Brad Pitt Goes to 'War' with S&W M1917

"...he called the .357 Mag. his "killing gun"."

I haven't seen the movie for awhile, but didn't it show Patton shooting the horse or mule that was blocking traffic on the bridge with the .357? I don't remember.
 
"While most draftees were fairly young in WWII many were not."

I grew up in the 1950s and knew many WWII vets, and had some as teachers in high school, including one who had some amazing stories about his adventures in Burma, another who was a Navy corpsman all through the Pacific campaign, and one who landed on D-Day and later marched into Berlin. Those two had some great and gory war stories also. Most every one of them I knew had been just a teen-aged kid during the war. Of course there were many who were older draftees, and I knew some of those too. And also those who had been in the military from before the war. I had an Uncle who served in in the Navy during both WWI and WWII - he joined the Navy in 1917 at age 15 by lying about his age, not unusual at the time. But the majority of soldiers and sailors during WWII were young people.
 
My Dad served in the Aleutians from 1940, was brought back to the mainland as an officer in a replacement unit training newbies in 1943, then sent to England for D-Day. He was blasted off the side of a hill on the French - German border, spent months in an English hospital, then went back to fight on, and eventually be in the army of occupation. I have some few photos. Having clothing was a challenge second to having a weapon. He had to leave literally everything on Umnak, including heavy clothing sent by his mom. His .45 was (re) issued in England, and carried in on Noramdy. He kept it when in the field hospital, and carried it to his death in service in 1967. It was held by the NG and issued to me when it was my time. I was allowed to keep it under the change to 9mm.
 
bedbugbilly said:
...
My father in law went in to N Africa as a replacement and then moved up to Italy (34th Red Bull Division). He never discussed anything with his children. For some reason, he did discuss a few things with me and they had a mighty rough time of it. He was a BAR man. After he passed, I did some more research on his division. It was interesting in that in one source, it was estimated that the life of a BAR man in that division, once they entered into an engagement, was 15 seconds.

....That generation is fast fading and they went through a lot - the Depression, the war and everyone sacrificed - both at home and in the service. Their generation furnished "leaders" - those we have today, can't hold a candle to them. I'm a firm believer that's why this country is in such a mess that it is . . . . and I firmly believe that they all earned the title of the "Greatest Generation".
Click to expand...

My Dad was an BAR man in the 76th Division in Luxembourg and Germany for the last 5 months of the European war. He is still alive and will be 90 later this year. I live in an urban environment, and when he and I are out to dinner sometimes, there will be young men cutting up and acting bad-*ss. I smile to myself and think these guys have no idea who the baddest-*ss man in the restaurant really is.

And to keep it "on-topic" I won a 1917 in an auction yesterday, and can't wait to receive it!
 
I served on active duty with a good number of WWII vets. I remember one quite vividly. An Army captain, he had served with the 8th Air Force. He kept a long list of his missions over Germany under the plexiglass cover of his desktop. He was way overage in grade, but the Army kept him on active duty status so that he could get in his 30 years' retirement pay in deference to what he went through during the war. The commanding officer of my unit was a WWII vet, an infantry light colonel who was promoted to bird while I served with him. He was also a firearms aficionado, and had some magnificent skeet shotguns. I'm sure he's long gone now - most of the WWII guys are fading away. The U.S. and the world owe them way more than we can ever repay.

John
 
In the movie Patton. he is shown drawing his Colt SSA on the bridge to dispatch the mule. We only got a quick peek at it but it definitely was a big nickel plated revolver. The Colt was engraved nickel and the Smith & Wesson was blued. As I remember the film, the only time we see the Smith is in the opening sequence when Patton is standing at attention saluting during the To the Color trumpet solo just before his "blood and guts" speech. The camera moves around giving different shots of him, his metals, and both revolvers. Definitely worth another look which I will try during the next few days.
 
My Uncle,1941 Philippines, Stuart tanks, 1917 S&W

As I read these posts on the 1917 S&W, I am looking at a
picture of my namesake, my Fathers older brother who is
posing beside a Stuart tank while wearing a 1917 S&W in
a calvary holster.
He was a member of a Ohio Army NG armor unit stationed
in the Philippines, when the Japanese invaded, his unit was
ordered to the front where they were destroyed in total.
No trace of him exists, no grave, my father enlisted in the
Marine Corps in 1942, 3 campaigns, and he never forgave
the Japanese.
 
Dakota,

Remember my "rule" - you're not forgotten until your name vanishes. Put together an electronic scrapbook of him, his family,that photo, and what you know of what happened. Put a copy in your state history commission, Ohio's history commission, and the National Guard Museum if Ohio has one (I expect they do - send it to the Adjutant General's office).

It is up to us to remember those who went before.
 
Texas Star said:
I don't know about the treads, but don't think WW II Shermans had muzzle brakes (not "breaks").

Something bothered me about that 75mm, and I think that's it.

The muzzle brakes were probably inspired by those on German tanks.

Some British-used Shermans had upgraded, more powerful guns. Don't know if they used brakes. Did the Soviet T-34?
Click to expand...

