My First WW2 Gun. What should I get?

I am going to 'resurrect' this thread, as I think it is an important one, to further support Chomley's original post if I may.

I would like to do this by adding the following photo from the last Doughboys game.

This photo features the aforementioned using (if I am not terribly mistaken) an M14. The gun does not look out of place, in fact I only noticed it was an M14 when I looked at the pics after the event, not noticing on the day.

The weapon fits in with the period look and feel and, for those who are not 'engineeringly minded'/rich enough to make/mend their own Garand and it is functionally accurate, which far outweighs little niggles about it not being spot on.

Plus at a later date you can always convert it to a garand if you are so inclined.

i am sure PBI members will remember when a section of south staffs armed with no4 enfields and 2 stens ran the members of a certain airsoft site ( UNREAL AIRSOFT) ragged all day... in the end, the marshals had to " engineer" a victory for the duel wealding , chrome AK 47 box mag team in the last game (event, sorry chomers) ......

Why are you sorry - that clearly was a game not an event.

ah.

Plus I did have a Garand that day

Though, to bring this into the discussion, I don't think that 'viability at open days' is actually that high on people's lists (I have used MP40 low caps, and boltie Mosin Nagants before with equal enjoyment). Getting a gun that is available, affordable, and correct for a WWII game is.

The M14, in my own humble opinion, is a more 'correct' gun than one of the list of period SMGs available.

As a long-term devout skinflint (regularly worshiping at the church of St Miser); my first WW2 weapon was my homebuilt Vickers MMG. I then went on to gain a lightly-used second-hand Thompson with 6 metal bodied mags (albiet, high-caps) for the brilliant price of £80. Cost is my only limiting factor.

Re my previous post M14 great starter gun. I used mine at OP Sealion and it did not fail once. G43 look a like for limited outlay. Just a K98 cleaning rod, cut off the flash hider change the top and hide the top receiver with a scope

I fully endorse the More rifles less Smg approach-- attachment is not available --

If you dont fancy going the whole hog and cutting/modifying your M14, you could make something like this.-- attachment is not available --

I was going to make an SVT-40 (or SVT 14 like Barrie and Annes). This was as far as I got. Its a spare M14 plastic heat shield which I smoothed out with milliput, then glued on a wood veneer, which was stained and oiled to look like the stock. It looks ok on the rifle and its fairly easy to change back to the original M14.

Steinlager, that wood effect looks excellent. What's the wood veneer you stuck on? I was looking for something like that when I did ours but ran out of time and just ended up painting them. By the way, I don't think SVT 14 is a real gun, ours were supposed to be SVT 40s too but someone (Beds n Herts I think) just made up SVT 14 and I liked it!

Also, and about a year or so too late, I must say I agree wholeheartedly with the original premise of this thread. More rifles, even if they are "farby" M14s, can only be a good thing and as stated it's a versatile gun too, applicable just about anywhere.

Steinlager, that wood effect looks excellent. What's the wood veneer you stuck on? I was looking for something like that when I did ours but ran out of time and just ended up painting them. By the way, I don't think SVT 14 is a real gun, ours were supposed to be SVT 40s too but someone (Beds n Herts I think) just made up SVT 14 and I liked it!

Also, and about a year or so too late, I must say I agree wholeheartedly with the original premise of this thread. More rifles, even if they are "farby" M14s, can only be a good thing and as stated it's a versatile gun too, applicable just about anywhere.

Thanks. I know the SVT14 thing was a joke, just seemed right somehow . I bought the wood veneer cheap off ebay, a job lot of different woods. I was going to paint it then remembered I'm rubbish at painting.

i think the thing to remmeber about a first ww2 gun is who is buying it ,most (not all)new players are moving over from walk-on airsoft and are toe dipping.now there is a gulf of difference,not so mutch if the player has done some mil-sim,between walk-on and ww2.the player is going to have to find mid-caps and gun that he may feel he wont use mutch(i say he but it can also be she),now in the competative world of walk-on airsoft he's looking for a competative gun and is going to take a lot of convinceing before getting an m14 locked to single shot when he could have an smg or assault rifle.
i know that i came from and still enjoy walk-on and am as guilty as many others in this attitude,but am going to make my next purchase a rifle .
i dont know if this is the right place to suggest it but maybe game organization should limit the numbers of full-automaticks in games when booking or limiting the way in whitch they can be used in a senario ,eg dispersing them so that no two players on the same team with full-auto to be within twenty paces of each other or limit the number in an assault makeing the rest defensive only and rotateing the players .
in whatever way its done a greater number of rifles is the wey forward (or back in time) but i think its going to be hard to persuade new players to go for a rifle role .maybe the most we can hope for is a second gun to be a rifle once weve got them interested,i know that was the route i took , i got a thompson a few months after marui started makeing it ,long before i heard of ww2 airsoft in the uk ,my next ww2 gun was a home made sten mk2 ,now ive just finished a mk2 bren and im now thinking of getting a rifle so like i say im pretty guilty but i know im not the only one.

now in the competative world of walk-on airsoft he's looking for a competative gun

Strange thing to say - in what way is an M14 less "competitive" than an SMG?

True... I've known plenty of players who get the competitive edge in open day play by using an M14 on semi as their main weapon because of it's higher accuracy and range.

Indeed, M14s tend to have excellent range and accuracy for an AEG, TM ones especially. They can also take high caps and there is no need for locking them on semi for WWII- infact its better not to in case of a jam. That makes them ideal for both open days and WWII to my mind. The only advantage I can see with having an SMG is the smaller size and weight: an M14 isn't so good for CQB.

yeah, especially since your not allowed to hit opposition with the butt

Well not deliberately anyway.

I can only add my 2 cents worth as a fairly long time aitsofter but new to WW2
I brought a Cyma M1A1 because I got it cheap after War and Peace show from Elite Essex (as was)they were selling them with a huge discount so I thought why not
Now after (nearly) completing my 35th Inf Div load out and no inconsiderable cost I will be sticking with my Thompson and m1911 for quite some time ( unless I win the lottery)
so an M14 might be the ideal unless you already have a "period" AEG
Hope I don't get flamed as and when I turn up at a CIA game with a Thompson
Cad

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

everyone is banging on about the cost of a rifle/second gun/ the ressesion/ wife wont let me etc........ i managed to buy a new shoot and scoot enfield at over £500 without having worked or recieved a coin in state hand outs for two years.

if you want one, you will find a way to get one.

my first ww2 airsoft was a china tommy.

That's missing the point really Cadaceus (and Scaley). This thread is about thoughts on getting an ideal first gun, and the proposal is that an M14 fits the bill perfectly. No more, no less. What players actually bought as their first gun is by-the-by.

"Flaming" forms no part of what CiA does or will ever do (and I can safely say the same goes for all other organisers too)

(Heh, for the record - my first gun was a Thompson but that was long before we got the WW2 scene going!)