1909 Match 1903 with Winchester A5 Scope

[cplnorton]

This is a interesting rifle that just appeared out of Massachusetts. It is an original 1909 Springfield 1903 with a Winchester A5 installed. I've shown it to a lot of experts and I think the general consensus is, it is probably one of the early Star Guaged Match rifles, and it might have been a Marine Match rifle as well. But as with anything of this time period, it's always hard to prove 100%. The conversion seems to be of the time period and probably was done in WWI or before. The rifle, except for a modified trigger does not have any of the later National Match modifications done to it. But that would be correct for a Star Guaged Match rifle made in 1909.

The serial is 368496 and has a 6/09 SA barrel.

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/P1290788_zpslywkdmmu.jpg

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/P1290801_zpsp18t3kij.jpg

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/P1290795_zpstlgqches.jpg

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/P1290805_zpsdpf1o29j.jpg

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/P1290800_zps7zn6woxu.jpg

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/P1290813_zpsq2gvjkks.jpg

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/1909%20SA%201903%20A5%20Winchester%20rifle/P1290468_zpshtffk5bx.jpg

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/1909%20SA%201903%20A5%20Winchester%20rifle/P1290470_zpsomfmlotw.jpg

[cplnorton]

The blocks on the Rifle, match the drawings of the Winchester Springfield Marine blocks in Brophy's book. It also bears a strong resemblance to a A5 Marine rifle pictured from the WWI era. The date and location of the photo is unknown, but speaking with WWI uniform experts that study the pictures of that time, they believe it might be in France in 1917. The rifle appears to be early as well. With a single bolt highwood stock, small knob on the windage, and I cannot see any reinforcing clips on the handguard. This rifle also bears a strong resemblance to the rifle in Brophy's book with the Springfield Marine Mounts in the Cody Museum. But the Cody rifle is a later serial number.

I sort of doubt I can prove what it is 100%,just because so little exists from this era. But regardless it sure is a neat rifle to look at. I hope you guys enjoy it.


http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/1909%20SA%201903%20A5%20Winchester%20rifle/P1220288_zpsbxp0rhi0.jpg

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/1909%20SA%201903%20A5%20Winchester%20rifle/desktop%20photos2_zpsak8etekv.jpg

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/1909%20SA%201903%20A5%20Winchester%20rifle/A5%20to%20comapre%20brophy_zpspsj7rpvu.jpg

[Fred]

I LIKE it!

[Rick the Librarian]

...as do I!

[03Rifleman]

Wow...now that's what I call "eye candy"!

I'd say you've built a very convincing case cplnorton...as far as that goes, I'd like to think that could be the same rifle that Marine has shouldered in the picture...less the front sight cover~

Is this a recent acquisition of yours? If so, you've got yourself quite the treasure!

Great pictures and many thanks for the posting!

[cplnorton]

Yeah it showed up on Gunbroker as a Buy it Now a couple weeks back. The seller was a gunshop and said it came from a older women who had sold it because her husband had passed.

[RCK]

I just can't stop staring at that combination. Thanks for sharing.

[rockisle1903]

Nice rifle and thanks for sharing..Good deals are out there and rare rifles are still available..Congrats

[louis]

A real find Steve!! A guess there are some hidden ones around.

[Dan Shapiro]

WOW!

[John Beard]

Steve and I corresponded quite a bit on the rifle. We concluded that the rifle was a star-gauged and targeted rifle issued to the USMC shooting team in 1909 (but too late for the 1909 National Matches), who fitted it with a Winchester A5 telescope for match competition in that classification. Prior to 1910, National Match rifles were nothing more than selected, star-gauged, and targeted service rifles.

J.B.

Correction. Steve's rifle was manufactured and potentially issued in time for the 1909 National Matches held at Camp Perry, Ohio, beginning in late August.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

I have tried to isolate the date the Mann-Niedner base was first used with no success. It could have been as early as 1906, and most certainly before 1916. Niedner mounted many of these mounts on the rifles of Marine target shooters before WWI. The fact that #2 mounts were modified for use with the bases is certainly interesting. The serial number and time frame separate this rifle from the later designated sniper rifles assembled by Niedner and Winchester by years. Since as late as 1917, the Marine target shooters were still having their scopes with Mann-Niedner mounts mounted by Niedner, it is not only possible, but most likely, that Niedner mounted that scope. The Marines had the capability to make any part of the assembly, but I doubt the Corps would have ripped off Niedner in such a way unless some agreement existed between the two. In mid 1917, the Corps contracted with Niedner to mount 150 scopes on 1903's using the Mann-Niedner bases rather than do it themselves. Oddly enough, the bases on this rifle are missing all the typical Niedner "signatures". A mystery inside a mystery.

I suspect a very early Niedner mounted scope for a Marine Rifle Team member, probably ordered by the team member for his own rifle.

Nice find.

jt

Correction on my post also: I must have been asleep when I made that post. Those bases are "Marine Bases", and those are typical, commercial #2 "Grass Hopper"mounts. If you were lucky enough to own a 1903 back in the day, and you ordered an A5 mounted on 7.2" spacing, that is what you would have received from WRA. Of course, only the military had 1903's in 1909, to my knowledge. But any US military entity who had been issued 1903's and ordered an A5 from WRA mounted on 7.2" centers would have received a rifle that looked just like this one. The "Marine Bases" were the WRA bases to mount an A5 on 7.2" centers, nothing more, nothing less. I personally see nothing on this rifle to connect it to the Marine Corps whatsoever. As for it being a Match Rifle, I don't know, as the A5's on 7.2" centers were typically used for matches less than 1000 yards (due to field of view issues), and I am unaware there were any 1909 matches where scopes were used at less than 1000 yards. I would expect 6" centered scoped match rifles to be used at 1000 yards, but anything is possible. Some of the rifles, such as this one, were later converted to Mann-Niedner bases to take advantage of superior zero holding capabilities of the Mann-Niedner bases over the WRA bases, which is typically evidenced by the front hole of the Mann-Niedner rear base being plugged, and a third hole drilled to match the 7.2" spacing WRA "Marine Base" hole spacing.

[cplnorton]

John and Jim, thank you for taking the time to comment on this thread. Also thank you so much for taking the time privately to look at the rifle and discuss it.

[Rick the Librarian]

Yes, excellent discussion!

[StockDoc]

Beautiful, love the look of the stock. One question though on the sling why so short, was that a shooter modification or a different variant of an issued sling?

[cplnorton]

I don't know honestly. But it didn't have a sling on it. That is just one from my stash I put on. :)

[StockDoc]

Interesting, looks like the same sling in the picture of the Sgt holding the rifle.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

....It also bears a strong resemblance to a A5 Marine rifle pictured from the WWI era. The date and location of the photo is unknown, but speaking with WWI uniform experts that study the pictures of that time, they believe it might be in France in 1917....

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/1909%20SA%201903%20A5%20Winchester%20rifle/P1220288_zpsbxp0rhi0.jpg



I believe that picture was taken at Camp Perry (or some other range). The Marines in France wore Army uniforms.

jt

[cplnorton]

I've been trying to put a exact location and date to the picture ever since I first picked up the rifle. Just because if I can, then I have a exact date and location to better understand the history of mine.

The picture is pretty popular in all the books, and online, but no date or location is ever detailed. They usually say WWI or "WWI Era" as the description. But, I might have found a clue that would detail more where the picture was taken though. I traced the photo to Europe and found it in an online museum collection over there. They have the description, On the Western Front 1917-18. Which is also a generic term and one could argue they just mislabeled the picture as well.

But they have a un-cropped version of this picture that I have never seen before. In this un-cropped photo, it has identifiers at the bottom of the photo that can provide more clues. It has 4337 in the lower left corner, and a US Official watermark in the lower right.

I've been working with some Marine WWI Photo collectors trying to date this picture for a while now. When I first showed them this, they said it had to be France in 1917, but they could not prove it. Well when I found the un-cropped version of the picture, I went back to ask them what that means. They said that is how the Army Signal Corps marked their official photos taken in France during WWI.

Here is the un-cropped version and you can see the number in the lower left, and the US Official in the lower right.

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/American_First_World_War_Official_Exchange_Collect ion_Q85303_zpsxsegbb1p.jpg


Just to make a comparison, this is another really famous photo that is shown in about all the books of a camo painted Warner Swasey. I also found a un-cropped version of this picture, with the same type of markings at the bottom that the collectors said was WWI Army Signal Corps. The only thing about this photo, a date and location is known. I've seen this one described as taken in France in May 1918. But notice the same style number in left corner and the same US Official watermark in the right.

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/American_First_World_War_Official_Exchange_Collect ion_Q103350_zpsbobhw1sh.jpg

Here are the two photos Side by side with the Markings visible.

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/Desktop14_zpswnn5hogx.jpg


Now I'm trying to locate the photo at NARA, and pull it. I'm hoping if I can find it at NARA, it will have on the back the location and date of when it was taken. But I'm really starting to think this photo was taken in France in 1917-18. Which that would be interesting. Just because the assumed serial ranges of the Marine A5 Rifles in WWI are later serials numbers, which would not have the early features of the rifle in that picture.

