Other Post Best military rifle of WW2???



I was wondering what the consensus opinion was regarding the best standard military issue rifle of WW2 was? I have owned several wartime 98K mausers , and I currently own a No.4 Mk1 , but wondered if there was one that any felt was a better weapon. My vote goes to the No.4 Mk1 , as its 10 rd clip gave it a major advantage over the others.
No doubt about it. The M1 Garand.
Last edited by a moderator:
Yep.M-1 Garand without any doubt.Germans had the best LMG's.
M-1 Garand - sorry, but no! The clip-loading system was the achilles heal of the M-1. It could not be operated other than by loading it with an 8-rd. clip - not the ideal in battlefield conditions. The solution eventually came along, the M-14 with a magazine-loading system.

The Germans had some great weapons - the K98 - the FG-42, a brilliant but flawed idea - the Stg.44 (and pre-decessors), great idea, but poorly made.

but for a straight-forward, accurate and most importantly soldier-proof battle rifle, the No. 4 Mk.1 Lee Enfield rifle in .303 - in service in various versions from 1888 (Lee Metford No.1) until 1990 (L42A1 Sniper rifle) - 102 years...............need I say more?
I'm with highland sniper on this one....the FG42 was an awesome weapon but the 98K mauser was the standard issue , and a damn good rifle...no doubt about it...I still give the No.4 MkI the edge though....whilst I have fired an Stg44(my friend in La. has 2 of them) and they are an intriguing weapon , there weren't enough of them to go around. The Garand was good too and self loading , but the jerrys knew when to charge after hearing that pling of an empty mag. It is close between the M1 and the No.4 MkI.....just my 2 cents.

Thanks for the debate
Not to get into a debate here, I still think the Garand was best. #1-look who won the war. #2- Rob, the M14 didn't come out till just after the Korean War. The Mauser 98 and the Lee-Enfield were great in their own right, but they were bolt action. When you got in a tight, you needed firepower.
Do you hear about Polish verssion Mauser?
Befor WW2 Mauser was standard weapons in Polish Army. The production started in July 1922 in Panstwowa Fabryka Karabinow in Warsaw using tools and machinery from a former German factory in Gdansk (Danzig) which was granted to Poland by the Treaty of Versailles. Poland produced 4 version Mauser :
kb wz. 1898 - was almost identical to the German model 1898
kb wz. 1898a - was produced by in new factory in Radom
Kbk wz. 1898 -was a clone of the German Kar 98a.
Kbk wz. 1929 -was designed in Poland in 1929

Kbk wz.1929
Last edited by a moderator:
I found this comparison on another web site, I can think for the life of me which one but here it is;

It depends on what role you are using the rifle for. As a combat rifle, few if any rifles in history ever matched the M1 Garand's effectiveness in battle (ARs, M16s, AKs are all considered "Assualt" rifles rather than "Combat" rifles and are not in the same class as the Garand and Enfield). The Garands rarely malfuctioned; could be field stripped quickly; and can be reloaded faster than any rifle of its time. Though the Garand wasn't nearly as accurate as the Enfield, it was still highly effective within 500 yards. Because of rate of fire and the quickness of reloading the German soldiers found it very difficult to advance and gain position on squad/platoon of American GIs carrying them. This same surpressive fire capability made it easier for an allied advance as well. Now had you been compairing the M1 carbines to the Enfield, I think the Enfield would win out. The rounds from the carbine didn't have much knock down power and were known to barely penetrate through a German wearing heavy winter cloths.

Now if the role is as a sniper rifle, the Enfield kicks the living $#*% out of the Garand. The M1 Garand Model "D" was highly ineffective as a sniper rifle due to its awkward scope mounting (mounted on the side due to the cartridge ejecting) and inaccuracy at more than 500 yards. The Enfield's accuracy was among the top in the world in its time. The only rifle we Americans designed that could even come close to their accuracy was the M1903A3 (more commonly called an '03 springfield), even still these came up short. Add to that the fact that the American government viewed sniping as a "dark art" and didn't have a sniper program in place until well after WWII had started (this program was quickly cancelled after WWII and has had an up and down history until recent years). The British (and the German's for that matter) realized the value of sniping in the great war and were the best in the world, hands down. Even today British snipers are the best in the world, and we Americans have learned what we know from them. This knowledge of the art of sniping and its needs are reflected by the design and accuracy of the Enfield.
Absolutely.Those of pre-WWII make are highly thought of in this country for use as the basis of very high$$$$ custom sporting rifles.

NOW ya done it.Are you sure you wanna add snipeing and sniper rifles to the question of the best gen. issue WWII rifle?
Hey doc :lol:
Just adding some more substance to this interesting subject :p
I'm sorry guys - but there is still one vital point to be adressed - the M-1 Garand and a box of .30-06 ammo was still little more than a club unless the ammo was pre-loaded into the specific 8-round clips without which it was useless. This was a design flaw from day one which should have been reason to reject the rifle.

I am not doubting the ability of a group of well-trained riflemen with M-1s to lay down a heavy rate of fire, but the concept of a rifle unable to operate without clips, unable to be single-loaded, or have it's magazine topped up is madness.

I know the M-14 came along post-Korea, but clearly even the US Army saw the flaw in its previous rifle, but it took them about 15 years - and two major wars - to see it.

The No.4 Enfield is not just any bolt-action rifle - the design of the Lee Enfield action lent itself to rapid and accurate fire which was proven time and time again. More over it was superbly accurate - far more so than the M-1, over much greater differences, could take ammo singly, in clips, in magazines and could be topped up. And most important of all - it was totally soldier-proof.

I'm afraid I'm not quite sure what Eagledriver is getting at with
#1-look who won the war.
- the answer to that is we all did (i.e. the allies), and a fair part of the US military's infantry contribution was made by Marines carrying bolt-action M1903 Springfields because production of M-1 Garands never met supply during WW2.

This is one of these debates which has no correct answer - the US guys will obviously say the M-1 because they always think American is best. The Brits will say the Lee Enfield because they know it is best - result stalemate - pointless question in the first place - sorry D_squad_22_SAS, but that's the way it is.
Rob, You are totally, absolutely 100% right. All of us did win WW2. What I said was strictly "tongue in cheek" if you catch my drift. I certainly don't want to offend any of our friends. I most humbly apologize. :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops:
Eagledriver said:
Rob, You are totally, absolutely 100% right. All of us did win WW2. What I said was strictly "tongue in cheek" if you catch my drift. I certainly don't want to offend any of our friends. I most humbly apologize. :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops:

And no offence taken - and what's more we did it with goodness knows how many different types of rifles - even some as bad as the French MAS and other clunkers like that.

My proposal to end this debate is that we put the M-1 Garand and No.4 Mk.1 Lee Enfield on level pegging, and rate the others second place - how's about that then? But really, we mustn't forget the various Mauser actioned rifles which ia many ways were only handicapped by their five round fixed magazines.
I guess since I am new here I shouldn't pose "pointless" questions....so I will bid you all adieu.

Respectfully ,

Hey, D. He meant no harm. Don't run off. We all do a lot of kidding and all. :D No question is "pointless." If you don't ask, how can you learn?
Hey D_squad, he was not being disrespectful, its just Highlands way. Its very difficult to disagree with somebody in type, it always sounds worse than it really is.
Come on buddy, I thought it was a great question. :mrgreen:

Similar threads