STG-44

>>34697695
No

>>34697707
You spelled 'Yes' wrong

>>34697695
I'd rather be seen with a hipoint then that collection of scrap.

>>34697827
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSh-XENBLRQ
is that you?

File: 1446542721576.jpg (242KB, 1024x819px) Image search: [Google]

242KB, 1024x819px

>>34697836
This you?

>>34697869
no I'm not white

>>34697874
And the STG looks like cheap shit.

>>34697874
>that eye shape
>that eye color
neither is he!

>>34697695
this might be an unpopular opinion, but I don't really think any krautshit from WW2 is sexy.
I much prefer the aesthetics of british and american WW2 gear

>>34697731
you spelled "no" wrong

>>34697994
not even their uniforms?

>>34697994
I don't think any of the small arms used in WWII are as sexy as the ones used in WW1.
Planes, tanks, warships sure, but not machine guns, rifles, pistols, etc.

File: sterling.jpg (775KB, 1500x1125px) Image search: [Google]

775KB, 1500x1125px

Sterlings, chap.

>>34698477
>Literally made to be as cheap as possible yet still worthy of military use

Why do we not see modern repos of these? I'd buy one in a heartbeat.

>>34698753
They are not useful to anyone
Meanwhile the stg44 is still being used by Armies and rebels

>>34697695
It would be, but you said "politics aside", so I guess not.

>>34698850
Modern rebels will use anything they can get their hands on. If they could be made cheap they'd be cool for people who want something like a Hi-Point carbine without getting a hi-point carbine. Not that I'm shitting on them.

>>34697695
>there are crates of unused stg44s lying around in syria that you will NEVER touch
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

File: 1200px-RK_62_76.jpg (82KB, 1200x404px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 1200x404px

>>34697695
It's not even the sexiest assault rifle.

File: PL-14.jpg (354KB, 900x582px) Image search: [Google]

354KB, 900x582px

Not even close m8

>>34698392
Well you're a fucking retard

>>34699059
>implying i give a shit about the opinions of shit taste plebs
go jack off to some more vatnik/nazi/burger garbage

>>34699098

>>34698753
HMG makes one, but it's a slightly modified design IIRC and not cheap

>>34699184
>slightly modified

>>34697695
no Nazi guns need to be destroyed and anyone who has them should be in jail

File: Mateba sex.jpg (178KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 1000x667px

>>34697695
That's not a Mateba anon.

>>34699257
Fuck its disgusting

File: cast.jpg (56KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 250x250px

>>34699471

>>34699257
Fuck off yankeemarshal.

>>34698477

I can see why they used it for Star Wars, totally has an old school Flash Gordon sci fi look to it.

>>34699000

>folding stocks
>sexy

Pick one. They're practical maybe, but they look like garbage.

File: 1471359405123.jpg (38KB, 403x403px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 403x403px

>>34699233
>no Nazi guns need to be destroyed
I agree.

>>34697695

Yes

>>34699647
Keep telling yourself that.

>>34697695

nah, I'd say the FAL is

nothing like one stop amputations on the go

>>34697994
>this might be an unpopular opinion, but I don't really think any krautshit from WW2 is sexy.

On some of the weapons, I can see that - e.g. if you're not into Industrial Design, then the wood furniture of the Thomson is nicer than the MP40 (Now I *am* into industrial design so I like the MP40 better)

But: MG42?

Do the allies have any nicer machineguns? Bren is ugly, Vickers and M1919 are just metal boxes with barrels on them. I think the MG42 might legitimately be the most aesthetic machine gun ever made.

File: VDEY4kZ.jpg (112KB, 800x447px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 800x447px

Let's say you're a small nation in the middle of a shithole like Africa or the middle east, who happens to dig up a massive cache of late-war German weapons, all in pristine condition.

Would stuff like the StG44, FG 42, MG 42, P38, Gewehr 43, and a large quantity of heavier vehicles like their half-tracks, tanks, airplanes, etc. still be useful enough in a modern war against african warlords and militant ragheads?