So yeah I don't know. I might find it at NARA and it says Camp Perry, 1919. I won't know till I find it. I just want to find exactly where that photo was taken and the date. Just for nothing else than to better understand my rifle better. :)

[Griff Murphey]

Beautiful rifle, what history to hold in your hands.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

[QUOTE=cplnorton;445069.... Just because the assumed serial ranges of the Marine A5 Rifles in WWI are later serials numbers, which would not have the early features of the rifle in that picture...[/QUOTE]

Assumed? First time I've heard of the serial number range being "assumed".

The Marines held their match rifles in reserve during the war (Senich). That was just one of the reasons the Corps had Winchester assemble the sniper rifles.

The Winchester A5 was first marketed in Feb 1910, and the matches were held in August 1910. That means the Mann-Niedner base system had to have been developed within that 5-month window, actually less time since Neidner would have needed time to mount the scope plus travel time. That is a short time period for 1. Mann or Niedner buys the new scope and bases, 2. the development of the Mann-Niedner bases, 3. the Marines to have become aware of the new base system, 4. the rifle sent to Niedner, 5. bases mounted, 6. rifle returned to Marines, and 7. shooter to become acquainted with setup. I realize anything is possible, but one must admit it seems highly unlikely at best.

If we keep looking, we will find the answers.

jt

[cplnorton]

Jim,

So you think the bases were designed and made by Neidner? I keep on researching them and everything I find points to Winchester as the manufacturer. Unless I am misunderstanding you, and you think Neidner installed the Winchester bases?

I appreciate your help! :)

[John Beard]

Jim,

Cplnorton's rifle is fitted with WRA USMC scope mounts, not Neidner tapered scope mounts. I see no Neidner connection, unless you think Neidner installed the mounts. Your response is solicited.

J.B.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

Mea culpa. I was under the mistaken impression that the bases were Mann-Niedners. My mistake. The "Marine" bases could have been, and probably were, installed by Winchester when the scope was purchased. If I recall from the early ads, Winchester offered to install bases for any Winchester scope purchased. The Corps must have been very impressed with the A5 from the get go. In the 1909 issue of AatM, is an article about the W&S M1908 scopes being issued to the troops. In a demonstration, a shooter did as well with open sights as he did with the W&S at 1000 yards. The article said the advantage went to the scope at 1500 yards.

I did make a couple of observations, and I preface this part by stating I don't know much about the NM's. I read several articles in the AatM about the 1909 and the 1910 NM's. No where was the word scope mentioned. Winchester's ads in the 1910 issue did not mention the A5, just their ammo. No scoped rifles appear in the very few pictures in the articles. In one article it states that only the service rifle "as issued" will be used in the matches, and that 1909 rifles can be turned in for 1910 rifles. Since the 1903 is issued sans scope....?

I realize, and they discuss, the "as issued" rifles were all modified in several ways, including matching trigger pulls for 1000 rifles; so they were hardly "as issued" rifles.

Someone save me here, but as best I can tell, the first "any rifle, any sights" match at Camp Perry was the Wimbledon Cup; but the first time the Wimbledon Cup was held at Perry was after WWI. In 1916, the WC was held at Jacksonville, Fl of all places. That brings us to trying to figure why the Marines would scope a NM rifle that wasn't going to be used at the NM's for another 10-years. Granted, it could have been used in other AR,AS matches; but then it wouldn't be a NM rifle, or maybe it is a NM rifle that the Marines scoped after Camp Perry, making it useless for Camp Perry in its near future. According to the 1910 rules for the NM's, competitors had to use a rifle issued them by the Ordnance Department at Camp Perry, and they were not allowed to make any alterations to the rifles other than stock relieving around the barrel and such. Were the competitors allowed to keep their issued rifles after the match was over?

Your response solicited.

My response proffered.

jt:1948:

PS
How did you like them Bulldogs this year, John? Makes me proud I saved my cowbell.

[cplnorton]

John probably has way more info than I could ever find. But this is what I have found so far by going back through the documents and interviews of the time.

The first use of a scoped 1903 service rifle on the Marine team was in 1909 at the Sea Girth NJ match. It said that 1stSgt Victor Czegka attached a scope to his service rifle at Sea Girth and practiced with it, and then took that rifle to the Wimbledon Cup in 1909 and won the cup with it. I've been trying to find a pic of that rifle for two weeks now, but can't find it. The reason being, the first time the Winchester A5 scope was ever showcased by Winchester was at Sea Girth in 1909. So you have a report of a Marine attaching a scope to his service rifle at Sea Girth, and a report of the first time Winchester brought demos of the A5 scope at the same match in June 1909. Now I have no clue if that is what he used or not. Just a observation and a coincidence until it can be proven right or wrong. It just describes it as a telescope he mounted himself. I figured he had to have his picture taken being the first Marine to ever win the Wimbledon Cup. But if I can find that, that might be a clue. But that was the first use of a scoped Marine 1903 team rifle I can find.

I can find other mentions of them using the scoped 1903's at the Wimbledon Cup pre WWI as well. When I researched the cup it looks like it began in 1875 and was held pretty much ever year since. In 1907 the rules of the Cup changed and it became a competition that was 20 shots at a 1000 yards with any rifle. So any rifle, scoped or not, was legal after 1907. But it seems to the be the only competition I can find where competitors could use a scoped rifle if they wanted to. But here are the winners I can find from that 1909 time period to 1918.

1909 1SGT Victor H. Czegka, USMC 98
1910 CPT Guy H. Emerson, 6th OH Inf. 99
1911 CPT Guy H. Emerson, 6th OH Inf. 98
1912 CPT A.L. Briggs, 26th US Inf. 97
1913 CPL Thomas E. Vereer, 14th US Inf. 99
1914 NO COMPETITION
1915 CSGT J.E. Jackson, IA NG 98
1916 GYSGT John J. Andrews, USMC 99
1917 NO COMPETITION
1918 CPL Frank L. Branson, USMC 92

The other other reference I find to them using the Telescoped 1903 besides the Cup, pre WWI, was they were a training tool. And this is probably the primary purpose of them honestly. It makes the most sense. The interviews I have read, said they could put them in the hands of a team shooter, and looking through the telescope at long distances, it would help them control holding the rifle more steady. They said looking through the magnification it was easier to see how little movements effected your shot at a 1000 yards. And it sounds like they were used for snapping in. As they practiced trigger pull looking through the scope, to see how trigger pull affected the movement of the crosshairs on the taget. So it honestly sounds like they migtht not have been shot that much. But I've found several mentions of them doing this in 1916 and before, and even a mention in 1913. In 1919, when the teams reformed, they continued the practice. In fact in 1919, they detail that they have (40) of these telescoped 1903's set up to train on holding the rifle steady, that were available to the rifle team. I have not yet found a reference to how many they had pre WWI.

But yeah that is the most I can come up with so far on them using them pre WWI. But I will keep digging, but from everything I have read so far, it just sounds like they had the scoped rifles almost as soon as they switched form the Krag to the Springfield in competitions in 1908/09.

Like you said, this is going to take a lot of research. You probably don't even want to know how much money and time it has cost me to find even these snippets. lol This era is a nightmare to research as you already well know.

[cplnorton]

Were the competitors allowed to keep their issued rifles after the match was over?

I forgot to mention this, and the other post is so long, I just thought I would do a new post. But in the Marine manual from the time of the Krag till at least the 1930's, the Marines could purchase their service rifles and pistols. I have the document downloaded in my photobucket, but the site is down for maintenance. Once it comes back up, I will throw it up there. I imagine if they could buy their service rifles and pistols for the actual cost to the Government, I would think they would be able to buy their match rifle as well. But John would have a better idea than me on the Match side of it. Just because he's the NM king. And the Marine rifle team and the Marine Corps itself were really two entirely different organizations at this time. But I will post it when the site comes back up and edit this.

*Edit, I forgot I could attach the document. It's from the 20's, but I can find almost the same identical document even back at the start of the 1903.
34073

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

John probably has way more info than I could ever find. But this is what I have found so far by going back through the documents and interviews of the time.

The first use of a scoped 1903 service rifle on the Marine team was in 1909 at the Sea Girth NJ match. It said that 1stSgt Victor Czegka attached a scope to his service rifle at Sea Girt and practiced with it, and then took that rifle to the Wimbledon Cup in 1909 and won the cup with it. I've been trying to find a pic of that rifle for two weeks now, but can't find it.

It wasn't an A5, because he had to make his own mounts (I think we are reading the same book).


The reason being, the first time the Winchester A5 scope was ever showcased by Winchester was at Sea Girth in 1909.

Now where did you find that? The first time the A5 showed up in Winchester's catalog was 1910.


So you have a report of a Marine attaching a scope to his service rifle at Sea Girth, and a report of the first time Winchester brought demos of the A5 scope at the same match in June 1909. Now I have no clue if that is what he used or not. Just a observation and a coincidence until it can be proven right or wrong. It just describes it as a telescope he mounted himself. I figured he had to have his picture taken being the first Marine to ever win the Wimbledon Cup. But if I can find that, that might be a clue. But that was the first use of a scoped Marine 1903 team rifle I can find.

