinary infantry rifle, it was just as light as rkm wz.28 so it was extremely easy to carry, shoot and fire even from crouching position
@PolishWingedHussar10 Thanks for the reply PWH love the critique but I've heard the Boys kicked like a mull in action. My uncle was in the desert rats in WW2 (British 8th Army) and though not disparaging of the Boys he did say how in one action they shot one German tank around 38 times and failed to put it out of action; didn't even stop it in fact. Still great to see one in action so thanks LaurenTurtles...
@jrms999 Bazookas, and Panzer fausts were not contemporary to the Boys rifle. The boys preceeded the Bazooka by 5yrs, and the faust by 6 yrs. Shaped charge rocket propelled munitions were the next step in the evolution of infantry anti armor weapons.
@beardo52 Obviously but look at how quickly things evolved and us Brit's were still using them in the desert until we realised they just couldn't get the job done again the Panzer MkIIIs and IVs. When you think 'anti-tank' the first thing you think is Bazooka, not Boys anti-tank rifle. Even when the bazooka was in wide circulation instead of us buying the US patent and making our own we came up with the PIAT. Fair enough it didn't have a back blast but still....
@jrms999 Commiserations on the PIAT, good round, spring drive not so much though. The M-6 rocket munition of the bazooka was not very reliable, the rocket motor being effected by moisture, and heat, and salt water. And even when it did function properly it had limited effectiveness against heavy, or stand-off equipped armor. This was fixed in later versions of the rocket, but not completely. I'm surprised that Britain did not get a boat load of then on lend lease.
@ehnogi In 1937 when this rifle was first issued, tanks didnt have very much armor at all. They were more of a mobile dumpster. The world's militaries needed an infantry anti armor weapon, and these types of rifles were it until 1942 when the U.S. deployed the firrst Bazookas, and 1943 when Germany deployd the Panzer faust,/Schreck. These days they are just an amusment, or a display in a museum. (but devilish fun to shoot)
A lot of armored vehicles have an external plate that falls off upon recieving heavy impact (i.e from RPGs) to lessen the affect of shape-charged (anti-armor) rounds. This plate is called "reactive armor". With a weapon like this old anti-tank rifle, it probably wouldn't do much against a modern tank.
@ehnogi No that is spaced armour. Reactive armour is with packs of explosives that deflect the molten copper jet of anti tank/shaped charge projectiles.
@iLoveMyGun89 Check out the Russian T-90's with ''Era''(you can find it on google pictures or even youtube), Those boxes that it has all over it are what they call reactive armour. Basically is just packs of explosives that detonates as a counter blast to any anti-tank weapons. Ideally cancelling it out, or at least lessening it's impact.
@iLoveMyGun89 That is why some designs have an armour thinkness of f.e. 2000mm. It doesn't mean literally 2000 mm of steel but rather the equivalent of that in protection, achieved trough things like ERA(explosive reactive armour) and/ or composite armours like the British ''chobham'' armour. There are some pretty cool vids explaining the workings of ERA right here on youtube. Is brilliantly simple really.
@Trashcansam123 The Piat munition was good, but the projector was not so much.. Bazookas, Panzer Schreck were rocket launchers, and were pretty good, but lacked the range of Recoiless rifles, which are something different still. Britain built a number of simple, easy to make spigot mortar type weapons The PIAT, the Northover Projector, and some others that I can't recall just now.
16mm penetration, so it barely makes it through half a plate on a bradley, not to mention the 1 inch "unarmored" steel base behind the actual plates, which in my opinion is still armor , whether it's part of the hull or not...
@GodlessMartyr666 The Boys rifle was first issued in 1937, when tanks were made like dumpsters. it was effective in its time, but like all a.t. rifles was retasked to what is now referred to as anti materiel. A.T. rifles are the progenitors of the modern a.m. rifle.
@beardo52 yeah but the front plate of a tiger tank was 100mm thick, hiting it with one of these would do nothing but buy you a one way ticket to staring down the bore of its acht acht
@GodlessMartyr666 The Tiger I was introduced in 1942, 5 yrs after the boys. before that, German tanks were very thinly armored the PZKW I being only 7-15mm , and the II, III, and early IV, still having some thin spots this rifle could get through. (although one would have to be close, and a good shot to exploit those weaknesses) The Boys was used in groups, maybe 6 to a group, so it was thought that someone would hit the right spot. The Boys was never intended to engage the Tiger.
