Thompson or PPSH I want the facts, opinions on which one is better

Discussion in 'Weapons, Technology & Equipment' started by war hawk, Dec 18, 2008.


Which is a better sub- machine gun?

  1. Thompson

    3 vote(s)
  2. PPSH

    3 vote(s)
  1. war hawk

    war hawk New Member

    I tried this thread during downtime, I want facts then opinions , I ask this because I don"t know enough about them. I hope this thread isn"t a flop. :noidea: The Thompson had a .45 caliber pistol round, and usualy a 20 round clip, sometimes a 30, very rarely a 50 round clip. I once was at a museam and he asked me if I wanted to hold a Thompson I could not refuse, heavy gun,. I was also at a shooting range and this guy pulled up and asked me if I wanted to shoot a clip in semi-auto. I know very little about the PPSH so I asked this question, I know it had a 30 round clip and 71 round clip.:) EDIT. I have studied about both of them, and now no more about them.
  2. spidge

    spidge Active Member

    The Thompson was well liked by most who used it but it was expensive to manufacture although the costs dropped quite considerably by wars end due to the number that were manufactured. Many thousands were sent to Russia with Lend and Lease however the Russians did not like them very much. (Too heavy and less penetration than the PPSH)

    The PPSH except for the barrel could be manufactured by unskilled workers, leaving skilled workers to do more important work. Less working parts and cheap to produce.

    Such was the effect of the PPSH that the Russians would supply whole battalions and even whole divisions with these weapons.

    The PPSH was the second most used German MG through the amount that were captured.
  3. Kyt

    Kyt Άρης

    As I have often stated in other similar threads, a weapon is only as good as its user.

    But the Thompson was a good weapon, once the unnecessary commercisl elements had been removed. The models produced in the last couple of years was lighter, less complicated and easier to produce. The drum magazine had been rejected due to its tendancies to jam, and the bullets rattled. But it was till superceded by the M3 Grease gun, which was easier to produce and was not as bad as some claimed.

    The PPSh had similar problems with the drum.
  4. war hawk

    war hawk New Member

    I didn"t think it woulde be this close. Poll 3-2 :)
  5. war hawk

    war hawk New Member

    With the Grease Gun
    You could almost count the rounds fired in one clip. I have not seen one fired, but I do know they had very slow rate of fire.:headhurt::crutch:
  6. SSTk

    SSTk Member

    3-3. I will take the PPSh without blinking an eye. Ease of use, mass produced, reliability and low weight combined with a high rate of fire in mass volume from entire platoons engaged in the close combat of the tank rider divisions, made this weapon a platform that transcended conventional tactics for the Russians and how infantry were meant to support tanks on the move.

    As was said above, the Germans used it as much as the Russians.
    1 person likes this.

Share This Page