i have spent a good amount of time on the range with the Thompson, and the one thing i WOULDNT call it, is "delicate". in fact, the wooden stock is more of a pro, as it provides a balance point and absorbs much of the recoil, making it easier to control. the lighter the gun, the more the user must deal with the recoil..Sup wrote:
The wooden stock is very delicate, more of a con than pro, MP40 is very compact and lighter I think than Thompson, MP40-less recoil than and a lot more accurate compared to Thompson.Parker wrote:
i would beg to differ. the weight of the wooden stock provides stability for sustained fire. it had a 20 round and 30 round stick, as well as the 100 round drum fed. the .45ACP is a much more powerful round...combining those three features, also an open bolt firing system, IMO the Thompson is the better gun..Sup wrote:
What are the advantages of Thompson? It was more inaccurate than MP40 and its clip had less capacity.
regarding the accuracy issue; sub machine guns are meant to be used up close and personal...thats why they werent M1's or K98's. anything on rock and roll beyond ten yards is nothing more than a wish anyway.
furthermore, i would say that it is easier to control and much more effective than more modern firearms...the MP5 and Uzi to be specific.