@beardo52 thx for clearing that up for me, I had always just assumed and pictured a single guy praying to his jesus that the round would somehow miraculously disable the tiger, what a fool I was! And I guess the germans got wise to the whole lets use less plating and save on building cost, time and complexity when engineering and producing our tanks idea was rather regressive due to this rifle and the round it fires,... Did the brits ever design a bazooka/ panzershreck type device im unaware of?
@GodlessMartyr666 Well, they made a thing called the PIAT, (Projector, infantry anti-tank) It was half spigot mortar, half spring gun, between the spring, and a small propellant charge in the bomb it "fired" it could loft a shaped charge bomb several hundred yards/meters, but it was not accurate at the greater distances. the Bomb did a fine job, as long as it hit something it was aimed at. Britain probably had tons of U.S. bazookas, but I dont know if they made any on their own.
Then Russia makes the PTRS-41 semi auto rifle that fires a 14.5X114 round with twice the muzzle energy of the Barrett.
ruski1945 2 weeks ago
@ruski1945 Both the PTRS, and D rifles came out in 41', the Boys was in the field in 37' . One would expect a later design of rifle to be improved.
beardo52 2 weeks ago
a weapon like this would literally tear a human being limb from limb in about 3 rounds.... seemingly.
snasty99 3 weeks ago
Dear Santa although it is January can I have that gun to blow peoples brains out. Just because I am a sociopath doesnt mean I cant have fun.
ahenryb1 1 month ago
@ahenryb1 Yes, it does.
beardo52 1 month ago
And I gotta say, that must hurt like hell when you fire it.
UKGameMaster 1 month ago
@UKGameMaster Next to the German 1918 tank gewehr that had no recoil absorption features, and frequently injured its shooters, the Boys had the least favored recoil, which did cause bruises, and occasional dislocations dispite having several recoil reducing features.
beardo52 1 month ago
@HeirofGojira91 well, a .22 is lethal at 1.5 miles, so at a thousand yards, with a bullet the size of your middle finger, in a gun designed to go through walls, yeah, I'd guess it could kill a rhino, seeing as rhinos heads are slightly less solid than armour plating.
UKGameMaster 1 month ago
questio tira un panzer III..
71chef 1 month ago
@hellcatdave1
71chef 1 month ago
Was updated in the 1980's to fire the 12.7mm (.50BMG) as a new proposition for Anti-material rifles being used as sniper rifles.
hellcatdave1 1 month ago
Muahahaha Brittish Anti tank rifle...deliciously evil..
KeithBreit 1 month ago
Little known fact that the USMC made use (albeit in tiny numbers) of this rifle in WWII. The NRA publication American Rifleman did an article on it several years ago.
Years ago I found the ammo box for this thing in a thrift store for $25 and re-sold it for $125 on evilbay!
nagmashdriver 1 month ago
@nagmashdriver i doubt thay used it as this is a british/canadian rifle and i'll tell you the ammo is about $45 a round for the standered stuff and can run up to 4150 a round
camerl2009 1 month ago
@camerl2009 It sounds like you yourself might be British or Canadian, so I will elucidate: The NRA is the National Rifle Association and is considered the last word when it comes to the history of guns, among many other gun-related subjects.
Their monthly magazine, The American Rifleman regularly has interesting articles on specific guns.
nagmashdriver 1 month ago
@nagmashdriver im a canuck and just so happen to be buying a boys AT rifle right now
and yes i know what the NRA is (i too get that mag)
the boys anti tank rifle was short lived as RPG type rockets where now being used the boys anti tank rifle was still being used by us for light armor but was under powered for most german tanks
im a canadian gun nut and a ww2 buff not once have i heard the USMC using them although the place im getting mine from does have one thats US marked
camerl2009 1 month ago
@camerl2009 The MK2 (IIRC) Rifle was made by the firm of John Inglis,in a lend lease contract, and was marked Property of the United States. Although I am not a Boysophile, Wikipedia does mention that some were used by the U.S. Marines in the Phillipines against the Japanese. But I do not recall that they were ever officially used by U.S. forces.
beardo52 1 month ago
dear satan ((:
Nudelsalates 1 month ago
Dear Santa
LegatoDeFortissimo 1 month ago
What do you mean "effective range 91 m"?!!
zerghalo2 1 month ago
Bitches love cannons.
