Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

KarmaticIrony t1_j12mm1y wrote

Reply to comment by Downtown-Ad-8706 in Why didn't the US adopt the STG-44 after WW2? by TurboTortois3

TLDR compared to the M1 rifles and carbines the US already possesed the STG-44 was significantly heavier and less reliable. It's major X factor of possessing automatic fire was essentially useless as automatic fire is not useful for most rifleman in general and the STG-44 in particular was not well designed for sustained automatic fire.

33

Cristoff13 t1_j12pf96 wrote

Yet part of the definition of an assault rifle is it must be capable of selective fire. And the great majority of intermediate calibre rifles in military service still have selective fire. This despite most sources I've seen agreeing automatic fire is something the great majority of riflemen very rarely, if ever, use.

And the STG-44 wasn't a very well constructed rifle. It was almost a last ditch weapon, sacrificing longevity of service for ease of manufacture.

8

ParaglidingAssFungus t1_j1bteki wrote

That selective fire also includes 3 round burst rather than full auto, which is what most of the US Army’s M4s and M16s have.

2