Does MG42/ M53 Barrel actually need to recoil/ move?

Anything MG42 related.
Post Reply
HKARAK
Feldwebel
Feldwebel
Posts: 56
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 7:54 pm
Anti-spam: Mg42

Does MG42/ M53 Barrel actually need to recoil/ move?

Post by HKARAK »

Does MG42/ M53 Barrel actually need to recoil/ move back? Or was this really over engineering..... just thinking about HK roller locking and what makes them different. Welcome any thoughts. Thanks!!
User avatar
DARIVS ARCHITECTVS
Field Marshal
Field Marshal
Posts: 2442
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 12:24 am
Anti-spam: Mg42
Location: Minnesota

Re: Does MG42/ M53 Barrel actually need to recoil/ move?

Post by DARIVS ARCHITECTVS »

Yes, the barrel needs to move back in order for the bolt to be unlocked from the breech. The gun was designed to do so. The barrel move rearward under the effect of recoil. Hence, the guns of this type are called "recoil operated". Now, having a moving barrel is less accurate than a static unmoving barrel, but it has the advantage of allowing you to have a much simpler bolt to breech locking mechanism. In every design, there are advantages and disadvantages. It all depends of what design features you want to stress.

The extreme power of full sized rifle rounds REQUIRES a full locking mechanism if you want to keep the weight of the bolt LOW. A roller delay design for breech locking, called "half locking" in German, like you find in HK submachineguns and assault rifles, does not have enough strength by itself to hold the breech safely closed, long enough for the pressure to come down to a safe level (just enough to operate the action). For .308 rifles like the HK-91, a combination or roller delay blowback design combined with a friggin' heavy bolt is used against the power of that round, which is LESS than the power of 8mm Mauser. Ever fire an HK-91 or G-3 battle rifle? That heavy bolt transmits a lot of felt recoil to your shoulder! A gas operated .308 rifle like the FAL or AR-10 is a LOT softer on the shoulder. The German design was made PRIMARILY for easy, fast, and inexpensive manufacturing of a military rifle, at the expense of some comfort in shooting. That's why they are the way they are.
DARIVS ARCHITECTVS
Knight's Armoury
User avatar
flemgunner
Brigadegeneral
Brigadegeneral
Posts: 635
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 6:35 am
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: Does MG42/ M53 Barrel actually need to recoil/ move?

Post by flemgunner »

Man thats a pretty good explanation
Bil
Field Marshal
Field Marshal
Posts: 4873
Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2006 10:21 pm
Location: Brookline,VT

Re: Does MG42/ M53 Barrel actually need to recoil/ move?

Post by Bil »

Also consider they were also used on a heavy mount,or vevivle mounted,it was a multiple-use gun.It also had to be usable as a squad weapon,and be easily moved and repaired.With all of these criteria,they came up with a pretty good compromise,considering one of the main faults was keeping it fed. :D ---bil
"I dream of a world where I can buy alcohol,tobacco and firearms from the same drive-up window,and use them all on the way home from work!" Dogbert
blackreichswehr
Stabshauptmann
Stabshauptmann
Posts: 181
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2007 12:09 am

Re: Does MG42/ M53 Barrel actually need to recoil/ move?

Post by blackreichswehr »

the outstanding feature of the short recoil system of operation is that, by proper disign, high rates of fire can be attained. and this is what the military asked for in the specs. --high rate of fire, cheap, funtional reliability, 8mm
Post Reply