PrinceXTC86 1 month ago
They had a gun similar or the same (Can't remember) that was on skis and used by the germans against tanks by one man but it never caught on because the recoil kicked the shit out of your arm in full auto.
hugh705 1 month ago
@hugh705 you had a 20 mm ladi
shawn4201111 1 month ago
@shawn4201111 20mm lahti :)
hugh705 1 month ago
@hugh705 The Lahti had a crew of 2 men, it was produced , and used by the Fins. Germany may have gotten some of them, but had their own at rifle,the Solothurn S18-1000. it used the same cartridge, but was very different from the L-39 Rifle. The Solo S18-1100 was selective fire, the L-39 was semi auto only, though there were 400 or so converted to full auto for A.A. use. Neither the L-39,39/44 nor the S181000/1100 had a very bad recoil, it was less harsh than the Boys.
beardo52 1 month ago
real men fires the PTRS-41 while standing
zorbaknecromancer 2 months ago
@zorbaknecromancer no zorbaknecromancer, that ppl do when they play WaW
FishTurd69 2 months ago
is the Steyr HS .50 basically a more modern version of this?
VideoRoom207 2 months ago
@VideoRoom207 no. the steyer .50 would be even more usless then a Boys AT rifle (steyr 12.5mm round,Boy 14.5mm)
nick21sammy 2 months ago
is it bulpup?
stitches611 2 months ago
@stitches611 nope...bullpup means that the magazine and bolt assembly are in the stock or behind the trigger assembly
reaper621993 2 months ago
@reaper621993 i thought thats what it looked like
stitches611 2 months ago
too bad they were practicaly useless after 1940 on tanks as most had armour thickness of 30mm upwards. after that they were only effective against armoured cars
nick21sammy 3 months ago
@nick21sammy Would be still a good 'hunting' rifle and taking pot shots at large animals though haha
HeirofGojira91 2 months ago
@HeirofGojira91 not if you want to bring meat home
nick21sammy 2 months ago
@nick21sammy Haha - I was just joking about - but I'm wondering - given the Boys AT rifle was designed to puncture no more than say 23.2mm of armor at 100 yards - would the Boys AT actually be capable of stopping something say the following: Large Saltwater Croc, Elephant (African Bull), Kodiack Bear, Honey Badger (not joking here given they are said to be capable of withstanding light bullets) or say finally a Rhinocerous at approximately 1000 yards? Apologies for this question - just curious
HeirofGojira91 1 month ago
Think of it ...... Anti TANK rifle..
BlackPsychoNonick 3 months ago
@BlackPsychoNonick the russians had a superior anti tank rifle back in WW2
Spetsnaz2112 2 months ago
any one got a woody ?
MrTedwise 3 months ago
i would hate to be their neigbhors
Nastynuts100 3 months ago
super...!
nsealjosh 3 months ago
I think this just made me pro-gun.
sErgEantaEgis12 3 months ago
the effective range is 16 to 19 milimeters, really thats aprox. 6 to 7 inches, just a bit of a typo
valhallawelcomesme 3 months ago
I take it you mean it was designed by the "Royal Ordnance Factory"? There's no such thing as the "Royal Small Arms Factory" that I'm aware of.
noonsight2010 3 months ago
It's "Boyes"!
noonsight2010 3 months ago
@noonsight2010
My mistake. "Boys" is correct. I always thought there was a "e" in the name. It was developed by BSA - the Birmingham Small Arms company, who also made motorcycles.
noonsight2010 3 months ago
HAHAHA EFFECTIVE RANGE 16-19 mm!!! HAHAHA
archuna11 3 months ago
my grandfather used one of these in ww2 he told me that it kicked so hard you just about had to crawed back up ot it
flattyvdrive 4 months ago
@flattyvdrive The Aussies called it "Charlie the Bastard" because it was such an unpleasant weapon to operate.
jonewer 1 month ago
TANKS FOR WATCHING US!!
MultiArmaggedon 4 months ago
WELL IT SURE AS HELL AINT A GIRLS ANTI TANK!
SpiroHrvoje1989 4 months ago
@SpiroHrvoje1989 Funny, originally it called the Stanchion Rifle, for the mount it had. It was changed after the death of one Capt. Boys who headed the weapon's design team.
beardo52 4 months ago
Man these videos are never a 'fail' or boring
SweatyNutSack69 4 months ago
@19Truth53 why so made bro?
annasajerk 4 months ago
whats the max range on it?