From Wikipedia: "M4A1, M4A2, and M4A3 models received the larger T23 turret with a high-velocity 76 mm M1 gun, which reduced the number of HE and smoke rounds carried and increased the number of anti-tank rounds...The first standard-production 76 mm gun Sherman was an M4A1, accepted in January 1944." The muzzle brake was added to redirect the muzzle blast to the sides after it was found that without it no followup shot could be taken due to dust and debris obscuring the target. In all about 4,500 of these tanks were built, but I could not find how many found their way into theater. However, after the heavy tank losses of the Battle of the Bulge, in January 1945, General Eisenhower asked that no more 75 mm M4s be sent to Europe: only 76 mm M4s were wanted. The Jumbo was a very rare variant with upgraded front glacis armor built to assault heavily defended areas.
 
Last edited:
cprher said:
From Wikipedia: "M4A1, M4A2, and M4A3 models received the larger T23 turret with a high-velocity 76 mm M1 gun, which reduced the number of HE and smoke rounds carried and increased the number of anti-tank rounds...The first standard-production 76 mm gun Sherman was an M4A1, accepted in January 1944." The muzzle brake was added to redirect the muzzle blast to the sides after it was found that without it no followup shot could be taken due to dust and debris obscuring the target. In all about 4,500 of these tanks were built, but I could not find how many found their way into theater. However, after the heavy tank losses of the Battle of the Bulge, in January 1945, General Eisenhower asked that no more 75 mm M4s be sent to Europe: only 76 mm M4s were wanted. The Jumbo was a very rare variant with upgraded front glacis armor built to assault heavily defended areas.
Click to expand...

Beat me to it. The muzzle brake was necessary for the 76mm gun.
 
From the NYT review, I guess I'll have to see the movie to see what sort of plot device puts a tank commander close enough to a German soldier to stab him in the eye. However, I'm not really sure I want to know.

While we're on the subject of WWII and tanks, you might want to do some reading on US pre-War tank doctrine. It was US doctrine that tanks didn't fight tanks. Tanks were primarily for Infantry support, hence the low-velocity 75 mm gun, with a higher explosive charge for shooting at machine gun emplacements and pillboxes.
Anti-tank duty was to be carried out by towed anti-tank guns and by the curious vehicles called tank-destroyers - lightly armored vehicles with high-velocity guns (M-10, M-18, and M-36).
The problem was that the Germans didn't bother to read our manuals and insisted in fighting tank against tank, hence the shortcomings of our tanks (and doctrine) for the war as actually fought.
 
Texas Star said:
Askins was in Vietnam prior to the US official involvement, I think. He hunted there. I recall him killing a guerilla that I think he referred to as Viet Minh, not Viet Cong. One shot from the M-29 did the job.

"Well, of course," you may think. But I knew a cop who shot a fleeing thug four times through the chest with a .44 Magnum, and that felon ran for another block or two before dropping.

I think Askins's target was DRT. (Dead Right There.)
Click to expand...


Early 240 gr 44 mag ammo wasn't famous for expanding well, unless you had a concrete block. My buddy learned to use 180 gr, after chasing too many deer.

I stuck with my 45 Colt, loaded mildly hot.
 
Just as a matter of some interest, when I was assigned to Vietnam in 1964, in the Air Force I was required to provide my own sidearm. Mine was a ltwt Colt Commander, but lots of troops had Ruger flattops, all kinds of colts and smiths. It was a trader's dream and I traded for a P-38, and a .357 Ruger flat top while on duty there. I also managed to acquire a Thompson, a grease gun, and a folding stock carbine. I remember a forward air controller with a S&W .44mag, and his sergeant used a Colt 1917 cut to 4 inches. I left the full auto guns in country when I left.
 
Well by the end of my last tour with the 3rdMarDiv in Vietnam, I was carrying a Victory model S&W 38spl. If I could have found one I would have preferred a 1917 too.

Carried it in a custom chest rig too.

I will be going to that film when I can.

Good luck.
 
I remember seeing Dr Sledge on the campus at Montevallo and it was in my second year, 1963, that I began to hear stories about him. I know that his students held him in awe had nothing but great respect for this quiet warrior. We may never know about these giants that walk among us.

Regards, yashua
 
WATCHDOG said:


Those two films did for D-Day and WWII what Platoon and possibly even Full Metal Jacket did for the Vietnam war.
Click to expand...

I hope not!

Any substantive resemblance between Platoon/Full Metal Jacket, except for a few details, and the Vietnam war are purely coincidental.

Saving Private Ryan and Band of Brothers were realistic depictions of dedicated American soldiers doing an impossible task to the best of their ability. Those "Vietnam" movies were fanciful tales of totally unrealistic characters. Those movies didn't "do" anything for the Vietnam war. They actually made the average American soldier look bad. "We Were Soldiers" is much more accurate.

Regarding this new movie with Brad Pitt. Love the gun. But for crying out loud, couldn't they find an actor in his early 20s to play the tank commander? Pitt is 50 years old!
 
Last edited:
On the subject of "Tanks". My Father was Cavalry when the Cavalry was changing from horses to motorized vehicles. Dad had a photo of one of the "Tanks". The treads went as high as the upper portion of the vehicle. Two cannon, one pointed forward and one pointed rearward ( No rotating turret). It had several MGs, several crew members, and Dad said it had a gasoline motor with the gas tank in the rear which was a weak spot in case of enemy fire struck the gas tank. This was during and after WWI.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top