doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Something to Ponder

How Great Britian whose citizens have designed, engineered and built some of the most beautiful shotguns ever made were able to also come up with the likes of the Webley revolver the Enfield rifle and the Sten submachine gun??
Jim

Ask a half-million dead Huns wot's wrong with the Enfield.

The Sten? Ummm ... once you get it going at least it doesn't stop (till the clip is exhausted, anyhow).

Ugly works as well as a lovely gun. Lugers look great but take a ton of machining, Enfields work extremely well and the Sten was almost a throw away gun. Stamped parts, simple operation and at short ranges very deadly. No I think that the British figured out war was a nasty game and first prize went to those who killed the enemy, not who had the nicest looking gun. By the way did you ever look at a 30 cal. carbine, ugly, Sherman tank, ugly again and both were marginally effective at best.

It doesn't take one hell of a lot of extra effort to design good looking firearms as well as functional firearms. The Brits IMO were guilty of doing exactly the opposite. If the Enfield accounted for that many lives I wonder what the numbers would be for the Garand and K98? Ky Jon: What exactly is your problen with the M1 carbine ?
I started this thread with a discussion of good looking firearms not functionally as the main criteria. Functional I'll readily admit is a category Enfields and Stens fall into.
We have a host of full auto firearms that can be rented at my local gun club. I don't remember the last time someone rented the Butt Ugly Sten we have available. Even the British soldiers felt it was a POS when they were issued a Sten.
Jim

I don't think the Lee Enfield rifles nor the Webley revolvers are ugly at all. Just a matter of personal tastes, just like the disagreement already over the beauty (or not) of the M1 Carbine. I own several L/E's and though I'm down to one Webley revolver, I find them all very appealing in looks and shooting abilitys. I kind of like my M1 Carbine too! The Lee sporters IMHO are as nice as any of the early 20th century sporting rifles. The STEN was designed to be built quickly and cheaply during war time. It was just that. We had our own, the M3 & M3A1.

I-sxs: Good point. Contrast also the Spitfire against the work of the Short brothers.

Not limited to GB, nor to guns. The same people brought you both the German Shorthair Pointer and the weiner dog...

Italy bats 1000% with the low profile boxlock and Giada De Laurentiis.

I have owned and shot both the M3 & the Sten, The sten never failed me, stopped firing when I wished. The M3 was prone to jams, even with numerous different mags. FWIW, Ken

It is said that:
The Americans entered WWI with the finest target rifle;
The Germans the finest hunting rifle; and
The British and Commonwealth the finest battle rifle. That sloppy, rear locking action and 10 shot, detachable, charger-loadable "smelly" can be full of sand, mud, or blood, and still cycle perfectly; wrapped in Qld maple or coachwood and built like a crowbar, it could easily take some fearful punishment with no complaints.
Aesthetics tend to be a personal, subjective thing: plenty of people regard the SMLE beautiful indeed; I've been priveleged to know a few who've own their lives to one. In marble or bronze they adorn many a war memorial here, and have an unmistakeable shape that has worked its way into our national psyche as an almost revered symbol.
RG

Nobody makes an attractive military rifle anymore so why look back at the SMLE and Sten now. The M3 grease gun is particularly ugly but for $10 they made a submachinegun that works. Happens to fire a lot faster pointed downhill than uphill though and the magazine springs lose their strength pretty fast when left loaded. It is also dangerous as hell to carry in the ready to fire position with firing from the open bolt required. (That feature about got me killed by a medic who picked up my M3 and opened the bolt to make sure it was loaded.) Other than that it does pretty good to about 75 yds. The AK47 is another piece lacking good looks but easy to make and works reliably.

I've always felt the AK 47 and our own M16 to be good looking weapons in a menacing sort of way. This also holds for the German MP40 another machine gun designed to be built rapidly and cheaply.
BTW: The most popular machine gun rental at our club is the H&K MP5. These IMO, are also ungainly looking but function flawlessly. The second most popular is the Thompson which I believe is the most attractive sub-machine gun ever.
But I digress. Do anyone have an opinion as to why these British guns ended up looking so ackward?
Jim