WW II British tanker's assessment of the Sten and .38 Webley

[Dain Bramage]

But remember, the Luger saw the German military through two world wars and through their period of Colonial expansion. It was well regarded as being reliable and accurate, even in very adverse conditions in the trenches.

Wasn't it replaced by the P-38 mostly for lower manufacturing costs (man hours)? Also, after the Walther PP came out, DA/SA was considered the modern European standard.

[tangolima]

Originally Posted by Mike Irwin

They're only more accessible if you're either issued one or if you manage to capture one. Obviously, he wasn't issued one, as he talks about the .380 revolver, and almost all of the Hi Powers available to the British military were going to specialized troops, so capture is it.

Once you've captured a pistol to replace the gun you don't like, it's a lot less likely that you're going to search for a different one to replace the one you've got, especially given that the Luger was iconic and was considered to be quite the trophy.

We're looking at it from the point of view of gun guys.

He's obviously looking at it from the point of someone who has to fight, and wants better weapons, even if that means using captured weapons.

At least back in the day, only wealthy families could afford Sandhurst. He could buy his pistol of his choosing, as did Churchill. Some models would be more available than the other. As an officer in the tank corps, he could get an inglis hi power from Canada with no fuss, instead of shooting his revolver in a less-than-gentleman manner.

Didn't he shoot out the street lamp with his Luger as a college boy prank (questionable judgement perhaps)? Maybe he had already gotten that Luger before going to the field. Maybe he didn't really have to do the cowboy move with his service revolver. He just saw the other guys doing that. It is still unthinkable the British army didn't teach their lads how to use their weapon properly.

-TL

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

[44 AMP]

Wasn't it replaced by the P-38 mostly for lower manufacturing costs (man hours)?

New Luger production ended in 1942. Yes, the P.38 was intended to replace the P.08, and did, to the extent possible, as it was more modern and cheaper to make, in terms of manhours needed.

Nazi Germany was, through out its brief history, chronically short of pistols (among other things). One of the reasons was the fact that nearly every govt official was in a uniform, and most of the time, that uniform included a pistol. Full dress uniforms often included both pistol and dagger.

P.38s primarily went to ground forces (Heer) first, the navy (Kriegsmarine) and air force (Luftwaffe) had mostly P.08 Lugers throughout the war.

Every arms maker that Germany captured intact was put to work making arms (especially pistols .32acp and above). Lots of .32s were worn by political officials, 9mms generally went to combat troops.

Lugers (Parabellums to the English) were prized trophies. P.38s less so, for a trophy, a bit more so for a combat handgun.

[Mike Irwin]

"At least back in the day, only wealthy families could afford Sandhurst. He could buy his pistol of his choosing, as did Churchill. Some models would be more available than the other."

By World War II junior officers were no longer required to purchase their own sidearm. They were issued a sidearm.

"As an officer in the tank corps, he could get an inglis hi power from Canada with no fuss, instead of shooting his revolver in a less-than-gentleman manner."

Uhm... No. He couldn't.

Inglis-made Hi Powers weren't available until late 1944. ALL production was contracted to the British government (for British and Commonwealth troops) and the Nationalist Chinese government. One simply couldn't bop over (or drop a letter) and expect to get one.

One the British army started issuing the Hi Powers, they were priority issued to Airborne and Special Forces. No general issue of Hi Powers was made to regular army commands, including armor, until well after the end of World War II.

http://www.ai4fr.com/main/page_milit...da_inglis.html


"Didn't he shoot out the street lamp with his Luger as a college boy prank (questionable judgement perhaps)?"

Not sure what you point is about this. I've not read the book, so I don't know what the time frame is for when he did this vs when he and his tank landed in France.


"It is still unthinkable the British army didn't teach their lads how to use their weapon properly."

As with most European military organizations, handguns were largely seen as a badge of officer's rank. There are accounts of the British and French being very surprised at how many American enlisted personnel had handguns when American troops arrived in Europe in World War I. Even more surprising to the British was that the Americans viewed handguns as legitimate fighting tools.

The British placed almost no priority on training their officers in the use of handguns. Essentially it boiled down to being shown how to load, unload, and maintain the gun and range time that MIGHT get them up to 50 rounds fired total. If they were lucky. As war time pressures of ramping up an army really hit home, it's very likely that that amount of training was cut considerably. The military needed the officers more than it needed the officers to be proficient in handgun use.

For most of the first half of the war officers were issued a total of 12 rounds of ammunition -- 6 in the gun, and 6 in load loops. Getting more ammunition required it to be requisitioned from regimental stores and likely offering justification as to why you needed to replace your ammunition.

So no. It's not surprising at all that the British didn't properly train their officers how to use the issue revolver.

[Mike Irwin]

"Wasn't it replaced by the P-38 mostly for lower manufacturing costs (man hours)?"

Luger production continued into 1943 when Mauserwerk finally ceased production. The simple fact is that the P-38 couldn't be made quickly enough to allow the Luger production to cease.