JackD314 4 months ago
Is this still chambered in .55 Boys or a .50bmg conversion to get around NFA restrictions? I've heard .55 Boys is pretty hard to find in the US.
agadhahab1 4 months ago
@agadhahab1 Its chambered in .55 mens which squeezes the atfs guidelines and strokes the rules.
MrSheissen1 4 months ago
i want one :/
ruler1978 4 months ago
Jojoa20727 USA is the land of the free home of the brave so for you to say that to a c/capt in army jrotc I'd say fuck you I'm gonna help with the war once I'm out of collage btw c/capt means cadet/captan asshole hell I may not have real rank in the real army but at least i show pride for my country and also who the fuck says we can't shoot a 1937 30mm boys anti tank rifle because if so we will point this kick ass rifle at themm
ilikebunnies777 4 months ago
@ilikebunnies777 Go Bunnies!
beardo52 4 months ago
@ilikebunnies777 overeact much?
agadhahab1 4 months ago
@ilikebunnies777 land of the fee, home of the the slave!!
MrXclio 3 months ago
usa is so crazy. u get in jail if u go naked on streets, u cant show tits in a newspaper u can drive a car if u r 16 but alcohol if u r 21 but u can shot with a anti tank gun,. what a stupid world or othe crazy weapons from war. i dont want to live in that country
jojajo2707 5 months ago
@jojajo2707 Glad you don't. We have the ability to change things here. Don't know where you live but I guess you can't change much there.
fsa0033 5 months ago
@jojajo2707 Glad you don't. We have the ability to change things here. Don't know where you live but I guess you can't change much there.
fsa0033 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jojajo2707 Glad you don't. We have the ability to change things here. Don't know where you live but I guess you can't change much there.
fsa0033 5 months ago
@jojajo2707 then why are you watching this?
GunMaker91 4 months ago
@jojajo2707 The U.S. is a free Country, and you are free to not come here.
beardo52 4 months ago
holly shit
TheLukaszH 5 months ago
I think it's funny how this is legal and marijuana isn't. America is very funny. Sometimes I question the land that I live in.
Girtaco100 5 months ago
@Girtaco100 Cracked?
TheBiAtheist 5 months ago
@TheBiAtheist YUS
Girtaco100 5 months ago
@Girtaco100 WHAAAAAAAAAAA! A TRENDY DRUG IZNT LEGALIZED! NOW ILL SEEM EVAN KEWLER WEN I SMOKE ET!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
sheep.
MrThembones 5 months ago
whats the caliber?
Lonewolf15100 5 months ago
@Lonewolf15100 13.9x99mm .55 caliber in the US/Imperial systems. The case aside from its reinforcing belt , is nearly the same as the U.S. 50BMG (also 99 mm in length, just needs the neck opened up to hald the larger bullet.
beardo52 5 months ago
@beardo52 cool thanks. im guessin thats a hard cartridge to come by these days?
Lonewolf15100 5 months ago
@Lonewolf15100 It can be, most of the old stuff is running low these days. It would be nice if some importer bought up a bunch of ammo for all the old A.T. rifles, it would be nice to get some newer stuff.
beardo52 5 months ago
shame there was a noob on a machine gun runied the whole video
White1Hunter 5 months ago
When 10 people heard the first blast at 0:07 they ran wee wee wee OUT of their homes.
Cacowninja 5 months ago
Effective range 16-19 millimeters? sounds pretty shit
xXGreyWolf 5 months ago
@xXGreyWolf Keep in mind that it is 16-19mm at sloped 70 Degrees. unsloped it was more
F4Wildcat 5 months ago
Anyone know of the Japanese type 97 AT rifle?
glitchbreaker 5 months ago
Comment removed
beardo52 5 months ago
@glitchbreaker Yes, it was on par with some of the other 20mm a.t. rifles, but was less powerful than the Solothurn s18-1000, and Lahti rifles. the Type 97's main problems were its weight, which required a 4 man crew to service it, and its severe recoil. Practically speaking it was no better, or worse than the other large A.T. rifles, just less convenient.
beardo52 5 months ago
it cant beat PTRD-41..
AnimeFanBadAsS 5 months ago
@AnimeFanBadAsS ptrs-41
lance1499 5 months ago
@lance1499 ptrs-41 is semi-automatic version of ptrd-41, and ptrd came out before ptrs.
AnimeFanBadAsS 5 months ago
@AnimeFanBadAsS The PTRS was designed earlier than the PTRD, but both were accepted for service in 1941.
beardo52 5 months ago
@beardo52 PTRS was out of production because of its unreliability.
