Talk:Boys anti-tank rifle

Firearms Unassessed

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firearms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of firearms on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FirearmsWikipedia:WikiProject FirearmsTemplate:WikiProject FirearmsFirearms
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Technology / Weaponry Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force

Clearly there is not a lot of excitement or interest generated by this page in Wikipedia devoted to the Boys Anti-Tank Rifle - so I write this into an aching void! My interest is through my father being equipped with a Boys when he was with the 1939 British Expeditionary Force [Grenadier Guards]in WW2. He reminisced [in his writings] about the awful recoil of the Boys - it was necessary to have someone to kneel on the firer's shoulder so as to prevent the recoil dislocating the collar bone - and of its weight - it was a very heavy tool. My father said that in use, the Boys would stop any vehicle dead in its tracks - except tanks which remained impervious to any number of hits. By '39 the armour on German tanks had so improved that the Boys had been rendered obsolete. The projectile was designed to disintegrate as it penetrated armour and in doing so release saucer-shaped shot pellets; these were designed to ricochet off metal surfaces. Thus it would slice the crew into shreds whilst the tank trundled on! I understand the Boys was the only hand-held anti-tank weapon available to the British Army in '39. Incredible! I read somewhere that the Boys [not being very successful in tests] was sold to the French Army. With war imminent Britain, in a panic, bought back the patents. But the French charged them double the original selling price. C'est la guerre!

FWIW, a small number were purchased and employed by American forces in the Pacific Theatre.

Very surprised to see the Boys described as a "semi-automatic bolt action" weapon. It can't be both. I suggest delete "semi-automatic".

Good call. They certainly cannot be both.

Nevertheless this rifle was used in anti- personnel role also setting the grounds to large caliber sniper rifles

If you have a citation, perhaps add this factoid.

The recoil is not that bad, I shot about 5 rounds back in the 90's, my Lt had gotten hold of one of those monsters and some ammo. We shot some at a military range, and we put the bipod (which I remember being U-shaped and attached to a straight bar going up) against a wooden rail that ran across teh range. The helped some with the recoil. Was a cool gun, though. 216.111.97.126 01:27, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I too fired a Boys, in the early 80s

Lovely accurate weapon, would have made a fine sniper's rifle except for that recoil!

Never tried hanging the bipod over a rail though...

I got a 5 round 1" grouping at 1000 yards - not bad at all, considering it's a 1/2" round!

chrisboote (talk) 13:03, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Boys1.jpg

Image:Boys1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 01:52, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Someone please change the name of this article, comma overload! Was it supposed to be Boys .55in Anti-Tank Rifle, or something else? Please make the title more understandable. Thanks. 124.169.136.17 (talk) 08:48, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]