Is the BAR overrated?

Its legendary, but outdated

>>33300837
But was it even good in its time?

>>33300844
>WWI & 2

yeah it was pretty fucking good for its time

>>33300844
Did it kill Japs,Jerrys, and Commies? You have your answer.

>>33300844
English Bren LMG is quite better than BAR, but BAR surely did its job on battlefield.

>>33300829
no

>>33300844
yes

>>33300869
no

>>33300844

Thats a good question. The first model was a little lighter but the more common 1922 versiopn weighs more then 4 pounds more then a Madsen 1902 which has a quick change barrel and top loading magazine of variable size.

Walking fire was a terrible idea. The chautchut (in tolerable 8mm lebel not the awful 30-06 clone) was lighter and had a foregrip for this sort of thing.

The action is really good for single shots. Think of it like a 20 semi auto with bolt action accuracy and used for supporting or defensively it does well in this regard. Especially as full auto tends to heat up and ruin the barrels.

Action survives in high end sporting rifles. The walking fire concept was completely flawed however.

For being the third light machinegun it didn't really improve on the concept and dead ended as it was trying to do too much at once while lacking required features. Though it did pave the way for true box magazine battle rifles and semi auto DMR's.

>>33300873
>Bren versus BAR
>quick change barrel
>magazine capacity

kek

>>33300829
Yes just like everything browning designed.

>>33300880
Sweet.

>>33300829
> Spandau

>>33300829
Not quite, given the Chauchat (which was no where near as bad or faulty as the reputation as it was given, the real issue is fact it needed more training to use) is similar in design, given the 20-round magazine especially...
both were transitional affairs, neither machine guns or battle rifles, though both could have been useful in both roles. their size and less-than ergonomic forms failed them in the long run, as the mg38 proved by being an ACTUAL machine gun.

>>33300880
>Walking fire was a terrible idea
mentioned literally once in an offhand manner in the first BAR manuals printed
they never planned to use it for that
their concept for the BAR's use was closely tied to British developing doctrine of bounding between positions and beating enemy locations with fire, which the BAR is perfect for

>>33301040
>with a tiny mag, a performance no better than an m1 is semi-auto and tiny sights on an oversized body

>>33300914
Found the poor fag.

>>33301068
World War 1 dumb cunt, Jesus have mercy on your retarded soul.

>>33300829
It was good for WW1 but it was terribly outdated by WW2

>>33301095
>bren gun is designed, basically an actual squad automatic weapon
>continuing to rely on a weapon that follows a rifle pattern as your squad level-machine gun
the m1 garand was designed to compensate for the lack of effective volume of firepower americans had

>>33300844
"It's time" meaning 1918?

Sure.

"It's time" meaning 1941?

Ehhhh

Too heavy to work as a battle rifle and not enough dakka to work as a Squad Automatic Weapon. It was still a functional weapon though.

>>33300905
>33300905
bren is a great gun, but that top side magazine has a few detractions. and you have to load the mags perfectly because of the rims

>>33300829
>american weapon
Yeah, probably

>>33301155
>reloading by yourself like a bloody peasant
>not making your bren squire AKA assistant gunner reload the weapon for you

>>33301169
>in sustained firefight in burmese jungle with jap 7.7s whistling through the foilage and thumping in dirt and trees all around you
>gunner yelling at you to reload the mags, hes on his last one and you hear jap screams of banzai
>easily start replenishing magazines with each cartridge in front of the other while not shaking even a bit

i mean im sure some people did it, and its not a huge detraction, but i think a non rimmed cartridge is definitely an advantage in speed of reload

the bren barral change is the shit but i have read about how the top mag was sometimes a location giveaway because of its profile and movement

>>33300829
Is that a Spandau?

>>33301181
>the top mag was sometimes a location giveaway because of its profile and movement
I've heard that said about the Japanese 96 and 99 LMGs, from the perspective of American GIs.

>>33301187
Far too accurate to be a spandau my good man

>>33301192
that said i think the bren wins in firepower because of the 30 round mags vs the bar 20 ones

File: ifunny lindy.jpg (130KB, 716x757px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 716x757px

>>33301196
isn't that bad for an MG?