That's also why the Germans routinely took handguns (and other arms) from invaded nations into service. The Danish 1911, the French MAS 35, the Polish Radom, the Belgian High Power, all were pressed into German service.

If the gun fired a non-standard cartridge (Danish 1911, MAS 35), those weapons were generally used to arm occupation troops in the nation of origin. During the invasion of France Allied troops frequently encountered Germans armed with Betherier rifles and MAS 35 and Lebel revolvers.

[Jim Watson]

For most of the first half of the war officers were issued a total of 12 rounds of ammunition -- 6 in the gun, and 6 in load loops. Getting more ammunition required it to be requisitioned from regimental stores and likely offering justification as to why you needed to replace your ammunition.

Probably why, in the Golden Age of surplus guns, there were plenty of British revolvers but little surplus ammo. Leading to .455s being (unwisely) cut for .45 and S&Ws being reamed to accept .38 Special. The .38 Webleys and Enfields just kind of languished. Although if you were an Englishman with a revolver on your license, Webley sold front sight blades to correct elevation for commercial 146 grain .38 S&W.

[Mike Irwin]

"The .38 Webleys and Enfields just kind of languished."

Which is kind of silly when you consider that the .38 S&W round was still readily available, and S&W was still making revolvers for it (I improved, J, and K frames), into the 1960s.

Western was even loading a 200-gr. load that matched the original British load (which had apparently been patterened on the Western load to begin with).

[SIGSHR]

In a book entitled If Britain had fallen the author tells of a maintenance unit, the men's rifle were taken away and even the lieutenant had to hand over his rifle for use elsewhere. Charlie Askins said when he was held up the staging area before D-Day he tried to teach as many officers as possible to shoot, he noted that few had handled a handgun before. We often forget that few soldiers -in any army-are gun people.

[Jim Watson]

Which is kind of silly when you consider that the .38 S&W round was still readily available,

There is still resistance to the .38 S&W. Ask on the S&W board about your old .38 and somebody will surely say: "They still make ammo for it but it is expensive and hard to find."

[Mike Irwin]

"There is still resistance to the .38 S&W. Ask on the S&W board about your old .38 and somebody will surely say: "They still make ammo for it but it is expensive and hard to find."

And today, that's true. It CAN be expensive and hard to find because it's not nearly as popular as it once was.

The reason for that is that S&W brought out the J frame in .38 Special, displacing the .38 S&W as the small snub caliber.

The entire Wonder 9 stampede that started in the late 1970s also didn't help the cartridge one bit, either.

But in the 1950s and 1960s, the heyday of the surplus era, .38 S&W was available just about anywhere that sold ammunition and/or firearms.

[4V50 Gary]

Thanks Mike. My grandfather bought a 38 S&W Special for the gang wars of his time. He used to go to Fremont, CA to practice. It was all farmland back in the '30s.

[Brit]

In Germany in 1955, Royal Signals, 2-year conscription, I witnessed an accidental discharge from a .38 revolver.
On guard duty at night, was something you got called to do. With a .303 Enfield rifle. No ammunition! Just a spike bayonet.
The Guard commander was supposed to be an Officer? But normally a Sgt. This night it was a Lance Corporal.
It was cold! The Guard Commander was wearing an Enfield. The 38 short version. His holster was hanging below his web belt, some jerry-rigged way?
The guard on post had just been relieved, and he was in the process of drinking a hot chocolate (Coco) dressed in a thick Great Coat, sweater, jacket, vest.
And a cross strapped ammo pouch.
The Guard Commander was the only person with ammo. He was doing some quick draw? BANG! Cup dropped! Corporal ran into the cell, closed the gate behind him, the key was on the outside, so not locked.
The squaddie who was shot in the back, with fixed bayonet on his Rifle, was trying to stab the corporal with it, through the bars. Could not reach him, but kept trying. Me and the other off-duty chap grabbed the Guard, took the rifle off him. Big wrestling match.

The bullet had hit him exactly at the crossed centre of the pouch straps.
We tried to undress this Guard in a panic, to get at the wound! The potbellied stove made the room hot. We found no blood! Just a quickly growing bruise!
Black and blue, huge!
So much for the power of that 600 fps 200g RN lead bullet.

[Mike Irwin]

Neat story, Brit. And certainly not unheard of with low power rounds like that.

[4V50 Gary]

Can't blame the squaddie for trying to go stabby on the corporal.

[Andy Blozinski]

All you guys sounding all knowledgeable and blaming it on bad training and stuff and saying his impressions were wrong are ignoring things.
He used a Luger and said it got the job done. What's the explanation there for why that suddenly worked for him and others?
Maybe you are saying a .38 Webley really is a fantastic gun only if properly trained but a Luger is a great gun with no training?
Same comment with the Sten.
He and many others had to use and kill lots of people with these things. He wasn't alone in mass practical use and coming up with the same replacement solution. Maybe hundreds of soldiers that had to kill lots of people know better than an armchair quarterback.