AnimeFanBadAsS 5 months ago
Lulz. EVA unit-01's rifle.
oriion1 5 months ago
Fuck your Barrett M107CQ.
IPAColosseum 6 months ago
@IPAColosseum look up M109 :)
DrunkenRussian121 5 months ago
yeah boy
n2488 6 months ago
nice.
bongoboyj 6 months ago
Snap.. crackle.. pop!! :)
BasicModelling 6 months ago
@BasicModelling And thats just the shooter's shoulder....
beardo52 6 months ago
@beardo52 Indeed.. reminds me a bit of my days in the Air Force.. but we used a different type of anti-tank weapon at the time, i.e the Pansarskott m/68 or Miniman.. :)
BasicModelling 6 months ago
goin' huntin.
bbcgamer 6 months ago
not made by the British you stupid rednecks
JaxxDaemon 6 months ago
@JaxxDaemon The Stanchion, later renamed the Boys rifle was indeed the product of Britain. The only Boys rifles not made in England itself were those manufactured by John Inglis in Canada for the U.S. on a lend lease contract. These Inglis built rifles are marked property of the United States.
beardo52 6 months ago
@JaxxDaemon someone needs to check their wiki.i know people can alter it, but its a better trusted source than a youtube comments section.
MrXclio 3 months ago
mm Is A Millimeter. m Is A Meter. There Is Close To 25mm In 1 inch. Cool Video Though.
MapleBalls 6 months ago
Thus begins another episode of Rednecks with Guns
TheChrisoid 6 months ago
its funny how thess things are legal
awsumpersun321 6 months ago
@awsumpersun321 i think its rather awesome! i wish i had one and could afford one.
MattieTheBear 6 months ago
@awsumpersun321 go on Cracked.com and search. "7 items you won't believe are actually legal"
GearShotgun 6 months ago
@awsumpersun321
Why?
lordsummerisle87 6 months ago
@awsumpersun321 Thank the second amendment. Nobody are using these things for criminal activity.
quimbyt 6 months ago
The later PZKIV had very thick add on armor, and the Panther & Tigers had very good armor, but a.t. rifles were never meant for those later, heavier tanks. Most early tanks were fairly slow, 10-15 mph, with the Soviet christy design tanks being the really fast ones, but they too were thinly armored. not enough room here for many details, but a google search will answer most of your questions Once Bazookas, etc, showed up it didnt matter much anymore.
beardo52 7 months ago
@StrykerKnights Early german tanks were fairly thin in the armor, Pzr I had only 1/2 inch, even the Pzr III had just 5/8 inch max later increased to 1.2inches in the front. They were vulnerable to a.t. rifle fire, especially the high velocity guns like the PTRS-D, the smaller bore rifles of Poland, and Czechoslovackia, not to mention the 20 mm guns.
beardo52 7 months ago
@beardo52
tanks also used sloped armour that make the armour even more thicker. So they used 1.2 inch of steel plate but because it is sloped the anti tank rifle had to penetrate thicker armour.sometimes it just bounce of because of that. Anti tank rifles were good agains tanks that were created before world war 2, But most tanks that were created or upgraded in world war 2 were immune on all sides for anti tank rifles. the t 34 make good use of sloped armour
burnout002NL1 6 months ago
@burnout002NL1 Not so much in the early days, research the armor used on Early German tanks, and you will see that they carried very little. Same for the Czech tanks captured by Germany. By the time the T-34 came along, the day of the A.T. rifle had pretty much passed. How many projectile impacts occured at the angle most advantageous to sloped armor. You may find that impact angles due to trajectory were closer to 90 degrees which would mean less protection from sloped armor.
beardo52 6 months ago
Despite loosing out to thicker enemy armour, Australian infantry found in particular useful in Papua New Guinea and Borneo for winkling out Japanese snipers whilst they did Macarthur's 'dirty work' cleaning out Japanese outposts!
RailfanDownunder 7 months ago
This weapon was a platoon issue support weapon within British Commonwealth units during the early part of the Second World War. It was also carried in Rolls Royce Armoured Cars (1924 pattern) used by the 11th Hussars during Operation Compass in 1940, where it was effectively used against Italian L33 tankettes in particular (The battle of Ghirba) It was also carried in Universal Carriers and Marmon-Herrington armoured cars. ....