I found his winning pic, but the rifle he is holding does not have a scope (yes, I know he used a scope). Bear in mind this match was not the NM, although Jacksonville (not Sea Girt) did host the NM's at least twice later on.


I can find other mentions of them using the scoped 1903's at the Wimbledon Cup pre WWI as well. When I researched the cup it looks like it began in 1875 and was held pretty much ever year since. In 1907 the rules of the Cup changed and it became a competition that was 20 shots at a 1000 yards with any rifle. So any rifle, scoped or not, was legal after 1907. But it seems to the be the only competition I can find where competitors could use a scoped rifle if they wanted to. But here are the winners I can find from that 1909 time period to 1918.

Wimbledon Cup - yes, NM's - no.



The other other reference I find to them using the Telescoped 1903 besides the Cup, pre WWI, was they were a training tool. And this is probably the primary purpose of them honestly. It makes the most sense. The interviews I have read, said they could put them in the hands of a team shooter, and looking through the telescope at long distances, it would help them control holding the rifle more steady. They said looking through the magnification it was easier to see how little movements effected your shot at a 1000 yards. And it sounds like they were used for snapping in. As they practiced trigger pull looking through the scope, to see how trigger pull affected the movement of the crosshairs on the target. So it honestly sounds like they might not have been shot that much. But I've found several mentions of them doing this in 1916 and before, and even a mention in 1913. In 1919, when the teams reformed, they continued the practice. In fact in 1919, they detail that they have (40) of these telescoped 1903's set up to train on holding the rifle steady, that were available to the rifle team. I have not yet found a reference to how many they had pre WWI.

But yeah that is the most I can come up with so far on them using them pre WWI. But I will keep digging, but from everything I have read so far, it just sounds like they had the scoped rifles almost as soon as they switched form the Krag to the Springfield in competitions in 1908/09.

Yes, I have no doubt they used scoped rifles in matches allowing AR, AS's., but we are talking about a rifle that may have been issued to them in August of 1909 for use in the Camp Perry NM's. The Corps would not have scoped it for the NM's as there were no NM matches allowing scopes that year, so the question is - did they scope it later? I personally don't believe the scope was available in August of 1909. Some of the patents for the A5 are dated in 1910, and the earliest drawings I can find of the "Marine mounts" are dated 1926. I believe the A5 was not available until 1910. One might want to consider the rifle was scoped after 1909.

Using a scope as a training aid to magnify tremors was started by USMC Capt. Garland Fay in 1916.


Like you said, this is going to take a lot of research. You probably don't even want to know how much money and time it has cost me to find even these snippets. lol This era is a nightmare to research as you already well know.

Oh, we know all right. Been there, done that. But look at how much one learns in cases like this.

jt

[cplnorton]

I found the mention of the first A5 at Sea Girth in 1909, in Brophy, Page 502, first paragraph on the page below the A5 pics.


Actually I might have just figured out the puzzle. I am going to do a little more research on this. So if I don't answer back right away you know why. :)

[cplnorton]

This wasn't what I was working on, but it's really sort of exciting. But I really thought if I could find that photo like my rifle in the archives, I could confirm that the picture was indeed taken in France in WWI. And that would mean the Marines used more than the Neidner modified rifles over there. So I contacted a Researcher and gave her the box number I thought it would be located, and she found it. :) So now I think it's pretty safe to say that the Marines used more than just the Neidner modified rifles in France. Which I don't think this has ever been documented before.

But this is what she wrote me, and the location if anyone wants to go pull it in the archives. I removed her name just for privacy reasons.

Dear Mr. Norton:

The complete caption for 111-SC-4337 is, "US Marines in France, telescopic rifle sight." The image is undated and the specific location in France is not noted. We are sorry we cannot give you any further information on the image itself. Reproductions (traditional or digital), if needed, can be purchased through any of our private vendors, by citing the above noted number. A list of private vendors is available at http://www.archives.gov/research/order/vendors-photos-maps-dc.html . Their prices vary (a pull fee is charged to each of the vendors by the National Archives). There are no known copyright restrictions on the image. Following is our publication statement. If we can be of further assistance, please let us know.

Thank you,
National Archives & Records Administration
Still Picture Reference


34072

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

This wasn't what I was working on, but it's really sort of exciting. But I really thought if I could find that photo like my rifle in the archives, I could confirm that the picture was indeed taken in France in WWI. And that would mean the Marines used more than the Neidner modified rifles over there. So I contacted a Researcher and gave her the box number I thought it would be located, and she found it. :) So now I think it's pretty safe to say that the Marines used more than just the Neidner modified rifles in France. Which I don't think this has ever been documented before.

Steve,

It is the Winchester modified Mann-Niedner mounts that have never been proven to have been used in France. The Corps had a gob of the rifles with #2 mounts in France. As it develops, they had both. The question is their source. If the Corps did indeed hold back their match rifles in reserve, where did the scoped 03's in France originate? Maybe we need to join forces if you are serious about researching Corps A5 scoped 03's. Others have saved me money, so maybe I can save you some, or at least split the cost. I think our future is in Philadelphia. Time to talk. I'll email you my phone number or vice versa - your pick. I have unlimited minutes.

Damn glad you found the true origin of that photo. I had written it off as being taken stateside. Facts beat out BS any old day.

[cplnorton]

Thanks Jim,

Yeah I don't mind sharing any of the Documents I've found. And I will touch base offline.

On the Neidner rifles in France, I've found a couple pics of the Neidner modified Rifles with the Mann style tapered blocks. This is the clearest pic of one I have found so far that was supposed to be taken in France. But I really don't trust a lot of the info out there anymore, unless I can find proof. To me this almost looks like a sniper school picture since you can see several of them in there. I do have one good pic of a Neidner modified rifle being tested in the states in June 1917 that I found in a newspaper of all places. But I haven't researched this pic below at all, just because I was researching the one like my rifle. But if you can for sure place this picture in France, it would prove it.

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/BQS7-X-CU90-L_zpsp7m1sukh.jpg

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/Fullscreen%20capture%201142016%2040346%20PM.bmp_zp sp8kccpsi.jpg

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

You are looking at a crop of a picture of the last "OSD Sniper School" graduates, and Marsden is in that picture (cropped part). All the rifles you see are Winchester assembled Corps sniper rifles with Mann-Niedner mounts/bases, and you can thank Hansen for that pic (he found it). The picture was taken at the OSD on 19 Nov 1918, after the war was over.

I can prove all types of mounts were present in France except one. One of the OSD SS graduates died in France during the war (each graduate kept his rifle and all graduates had Winchester mounted Mann-Neidner/Winchester modified A5 mounts), and I know someone who has a documented Niedner sniper rifle (1 of the 150 mounted by Niedner) that was used at Belleau Woods (I believe the 150 Niedner rifles went to France with the 6th Regiment). There were also, in France, Corps sniper rifles with an A5 mounted on 6" centers and sniper rifles with A5's mounted on 7.2" centers, all with #2 mounts.
jt:1948:

[Emri]

I must say that this has been a most interesting thread. Discussions like this one are the reason I started looking at CSP many years ago. Maybe y'all should come to Birmingham in March, then you can pick John's brain and maybe Lynn Meredith's also if he is there. Ask John how much fun we have discussing rifles (and other things) while picking the last bite off them rib bones !!

Thanks again,

Emri

[Rick the Librarian]

I agree - I tend to stay away from sniper rifles (probably due a mental block about such things!) but I agree with Emri - this is why I joined CSP all those years ago. A great, very learned discussion with nobody's tail getting out of joint!

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

I must say that this has been a most interesting thread. Discussions like this one are the reason I started looking at CSP many years ago. Maybe y'all should come to Birmingham in March, then you can pick John's brain and maybe Lynn Meredith's also if he is there. Ask John how much fun we have discussing rifles (and other things) while picking the last bite off them rib bones !!

Thanks again,

Emri

Such a meeting may be on the table for me, I don't know about Steve. Steve and I communicate a lot through email, and I find him to be damned resourceful. He finds stuff I couldn't, or haven't, found. I could use some ribs, and I am trying to buy a 1963 Chevy Impala SS convertible w/409, 4 in the floor. It would be a perfect trip to "break it in". Steve has gotten me motivated again. I seem to have info he doesn't, and vice versa.

I am intrigued with his find. It bears certain characteristics that leave me little doubt that Winchester mounted that scope. The USMC Philly Depot was fully capable of scoping all the sniper rifles for the Corps. There has to be a reason they relied on Winchester, as they had in the past (Vera Cruz invasion). As for the Mann-Niedner bases on all the sniper rifles, I think I can support the supposition that Niedner sold the Corps the bases to be installed by Winchester, or at least the rights to make and install them. The War Department paid Niedner $151 for something right before Winchester did the deed. Niedner had been paid by the Depot to install the 150 scopes (same month).

I do know why the Corps decided to use the Mann-Niedner system for their scopes. It is a neat story involving sex and intrigue.

jt

[louis]

Hey Jt. Don't stop there with sex and intrigue! Let's hear the story this whole thread is extremely interesting and educational. Please continue!!

