Why isnt the sten as popular as the mp40 and the tommy gun?

SLAM FIRIN'

WIRE STOCK HAVIN'

BUMPSTOCK STOCKPILIN

HIP FIRIN'

TRIGGER SNATCHIN'

Attached: 1520137689947.jpg (1800x1173, 1.91M)

HICKOK45 SUBSCRIBIN'

AIRBORNE OPERATION BUNGLIN’

BEANS N' TOAST EATIN

BLACKED SUBSCRIBIN'

EMPIRE LOSIN’

PAKI IMPORTIN'

custard

KNOIFE DISPOSIN'

>Its was literally designed to be the ak of SMGs
Stop getting your information from video games/shitty sources, stens were designed to be cheap weapons, thrown away after a while.

GAOL SCOARIN’

Attached: EF8AA469-4B4A-46DA-870C-B699D85D1CDB.png (1366x768, 77K)

You just want a goth worker. Please kys

because it's a piece of shit

Scoring in gaol is more an American thing

maybe because the brits didnt do much during the war? even the ppsh is more well known than the sten

russian you mean

I think you meant Huezilian

MP40: Total production: 1.1 mill
Thompson: 1.7 mill
Sten: 3.4 mill
PPSH41: 6 mill

However, most comuter games are made un USA. Most comics are made in USA. Most movies are made in USA. And they all love pitting American versus Germans. Guess which smgs tends to be depicted the most.

The Sten has been used in every war and conflict between WW2 and current Syria. It's nok the ak of msgs. It is the Mosin of smgs; outdated design, heavy and cumbersome and not at all pretty, has some issues, but still packs a punch.

The MP40 and the Thompson are frontline fighting weapons, they are much more expensive and refined.

The sten is not in the same class. It's designed to be cheap and easy to produce. It's not safe, reliable, durable, ergonomic nor accurate. If you ever get to hold one you'll notice it doesn't feel like a weapon as much as like a bunch of plumbing pipes crudely held together.
The only common point with the AK is it's percieved ease of manufacture, but it's far from being on the same level. The AK was produced in a very different context, it's not a disposable last resort weapon and it features some neat engineering feats.
The AK is still an adequate fighting weapon to this day, while the Sten was already inadequate the day they started producing it. They didn't care as they just needed guns, but they started to look for a replacement as soon as they could.

I don't know what you mean by popular, considering the interest for historic weapons is mostly, well, historic, and therefore very subjective.
While the MP40 and Thompson are liked as quintessential weapons of German and US soldiers, the Sten is liked as an example of the harshness of a world war, of the lenghts a country had to go to keep its men armed. All countries have such weapons (the M3 grease gun in the US, the Russian PPS, the German Volkssturmgewehr...), but if you have to give one example of a wartime, last resort weapon you immediately think of the Sten.

>not at all pretty
gonna have to disagree with that one

>it doesn't feel like a weapon as much as like a bunch of plumbing pipes crudely held together.
That's because it was explicitly designed to be able to be made from common plumbing found in houses during that time. As another user stated, it was designed to be the liberator of SMG's, where they could airdrop or wire the plans and locals could produce it themselves.

The Thompson is a peacetime weapon. The M3 that replaced it was built after considerable study of the Sten. USA, not being under constant bombing threat, and being a four time as big a country, could of course improve on manufacture processes and materials use.

The MP40 was far less issed than movies like to pretend. It was the NCOs weapon and in reality only one out of 20 German soldiers would be carrying one. It's the Mauser rifle that is the quintessential German weapon. MP40 manufacture had more or less ceased by 1942.

But hey, it's not as if I am really disagreeing with you.

Kalashnikov designed the AK to be the AK of smgs

I was more stating general facts about the way those weapons tend to be perceived in the gun community today, of course most guys were still running around with rifles.

The Tommy Gun is a fucking icon for many reasons. It's much older than the others you mentioned. It was glorified during the gangster era, it had that "Bonny and Clyde" era mystique. Like the M16 it's silhouette is instantly recognizable even to non-gun people.

The Sten was, as the other poster put it, the equivalent of the liberator. It was a cheap piece of junk meant to be made as cheap and as fast as possible. It did not have any of the mystique that the far more famous Tommy gun had.

Also, if anyone has ever handled and compared the two the difference is massive. Even the mil spec simplified Thompsons have FAR better fit and finish than the Sten.

ergonomic and downright vile aesthetics

Why was it side-feeding? Was it for a reason or did they just want it to be special?

You can rotate the magwell 90°, which blocks the action and allows you to conceal carry the gun more easily under a coat. But I don't know if that was the main reason for the side feeding.

Easier to fire from the prone position....like the MP-18, MP-28, MP-34, Erma MPE, Lanchester, etc, etc

The AK was designed to be a rifle that could be expected to outlive its user. The Sten was designed to be so cheap to make that its lifetime was a moot point.