RailfanDownunder 7 months ago
that tank is so gona get so fuked so u beter wish u werent in it
tommopurple 7 months ago
id pay alot of money to shot that
CHICKENNNNNNNNN 7 months ago
@PolishWingedHussar10 September 1939 says otherwise
rud100le 7 months ago
Check out my homepage for further experiments using laser. There are several easy to do examples to split the beam, modulate on of the two and then recombine them to produce low frequency beats. These beats should be able to induce currents into the body to transmit sound or steer muscles if used with high power lasers. You dont even need a laser, this can be done with ordinary light and heat radiation as well. The double slit experiment mostly is done with an ordinary light source.
wwwtotalitaerde 7 months ago
The original tanks where called land ships due to their flat riveted iron sides like a ship. tanks get their name cuz the brits thought germany would never check into a program called "tank". those germans CRAPED THEIR PANTS when they saw their first tank in ww1. there was the willie tank. then the big willie. willie couldnt jump the trenches. willie could. and they only had MG's. look them up! awesome looking!
tempviduse 7 months ago
YES! ww1 50 cal! kicks but!!!! i just told people from a us johnson vid to chek this out!
tempviduse 7 months ago
Guess who has a boner?
Aaron91092 7 months ago
Dear santa...
Minderbinder001 7 months ago
@Minderbinder001 Fuck you.
greenbayfan37 7 months ago
@greenbayfan37 why?
Minderbinder001 7 months ago
in GB gun makes you
menju32 8 months ago
fun!
JayRod12999 8 months ago
loving it, nothing beats the old Boys'
Pity it had such a poor rep because of its contemporaries like the Panzerfaust or the Bazooka
jrms999 8 months ago
@jrms999 anti tank rifles predated shaped charge rockets by a number of years. This rifle was first issued 5 yrs before the Bazooka made its debut, 6 for the PanzerFaust, or Schreck. They were all that was available to the worlds infantry at the time.
beardo52 8 months ago
@jrms999 Well If you meant that ''Boys'' anti-tank rifle was at top in its class you're wrong. Possibly the best ani-tank rifle of ww2 was polish Kbppanc wz.35 ''Ur''. Although its calliber was almost twice smaller than the ''Boys'' it could penetrate up to 33 or 35mm of armour at 100m, Boys had 15-20mm. ''Ur'' for anti-tank rifle was very safe and could be used without a problem by one trooper and even fired from crouch position and just above all it was very very effective
PolishWingedHussar10 7 months ago
@PolishWingedHussar10 The only reason such rifles were ever built was that the Treaty of Versailles prohibited Germany from building rifles with any larger a bore diameter. So, they took the 13mm TuF cartridge case, necked it down to 7.92mm, and called it an A.T. munition. Which worked on the older designs of the late 20's, and 30's, but was pretty useless against anything thicker than a dumpster. Germany realizing this, later converted some of the wee little rifles to lauch A.T. grenades.
beardo52 7 months ago
@beardo52 Well that was not the case with polish design. Polish Campaign 1939 was a massive shock for the germans when they had encountered poles armed with with many Kbppanc wz.35 rifles which had no problem what so ever in penetrating armour of german tanks. Its armour piercing ammunition and overall design was so great that even medium tank Panzer IV was very vonrouble to its fire. This fact forced germans to immiediatly increase the armour of all of thier tanks right after the campaign !!
PolishWingedHussar10 7 months ago
@PolishWingedHussar10 The Polish rifle was kept a secret, and few people were trained in its use. most were un issued, and taken by the Germans, who in turn gave them to the Italians. They were not at all perfect, in particular the barrel life was only 300 rounds before requiring replacement. Performance was 15mm @100 meters in field conditions. The Panzer IV was vulnerable to all of the A.T. rifles in one spot or another until the later IV's were built.
beardo52 7 months ago
@beardo52 ''Most were unissued'' Probably 1/3 or 1/2 were issued so it wasnt so bad. The performance wasnt a 15mm at 100m but 30-35mm at 100m. Panzer IV Ausf. A to Ausf. F1 versions from 1938-39 had an armour 20-30mm thick at the front so with no problem penetration could be achieved. Out of 210 used panzer IV tanks used 76 were knocked out(completely destroyed or badly damaged) Yes wz.35 rifle had its drawbacks indeed but at 1939 campaign it was a shock for german armoured or motorized units
PolishWingedHussar10 7 months ago
@PolishWingedHussar10 There was a Gerlich principle version of the Pz.B.35, that tapered from 13mm down to 7.92mm. Had an amazing muzzle velocity of nearly 5,000 Fps. Is this the rifle you are speaking of? The regular Pz.B. 35 was said to be limited to only about 100 rifles deployed of 2,000 produced. There is always the possibility of error in the account I have.