[Fred]

Yea!

[Promo]

Hey Jt. Don't stop there with sex and intrigue! Let's hear the story this whole thread is extremely interesting and educational. Please continue!!
so .. what exactly are you planning to learn? :icon_lol:

[cplnorton]

Thanks for the kind words everyone.

I'm going to be a 100% honest. I've sort of pulled away from posting stuff online that I find. I don't do it much anymore. Not because I'm hoarding it for a book or anything like that. It just sometimes seems to start a fight and that isn't what I want to do. If you know me, I love this stuff, and I love to research. So I dig into documents, pictures, newspapers, basically anything I can find from the time period. It's just something I really enjoy doing and I spend a good portion of my time researching.

I think I might have stumbled across something very interesting, in a FBI report of all places, that I think answers some of the big WWI Marine sniper questions. But I've been very hesitant to post it. Just because it goes against the grain of what some of the books say out there, and sometimes when you post that stuff, it ruffles feathers. And that isn't my intention at all. If I posted it, my intent would be so we could all pool our collective knowledge together, discuss it, and possibly solve this mystery once and for all.

I honestly don't think anyone has seen this info, and I don't mind sharing it. If you guys want me to throw it up on here, I don't mind. I just don't want to rub people the wrong way, if that makes sense?

[Cosine26]

In my opinion , post it with the caviar you just posted and mark it "FWIW".
.

[louis]

I know how you feel Steve. I'm the same way. Do what you think is best. This has been a very interesting thread. You won't rub me the wrong way.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

Steve,

Post whatever you want. Anyone who gets riled over data found during research is a nut anyway, it's when people use the data that the fireworks start. For example: Sgt. York has long been accused by female members of his family (one is a grand daughter) of serial incest and rape. A lot of people know about it, but no one wants to talk about it. No future in it.

I think I know what you are going to post, and that kinda stuff happened a lot in those days. You might be interested to know the govt didn't abandon him at all.

jt

[Fred]

Oh Heck, Please just post it and lets all kick it around. I Really Appreciate any and all theories and bits of information.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

Looky, looky at what I found, Steve.

Read the article. That rifle is from 1912, and it is an A5 with Springfield bases on 6" spacing like the group from 1914. I still believe, but don't know how to prove, that the Marine bases came to be in response to the Mann-Neidner bases which were on 7.2" spacing. By the way, it appears the Corps teams do keep their rifles after the matches.

Picture was taken at Sea Girt in 1920.

jt

http://www.jouster.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=34124&stc=1

[cplnorton]

Sorry guys, I've been having "Family time."

My wife is a Nazi about me not doing the "gun" thing on the weekends when everyone is home together, so I will jump on more in a little bit.

But what I essentially found is Neidner was a German Immigrant, and right after he finished converting the 150 rifles for the Marines. He was accused of some really bad pro German, Anti American statements and he got his butt investigated by the FBI. So they ended up detailing the whole conversition process he did for the Marines in the process of the report.

By the way, excellent Photo Jim! That is the kind of stuff we need to find. The more we find like that, the more we can piece it together. I haven't found any pics from that pre 1917 timeframe at all yet. All I've ever seen is those two 6 on center rifles at the SA museum with SRS hits to 1914. And the 1915 report by the Army that condemns the A5 scope, partially because it has the 6 on center mounts.

To be honest, the research I've found over the past couple days makes me sort of lean towards my rifle being later as well honestly. But that is just speculation on my part.

Hell I don't want to say what I think it is. lol

But I will be on in a little bit once the family all goes to bed. :)

[cplnorton]

I still believe, but don't know how to prove, that the Marine bases came to be in response to the Mann-Neidner bases which were on 7.2" spacing.

I was thinking this as well today honestly. I have a set of Mann Neidner bases and the modified scope, and I have the Winchester made Marine bases on my rifle. When you you compare them, the Winchester Marine bases seem to be just a simplified version of the Manns. It seems they took the design of the Mann, scaled it down to fit the existing standard mount of the A5 scope, and that was about it.

This was one of the points that I was going to bring up as well. I can't prove it 100% for sure either. But I think I could make a compelling case on why this might have happened.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

Take a look at this one, Steve. It is from an old post, (JB's as I recall), and the pic was taken in France. Take a long look at the rifle on the far left in the stacked arms. It is a Winchester modified scope (big knobs on 7.2" centers - sounds like tits). It can only be one of the 150 Niedner rifles.

jt

[Fred]

I've got that photo on a Stereo optic card.

[cplnorton]

I'm compiling all my info into and uploading everything. I have really slow internet, so it makes it a really slow process.

Yeah I have that pic too, that is one I have been working on with the WWI guys on picking their brain. They think it's probably the 5th Marine Regiment in France. And yeah I think it's probably the Mann Neidner too. I wish the pic was a little better.

But Neidner converted the 150 rifles in May/June 1917. Some had to go over. That was pretty early still.

[cplnorton]

I’ve been debating on how much info to show on all this because you can get into a lot of detail on this subject really fast. But I figured I would post this sort of shortened version of my notes and see where it goes.

But what happened was Adolph Neidner was a German Immigrant. And after he had completed the 150 rifles for the Marine Corps in May/June 1917, he was accused of making anti American remarks and reported to the FBI. Neidner was accused of saying that he thought it was better that Germany won the war, and the most damning claim, he was accused of saying he hoped that everyone that used one of his rifles would die. Well when you are accused of that kind of statement, not even weeks after completing the work on rifles for Marine sharpshooters for France. That is something that really draws attention, especially back then as they were paranoid of all the Germans in the US anyways.

So because of the accusation, it launched a detailed FBI investigation of Neidner and the work he had done for the Marines at Philly. Which I’m sure was not fun for him, but fortunate for us, the FBI detailed almost the whole process in their investigation. The main thing the FBI seemed concerned over, was if Neidner could have done something to make the rifles fail.

The first big shocker to me when I read the FBI report, Neidner converted the rifles at the actual Marine Corps Depot in Philadelphia. It seems most of the info out there says that the Marines sent their rifles to Neidner to convert at his location, or he made the mounts and sold them to the Marines. But that isn’t what it is saying here.

Basically at this time, Neidner was working out of his home on a very small scale. It sounds like he was mostly working on fellow rifle team member rifles in the Massachusetts area. He had no employees, and the easiest way to put it, he would probably be called a Garage shop gunsmith today. So I imagine because of this, he traveled to the Marine Depot at Philadelphia to do the actual conversions. He was a contractor basically. At this time there were a lot of civilians working at the Depot so this was nothing uncommon at all and it isn’t even uncommon today. It think it still happens today at PWS Quantico.

But Neidner converted a total of 150 rifles in that May/June 1917 time frame at Philly. For this work, the Marine Corps paid Neidner $1500.
From reading the report, the 150 rifles converted by Neidner were supposed to be just the start. He made a statement in the report, "that he is shortly to equip 1500 additional rifles for the same use." So to me this 150 sounds like a test or trial group, and he was supposed to return to do more. But then the investigation happened, which I think cancelled it all. I have more evidence that supports this claim later on.

One thing the report doesn’t state is the actual date he was accused of making the comments, but I can see by the end of June, 1917, the FBI was already investigating him. So they started the investigation not even weeks after he was done building the rifles. In fact, Neidner when he was done with the conversion, used the $1500 he received off the Marines and took his family on a month long vacation to Milwaukee. And it was while on this vacation, the FBI went in and interviewed everyone, and they were looking for him.

The one thing that strikes me about the report, the FBI was very concerned Neidner could have sabotaged those 150 rifles he built in some way. And they even interviewed someone from Iver Johnson to see if that was possible, and the expert from Iver Johnson said yes.

I can still see dates in August 1917 that they are still interviewing people about him. And there are even dates all the way into 1918 in there as well. It seems this was a active investigation for a while and it wasn’t just dropped.

This is the cliff notes of the investigation and Instead of detailing every single detail, I figured I would just attach the 15 page FBI report. I don’t know if it will be too small to read. If it is, I think you could download the pictures and blow them up and read them. But here is a link to the FBI report. It’s 15 pages.

http://s1282.photobucket.com/user/cplnorton11/slideshow/Neidner%20FBI%20investigation

[cplnorton]

So we have established Neidner had converted the 150 rifles in May/June 1917. On June 15th, 1917 in the Fort Wayne Paper, this picture appears stating that the Marines were testing a new telescoped rifle. The detail of the rifle isn’t the best in the mount area. But it has to be a Neidner rifle as those blocks are pretty big. Too big to be regular mount. I think I might have located the microfilm this came from, and luckily it is only an hour away from my house. So I’m going to go find the original and see if I can get a better copy of this picture.

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/Fullscreen%20capture%201282016%2072646%20PM.bmp_zp s6yej3zrl.jpg

So again this was June 15th, 1917. Neidner had barely finished the first 150 rifles. Now combine what this says, with the statement by Neidner that he was supposed to go back very shortly and equip another 1500 rifles. I think it’s pretty safe to assume the Marines wanted more than those first 150 rifles to use in the war.