>>33301040

You are forgetting the hip cup where you tuck the BAR into the little cup so it is now stuck you your hip as you swing it left to right. That shit got issued and trained with. Look up photos of it.

>>33301082
Your default "argument" doesn't even apply here faggot.

>>33301217
nobody is able to beat the Knights of swadia

>>33301376

Except for rhodoks

>>33300829
YES. The M1918 was pretty amazing in WWI, but they screwed the pooch with the M1918A2. Heavy, expensive, shit-tier bipod, heavy/bulky guide for the mag, handle was added to weigh it down further because of all the extra weight the other features put on it, no semi-auto function, lower capacity than just about every other LMG of WWII, and can't swap barrel. The BREN isn't all that much heavier than it, but is better in just about every way including disassembly/maintenance.

>>33300844
In WWI, yes. In WWII, no. One of the worst LMGs going.

>>33300853
The Chauchat and Ross rifle killed huns, the XM16 and M60 killed Vietcong, the STEN killed Jerries... what's your point? Just because a firearm can shoot doesn't mean it's a great design for its time or purpose.

>>33300869
It got the job done in WWII, that's about the only good thing that can be said about it. It didn't excel, it didn't give an edge, it didn't do anything that any other LMG could do (and probably do better), it just did what it could. It did its job. Just like a pimple-faced burger flipper lazily making burgers while it's Dinner rush. He should be doing more, but he's a lazy cunt and will work at his own speed. He's still doing his job while people are complaining in line about the wait. Then the BAR goes home, masturbates to hentai, and goes to sleep.

>>33301307
Found the butthurt poor fag

File: DSC08468-660x440.jpg (49KB, 660x440px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 660x440px

>>33300829
>that isn't even his final form
Yes, but it's underrated in its best format. Pic related.

File: Real_fuckin_hollywood_style.webm (2MB, 1054x438px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1054x438px

>>33300829

Maybe you should ask all the dead Nazis and Commies it bodied

>>33301727

>have you no respect for the dead?

The thing is the BAR is not a light machine gun, it's more of a "heavy rifle". It's not really meant for suppression, it's doctrine and roll was to frankly give rifle teams more daka without overly compromising mobility. It difficult classification to wrap ones head around but in a way we're sort of returning to it with the M27. It was a successful rifle, ahead of its time in some ways, and this can be seen historically as the war progressed many units actually put more BAR men in their squads not less.

I was interviewing a Korean War vet for an article I was writing and we got to talking about his BAR. I had read some shitposts about it being unpopular/outdated and I asked him his thoughts.

His response was "Well, the chinks sure hated it."

I busted out laughing. He had no complaints about his BAR.

File: 1440714129606.png (902KB, 1018x1600px) Image search: [Google]

902KB, 1018x1600px

>>33301696
Oh yeah, how is the HCAR? Would it be a good choice to give to a guy on your squad?

>>33303310
That's some MG derivative, look at the trigger.

>>33300829
As an LMG?
It was never overrated. Everybody knew it sucked.
But as a pseudo battle rifle it's kinda okay.

>>33300880
>open-bolt
>accuracy!

mmmmk

>>33302017
Based.

File: IMG_0788.gif (383KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

383KB, 1280x720px

>>33300829
It was great for WWI and WWII. Axis troops where pretty scared of BARs (sort of like how Alies where freaked out by the MG42 butnfor different reasons) because they'd could be flanked and suddenly have high volumes of 30-06 raining down on them. It was pretty menuverable and certainly did its job as a 40's squad automatic weapon.

>>33300844
It was extremely mediocre in WW2

File: IMG_0691.jpg (44KB, 500x470px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 500x470px

>>33303574
It was used more as a SAW to create suppressing fire and keep enemies down. It was also more maneuverable and worked as a battle rifle when needed. It certainly was good for the period in which it was used and was nevertheless meant for the role of a light machine gun that then m1919 was used for.