beardo52 7 months ago
@beardo52 Nope not that one, the rifle Im speaking of is anti-tank rifle wz.35 "Ur", its 7,92 x 107 mm DS ammunition was achievieng muzzle velocity of 1275m per second and could easly slice through 30-35mm of armour at 100m. 6000 were produced and 3500 were possibly used in combat in 1939. The german name of it was Panzerbüchse 35(p). All anti-tank rifles had flaw of massive recoil, very heavy weight but wz35 didnt had these and had a great penetration capabilities for its caliber and ammunition
PolishWingedHussar10 7 months ago
@jrms999 Well the drawbacks were that at longer ranges over 500m it was surpassed by larger caliber rifles, 300 shot barrel and tacticaly NCO's didnt know how to place a and alocate shooters to the effective use. But its armour penetrating was very good from its times of origins till 1941 then it effectiveness started to pass. It was just as easy to use as ordinary infantry rifle, it was just as light as rkm wz.28 so it was extremely easy to carry, shoot and fire even from crouching position
PolishWingedHussar10 7 months ago
@PolishWingedHussar10 Thanks for the reply PWH love the critique but I've heard the Boys kicked like a mull in action. My uncle was in the desert rats in WW2 (British 8th Army) and though not disparaging of the Boys he did say how in one action they shot one German tank around 38 times and failed to put it out of action; didn't even stop it in fact. Still great to see one in action so thanks LaurenTurtles...
jrms999 7 months ago
@jrms999 Bazookas, and Panzer fausts were not contemporary to the Boys rifle. The boys preceeded the Bazooka by 5yrs, and the faust by 6 yrs. Shaped charge rocket propelled munitions were the next step in the evolution of infantry anti armor weapons.
beardo52 6 months ago
@beardo52 Obviously but look at how quickly things evolved and us Brit's were still using them in the desert until we realised they just couldn't get the job done again the Panzer MkIIIs and IVs. When you think 'anti-tank' the first thing you think is Bazooka, not Boys anti-tank rifle. Even when the bazooka was in wide circulation instead of us buying the US patent and making our own we came up with the PIAT. Fair enough it didn't have a back blast but still....
jrms999 6 months ago
@jrms999 Commiserations on the PIAT, good round, spring drive not so much though. The M-6 rocket munition of the bazooka was not very reliable, the rocket motor being effected by moisture, and heat, and salt water. And even when it did function properly it had limited effectiveness against heavy, or stand-off equipped armor. This was fixed in later versions of the rocket, but not completely. I'm surprised that Britain did not get a boat load of then on lend lease.
beardo52 6 months ago
OMFG
calvinbudhan 8 months ago
So this would be a good first rifle?
Just kidding.
SwordsmanMercenary 8 months ago
@SwordsmanMercenary It would be an excellent first rifle, but they do cost alot, about 4,500 USD plus the transfer paperwork.
beardo52 8 months ago
chuck norris uses this for small pest control
aaronzack14 8 months ago
Too bad modern tanks have 1000 mm of armor beneath reactive armor.
ehnogi 8 months ago
@ehnogi In 1937 when this rifle was first issued, tanks didnt have very much armor at all. They were more of a mobile dumpster. The world's militaries needed an infantry anti armor weapon, and these types of rifles were it until 1942 when the U.S. deployed the firrst Bazookas, and 1943 when Germany deployd the Panzer faust,/Schreck. These days they are just an amusment, or a display in a museum. (but devilish fun to shoot)
beardo52 8 months ago
@ehnogi what is reactive armor?
iLoveMyGun89 8 months ago
@iLoveMyGun89
A lot of armored vehicles have an external plate that falls off upon recieving heavy impact (i.e from RPGs) to lessen the affect of shape-charged (anti-armor) rounds. This plate is called "reactive armor". With a weapon like this old anti-tank rifle, it probably wouldn't do much against a modern tank.
ehnogi 8 months ago
@ehnogi No that is spaced armour. Reactive armour is with packs of explosives that deflect the molten copper jet of anti tank/shaped charge projectiles.