So this equation now enters the picture. I found this in the magazine Man at Arms. I lost my notes of which issue this came out of. But I swear it was the middle of 1917. At least that is what I keep on thinking. I really think it’s about the same time, right after Neidner got in trouble with the FBI. Which makes me think the Marines couldn’t or wouldn’t have used Neidner anymore because he was still under investigation by the FBI. So they might have turned to Winchester. But stupid me, I lost what issue it was in, and can’t find it again.

**Edit, I finally found it again. It was in The Marines Magazine, dated July 1917. It's Volume 2, issue no 8***

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/12549092_10153872600484886_4349171756029791046_n_z pshnalndz3.jpg

Now we know Winchester was training Marines in the setup and repair of the A5 telescopic sight. So to me when you say “setup” that makes me think they were being trained to not only repair, but to install scopes on rifles. Which this was even common when I was in the Marines. I remember Marines traveling all the time to civilian companies to be trained in whatever skill they could bring back and do for the Corps. Because if you can get a Marine to do the work, you save money, and you can avoid a civilian company to do the work. And it was a Win Win for Winchester because at this time they were making alot of other weapons and probably ammo for the war effort. And they would also be selling the Marines the parts.

[cplnorton]

In Brophy’s book on page 507, he shows a factory drawing from Winchester that shows the two different styles of scope blocks for the 1903 Springfield rifle. The one on the right is called the Springfield Marine. The one on the left is the one that attaches to the rear sight base. Which is the 6 on center, and the Marine is a 7.2. Like Jim mentioned earlier.

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/12575769_10153859846504886_1248728331_n_zpsedthtz1 2.jpg

Now this drawing is dated 1926, but as we already detailed, that 6 on center block on the left, I bet is the exact same one we see in that picture Jim posted from 1912, and the ones on the rifles at SA from 1914. I think even though the drawing is dated 1926, these were around a lot sooner than that date. And I’ve found several times the same item was drawn different ways over multiple years in the online records at Winchester.

Now the mounts on my rifle, are the ones in that Winchester drawing labeled Springfield Marine. And we can place a rifle that appears to be identical to mine in France during the war.

One thing also that I think backs up my theory that those Springfield Marine Mounts were around before that 1926 date is serial 659062 in Brophys book, on page 504. It’s at the Cody museum and also has the Springfield Marine blocks. In fact, it’s the rifle I compared mine to at the beginning of this whole post. It has a 6/17 barrel date. And there is even a second at Cody, serial 661696, that also seems like a match to my rifle, but the blocks are missing on it. But I suspect it had the Marine mounts as well.

It’s a little bit of a coincidence that you have have two rifles at Cody that seem to have the WRA Marine mounts. And they seem to correlate to when the Marines were there training on the A5 since they are mid 1917 dated range. And that fits pretty well to the time period Neidner got himself into a world of trouble with the FBI and should have been building more rifles for the Marines.

This is my last piece I have found so far. This was in the Handbook of Ordnance Data. And it’s dated November 1918 I think if I remember right.

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/Fullscreen%20capture%201302016%20104219%20PM.bmp_z ps4l2bul4s.jpg

I think this is what has thrown people off. I think at this time, there are two distinct Marine Mounts for the 1903. One that was created by Neidner, and one that was created by Winchester. These scopes are coming from Winchester, to the Marines. And if you take the sentence and break it apart and read it like this, “Produced by the Winchester Repeating Arms company, with a special Marine Corps Mounting”

I speculate that those 500 coming to the Marines from Winchester, had the Winchester Marine mount, like the one drawn above in Brophy's book. Neidner had the control of the tappered base from everything I can research, and I think Winchester wouldn't have wanted anything to do with it anyways. To me, especially back then, if he was under investigation by the FBI, and they were worried he could have potentially sabotaged those rifles. I just can’t see them letting him back in to Philly to convert anymore.


I speculate that Winchester trained Marines, took their training back to Philly, took the shipment of scopes from Winchester, and built rifles themselves after Neidner got himself into trouble with the FBI.

This is my hunch. Can I prove anything past the paperwork I provided, NOT IN ANYWAY. But one of you might have the key to finish this puzzle and if not right now, maybe one of us will find it looking. This all has to be documented at the archives if it really did happen.

So that's my crazy idea. And hell I will be the first to admit I might be missing something or reading something wrong. And if we find one document it might crash my whole theory. lol

I think this just gives us a new place to look, and maybe some new ideas to think about.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

OK. First of all, Winchester built the 500 rifles using the Mann-Niedner bases, as every single one of the original rifles found to date have the Mann-Niedner bases. Of the hundreds of the Winchester modified scopes that have turned up over the years, 100% of them have the Mann-Niedner bases. I am not speaking of the profuse number of outright fakes that have been sold over the net either. I was fortunate to have been introduced to some high end collectors that have stuff I never imagined. When you see an original rifle and the "kit" that came with it, understand who was involved with starting the program for the Corps, and the process of distribution of the rifles and how the snipers were picked and trained and by whom, and the "power" that enabled them to do so, you will sit back and smile. You will also understand why the Corps needed those 150 rifles when they did and why they picked Niedner to do the job. By the way, Niedner started the job on 1 June 1917 and finished on 13 July 1917.

Second, about a month after Niedner completed the 150 rifles, there is a record of him selling something to the War Department. I believe that sale was the right to use the Mann-Niedner bases, or even the 500 Mann-Niedner bases themselves. Either way, Winchester did indeed install the Mann-Niedner bases on those 500 rifles and more. I always wondered why the switch to Winchester to finish the job, and you have provided the answer to that question also.

You are my new best friend. Someday, you have to tell me where you found this stuff. I have known (suspected) for years the 150 rifles came from the USMC Philly Depot, but couldn't prove it. You have done that and I profusely thank you. If you are interested, I have a new target, and I will split the cost with you or pay for it using your researcher, who is obviously better than mine. I will call you Monday and explain, as your goals may not be synonymous with my own.

One more hurdle, and it is a big one. The hunt is afoot.

jt

PS
Have a good time with the kids this weekend. They are way more important than this stuff, and they grow up too fast. I would surrender the solution to this mystery in a heart beat for a chance to go back and spend one more day with my youngest daughter as a kid. She is a mean old attorney now, and blowing her belly is no longer an option.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

I wonder if Niedner ever new how much money his big mouth cost him? That FBI report gives an insight to Niedner's personality of which I was previously unaware. Our heroes had flaws.

jt

[cplnorton]

Jim you could be 100% right. I have a lot of questions, a lot of speculation, and several scenarios that would work, and I can't prove any of them 100%. Which drives me up the freaking wall. lol

And I should say too, I'm not saying my rifle is the (S) word. I don't know what it is for certain. On my rifle, the million dollar question is, how soon did Winchester manufacture those Marine bases? I feel comfortable in saying they were for sure made at least by 1917, but how much sooner than that did they make them? That answer could be a huge clue to help identify my rifle that much more.

Now it might make sense if Neidner did sell the rights to the tappered bases to the Marines. I found a mention in a Jan, 1926 Philadelphia Ordnance Repair article in the Marine Corps Gazette that said this, "Telescope sight bases, known as the taper block Marine Corps type, were developed and are made at the Depot."

So now a good question is, that article is from 1926, and it sounds like they are still manufacturing those mann neidner style bases at the Depot. So did Philly convert some of those A5 scopes at a later time, after WWI? Maybe they converted some of the scopes in that mid 1920's time period, for the Marine rifle team rifles.

I agree there are for sure more than 150 of those converted scopes, but I sort of think the conversion might have been done by Philly as well.

I sort of study the Mann Blocks in the photos, and there seems to be a couple different lengths of the tappered blocks that are made for the receiver. I have a set of Mann Neidner blocks for a 1903 that I am 100% convinced that are real, just because of how and where I found them. And they came with a Marine modified A5 scope. But my rear base for the receiver, completely covers the full length of the receiver. .

Looking at some in photos on A5's from the beginning of WWII, they as well seem like they cover the full length of the receiver. But I found a picture in a Townsend Whelen book from like the 20's, that credits the rifle as a Neidner made custom rifle, with his tappered blocks. But in this picture, the rear block is shorter in length, than what I see in many of the Marine pics. It also is shorter than the one I have to compare in person.

This is the pic in Whelen's book. But notice the base on the rear receiver is shorter? It doesn't really prove anything at all, but it's a neat pic of a Neidner rifle from the time period, so it might be a useful picture to compare, if we can ever find some really good pics of one we suspect Neidner converted at Philly.

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/Fullscreen%20capture%201172016%20125813%20PM.bmp%2 0-%20Copy_zpsw28et7s0.jpg


As I said, I have a Marine modified A5, and later today I will try to post some pics of the conversion on it. I have no doubt it's real, but man it was sort of hacked apart. The quality of the work is top notch, but they were not worried about making it look pretty. It looks like crap. lol Which I have always thought, if Winchester would have converted that scope, they would have made it look a lot nicer. Now it could be possible it was one of the first 150, I don't know? That is a possibility.

