The Philipine Navy revives the grease gun

A place to talk about all things military, paramilitary, tactical, strategic, and logistical.
toad
Posts: 2529
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2008 5:00 pm

The Philipine Navy revives the grease gun

Post by toad » Tue May 17, 2016 4:25 am

There was an article on strategy page . com that talks about countries with tight budgets using old weapons and it led off with the revival off the M-3 grease gun. They put on a Picatinny rail for aux. sighting devices and a flash hider during the refurb. It seems in boarding actions the short length, controllability, and the effectiveness of .45 ball ammo at close ranges was just the ticket.

User avatar
D5CAV
Posts: 1998
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 2:48 am

Re: The Philipine Navy revives the grease gun

Post by D5CAV » Tue May 17, 2016 4:34 am

We had the M3A1 for a very short time. We were transitioning from the 1911A1 to the M9. When we lost the 1911s, we lost the grease guns.

No great loss. I only remember shooting them once for qual. I remember cleaning them a few times. I didn't see the point since we had M16s in our tracks. M16 was more controllable, even on full auto, more accurate, and the mags were a lot smaller and lighter.
None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.” Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

User avatar
PawPaw
Posts: 4493
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 8:19 pm

Re: The Philipine Navy revives the grease gun

Post by PawPaw » Tue May 17, 2016 1:37 pm

Controllable? I guess I'd need to see the definition of that criteria.

I liked mine. I had an M3A1,back when my Uncle was buying the ammo, and it had a certain "John Wayne cool" factor. I was able to qualify with it easily, but learned to milk the trigger to run it like a semi and it was fairly accurate. Of course, I always liked those big 230 grain ball slugs. By fairly accurate, I could keep it on a full-size silhouette at 50 yards, which was all that was necessary in the 1970's Army.

But, when the course was finished and they told you to dump the remaining ammo, we'll all go full-auto on the berm. Controllability wasn't an adjective I'd use to describe that exercise.
Dennis Dezendorf
PawPaw's House

toad
Posts: 2529
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2008 5:00 pm

Re: The Philipine Navy revives the grease gun

Post by toad » Tue May 17, 2016 1:55 pm

I'm guessing they are using them at pretty close ranges in the holds and spaces of fishing boats and small war craft.?
I remember one former crew member on a M113 mortar carrier telling me the barrels were so worn out the rounds were key holing. "Damn things wouldn't shoot through a screen door." I'm guessing nobody had the budget or desire to rebuild them. :!:

User avatar
D5CAV
Posts: 1998
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 2:48 am

Re: The Philipine Navy revives the grease gun

Post by D5CAV » Tue May 17, 2016 4:46 pm

PawPaw wrote:Controllable? I guess I'd need to see the definition of that criteria.
Maybe it was just a matter of familiarity. We had lots of stick-time on the M16, so I got pretty good at 2 to 3 shot bursts with the M16. Like I said, I don't remember a lot of time with the M3A1. Certainly once. Maybe two at the most.

I remember it was pretty heavy as well. It felt a lot bulkier than the M16 IIRC.

It was a fun toy, but I kind of felt like it was a solution in search of a problem. If I saw a threat that was too big for my sidearm, but wasn't big enough to use the .50 or the 105mm, I'd grab the M16 first.
None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.” Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

User avatar
randy
Posts: 7382
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:33 pm
Location: EM79VQ

Re: The Philipine Navy revives the grease gun

Post by randy » Tue May 17, 2016 4:53 pm

D5CAV wrote: It was a fun toy, but I kind of felt like it was a solution in search of a problem. If I saw a threat that was too big for my sidearm, but wasn't big enough to use the .50 or the 105mm, I'd grab the M16 first.
I think it was meant to be the solution to the problem of weight and expense (both in money and in manufacturing resources) of the Thompson in WWII for those designated to carry an SMG.
...even before I read MHI, my response to seeing a poster for the stars of the latest Twilight movies was "I see 2 targets and a collaborator".

User avatar
PawPaw
Posts: 4493
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 8:19 pm

Re: The Philipine Navy revives the grease gun

Post by PawPaw » Tue May 17, 2016 5:06 pm

randy wrote:I think it was meant to be the solution to the problem of weight and expense (both in money and in manufacturing resources) of the Thompson in WWII for those designated to carry an SMG.
At less than $20.00 per unit in WWII dollars, it was a bargain. I would assume that anyone set up to build them today wouldn't charge much more than that. I'd guess that a brand new one in today's dollars wouldn't be much more than $150.00. They are really simple little machine guns.

If it were legal, I'buy a half-dozen of them, just to fool around with.
Dennis Dezendorf
PawPaw's House

MarkD
Posts: 3853
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 5:59 pm

Re: The Philipine Navy revives the grease gun

Post by MarkD » Tue May 17, 2016 5:27 pm

randy wrote:
D5CAV wrote: It was a fun toy, but I kind of felt like it was a solution in search of a problem. If I saw a threat that was too big for my sidearm, but wasn't big enough to use the .50 or the 105mm, I'd grab the M16 first.
I think it was meant to be the solution to the problem of weight and expense (both in money and in manufacturing resources) of the Thompson in WWII for those designated to carry an SMG.
Not to mention that it wasn't intended as an alternative to the M16, but to the M1 Garand. Good as the Garand is, there are situations where it's not the best choice.

Aesop
Posts: 6149
Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2013 9:17 am

Re: The Philipine Navy revives the grease gun

Post by Aesop » Tue May 17, 2016 7:07 pm

Should be perfect for them: makes loud noise, doesn't hit shit, too heavy to steal in a pocket, and dirt cheap.
Exactly what the Philippine Navy needs in a weapon.

Inside of 15 feet, it will make 30 or so holes somewhere on a man-sized silhouette from feet to head; beyond that range, the muzzle blasts from 30 or so rounds will temporarily blind your opponent, giving you time to step closer, and club them into submission with the leftover transmission bits from 1939 Studebakers. (Picatinny on one is laughable, and purely Maybelline for porcine farm animals, which begs the question:
"Who makes a red dot sight with a 400-mil ring aiming circle the weapon requires?")

If they'd simply made the barrel longer, say about 3'-4', it would have made an absolutely splendid pole club for melee combat, and obviated the need for any ammunition for it in the first place, but far less utilitarian in confined spaces. As it stands, its chief use is that in older AFVs, if you could stick the muzzle into a view slit from the outside, you could be 70% certain of hitting anyone inside the vehicle. Used the other way, any really loud siren would be a better choice for a noisemaker.
"There are four types of homicide: felonious, accidental, justifiable, and praiseworthy." -Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"

toad
Posts: 2529
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2008 5:00 pm

Re: The Philipine Navy revives the grease gun

Post by toad » Tue May 17, 2016 11:20 pm

I was rereading that article. I couldn't figure out if he meant they mounted a flash suppressor or flash-noise suppressor on it. If you mounted an led flashlight it would form an aiming circle a 10 yards :twisted:
The Filipino's really like .45 ACP and they manufacture a lot of rounds.

Post Reply