[Brit]

The Lugar pushed out a 124g Hard Ball round at over 1000 fps. Right through the hardest clothing, hole in hole out! Best round of the 2ndWW, for pistols, sub guns.
I carry 16 rounds of 147g Ranger T, in my Gen 4 Glock 19.
But my spare G17 Mag. is carrying 17 rounds of NATO 124g hardball.
Nice and quick, better at car perforating!

[44 AMP]

What's the explanation there for why that suddenly worked for him and others?

One simple explanation is that it worked because he wanted it to.

[Mike Irwin]

OK, you want an explanation. Here's why we're saying what we're saying.

1. The level of training that the British gave their officers on use of handguns was incredibly minimal. You get more training in the use of handguns at a 1 hour NRA instructor's course.

2. The issue British revolver was double action only. It has a relatively heavy, long trigger pull and it takes considerable training and practice to become proficient with it.

3. The Luger is a single action handgun with a relatively light, crisp trigger pull.

4. The Luger is generally considered to be one of the most naturally pointing handguns ever designed, greatly aiding the shooter's ability to hit with it. I've seen absolute novices shooting a Luger do very well with it, and do very poorly with other handguns.

5. The Luger round is considerably more powerful than the British issue service round.


All that considered, give someone with minimal training a Luger and a Enfield revolver to shoot, and they're going to do a LOT better with the Luger.



"Maybe hundreds of soldiers that had to kill lots of people know better than an armchair quarterback."

So, in other words, you're doubling down on the armchair quarterbacking, because you're AC QBing the people you accuse of being AC QBs.

Gotcha.

Gotta remember something... More than a few of us on this board, and in this thread, have served in the military, have extensive firearms application and use backgrounds, and have fired shots in anger.

There are more than a few people in this thread who are commenting quite knowledgeably based on their personal experience.

I don't have military service to my credit, one of my great regrets in life, but I have considerable depth of practical experience with the firearms that are being talked about in this thread.

So, AC QB to AC QB, what's your background?

[105kw]

Being a Brit kid, not knowing much about guns, he probably knew a Luger. It was the standard bad guy movie gun of the late 30s and 40s.
He may have also heard stories from WW1 vets.
A lot of troops in the war wanted Luger, they hadn't heard of the P-38. They called it the wartime Luger, inferring it was a cheap copy.

[Brit]

The P-38 was the South African made under license pistol. I have shot them, cheaper to manufacturer than the Luger. But they are reliable, accurate.

[Mike Irwin]

The P 38 was made in Germany for the German Army, which was at war with South Africa.

Your comment isn't true for the WWII years.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

[Brit]

I know that Mike, my friend, a Soth African, told me of this situation, but I never made it clear (Old you know!) much after WW11. He carried one in Cape Town. That was made at home.

His comment on how to tell if someone was carrying in a Pub. They had a jacket on!

[Mike Irwin]

After your comment last night I did some more digging and was surprised to find out that the P-38 was used extensively in South Africa post WW II, apparently even becoming an official arm of SA police.

Not sure if they were all manufactured in Germany, or if the South African government manufactured their own variant.

[Mk VII]

The British placed almost no priority on training their officers in the use of handguns. Essentially it boiled down to being shown how to load, unload, and maintain the gun and range time that MIGHT get them up to 50 rounds fired total. If they were lucky. As war time pressures of ramping up an army really hit home, it's very likely that that amount of training was cut considerably. The military needed the officers more than it needed the officers to be proficient in handgun use.

Nor should they. The time was better invested in learning to shoot the rifle, and the LMG, and the various SMGs when they eventually came along. An officer must know how to do all these, and to at least the same standard as his men. As well as all the other stuff he has to keep up with. Later on in the war many were carrying rifles and wearing a private soldiers equipment, and not messing around pistols which were of marginal value on a battlefield where everybody else has got something bigger.

[TruthTellers]

Originally Posted by Mike Irwin

"There is still resistance to the .38 S&W. Ask on the S&W board about your old .38 and somebody will surely say: "They still make ammo for it but it is expensive and hard to find."

And today, that's true. It CAN be expensive and hard to find because it's not nearly as popular as it once was.

The reason for that is that S&W brought out the J frame in .38 Special, displacing the .38 S&W as the small snub caliber.

The entire Wonder 9 stampede that started in the late 1970s also didn't help the cartridge one bit, either.

But in the 1950s and 1960s, the heyday of the surplus era, .38 S&W was available just about anywhere that sold ammunition and/or firearms.

Also to keep in mind the .38 S&W was designed to be used, and has primarily been chambered in, top break revolvers. Once the top break design was usurped by stronger revolvers that could handle more powerful loads and be just as fast to reload due to the swing out cylinder, the .38 S&W was doomed for obsolescence.

The only reason the .38 S&W is still around today is that it's low powered enough it's not banned in other countries for civilians to own. Kind of similar to the .38 Super in Mexico, so ammo isn't impossible to find. Not easy or cheap, but not impossible.