But if that Philly article is right from 1926, and they did indeed make those bases in that timeframe. We might be looking at different periods in Marine history where they were still being made. Which complicates this even more on trying to figure it all out. We might be looking at conversions done by the Marines at Philly, after WWI. I still think Winchester might not have converted any, but I have no proof at all to back up this claim. And I will be the first to say I could be 100% wrong. It's just my gut feeling on it. But I will post some pics of my scope later on when I have more time to take some pics.

[cplnorton]

I thought I would post real quick a couple of pictures that I think are interesting, before the wife drags me away for the day. lol

I think someone posted this picture several years back on milsurps. In fact I think JB and you (Jim) were trying to figure it out back then. This is one of the next ones I'm going to throw up to the uniform guys and see if they can date it and tell me more. But the rifle seems more like the style of mine but it is so hard to tell any details, especially on the mpunts in this pic.. All i can say is, it does not appear to be a Mann Neidner to me.

This pic might be a early pic, especially looking at the style of boots on the man to the left. But I think one of you pointed out back then that the snaps on the cartriage belt might be later. So I'm going to throw it up to the uniform guys and see if they can help. The rifle has a low wood stock and it looks like the large knob on the windage, so I think that at least dates the rifle after the 1910-11 timeframe. But you guys know way more about the 1903 rifle than I do.

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/Marines%20on%20the%20Firing%20Line_Enhanced_zpskad lkz5q.jpg

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/Fullscreen%20capture%201142016%2040151%20PM.bmp_zp sxbpput7s.jpg

Also I found this one in a post that I think you made. This again looks like one that is like mine. You might be able to date this.

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/Sniper%20with%20Win%20A5%20468x354%20468x3541_zps9 ldrrc87.jpg

[cplnorton]

One last pic for now. This was taken at Winchester in 1943, when they were showing off their handiwork. From the fancy wood, especially on the carbine, they look like they might be ones Winchester would have kept as show pieces.

A good friend showed me this pic, and the rifle looks like mine. In fact, I almost wonder if it is one of the two 1917 rifles at the Cody museum today. Just a picture of it taken in 1943.

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/12373190_10153780233839886_1085756577218353007_n_z pszmox7pxn.jpg

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/12391351_10153780237039886_3633405651779903372_n_z psxbz0p7tl.jpg

[louis]

Wow Steve!! This is some research. Thanks for posting your info I really appreciate it. I enjoy reading the history of these marine rifles.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

Steve, you are prolific, to say the least. Let me introduce you to Sgt. Leslie David LaValley, Scout Sniper, USMC. Leslie died in a car accident in 1996, and most likely was the last living WWI Scout Sniper. Sgt LaValley was also an Instructor at the OSD Sniper School at Quantico, as was a couple of his friends. He never got to ply his trade, as the war ended before he got to France.

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/Sniper%20with%20Win%20A5%20468x354%20468x3541_zps9 ldrrc87.jpg


The photo is blurred on purpose to hide certain attributes of the rifle. I hate fakers and refuse to assist them in any way. Below is another picture of him. Same guy. Note the neat as hell USMC coveralls, you uniform guys. He is carrying a Winchester (Steve) A5 sniper rifle with a Winchester modified A5 scope in Winchester modified mounts specifically made BY WINCHESTER for the Corps sniper rifles of WWI. He was one heck of a shot. The third photo is of him and two other instructors on the OSD Sniper School rifle range that used to be behind the administrative buildings on your left as you come into Quantico MB from the south side. A second rifle range, built by Gunner Calvin A. Lloyd in the same location, took its place. Gunner Lloyd shot himself in the butts of that range. Believe it or not, no one in the Corps seemed aware of the original range until I showed them photos of it. It had a German bunker duplicated from a real one in France on the backside, used for OSD training

A friend of mine owns his scope and case. Notice anything odd about the scope? If you can spot it, I will tell you what it is.

Any questions? :hello:


Looking forward to talking to you.
jt

[cplnorton]

I've seen you mention something online about a object attached to a scope to help in low dusk light. I haven't got far in my research and know nothing of it. I sort of imagine that might be what you are talking about. But I'm on my phone and I can't see too details in the picture.

The Funny thing is, I used to know a Sniper named Lindsey and he looked exactly like this WWI Marine. lol

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

You are looking at yet another 1903 with a WRA modified scope attached, probably one of the WWI WRA sniper rifles. Note the round black dots in the center of the adjustment knobs and the absence of the Grasshopper. That round black dot is actually a blued screw head that holds the knob. This is a postbellum photo, but I don't know the date or location offhand. I have it in my files, and I think it was taken at Sea Girt.



http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/Fullscreen%20capture%201142016%2040151%20PM.bmp_zp sxbpput7s.jpg


I, too, have noticed the differing lengths of the rear base on the WRA sniper rifles. I suspect it is a result of their manufacturing process. The extra length is excess, but a man like Niedner would want a neat appearance, and would probably make them the same length as the receiver ring. I got nothing, and am just guessing.

As for who built the 500 WRA sniper rifles, you seem to forget the contract with Winchester for the rifles. If Philly built them, why would Winchester get paid for them. Winchester was building all kinds of arms for the War Department. No way in hell would they farm out a 500 rifle contract for modified scopes that they made. All they had to do was modify their existing mounts and tap the receiver and barrel and mount the scope and do some QAT. The Corps Philly Depot did indeed state they could make any part for the 1903. I suspect they were looking for work like everyone else. That is what depots do.

I worked at the MCB Albany Depot in 1970 as a Marine (Albany, Georgia). If all depots operate as Albany did, civilians run the depot and tolerate the Marines by giving them the menial jobs to keep them busy. I cleaned out blown up AMTRAKs that came in on rail cars about once a week. We had to remove all ordnance, ammo, weapons, and body parts from the AMTRAKs before the civvies started working on them. The two most interesting things I found were a 45 and a foot in a boot. An AMTRAK has a huge CO2 fire extinguishing system that is tripped by a switch at the drop door. Every new Jarhead got the treatment. The other Jarheads would let the new guy go into the interior and they would trip that switch. The new guy would come out with frost on his ear lobes and white as a ghost from frost. It was amazing how cold it got in an instant when those bottles went off. I got into the habit of tripping that switch on every AMTRAK I inspected to the detriment of my fellow Jarheads. I also safety wired the bolts that held the observation port windows to the body. I had to make the same number of turns between bolts or those old men (to me at the time) would make me redo the job. They could just look at the finished job and tell if it was right. I can now safety wire a dog's nuts to a cat's tail.

Keep 'em coming, Steve. You definitely have my attention.

jt

[Promo]

The bad quality picture: I assume it shows a lense attachement to the rear, for a higher contrast or something like that. I have a lense attachement for a British Aldis WWI sniper scope. Looking at this picture it appears to me that the scope is a regular Winchester A5 with the Winchester bases and also the original Winchester adjustment knobs - they have holes, plus the handguard doesn't seem to be shaped to remove the scope towards the rear. This is how an inletting for the Neidner bases should look like: http://collections.centerofthewest.org/treasures/view/firearm_bolt_action_repeater_breechloading_rifle_s elfcontained_metallic_ca5 where as the Winchester "inletting" would look like this: http://collections.centerofthewest.org/treasures/view/firearm_rifle_breechloading_repeater_selfcontained _metallic_cartridge_322

Steve, if the factory picture M1903 with scope blocks from Winchester went to the Cody museum, I can only suspect it to be this rifle: http://collections.centerofthewest.org/treasures/view/firearm_rifle_breechloading_repeater_selfcontained _metallic_cartridge_322 . The reason is pretty simple, it has the same inletting, and it only matches the "swivels" also shown in the picture - all others have either also the sling swivel missing or the stacking swivel in place. And this rifle also has the second cross bolt. And I wouldn't expect the museum to re-complete rifles with stacking swivels/sling swivels.

Besides this, does anyone knows if the original Neidner bases were blued or parkerized? I once bought a Neidner modified A5 scope with the original leather lense covers and original bases (in fact even with the screws). The screws were staked in the bases.

PS: His name is Adolph Otto NEIDNER and not NIEDNER, the FBI documents now clearly document that (yet still his Wikipedia entry is also wrong, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolph_Otto_Niedner). Also makes more sense to me, it sounds more German than "Niedner".

To me it was very interesting to read that he told the FBI he was about to get another contract for 1500 additional sniper rifles. If he didn't do this, they must have tried to make this work done in another manner.

[cplnorton]

To me it was very interesting to read that he told the FBI he was about to get another contract for 1500 additional sniper rifles. If he didn't do this, they must have tried to make this work done in another manner.

I agree with everything you said George. The FBI investigation started at the end of June, 1917. I went back and edited it to the issue I found it. But I found again where I found the Marines being sent to Winchester to be trained on the Telescope sight, and it was in the July 1917 issue of the Marine Magazine.

If someone would go dig in that July 1917 date in the archives, in the official Marine correspondence, and look for anything to or from Winchester. I bet they will find the proof that the Marines turned to Winchester for the 2nd part of that Marine sniper contract.

It all fits.

