Ask Ian - What Was the Best WW2 Rifle Cartridge? (ad-free)
Added 2022-08-04 12:01:01 +0000 UTCFrom crablegs21 on Utreon:
"In your opinion and in hindsight, which country had the most optimized cartridge for the their primary infantry rifle for WWII? Additionally, which country would have benefited most by switching to that cartridge prior to WWII?"
In my opinion - and I think post-war development supports this - the best rifle cartridge was 8mm Kurz (7.92x33mm). The StG-44 was never actually Germany's primary infantry rifle, but they wanted it to be. The 8mm Kurz offers much reduced recoil ideal for semiauto and select-fire rifles, allowing fast followup shots while remaining powerful enough to be quite deadly.
However, this doesn't address the logistical issue of machine gun cartridges. Basically everyone in WW2 used a single cartridge for both rifles and support machine guns, and the cartridge choice was largely dictated by what was most effective in a machine gun intended to shoot out to 1000+ yards and to engage vehicles and aircraft. Larger cartridges were much better suited for this than today's intermediate cartridges. Interestingly, both the Italians (6.5mm Carcano) and the Swedes (6.5mm Swedish) developed supplemental big machine gun cartridges because they considered their standard rounds insufficient (these were 8x59mm for the Italians and 8x63mm for the Swedes)
If I had to pick a larger cartridge to allow both rifle and MG use, I would pick 7.35mm Carcano. This is about the lightest "rifle" round of the war that used a spitzer bullet and a rimless case. Its larger bullet diameter compared to 6.5mm rounds would allow better tracer and AP bullets, which are relevant in a military context.
As for which nation could benefit the most from adopting this cartridge before the war, I will go out on a limb and say the US, at least form a rifleman's perspective. The M1 Garand chambered for 7.35mm Carcano would be a fantastic rifle, probably at least a pound lighter than normal and faster shooting. The BAR could be lightened much more, and might have been able to be a more truly effective automatic rifle.
Comments
Yeah Norway and Denmark used the Krag in 6.5x55 and Madsen light machine guns in 6.5x55.
2022-08-07 18:13:13 +0000 UTCI cam here to say this!
Phil Byrd
2022-08-05 16:15:48 +0000 UTCSwedish volunteers used it in Finland during the Winter War, together with Finns who were issued Swedish Mauser rifles.
Lance Thundercock
2022-08-05 11:23:57 +0000 UTCI was shooting mine at 1300 meters a couple of weeks ago!! It's still very much relevant even today.
Farmer Brown
2022-08-05 11:21:36 +0000 UTCNorway was a combatant, and weren't they using it? It was certainly used in Finland at least by Swedish volunteers.
Farmer Brown
2022-08-05 11:10:36 +0000 UTCIt was used quite widely in Finland, starting already in 1918
TJ
2022-08-05 04:06:16 +0000 UTCBet one or two rounds went over the border between ‘39 and ‘45. What about the flak aimed at belligerent aircraft? But yes, they were indeed neutral; article didn’t specify combatants, just a period of time and considering contemporaneous cartridges.
Pumba’s Gpa
2022-08-04 23:11:14 +0000 UTCBut it wasn't used by a combatant in WW2, as Sweden was neutral.
Simon Jeffreys
2022-08-04 21:58:50 +0000 UTCShould have said 6.5x55. Typed before first coffee of the day.
Pumba’s Gpa
2022-08-04 20:21:47 +0000 UTCPersonal and perennial favourite to shoot 6.55x55. Flat shooting, more than enough ‘puissance’ at 1000yds, noticeably lighter than the 30-06 for carriage, rimless. Imagine a Bren built for this round. A lighter Garand would probably have accepted a 10rd clip. Consider the shipping logistics and manufacturing savings of a smaller cartridge with better packaging.
Pumba’s Gpa
2022-08-04 20:15:46 +0000 UTCLo
Pumba’s Gpa
2022-08-04 20:06:17 +0000 UTCthe 6mils. 6,5x50jap, 6,5x52carcano, 6,5x55swed? 7,62x39 (sks yes the very last days)
Guido Schriewer
2022-08-04 15:59:32 +0000 UTCGood analysis Ian. I am not all that familiar with the Italian cartridges but your assessement makes sense. Although the world's armies kept their late 19th/early 20th Century cartridges for the reason's you cited(range, material impact), it is worth noting that those ballistics originally were required for the infantryman to shoot horses. The history of firearms in war is the history of Infantry versus Cavalry. They just kept using what had worked against horses and repurposed it against vehicles and aircraft. As far as "standardization" goes, I chuckle at that. The U.S. had to supply Cal. .30 to the front lines but in several forms or packaging. Belts for MGs, 5-round clips for BAR reloading and 8-round clips for the M-1. As far as Logistics is concerned, that might as well be three differnt rounds. Keep up the great work.
Dana Arbeit
2022-08-04 14:52:54 +0000 UTCI concur. 6.5x55 is a great cartridge.
Chris Denner
2022-08-04 14:47:59 +0000 UTCOld wars, new wars: most efficient anti personnel round (least ammo & weapon weights/lowest recoil) will never be the most effective anti materiel/anti vehicle round (most DAMMAGE to moderately hard targets, effective tracers & maybe even some useful explosive/incendiary effects)... Splitting the difference and trying to get acceptable performance in both roles makes for a happy supply chain and unhappy, tired grunts without quite enough ammo in their basic load out, probably taking more casualties in the front lines.
Robert Rowe
2022-08-04 14:18:20 +0000 UTCWhat?! No 7.5 French?! Mon Dieu!
Gavin Rea-Davies
2022-08-04 14:06:36 +0000 UTCI thought you were just going to say "8mm Lebel" and call it a day ;)
James Caldwell
2022-08-04 14:03:14 +0000 UTC6.5x55 for infantry rifles. For shooting at vehicles, aircraft, etc. the 30-06 really wasn't optimized for those uses compared to the 50 BMG was available. The 30 cal browning and BAR really were not ideal for other than anti personnel use.
David K. Jernigan
2022-08-04 13:30:51 +0000 UTC