File: barrett01.jpg (59KB, 650x301px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 650x301px

>>33303310
>HCAR
Legitimately good but that's shit compared to Barrett's M240 LWS which is what's pictured fag.

>>33304290
> fag
no u

>>33301181
>>loading the mag in the middle of battle.

you're already fuck if up

>>33301979
>> It was a successful rifle, ahead of its time in some ways, and this can be seen historically as the war progressed many units actually put more BAR men in their squads not less.

ahead of its time in 1917 but a bit outdated in 1939, twenty years later.

it took a while for the US to catch on to intermediate caliber

>>33301158
Americans make the best rifles, shotguns, and revolvers in the world. Blow it out your ass.

File: BAR-COLT_MONITOR-FBI-Firearms_practice_1936_zpsa8ffff23.jpg (61KB, 1024x472px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 1024x472px

>>33300837
>you will never be a g-man slinging .30-06 at baddies through car doors and light cover.

>>33301979
>M27

Literally just a way to shoehorn in a new service rifle for the Marines. It isn't going to replace the M249.

>>33301181
It's not COD. Engagement distances were such that you wouldn't be close enough for a top mag to give you away. Not to mention the fact that fighting occurred between large groups of people.

>>33300880
The Chauchat is fucking trash even in lebel. Sides that good post.

>>33301040
>never planned to use it for that

Except for the part where they were literally issued with webbing that had a metal plate on the hip to brace the butt of the weapon specifically for walking fire.

>>33306228
I fucking love those cut down FBI gats so much.

>>33301419
Its not a light machine gun

>>33301103
/thread

>>33300829
It was excellent in its day but try to reload it under stress when your prone. Feels like minutes go by.

>>33301103
But was used through Korea and Vietnam

File: Marine Automatic Rifleman stands guard in Saipan.jpg (191KB, 964x929px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 964x929px

If it was good enough for him, its good enough for me

>>33300829
Yes it's a complete meme gun. Which is why people always make that dumb joke about Nazis walking into one.

>>33308062
>Because the military is lightning fast when it comes to totally phasing out old gear.

File: Marine Automatic Rifleman smoking in Okinawa.jpg (73KB, 500x672px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 500x672px

>>33308098
don't forget that japs and commies walked into it too

>>33306357
ok ill take your anime forum conjecture over noted observations from the soldiers who actually fought there

BAR is cool and all, but the HCAR is where it's at

>>33308112
If it still works....

>>33300829
American BARs were pretty meh and outdated compared to their export models. In my opinion, the four BAR models that were good for its time were the Kurwa BAR (Browning wz. 1928), the Swede BAR (Kg/m21-37) and the Chinese BARs (Type 22 and 22B). Their notable features:

Browning wz. 1928
>Selective fire (semi and full automatic, none of that rate reducer bullshit)
>pistol grip, Open V notch sight, reliable and simpler bipod, longer barrel

Swedish Kg/m21-37
>A 1919 BAR but with a pistol grip and a spiked bipod
>Cooling fins on the barrel, is also a quick detachable barrel
>Screw on receiver extension

Chinese BAR Type 22 and 22B (These are by far the most interesting ones.)

Type 22
>Unlicensed M1918 BAR, _almost_ the same thing
>Receiver was stamped (2 piece halves) to reduce the weight and was held together by take down pins.
>Had rate reducer scratched out and was instead given a much more simpler and reliable gas regulator
>Barrel interchangeability with licensed MG34 machine guns
Type 22B
>A licensed FN Model D
>Same as above but with a pistol grip and quick detachable barrel

>>33306608
Well it was used exclusively as one so it's treated as one.

File: three gooks walk into a bar.jpg (719KB, 1613x1368px) Image search: [Google]

719KB, 1613x1368px

>>33308098
stay mad wehraboo

File: IMG_4306.jpg (3MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4032x3024px

>>33309239
My uncle's Mle D, this was the version the US should have adopted before WW2.

>>33300869
Quite better? Not really. They're essentially equivalent. Neither is significantly better than the other.