Some modernization like night sights, ERA, etc. can be applicable too.

>>34697695
>>34697786
>All those stamping marks
>Sexiest
No. I'm sure even people at the time found it ugly. I also wonder what they thought about the banana mag the first time they saw it.

>>34702016
Is that pic a modernized panther?

Its kool

>>34702016
Small arms sure, so long as you also find plenty of or can acquire ammo for them bullets still kill people.

Heavier vehicles wouldn't be much use, most of Africa lacks the industrial base to maintain them over time so unless you found this cache just before some shtf event for your country they're probably going to be knackered by the time you need them. Also many countries have huge amounts of land to cover, African countries have tended to find light mechanised infantry allows them to get enough firepower somewhere fast most of the time, without the huge extra cost of maintaining heavier armored vehicles, the logistics capability to move them around rapidly, and trained crews to make good use of it. Take the same stuff to the middle east and it's food for modern air and atgm that everyone has at least one if not both of. Syria has been getting away with using ancient stuff like T55s only wth extreme care and because nobody they're fighting has any air power, and they lost a shitload of them before they (mostly) realised they really have to keep them far from potential harm.
Best use of pretty much all vehicles heavier than trucks or half tracks would be selling to western collectors for millions of dollars each, and spending whatever you don't pocket yourself on whatever light vehicles/weapons your military already uses.

Fighter type aircraft would work well for providing CAS in Africa so long as you don't mind losing a few whenever someone manages to find a manpad or get a decent hit with some truck mounted AA gun, against more modern stuff that's prolific in the middle east they'd get fucked once people figured out what was going on.
That said best use again would likely be selling anything rare you had to collectors, although there's a bit more in the way of surviving aircraft already, you'd still get good money for stuff in pristine/flyable condition, and you don't have to worry about sourcing non-existant spare parts longer term.

>>34697695
Tie between the STG44 and the MG42. FG42 is a close 3rd.

Chinese

>>34697695
>Politics aside
Instant politics

>>34702339
It wasn't novel at the time, the Bren used a 20(?) round banana magazine and the Chauchat had a fucking semicircle magazine.

File: image_1_0.jpg (47KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 600x600px

>>34698477
What if you chambered the Sterling in 7.62 kurz

>>34697695
No, the FAL is.

File: ekFCOh8.jpg (352KB, 1229x692px) Image search: [Google]

352KB, 1229x692px

>>34697695
>is stamped shit capable of being sexiest weapon ever made?
no

File: brit2030820prototype201-1.jpg (57KB, 1017x520px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 1017x520px

>>34704345
7.62 RFN, but close enough.

File: AUG_A1_508mm_04.jpg (16KB, 550x217px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 550x217px

>>34697695
I think the AUG is the best looking gun of all time. Argue about bullpup pros/cons all you want just look at the thing

>>34704830
Spacegun A E S T H E T I C
I personally prefer steel and walnut, but I get the appeal.

>>34698850
I garuntee more sterlings are seeing service right now than STGs by a large margin. Even counting the postwar zastava ones

>>34697695
I do find then highly aesthetic, but the design has been eclipsed by better and lighter mechanics by now. If I wasn't poor I'd get the HMG variant just for fun.

>>34697892
>Implying most white people don't have brown eyes
The fuck is up with you?

File: IMG_3815.jpg (87KB, 1200x423px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 1200x423px

>>34701904
Lewis guns are particularly pretty. I also prefer the nose of no1 enfields. All stubby and cute.

Lanchester is pretty sexy too, granted it's an MP34 copy.

Sten mk5 does things to me

>>34697695
Sexiest of all time? No, I like the STG but it hardly looks beautiful, it has little ridges throughout, and looks like a gun that took as little effort as possible to tap together, which is what any WW2 weapons factory would've wanted.

Personally I'd say it looks more iconic, or aggressive, than it does sexy.

When I think sexy I think of guns like the Winchester 1897, or even the Remington Model 8.