The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post - WWII aircraft armament machine guns and cannon

**Mike Irwin** · May 5, 2025, 08:03 AM

"I am far from a machine gun expert so will take your word for it. I kind of tend to the M3 as the all time winner but?"

The M3 wasn't as reliable as the PPS 43, primarily due to the double column single feed magazine.

The cocking lever was also a very poor design and in a significant number of the early guns suffered cocking lever failures. Troops apparently resorted to cocking the gun by slamming the butt on the ground.

The wire stock was also lacking. Not as bad as the wire stock on Reisings, but not particularly useful as a stock, either, and FAR less useful as a stock than the folding skeleton stock on the PPS 43.

The PPS 43 also use a proper double column double feed magazine, which virtually eliminated the kind of stoppages experience in the M3 magazine and which made magazine loading far easier.

I've handled, fired, and stripped both the M3 and the PPS 43.

Firing is largely a wash. They're submachine guns. Both are controllable.

Handling is subjective. Both handle about the same as they look -- like utilitarian low-cost weapons.

Field stripping, for me at least, goes to the PPS 43. It's simpler by about half.

May 5, 2025, 08:03 AM	#331
Mike Irwin Staff Join Date: April 14, 2000 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 41,641	"I am far from a machine gun expert so will take your word for it. I kind of tend to the M3 as the all time winner but?" The M3 wasn't as reliable as the PPS 43, primarily due to the double column single feed magazine. The cocking lever was also a very poor design and in a significant number of the early guns suffered cocking lever failures. Troops apparently resorted to cocking the gun by slamming the butt on the ground. The wire stock was also lacking. Not as bad as the wire stock on Reisings, but not particularly useful as a stock, either, and FAR less useful as a stock than the folding skeleton stock on the PPS 43. The PPS 43 also use a proper double column double feed magazine, which virtually eliminated the kind of stoppages experience in the M3 magazine and which made magazine loading far easier. I've handled, fired, and stripped both the M3 and the PPS 43. Firing is largely a wash. They're submachine guns. Both are controllable. Handling is subjective. Both handle about the same as they look -- like utilitarian low-cost weapons. Field stripping, for me at least, goes to the PPS 43. It's simpler by about half. __________________ "The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.