evildeathmonkey1 8 months ago
@iLoveMyGun89 Check out the Russian T-90's with ''Era''(you can find it on google pictures or even youtube), Those boxes that it has all over it are what they call reactive armour. Basically is just packs of explosives that detonates as a counter blast to any anti-tank weapons. Ideally cancelling it out, or at least lessening it's impact.
evildeathmonkey1 8 months ago
@evildeathmonkey1 Wow, thats pretty neat.
iLoveMyGun89 8 months ago
@iLoveMyGun89 That is why some designs have an armour thinkness of f.e. 2000mm. It doesn't mean literally 2000 mm of steel but rather the equivalent of that in protection, achieved trough things like ERA(explosive reactive armour) and/ or composite armours like the British ''chobham'' armour. There are some pretty cool vids explaining the workings of ERA right here on youtube. Is brilliantly simple really.
evildeathmonkey1 8 months ago
ahhhhh just like in call of duty
luvz2snipe360 8 months ago
@luvz2snipe360 which call of duty? the sniper from cod5 is another one
Kackamann1 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Kackamann1 i am talking about the original
luvz2snipe360 8 months ago
The PIAT was more effective but It was worse than a recoiless rifle like the bazooka.
Its spring loaded pin made it throw back the gunner and it was not long range.
It was similar to the PanzerFaust but heavier.
Ever see "A bridge too far"?
Trashcansam123 8 months ago
@Trashcansam123 The Piat munition was good, but the projector was not so much.. Bazookas, Panzer Schreck were rocket launchers, and were pretty good, but lacked the range of Recoiless rifles, which are something different still. Britain built a number of simple, easy to make spigot mortar type weapons The PIAT, the Northover Projector, and some others that I can't recall just now.
beardo52 8 months ago
16mm penetration, so it barely makes it through half a plate on a bradley, not to mention the 1 inch "unarmored" steel base behind the actual plates, which in my opinion is still armor , whether it's part of the hull or not...
GodlessMartyr666 8 months ago
@GodlessMartyr666 The Boys rifle was first issued in 1937, when tanks were made like dumpsters. it was effective in its time, but like all a.t. rifles was retasked to what is now referred to as anti materiel. A.T. rifles are the progenitors of the modern a.m. rifle.
beardo52 8 months ago
@beardo52 yeah but the front plate of a tiger tank was 100mm thick, hiting it with one of these would do nothing but buy you a one way ticket to staring down the bore of its acht acht
GodlessMartyr666 8 months ago
@GodlessMartyr666 The Tiger I was introduced in 1942, 5 yrs after the boys. before that, German tanks were very thinly armored the PZKW I being only 7-15mm , and the II, III, and early IV, still having some thin spots this rifle could get through. (although one would have to be close, and a good shot to exploit those weaknesses) The Boys was used in groups, maybe 6 to a group, so it was thought that someone would hit the right spot. The Boys was never intended to engage the Tiger.
beardo52 8 months ago
@beardo52 thx for clearing that up for me, I had always just assumed and pictured a single guy praying to his jesus that the round would somehow miraculously disable the tiger, what a fool I was! And I guess the germans got wise to the whole lets use less plating and save on building cost, time and complexity when engineering and producing our tanks idea was rather regressive due to this rifle and the round it fires,... Did the brits ever design a bazooka/ panzershreck type device im unaware of?
GodlessMartyr666 8 months ago
@GodlessMartyr666 Well, they made a thing called the PIAT, (Projector, infantry anti-tank) It was half spigot mortar, half spring gun, between the spring, and a small propellant charge in the bomb it "fired" it could loft a shaped charge bomb several hundred yards/meters, but it was not accurate at the greater distances. the Bomb did a fine job, as long as it hit something it was aimed at. Britain probably had tons of U.S. bazookas, but I dont know if they made any on their own.
beardo52 8 months ago
dddddaaayyyyyuuuummmm!!!
insaneclown15 8 months ago
Good to be British, i can fire this freely as a citizen BTW. in England. :D
TheOsiriss2 8 months ago
Comment removed
TheOsiriss2 8 months ago
That MG sounded like DP-28
steiner1203 9 months ago
did i c a mg42 in there?
matthewcolt1911 9 months ago
they need to make a quad mount with these along with 100 rg mags to mount in trucks
spiffinz 9 months ago
@spiffinz You'd wear your arm out operating 4 bolt actions every few seconds....:)
beardo52 9 months ago
I want to live in America
dylanotoshiro 9 months ago