I really bet the proof is in July 1917.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

The bad quality picture: I assume it shows a lense attachement to the rear, for a higher contrast or something like that. I have a lense attachement for a British Aldis WWI sniper scope. Looking at this picture it appears to me that the scope is a regular Winchester A5 with the Winchester bases and also the original Winchester adjustment knobs - they have holes, plus the handguard doesn't seem to be shaped to remove the scope towards the rear. This is how an inletting for the Neidner bases should look like: http://collections.centerofthewest.org/treasures/view/firearm_bolt_action_repeater_breechloading_rifle_s elfcontained_metallic_ca5 where as the Winchester "inletting" would look like this: http://collections.centerofthewest.org/treasures/view/firearm_rifle_breechloading_repeater_selfcontained _metallic_cartridge_322

Steve, if the factory picture M1903 with scope blocks from Winchester went to the Cody museum, I can only suspect it to be this rifle: http://collections.centerofthewest.org/treasures/view/firearm_rifle_breechloading_repeater_selfcontained _metallic_cartridge_322 . The reason is pretty simple, it has the same inletting, and it only matches the "swivels" also shown in the picture - all others have either also the sling swivel missing or the stacking swivel in place. And this rifle also has the second cross bolt. And I wouldn't expect the museum to re-complete rifles with stacking swivels/sling swivels.

Besides this, does anyone knows if the original Neidner bases were blued or parkerized? I once bought a Neidner modified A5 scope with the original leather lense covers and original bases (in fact even with the screws). The screws were staked in the bases.

PS: His name is Adolph Otto NEIDNER and not NIEDNER, the FBI documents now clearly document that (yet still his Wikipedia entry is also wrong, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolph_Otto_Niedner). Also makes more sense to me, it sounds more German than "Niedner".

To me it was very interesting to read that he told the FBI he was about to get another contract for 1500 additional sniper rifles. If he didn't do this, they must have tried to make this work done in another manner.


Georg, I can assure you the handguard on a Niedner 03 looked nothing like the one in the Cody museum. Ditto the WRA. The scoped rifle at Cody is scoped with a Grasshopper A5 in #2 mounts. If you compared a Niedner Corps sniper rifle to a WRA Corps sniper rifle, they look identical to each other except for certain stamps in the stocks, and they weren't scoped with Grasshopper A5's. I don't now how you can see the portion of the handguard altered for scope removal, as the man's hand covers that part of the handguard. If that is a "regular" A5, where is the Grasshopper?

As for the spelling of his name, Otto spelled it "Niedner" as shown by his manufacturing stamps, signature, grave marker, and a whole mess of other stuff.

The original request was for 1500 sniper rifles in three batches of 500. Most of these were delivered. The man that ordered the rifles intended for Niedner to mount scopes on all of them. Niedner was correct in his statement, but his big mouth cost him the remainder of the jobs.

And yes, the scope has one of the original accessories attached, a colored lens for target enhancement in low light.

jt

[louis]

I was on the internet last night and ran across this rifle that was sold in auction. Thought you might be interested in seeing it. It claims to be one of the early experimental A5 svoped 03's.

http://www.icollector.com/Extraordinary-Documented-Experimental-Springfield-Model-1903-Sniper-Rifle-with-Winchester-A5-Scope_i15827961

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

I agree with everything you said George. The FBI investigation started at the end of June, 1917. I went back and edited it to the issue I found it. But I found again where I found the Marines being sent to Winchester to be trained on the Telescope sight, and it was in the July 1917 issue of the Marine Magazine.

If someone would go dig in that July 1917 date in the archives, in the official Marine correspondence, and look for anything to or from Winchester. I bet they will find the proof that the Marines turned to Winchester for the 2nd part of that Marine sniper contract.

It all fits.

I really bet the proof is in July 1917.


The fact is that Winchester contracted for 1500 rifles (3 different batches of 500). The man in charge of the sniper program convinced Niedner to mount 150 rifles in time to meet the departure date of the 6th Marine Regiment. Two different contracts. I don't believe Niedner would ever have gotten that 1500 rifle contract (but he was obviously aware of it) because he couldn't complete the job fast enough. It took Niedner 42 days to complete 150 rifles. That is 3-4 rifles per day, or 125 to 167 more days to complete 500 rifles if he worked every single day without a break. That would be around Christmas Day, 1917. Instead, Niedner took a vacation. I believe Niedner got the contract for the first 150 and WRA got the contract for the remainder of the rifles. Remember, No one knew when the OSD facilities would be completed at this point. Everyone had to be going balls to the wall to avoid being late with deliveries. To show how resourceful the guy running the sniper program was, he arranged for sniper training at another range until OSD was open. I know the name of the range and its location, but I have been unable to find one word about this particular range.

Why not just pull Winchester's original contract?

jt:1948:

[cplnorton]

****Edit 4/18/16. All this below about Winchester not creating the WRA Marine base, I am wrong on. Tracing all the documents, WRA did make them and looks like they started in 1917. I just know people go back and review these and I don't want them to see wrong info. I will leave all I wrote for reference, but whatever the rifle team used in 1909, was not the WRA Marine Blocks. ****



I think I might have figured out the mystery of the "Winchester" Marine blocks for the 1903 Springfield. I do not think anymore that Winchester created them. I think they were developed by a Marine on the rifle team in 1909.

As John said, he thought the rifle was a star guaged 1909 match rifle, but it was a mystery on the when/where/why on the Marine telescopic bases being added. The main reason is, the rifle really predates the A5 telescope by almost a year. And there just wasn't any scopes or scope mounts made for a 1903 Springfield at this time.

Well as said earlier in this discussion, 1st Sgt Victor Czegka was credited with the 1st Marine Corps Telescoped 1903, in 1909. This was the first time a telescoped 1903 had ever been used in a high power Match from what I can tell. Many have long thought that since it predates basically everything, he created that scope from scratch, because there just wasn't another scope or mounts he could have used. Victor was very mechanical though, and could have about created anything he wanted. In fact, he later developed a lot of items for the Marines, and was awarded a Navy Cross twice for these inventions. But this is the quote from the History of the Marine Corps Rifle Team put out by the Marines in 1961.

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/1909%20scope_zpskvzywxue.jpg

I think the author of book made one little mistake in his account of the scope. And I would say the key word to me that we need to focus on is, Victor created the "Mounting."

Now looking through Newspaper clipping from back then, I found a mention in the August 19th, 1909, Washington Post, that said the whole Marine team had telescopic Sights. So now instead of just Victor having just one scoped rifle, we now have a mention of the whole 1909 Marine team having telescopic sights. Which this has never been documented before. Here is the newspaper clip from the Washington post in August 1909.

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/The%20Washington%20Post%20Thursday%20August%2019th %201909_zps1choxrpe.jpg


Again this predated the Winchester A5 scope by about almost a year, and there are no scope mounts for a 1903. That is also why so many have said he had to create the scope he used to win the Wimbledon Cup. Because nothing else existed back then that Victor could have used.

Well going through the NRA Magazine of the day, Man at Arms, I found the answer. This is in the 9/09/09 issue of the Man at Arms, and it is a article of Victor and the Marine team using Telescopic sights for the first time in matches at the 1909 Wimbledon Cup.

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/wimbledon%201_zpso74veqix.jpg

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/wimbledon%202_zps5l0bgizq.jpg


The key word in this article, it details for the first time that a a SCHUETZEN scope was fitted to Victor's Rifle. Which that term instantly clicked.

Winchester was at this time, marketing a Schuetzen rifle, which was just a smaller bore target rifle. They were meant for target shooting at a very close range and were not high power as far as I know of. They were meant for short distance target shooting. Well Winchester had a Telescope that was also made for this Scheutzen class, and it seems only marketed towards smallbore. Winchester never seemed to intend for this scope to be used on high power, or longer ranges. That is why I think they were developing the A5s at this time, but it the A5 not offered for sale till mid 1910.

These are the Winchester ads for the Scheutzen rifle and the scopes that were marketed for this class. There are Winchester Ads for this class littered in the Man at Arm's magazines from that 1909 timeperiod. And the pattent on that scope is from 1907 I believe. But If you know the A5 scope really well, you will see a simple version of the A5. The scope would fit the same rifle mounts as the A5 would have. They are the same design. The only real difference cosmetically between this scope and the A5, the A5 had a beefier micrometer design, probably to handle the recoil of high power.

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/Fullscreen%20capture%20212016%2071808%20AM.bmp_zps cfplhqzu.jpg

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/Fullscreen%20capture%20212016%2074622%20AM.bmp_zps yaj8rcue.jpg

[cplnorton]

****Edit 4/18/16 I proved myself wrong. The WRA Marine blocks appear to be made starting in 1917.****


The Winchester Springfield Marine mount drawing from 1926, I now believe were only reference drawings and probably filed. The Cody Museum website has a link that takes you to all the Winchester patent numbers and descriptions for all their firearms and scopes. Which you can take those patent numbers, go to the Govt Patent website, and type them in, and it brings up not only the image of the patent, but the description.

I can see WRA patent drawings for a Winchester block that fits on the rear sight base of a 1903 Springfield about of the time of the A5 coming out. But there are not any patents that I can locate for a 1903 Springfield Marine block like mine, or detailed in that 1926 drawing. I went though every WRA telescope mounting patent, all the way into the 1940's, and nothing.

