Most successful military projects

[The Larch]

Nah, I'd argue the T-72

Wow, they're still making them?

A new model, the T-72B3, was introduced in 2010. If you mean the basic model, no idea.

[The Larch]

(...) Versions of the Mauser action designed prior to the Gewehr 98's introduction, such as that of the Spanish/Swedish Mauser rifles and carbines, lack the third locking lug and feature a "cock on closing". It was the most copied bolt action rifle.

There's a reason why the British and American got the snot shot out of them in the Boer War and Spanish American War respectively. Their opponents were using Mausers.

Could you expand on that regarding the Spanish American war? It's a topic (military hardware) that I know very little about and this comment surprised me a bit, as the immage of that war over here does not really put the Spanish armed forces under a good light, equipment-wise.

[celedhring]

(...) Versions of the Mauser action designed prior to the Gewehr 98's introduction, such as that of the Spanish/Swedish Mauser rifles and carbines, lack the third locking lug and feature a "cock on closing". It was the most copied bolt action rifle.

There's a reason why the British and American got the snot shot out of them in the Boer War and Spanish American War respectively. Their opponents were using Mausers.

Could you expand on that regarding the Spanish American war? It's a topic (military hardware) that I know very little about and this comment surprised me a bit, as the immage of that war over here does not really put the Spanish armed forces under a good light, equipment-wise.

I think that's mostly the case of the navy, which was in a laughable state of modernization compared to the US. The Spanish infantry IIRC put up a good fight.

[Malthus]

Nah, I'd argue the T-72

Wow, they're still making them?

Don't know. I'd argue the T72 is far more successful than the Merkava

The one time they actually squared off against each other was in the Lebanon War, in 1982 or thereabouts - my recollection is that the Israeli tanks demolished the Syrian T-72s. Though I have also heard the Syrians claimed the opposite.

Though all things were of course not equal, so it was hardly a fair test of the capabilities of the two weapons.

Certainly the T-72 was widely exported.

[11B4V]

(...) Versions of the Mauser action designed prior to the Gewehr 98's introduction, such as that of the Spanish/Swedish Mauser rifles and carbines, lack the third locking lug and feature a "cock on closing". It was the most copied bolt action rifle.

There's a reason why the British and American got the snot shot out of them in the Boer War and Spanish American War respectively. Their opponents were using Mausers.

Could you expand on that regarding the Spanish American war? It's a topic (military hardware) that I know very little about and this comment surprised me a bit, as the immage of that war over here does not really put the Spanish armed forces under a good light, equipment-wise.

I think that's mostly the case of the navy, which was in a laughable state of modernization compared to the US. The Spanish infantry IIRC put up a good fight.

Larch, I'm talking the lowly infantry rifle.

Spanish Mauser v. Krag Rifle. Also, US units were even equipped still with the 1873 Springfield 45-70. Both were far inferior to the Mauser. That conflict spawned the development of Springfield Model of 1903 because of the Mauser. The '03 Springfield is essentially a copy of the Mauser. 

[11B4V]

Nah, I'd argue the T-72

Wow, they're still making them?

Don't know. I'd argue the T72 is far more successful than the Merkava

The one time they actually squared off against each other was in the Lebanon War, in 1982 or thereabouts - my recollection is that the Israeli tanks demolished the Syrian T-72s. Though I have also heard the Syrians claimed the opposite.

Though all things were of course not equal, so it was hardly a fair test of the capabilities of the two weapons.

Certainly the T-72 was widely exported.

By your comparison (battle results) it would be the M1 Abrams.

From the OP

This might be more of a challenge. What military investments/programs paid off well beyond expectations? Again post WW2.

Again the T72 not the Merkava.

[Malthus]

Nah, I'd argue the T-72

Wow, they're still making them?

Don't know. I'd argue the T72 is far more successful than the Merkava

The one time they actually squared off against each other was in the Lebanon War, in 1982 or thereabouts - my recollection is that the Israeli tanks demolished the Syrian T-72s. Though I have also heard the Syrians claimed the opposite.

Though all things were of course not equal, so it was hardly a fair test of the capabilities of the two weapons.

Certainly the T-72 was widely exported.

By your comparison (battle results) it would be the M1 Abrams.

From the OP

This might be more of a challenge. What military investments/programs paid off well beyond expectations? Again post WW2.

Again the T72 not the Merkava.

If going strictly by year of introduction and widespread export, the Soviet tank will certainly win, as it was developed earlier and exported much more widely.

The latter, however, is more a function of the fact it was originally a Soviet machine. The Soviet Union subsidized its export of military hardware, and the recipients were glad to get the tanks, whether they were 'the best' or not. The fact it is kept in use for so long may also have to do more with he break-up of the Soviet Union than with the machine's qualities.

This seems to me to contrast with the example of the Kalashnikov, which was both widely exported and highly sought after in its own right because of its inherent qualities.

In addition, the question became which of the two were most successful. It could be the case that a third was more successful than either.

[The Brain]

The Swedish S-tank never had to fire a shot in anger. Not even having to fight is, dare I say it, Sun Tzu-esque.

[Barrister]

If going strictly by year of introduction and widespread export, the Soviet tank will certainly win, as it was developed earlier and exported much more widely.

The latter, however, is more a function of the fact it was originally a Soviet machine. The Soviet Union subsidized its export of military hardware, and the recipients were glad to get the tanks, whether they were 'the best' or not. The fact it is kept in use for so long may also have to do more with he break-up of the Soviet Union than with the machine's qualities.

This seems to me to contrast with the example of the Kalashnikov, which was both widely exported and highly sought after in its own right because of its inherent qualities.

In addition, the question became which of the two were most successful. It could be the case that a third was more successful than either.

My understanding is that the AK-47 is actually a fairly shit weapon.  It's popularity derives from the fact that the USSR (and other communist states) sold so very many of them all over the world, and that it was easy to service even under fairly primitive conditions.

[Valmy]

An automatic rifle that works even when full of mud doesn't sound shit to me.

[Razgovory]

An automatic rifle that works even when full of mud doesn't sound shit to me.

If only the soviets could have built a tank that works when full of fire.

[The Brain]

Any Ranger/Tanker can tell you that Russian tank armor is greatly superior.

[derspiess]

I think Beeb and Valmy are both kind of right.  The AK platform remains the best option for less developed parts of the world.  But it falls far short of what most modern armed forces are using.

[The Larch]

As Nick Cage himself said in "Lord of War":

"Of all the weapons in the vast Soviet arsenal, nothing was more profitable than (...) the AK 47, or Kalashnikhov. It's the world's most popular assault rifle, a weapon all fighters love. An elegantly simple 9 pound amalgamation of forged steel and plywood. It doesn't break, jam or overheat. It will shoot whether it's covered in mud or filled with sand. It's so easy even a child could use it, and they do. The Soviets put the gun on a coin, Mozambique put it on their flag. Since the end of the Cold War the Kalashnikhov has become the Russian people's greatest export. After that comes vodka, caviar and suicidal novelists. One thing's for sure, nobody was lining up to buy their cars."

[Iormlund]

... it was easy to service even under fairly primitive conditions.

Not just service. A skilled gunsmith can make AKs even in the developing world. And do so really cheaply.

Take into account that only the best trained soldiers will be bothered by its lack of accuracy. An individual Somali miltiaman is unlikely to be as good a marksman as a US Ranger, so why would you give him a rifle that costs 50 times as much and is so much harder to acquire?