Thompson or MP-40 : Whcih do you personally prefer?

During WW2, The Thompsn proved to be one of the best guns that American forces had. For the Germans, one was the MP-40

Both were fast and powerful, but which one would you have picked to use?

Personally, I'd go with the MP-40

 

I know what this lady's pick is!

YouTube - MP40 Grandmam

Personally I like the Thompson

Modern Firearms - Thompson M1921 M1928 M1 and M1A1 submachine gun / "Tommy Gun"
Modern Firearms - MP-38 and MP-40 submachine guns

 

The Thompson is what I choose, .45 cal. pistol round. On the other hand the MP40 had these advantages, decently light, 9mm pistol round the British had the Sten in 9MM pistol round so the Germans could pick up Sten ammo from British that had Stens. Folding Butstock.

 

I Pick the MP40 cuz it looks better in my opinion. And I heard a story that GIs liked them for house clearing.

 

That is close which one realy looks better? I am leaning Thompson( I like a gun with wood, and the MP-40 has no wood):music: Edit......... I decided I am totally a Thompson fan

 

I like the Thompson because it had a 500-round magazine, could hit a running German at 300 yards when fired one handed by a GI carrying his wounded buddy on his back, and every hit was a kill. On the other hand, the MP40 always fired in the dirt at the aforementioned GI's feet and made the shooter stand still, completely exposed to the accurate Thompson fire.



On a serious note... the MP38/40 was a nice weapon, but the original Thompson, the so-called "Tommy" gun with the cutts compensator and front pistol grip (used by His Majesty's Forces) was a work of art that was more accurate than the later, more easily manufactured GI version. I personally like the .45ACP round more than the 9mm parabellum.

As someone mentioned earlier, the wood furniture is nice on the Thompson, and it beats a folding stock any time!

Remember the photo of Churchill with the "gangster" Thompson? The Germans used that as propaganda as they were building the case that the British and Americans were just gangsters!

 

MP40 easily looks better and I prefer a folding stock (so there).

 

The MP-40 is just a piece of stamped metal. Please explain why the MP-40 looks better.:biggrin1:

 

Just give me the owen machine gun and I would be happier
:hail:

 

I can not stand the Owen gun:lock1: I think it looks like a butchered Sten . I seen a few pics on the internet.:cc_hang: :cc_hang:

 

Machine Guns aren't meant to look pretty, after all it is meant to be an effective killing weapon which it is. It has been used in WW2, Korea and Vietnam. I have had the pleasure of firing them a couple of times when i was in the CMF and I enjoyed the experience.
John
:common001:

 

Hi John, The thing is the Thompson is good-looking, and its got the power to get the job done ( Does .45 caliber pistol round mean anything to you?):boxing:

 

For some things WH, there are no reasons. It just does.

 

War Hawk
a small hole in a vital organ kills just as quick as a big hole.
:behindsofa:

 

Reliability is what matters to me - and a ready supply of ammo. Don't much care for looks

 

A big hole has a better chance of hitting a vital organ than a smaller hole .:caked:

 

For those that maybe interested in Owen gun I have put a website that has the story of the Owen gun

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/usr/wbardwel/public/nfalist/owen_gun.txt

John
:behindsofa:

 

Would take the MP38 in a heartbeat. Light, compact, and was effective for what it was designed to do. Was made cheaper and easier to build, in the MP40 model. For a guy that has to hump his gun and ammo around all day, the MP38/40 made a difference and was as effective in a similar operating range to the Thompson.

That being said, the Russian PPSh-41 had them both beat.
And that being said, the MP44 was top of class.