The other thing, just like what Jim said, every picture I can find of a non Marine mounted A5 pre WWI, has that mount attached to the rear sight base at that 6'' on center position. Which is also what all the books state as well. And there are two 1914 (A5) SRS hits at the Springfield Museum. Both have the 6'' on center spacing. And possibly the final piece, the 1915 US Army official report on the testing of the A5, as a potential Army sniper, also mentions that a 6'' on center base was a weak point in the design.

As mentioned earlier, Victor is credited with making a "Mounting" in the Marine Team history book in 1909. I now think Victor created that Springfield Marine mounting, and attached it to the team rifles, to to attach those small bore Schuetzen scopes. I think that is the reason why Winchester was only producing the 6'' on center blocks up till almost that WWI timeframe. I don't think the Marine mount was their design. I think it was the property of the Marine shooting team and Victor. And maybe the Marines let Winchester use it when the Niedner mess happened. Or Winchester trained the Marines to install them and maybe Philly built some of the A5's with the Marine mount. That 1917 timeperiod still needs investigation to figure it out.

After WWI, you see a explosion of scopes, mounts, and about everything else. There were even Steven's scopes which were a cheap knockoff of the A5, and I don't think you could tell one apart in these old pics. Unless you could see the markings.

But I now think John hit the nail on the head on my rifle. The 1909 Marine team, with the telescoped rifles, used them in mid to late August 1909. It would seem that timeframe would correspond nicely to my rifle, and might be a very plausible explanation for it.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

I was on the internet last night and ran across this rifle that was sold in auction. Thought you might be interested in seeing it. It claims to be one of the early experimental A5 scoped 03's.
http://www.icollector.com/Extraordinary-Documented-Experimental-Springfield-Model-1903-Sniper-Rifle-with-Winchester-A5-Scope_i15827961


I have seen this rifle before, Louis. I always wondered why a rifle built in Jan 1918 had a SA 6-17 bbl and no inspector's stamp. Of course, we have no way of knowing when the scope was attached unless Brophy so states (my Brophy is upstairs). This rifle has the Springfield Marine bases obviously, and would be a neat data point if we could date the scope attachment date.

jt

[cplnorton]

Why not just pull Winchester's original contract?

Anyone live near Cody, I think I know the box number it would be located. I just can't access it online or travel out there. But if someone is local and wants to investigate this, I can give you the box number and Cody will pull it, and you can view it in person. That correspondance in 1917, and why the Marines were traveling to Wincehster in July 1917, might just solve the sniper equation.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

.... The 1909 Marine team, with the telescoped rifles, used them in mid to late August 1909. It would seem that time frame would correspond nicely to my rifle, and might be a very plausible explanation for it.

Steve, If the Springfield Marine mount was available in 1909, why in the world would the various teams still use the 6" spacing? Let me see if I have this right, you are saying that Victor developed the Springfield base, but we have never seen Victor's base or even his system for adjustment? Isn't that a bit of a stretch?

There is probably a picture of Victor's rifle someplace.

jt

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

.... might just solve the sniper equation.


Exactly what sniper equation are we trying to solve at this point? I'm serious.

jt

[cplnorton]

Victor was basically a very good machinist from everything I can research. So to me, measuring the base of the Winchester scope, and the receiver and barrel off a 1903, and making a simple set of bases would be an easy thing for him to do. It probably was a piece of cake for him.

I'm still looking for pics of ANY Marine scoped rifle pre 1917. I can't find any. All the pics I can find, you can't see enough detail to see if the rifle has blocks. And I have not seen one for sure Marine scoped rifle pre 1917. But we know they had them. That is for certain. A picture would for sure document my hunch.

The only other two sets of blocks I can find for the 1903, pre 1917, were the Mann Niedner tapered block style. And the 6'' on center used by Winchester. And I think this Springfield Marine type. There is possibly a Stevens too that I'm trying to research, but it's on the rear sight base as well.

[cplnorton]

Exactly what sniper equation are we trying to solve at this point? I'm serious.

jt

Marines were being sent to Winchester in July 1917 to be trained in the "setup" and repair of the Winchester Telescope sight. There are also two for sure, 1917 dated Springfield rifles with USMC bases at Cody. Why were Marines being sent to Winchester in July 1917 for Winchester Telescopes? That is a question I would love to know, just for my own curiosity.

[cplnorton]

I just got off the phone with Jim. What a damn good old Salty Marine. lol I wished I lived closer. I would bug the crap out of him.

It's really nice talking to you Jim. :)

[CptEnglehorn]

beautiful rifles

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

I just got off the phone with Jim. What a damn good old Salty Marine. lol I wished I lived closer. I would bug the crap out of him.

It's really nice talking to you Jim. :)


The feeling is mutual. It was a most interesting conversation indeed.

Jim:1948:

[Rick the Librarian]

Always nice to hook up with Jouster members. I remember Dick and Gloria gave me a standing invitation to visit them. Very much regret never doing so.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

I have met or spoken to quite a few Jouster members, and I liked them all immensely. As much as we bicker on the forum, we are gracious in person.

Don't give up on this thread, as Steve and I are trying to account for the earliest appearance of the Springfield bases (Springfield, Springfield Marine, and the Mann-Niedner's). The question we had is why the predominance of the 6" base spaced scope installations if the Springfield Marine bases on 7.2" spacing were available from the get go; and in Steve's case, the likely period of time when his rifle's scope was installed. We have half the answer, and we search on. We'll be back. Trying to keep up with Steve is a full time job in itself.

jt

[Fred]

I'm learning a Lot from both of you guys all the time. http://www.jouster.com/forums/webkit-fake-url://ade75038-e7e5-4cdc-aaae-f88f565aa865/imagegif

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

You have caught me off guard a few times, Fred. When I see one of your posts, I open it. Always good stuff.

jt

[cplnorton]

I finally said screw it and hired a researched to pull all the Winchester files. It's going to cost me some money, but this is going to bug me till I do. lol I think if I can see that correspondence from early 1917 to around July 1917, it will answer a lot of my questions.

I did find a better copy of this in another paper from 1917, so I thought I would post the better copy.

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/darker%20version_zpssba7yfck.jpg

[Fred]

2,000 to 3,000 yards is pretty cool. It Can be done with a U.S. Model Of 1903.
Back in 1981, another Lt. and I took a jeep and our 1903 Springfields out to the Ft. Irwin live fire Tank Range to see what we could accomplish at 1200 to 3000 yards. Those rifles were real accurate at all ranges with open sights. Real accurate.

[John Beard]

Fred,

I anticipate that a .30-'06 bullet would fall out of the Winchester A5 telescope field of view at 3,000 yards, and perhaps even 2,000 yards. Whoever wrote the newspaper report engaged in some sensationalism.

J.B.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

With a 400 yd zero, the 30-06 has a drop of 100 feet at 1500 yards. That 3000 yard shot is going to require some serious elevation. At 1200 yards, the A5 on 6" spacing will still have the target in view, a distinct advantage over 7.2" spacing, which is why one sees so many 03's with scopes mounted on 6" centers. At 3000 yards, the shooter is on his own.

jt

[Fred]

Using our open sights, John Moody and I were able to consistently hit the old WWII tanks that had been used as targets for decades. It was neat seeing the dust pop up wherever a bullet would impact. I suppose that at those distant ranges, it was actually like the old time mass volley firing where soldiers massing together far away could be harassed and casualties inflicted with those "for whom it may concern" shots. Anyway, it was quite fun. We had an 1898 Krag with a 1901 rear sight on it too that seemed to me to be more accurate than the 1903 Springfields. Perhaps the heavier 220 grain bullets carried themselves better through the air.

[Promo]

I own a 605.xxx M1903 which features the long slide Lyman 48C up to 1000 yards. Makes more sense to me now that they used the 6" spacing with the rifle, if that is required with the A5 on this distances ... Attached some detail shots.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

Georg,

I may have to correct myself, as I was repeating something I read in Townsend Whelen's book, The American Rifleman. The modified WRA A5 has a knob on the vertical adjustment of the mount that is calibrated from 100 to 1600 yards. I generally don't argue with statements by Townsend Whelen, as that statement may be true of the #2 WRA mount, but in the case of the WRA modified #2 mount, it appears to not apply. The modified mount is neat in that you can zero your rifle and then zero the adjusting knob, which allows you to just dial in the range for elevation adjustment. That scope/rifle combination was way ahead of it's time, which may explain Pvt. Roland Fisher's ability to hit 6 Germans with 6 shots at 1400 yards at Le Mare farm.

I have a modified A5 on a Sporter, and we are looking for an area where we can make a 1,600 yard shot to check out the accuracy of the graduations. So far, all we have found is a long stretch of I40.:banana100: Will get back to you if and when.

The WRA A5 has a 3.2 degree Field of View, which calculates to be 16.752 feet per 100 yards (someone check my math). At 1200 yards, the FOV would be 201 feet. I do not know offhand what the range of adjustment in a WRA #2 mount is for any spacing, but you should be able to calculate it pretty easily.

jt:1948: