Sniper rifles in private hands ???

[1903fan]

I have been reading on sniper rifles in this forum, and no one has a A5 Winchester sniper rifle. Expert consensus that they were destroyed later. I've seen some Warner Swasy sniper rifles before, are these most likely real? Are there any other real types out there? I can see how these are all so rare, but itd be great if someone owned a real one, of any kind! My dad was a WWII Gyrene, and said the 1903 was a great shooter, loved them ever since!

[John Beard]

By "A5 Winchester sniper rifle," do you mean a Winchester rifle fitted with an Winchester A5 scope? Or do you mean an M1903 rifle fitted with a Winchester A5 scope? Please advise which one.

And if you mean the latter (M1903 rifle fitted with a Winchester A5 scope), then those rifles exist, but they're very scarce.

J.B.

[1903fan]

Yes with this being the 1903 page I am referring to a 1903 with a Winchester A5 scope as the Marines used in WWI. So far I have not been able to find any that are real that exist and are pictured just ones that are rumors.

[1903fan]

I would not mind owning a Warner Swasy rifle one day, some forum members say the were used by all marines and army alike. I do see them from time to time for sale.

[clintonhater]

And if you mean the latter (M1903 rifle fitted with a Winchester A5 scope), then those rifles exist, but they're very scarce.

J.B.

If so, it's not because the fakers aren't doing their dead level best to put more of them into circulation. They've driven up the price of Winchester scopes (which I began collecting 40 yrs ago, along with other antique scopes) to stratospheric levels. The first thing any dealer does who gets his hand on one of them is list it on ebay as a "sniper scope," despite the fact that only a tiny fraction of them were ever used for that purpose.

[cplnorton]

The Marine A5 Sniper rifle is a complicated topic. Because nothing about it is simple. The Unertl Sniper rifles are simpled compared to the A5. lol

But the problem lies in the fact that you have a rifle that was probably built by three seperate hands, just during the WWI time period. I can place two different versions in Marine hands in France alone. The after the war, you have a rifle that the Marines were still building and re-building until 1941. The last Marine A5 rifles built by the Marines that I can trace, were in 1941. There are actually some good pics of the A5 rifles in WWII. But those would have been rebuilds or new builds. They weren't likely original WWI configuration.

The Burden of proof is anyone's task in saying they have a Marine A5, because even in 1939, the majority of them didn't exist. At least not in WWI configuration. So for any to be in original WWI condition, it would have just had to escaped the Marine Corps pretty early on after WWI.

For instance, I have a A5 rifle that has the Winchester Springfield Marine Blocks and it matches identical to a Marine A5 pictured in France in WWI. But my rifle is a original 1909 rifle, so the burden of proof on me is to prove whether it was built for a rifle team or it was built as a sniper. Even these rifles are rare. I only know of a couple in private hands, and one complete one at Cody Museum.

But the A5 rifles are so complicated to prove, because you have several different people who built them, and many years of service and parts swapped. Unless you can get a offical Marine Corps document with the serial on it, saying it's a Telescopic equipped rifle, I think it's pretty hard to prove one.

The Serials of the A5 rifles are at the Archives though. I have no doubt on that. It just might takes years to find them. There are a lot of documents to go through there.

[1903fan]

The Marine A5 Sniper rifle is a complicated topic. Because nothing about it is simple. The Unertl Sniper rifles are simpled compared to the A5. lol

But the problem lies in the fact that you have a rifle that was probably built by three seperate hands, just during the WWI time period. I can place two different versions in Marine hands in France alone. The after the war, you have a rifle that the Marines were still building and re-building until 1941. The last Marine A5 rifles built by the Marines that I can trace, were in 1941. There are actually some good pics of the A5 rifles in WWII. But those would have been rebuilds or new builds. They weren't likely original WWI configuration.

The Burden of proof is anyone's task in saying they have a Marine A5, because even in 1939, the majority of them didn't exist. At least not in WWI configuration. So for any to be in original WWI condition, it would have just had to escaped the Marine Corps pretty early on after WWI.

For instance, I have a A5 rifle that has the Winchester Springfield Marine Blocks and it matches identical to a Marine A5 pictured in France in WWI. But my rifle is a original 1909 rifle, so the burden of proof on me is to prove whether it was built for a rifle team or it was built as a sniper. Even these rifles are rare. I only know of a couple in private hands, and one complete one at Cody Museum.

But the A5 rifles are so complicated to prove, because you have several different people who built them, and many years of service and parts swapped. Unless you can get a offical Marine Corps document with the serial on it, saying it's a Telescopic equipped rifle, I think it's pretty hard to prove one.

The Serials of the A5 rifles are at the Archives though. I have no doubt on that. It just might takes years to find them. There are a lot of documents to go through there.

Oh wow!!! Just even finding a Marine special taper block rifle like yours is very neat! I would like to get my paws on something from that time eventually, maybe a Warner Swasy, maybe a A5.

[John Beard]

Counting cplnorton's rifle, I am aware of at least ten (10) USMC sniper rifles from the WWI period in private collections. So the rifles can be found. But as clintonhater pointed out, I am also aware of fakes.

Caveat Emptor!

J.B.

[cplnorton]

Oh wow!!! Just even finding a Marine special taper block rifle like yours is very neat! I would like to get my paws on something from that time eventually, maybe a Warner Swasy, maybe a A5.

The only catch, mine isn't the tappered block version. Mine is the style Winchester produced for the Marine Corps.

I personally want one of the Marine A5 rifles put together in 1941. I would like to have one of those, and so far I only know of one out there, and he isn't going to sell it. :)
That is really one of the last Marine Sniper rifles I want.

[1903fan]

The only catch, mine isn't the tappered block version. Mine is the style Winchester produced for the Marine Corps.

I personally want one of the Marine A5 rifles put together in 1941. I would like to have one of those, and so far I only know of one out there, and he isn't going to sell it. :)
That is really one of the last Marine Sniper rifles I want.

Oh I see, I thought they were all tapered blocks like the ones in WWI and WWII! Lots to learn out there still, but I am enjoying going through more. Have you shown it to Marine A5 Sniper JT on here? He is very knowledgeable on them and has scene a lot of them. :icon_salut:

[cplnorton]

Oh I see, I thought they were all tapered blocks like the ones in WWI and WWII! Lots to learn out there still, but I am enjoying going through more. Have you shown it to Marine A5 Sniper JT on here? He is very knowledgeable on them and has scene a lot of them. :icon_salut:

Jim has seen it. But Jim and I have reached very different conclusions on our research of the Marine A5 rifles.

The A5 story is really in need of a rewrite. You don't find much written on them in the books or online, mostly because not a lot of original documentation has never been found. And many of the things written, were more based on opinions, than actual documentation. But a couple guys (Andrew Stolinksi and Tim Plowman) are pulling some amazing stuff out of the National Archives, and they should be commended for the amount of work they are doing there to find the original documents.

John Beard who posted earlier is a really good person to talk to about all of this as well. I really value his opinion and have talked with him offline a lot. John is a really good guy, and probably out of all of us who research these rifles, he has has seen the most real ones. He's been the 1903 sniper expert for so long, and that title always brings a lot of perks. :) There are a lot of guys who are very secretive of their rifles, but they will show him stuff, that they will not show many others.

[1903fan]

Jim has seen it. But Jim and I have reached very different conclusions on our research of the Marine A5 rifles.

The A5 story is really in need of a rewrite. You don't find much written on them in the books or online, mostly because not a lot of original documentation has never been found. And many of the things written, were more based on opinions, than actual documentation. But a couple guys (Andrew Stolinksi and Tim Plowman) are pulling some amazing stuff out of the National Archives, and they should be commended for the amount of work they are doing there to find the original documents.

John Beard who posted earlier is a really good person to talk to about all of this as well. I really value his opinion and have talked with him offline a lot. John is a really good guy, and probably out of all of us who research these rifles, he has has seen the most real ones. He's been the 1903 sniper expert for so long, and that title always brings a lot of perks. :) There are a lot of guys who are very secretive of their rifles, but they will show him stuff, that they will not show many others.

Well shoot if this all gets a rewrite be sure to share on here for us to read! It's a lot of fun to read all the ins and outs.

Would you have a Warner Swasy too? I'm not sure if you have seen the Canfield and Brophy books but boy there are some great shots of the World War One snipers.

[cplnorton]

I've had Warner Swaseys. Both with scopes, and then also the pluggged receiver service rifles, but I've never had one that I thought was original to WWI, and that is what I really want if I get another one again.

I think the documents said Springfield Armory declared them obsolete in 1924, and ordered all the receivers to have the mounts removed, and them to be returned to regular service rifles. Which they just cut the mount off them and ground the screws flush to the receiver.

So just not a lot of original ones are out there. And most you see, they are restorations of a plugged receiver. If I ever see one that I think is original, I might try to pick one up again. They are sort of a neat rifle.

Promo on here, has some really nice Warner Swasey rifles. But then the problem lies if you get a nice Warner Swasey sniper, then you need a nice Maxim Silencer to go along with it. :) It's a sickness I swear! lol

[cplnorton]

Yeah I really like Brophy's book. His book is probably about the best written so far on the A5 rifles. It's a little older one, so it could use a little bit of a update. But honestly as far as the A5 goes, his has the most info of any written that I have seen that is correct.

If you sort of read between the lines though when you read his info on the A5, I think he suspects something hasn't been recorded right. At least I think he hints around it. But honestly I wish he was still around. I would love to talk to him and exchange ideas.

If you really like WWI pics, you might like these. These have all circulated enought that I don't think any are any big secret anymore. The top one is in Brophy's book, but this is the high defintion one from the Archvies. The two top pics are both pictured in France in 1918. Then up close of the rifles. The next two are stateside in Sniper School in Nov 1918. I copied them off an original panaramoic picture. The next is a newspaper ad that ran nationwide in July 1917, as they were testing a new rifle. There are more, but these are really some of the best from WWI.

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/1903%20Winchester%20A5/111_SC-4337_zpsqajvai0s.jpg

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/1909%20SA%201903%20A5%20Winchester%20rifle/14285698_10154534703479886_2098709895_o_zpsmhr44ut g.jpg

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/1909%20SA%201903%20A5%20Winchester%20rifle/winchester%20a5%20files_zpsgdfialht.jpg

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/1909%20SA%201903%20A5%20Winchester%20rifle/14339200_10154534705414886_1719309158_o_zpsiddyuar 8.jpg

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/1909%20SA%201903%20A5%20Winchester%20rifle/Fullscreen%20capture%2011172016%2090410%20AM.bmp_z pscyrx0hpi.jpg

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/1909%20SA%201903%20A5%20Winchester%20rifle/Fullscreen%20capture%2011172016%2085750%20AM.bmp_z psyilyn4c2.jpg

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/1909%20SA%201903%20A5%20Winchester%20rifle/Fullscreen%20capture%201142016%2025340%20PM.bmp_zp smqmrevd4.jpg

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

[m1903rifle]

03 carbines???

[cplnorton]

03 carbines???

You mean in the WWI pics above? It's just the angle of the pics.

[Fred]

Great photos Steve. Thanks.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

....If you really like WWI pics, you might like these. These have all circulated enought that I don't think any are any big secret anymore. The top one is in Brophy's book, but this is the high defintion one from the Archvies. The two top pics are both pictured in France in 1918. Then up close of the rifles. The next two are stateside in Sniper School in Nov 1918. I copied them off an original panaramoic picture. The next is a newspaper ad that ran nationwide in July 1917, as they were testing a new rifle. There are more, but these are really some of the best from WWI.

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/1903%20Winchester%20A5/111_SC-4337_zpsqajvai0s.jpg

I doubt this picture was taken in France, but it is possible it was taken soon after the Marines arrived. The marines had to surrender their uniforms before going into combat, and wore Army uniforms. They did not wear the campaign hats either.



http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/1909%20SA%201903%20A5%20Winchester%20rifle/14285698_10154534703479886_2098709895_o_zpsmhr44ut g.jpg

This is a photo of two marines in the 5th rigade, which means it was taken after the war was over. Note the rifle has Mann-Niedner mounts.



http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/1909%20SA%201903%20A5%20Winchester%20rifle/winchester%20a5%20files_zpsgdfialht.jpg

The upper rifler has Mann-Niedner mounts, the bottom is a crop of the first picture, and has #2 mounts.



http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/1909%20SA%201903%20A5%20Winchester%20rifle/14339200_10154534705414886_1719309158_o_zpsiddyuar 8.jpg

This rifle also has Mann-Niedner mounts.



http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/1909%20SA%201903%20A5%20Winchester%20rifle/Fullscreen%20capture%2011172016%2090410%20AM.bmp_z pscyrx0hpi.jpg


This is a crop of a picture of one of the sniper classes, and those are Mann-Niedner mounts.



http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/1909%20SA%201903%20A5%20Winchester%20rifle/Fullscreen%20capture%2011172016%2085750%20AM.bmp_z psyilyn4c2.jpg

Ditto.



http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/1909%20SA%201903%20A5%20Winchester%20rifle/Fullscreen%20capture%201142016%2025340%20PM.bmp_zp smqmrevd4.jpg

Ditto.



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


Again, Mann-Niedner mounts.


It is truly an interesting subject. Yes, originals exist. Probable the most faked 1903 variant that exists. Buy an old '03, D&T it for whatever mounts you want, and proclaim it to be a WWI USMC Sniper rifle. I am one who does thinks the true rifles are easy to identify, and I also do not believe the Marines went to France with a hodge-podge of old rifles with telescopes. I believe great effort was put forth to ensure all the rifles were essentially identical. I also do not believe there is any document extant that proves me wrong. I obviously feel this way for good reason. Someday....

jt

[cplnorton]

Jim,

I have found out more details behind the the first two pics above, that explain where they were taken and when. But some of it is not my work, so it's not mine to say. But both pics are in France during the war.

Also I do not think the newspaper clipping rifle is a Mann Niedner. That I found, so I don't have a problem commenting on it. The blocks on a Mann Neinder are much larger, and for example, the rear block runs the whole length of the receiver. You can see that in the photo above of a Mann block. Where on the newspaper receiver you can see the block does not run the full lenght of the receiver. There is a space between where the block stops and the rear sight base. The handguard also seems the wrong style for a Mann Neidner as well. I do not think that handguard has enough clearance for a Niedner style tappered mount to slide onto a Mann style block.

Remember the Mann Niedner style blocks slide on from behind, they do not go on from the front like the most forward Winchester blocks does. That is because the Mann tappered blocks tightened under recoil.

When you look above at the pics, you can clearly see the Mann blocks go on from behind in the one pic in France. And you can also see how the block is the full length of the receiver. Now look at the Mann Niedner handguards in the school pics, and see how much they cut off the handguard so they could get enough clearance for the mount to slide onto the block from behind? I just don't see that same modification on the newspaper handguard. I don't think there looks like enough clearance to do it.

Also if you read the description on the side, it says it is easy to put the scope on the rifle and easily de-attached when not needed. I do not think anyone would claim the Mann Neinder style scope is easy to put on or take off. When you put that scope on, you have to fire a round to get the recoil to tighten it. When you want to take it off, you have to pound it off with a hammer and punch.

The normal WRA style just slides on and off and is tightened with a thumbscrew. Which I would imagine what they are detailing in the descritpion.

It could be a better quality picture, but I do not think it's a Mann Niedner Rifle. And putting it next to the WRA style in the photo above, I think it looks almost identical to the WRA style.

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/A5%20upload%20pics_zpsnaldf5w5.jpg

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

Jim,

I have found out more details behind the the first two pics above, that explain where they were taken and when. But some of it is not my work, so it's not mine to say. But both pics are in France during the war.

Look very closely at their uniforms. I believe the first picture was taken in the states, but the second picture could have been taken in either country. The two young men are part of the 5th Brigade, which was awash in OSD trained snipers with WRA Mann-Neidner sniper rifles, all too late for the war.


Also I do not think the newspaper clipping rifle is a Mann Niedner.

The bases are too large to be #2 bases, which are quite small in comparison.


That I found, so I don't have a problem commenting on it. The blocks on a Mann Neinder are much larger, and for example, the rear block runs the whole length of the receiver. You can see that in the photo above of a Mann block. Where on the newspaper receiver you can see the block does not run the full lenght of the receiver. There is a space between where the block stops and the rear sight base. The handguard also seems the wrong style for a Mann Neidner as well. I do not think that handguard has enough clearance for a Niedner style tappered mount to slide onto a Mann style block.

I found it also. It wasn't difficult.

Anyone who owns one of these scopes on a Mann-Neidner base will know the movement to the rear to unlock the base is not the length of the base. It is a short movement. I have observed differing lengths of Mann-Niedner bases, as have others.


Remember the Mann Niedner style blocks slide on from behind, they do not go on from the front like the most forward Winchester blocks does. That is because the Mann tappered blocks tightened under recoil.

I deer hunt with an A5 scoped Sporter in Mann-Niedner mounts. I don't note much tightening under continued recoil. I have a little wooden slat that I use to give a light bump on the front of the front base which will disengage the front base with ease, repeat with rear base. Ease of removal is the beauty of all my A5 scoped 03's in Mann-Niedner bases. If you take one to the range, scope unmounted, and just shove it on, the first shot is typically spot on. After a shooting session, bump the bases, remove scope from the rifle, and you are ready to go. I do not store my rifles with their A5 scopes on them.


When you look above at the pics, you can clearly see the Mann blocks go on from behind in the one pic in France. And you can also see how the block is the full length of the receiver. Now look at the Mann Niedner handguards in the school pics, and see how much they cut off the handguard so they could get enough clearance for the mount to slide onto the block from behind? I just don't see that same modification on the newspaper handguard. I don't think there looks like enough clearance to do it.

Sure there is.


Also if you read the description on the side, it says it is easy to put the scope on the rifle and easily de-attached when not needed. I do not think anyone would claim the Mann Neinder style scope is easy to put on or take off. When you put that scope on, you have to fire a round to get the recoil to tighten it. When you want to take it off, you have to pound it off with a hammer and punch.

Good grief! Who told you that? For goodness sake, please don't pound on that scope or its mounts. I wrote the previous description of mount and dismount before I read this bit. Please people, don't hit your scope bases with a punch and hammer. The mounts lock with a simple little push onto the bases. In years of hunting in heavy brush, I have never had mine loosen. You can repeatedly take the scope on and off without lose of zero.

On the other side, I doubt I am the only one who has had hell loosening that #2 mount locking screw. If not pretty tight, it will come loose.


The normal WRA style just slides on and off and is tightened with a thumbscrew. Which I would imagine what they are detailing in the descritpion.


It could be a better quality picture, but I do not think it's a Mann Niedner Rifle. And putting it next to the WRA style in the photo above, I think it looks almost identical to the WRA style.

By WRA "style", do you mean #2 mounts? The first picture below is an '03 with #2 mounts and bases, the second is an '03 with an A5 in Mann-Niedner bases. Look closely. You are missing something.

jt

http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/A5%20upload%20pics_zpsnaldf5w5.jpg[/QUOTE]

[cplnorton]

The top pic is an Army AEF Signal Corps Photograph taken in France and is able to be pulled at the National Archives. It is titled as a Marine with Telescopic Sights in France. You are more than welcome to pull the pic and file from the Army AEF files yourself if you don't believe me.

My explanation on the Mann Niedner scope attachment and removal was taken from the actual Marine Corps documents on how to mount and dismount the scope. That is what they detail to do.

I don't think I'm missing anything in the pic. There is a explanantion for the knobs that I found digging in the Winchester files, and I suspect that is what you are hinting around when you tell me I am missing something. I already factured that in.

This is about as clear as I can get in the size different between the blocks on the newspaper rifle and the Mann Niedner style tappered blocks. The top rifle is a photograph of a Niedner commercial rifle with a set of Mann tappered blocks. It's the same style and size of blocks that you see on the Marine Mann Niedner rifles. It's the perfect angle to show how much larger the Mann Niedner style blocks were to the blocks on the Newspaper clipping rifle.

Putting Mann Niedner blocks side by side with the pic, there is no way that newspaper clipping rifle has Mann Niedner mounts. The Mann Neidner conversion was huge compared to the blocks in the newspaper clipping.


http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/Desktop32_zpssrmnzgln.jpg

[1903fan]

Well you fellas have better eyes then me! Did the Marines use their Warner Swasy scoped rifles in WWI, or was that later?

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

I can't tell squat from those two pictures. The angle of the newspaper clip is way too severe to make any kind of valid judgement, but even at that angle it still looks like a Mann-Niedner to me.

Nope, it isn't the knobs.

Did they issue the snipers a hammer and a punch? I am sitting at my desk playing with my A5 Sporter now. I can assure you one does not need a hammer and punch to remove the scope.

jt

[cplnorton]

Well you fellas have better eyes then me! Did the Marines use their Warner Swasy scoped rifles in WWI, or was that later?

I can prove they had some before and after WWI, but I cannot prove they they used them in combat in WWI.

Andrew Stolinski just recently discovered a huge amount of WWI era sniper files at the Archives and he is just starting to go through them. There is a lot there, so it might take a little while, and God only knows what they say.

The only thing I would say at this point, from some of the AEF files I have seen, there is a real blurring of the lines with sniper rifles between the Army and Marines. For both branches, everything seems to be gravitating to the same locations and being distributed, and in the end I'm not sure what all that will mean. At this point, It would probably shock me more if they didn't use some in combat, than if they did. But everything I would say on that is just speculation at this point.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

Well you fellas have better eyes then me! Did the Marines use their Warner Swasy scoped rifles in WWI, or was that later?

Has anyone on here ever read Pershing's comments about the W&S scopes (made very early in the war)? Having shot one quite a bit, I agree with his assessment. Other than testing, which they were required to do, I have never seen anything that indicated the Marines fielded W&S scoped rifles at any time. They did use the W&S on one of their machine guns (Bernie whatever).

jt

[Smokeeaterpilot]

Andrew Stolinski just recently discovered a huge amount of WWI era sniper files at the Archives and he is just starting to go through them. There is a lot there, so it might take a little while, and God only knows what they say.

Steve is correct. The plan is to make them available to the public sometime next year. Updates to follow in the coming months.

[John Beard]

Jim,

What do you mean by "#2 mounts"? Would you please elaborate? Specifically,

(1) Who made the #2 mounts?

(2) When or over what period of time were they made?

(3) Who attached the mounts to the M1903 Springfield Rifle?

(4) Were rifles fitted with #2 mounts issued to and/or used by the military during WWI? And if so, which branch(es) of service?

(5) Were any rifles fitted with #2 mounts under government contract during WWI?

Please advise.

Thanks!

J.B.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

Jim,

What do you mean by "#2 mounts"?

The commercially available #2 scope mounts utilized for the Winchester A5 scope that followed the original issue of the #1 mount; and also used, slightly modified, as the basis for the Mann-Niedner Marine mounts. Both are #2 mounts, but one is modified for special use.


Would you please elaborate? Specifically,

(1) Who made the #2 mounts?

To which #2 mounts do you refer, the commercially available ones or the modified ones? Commercial ones - WRA or sub-contractor of WRA. Mann-Niedner ones - original ones had (1) bases modified by Niedner, later WRA or sub-contractor to WRA; and (2) modified knobs were specified by a Marine Officer and the work was done by WRA or a sub-contractor of WRA.


(2) When or over what period of time were they made?

Please be more specific as to what "they" means.


(3) Who attached the mounts to the M1903 Springfield Rifle?

Please be more specific as to which rifles and mounts you are referring.


(4) Were rifles fitted with #2 mounts issued to and/or used by the military during WWI? And if so, which branch(es) of service?

My area of concern involves only the Corps, and I can speak to no other branch. The Corps did contract for #2 mounts (the modified ones). The military's of several countries did use the commercial #2 mounts on various rifles including the 03.


(5) Were any rifles fitted with #2 mounts under government contract during WWI?

Considering the mount system I refer to as the Mann-Niedner mounts are modified #2 mounts, I assume the contracts specified #2 mounts. I have seen other documents that referenced the Mann-Niedner modified mounts simply as #2 mounts, so such a designation is not exclusive, but inclusive. My answer is "Yes".


Please advise.

Thanks!

J.B.

Got any more quiz's on hand, JB?

jt

[John Beard]

Jim,

Thanks for your reply!

Please pardon my lack of clarity. My questions pertained explicitly to the scope BLOCKS which mount on the rifle, not the rings. Permit me to re-phrase my questions.

(1) I am familiar with the tapered Mann-Neidner block that was adopted and used by the USMC during WWI. Did the USMC also adopt an alternative non-tapered scope block for the Winchester A5 scope during WWI?

(2) If the answer to question (1) is Yes, then who made and/or installed these scope blocks on M1903 rifles?

(3) If the answer to question (1) is Yes, was the rear scope block mounted on the receiver ring? If not, where was the rear scope block mounted?

(4) It is well-documented that Adolph Neidner personally mounted some of his tapered blocks on M1903 rifles for the USMC during WWI. Did anyone one else besides Neidner also mount Mann-Neidner style tapered blocks on M1903 rifles for the USMC during WWI? And if so, who?

Please advise. Thanks for your answers and your patience.

J.B.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

Jim,

Thanks for your reply!

Please pardon my lack of clarity. My questions pertained explicitly to the scope BLOCKS which mount on the rifle, not the rings. Permit me to re-phrase my questions.

(1) I am familiar with the tapered Mann-Neidner block that was adopted and used by the USMC during WWI. Did the USMC also adopt an alternative non-tapered scope block for the Winchester A5 scope during WWI?

The Corps used Winchester blocks for both 6" and 7.2" centers before the war, based on existing photographs of Corps team rifles. The blocks typically referred to as "Winchester Marine Bases", as depicted in Brophy, are the bases for the Win A5 scope mounted on 7.2" centers. Since I know of no other Win A5 bases for the 1903, I would answer that all WRA manufactured 1903 Win A5 bases were in existence before the war. This does not preclude others from having made mounting systems and bases for the rifle/scope combination not dedicated for Corps use.


(2) If the answer to question (1) is Yes, then who made and/or installed these scope blocks on M1903 rifles?

(3) If the answer to question (1) is Yes, was the rear scope block mounted on the receiver ring? If not, where was the rear scope block mounted?

(4) It is well-documented that Adolph Neidner personally mounted some of his tapered blocks on M1903 rifles for the USMC during WWI. Did anyone one else besides Neidner also mount Mann-Neidner style tapered blocks on M1903 rifles for the USMC during WWI?

Yes


And if so, who?

WRA, or one of it's subcontractors.


Please advise. Thanks for your answers and your patience.

J.B.

You are welcome, John. Now, please give me your opinion on the same questions.

jt:hello:

[1903fan]

It sure is great having so many people in here to tackle the specifics! Thanks for clarifying for the troops, Marine A5 sniper rifle JT!

[cplnorton]

Jim,

What pic are you refererring to of a Marine with a 6'' on center spacing rifle? I remember one you showed me a year ago, but he was not a Marine.

I will wait to comment on the rest until John does, out of respect.

[John Beard]

Jim,

Thanks for your reply!

Please pardon my lack of clarity. My questions pertained explicitly to the scope BLOCKS which mount on the rifle, not the rings. Permit me to re-phrase my questions.

(1) I am familiar with the tapered Mann-Neidner block that was adopted and used by the USMC during WWI. Did the USMC also adopt an alternative non-tapered scope block for the Winchester A5 scope during WWI?

(2) If the answer to question (1) is Yes, then who made and/or installed these scope blocks on M1903 rifles?

(3) If the answer to question (1) is Yes, was the rear scope block mounted on the receiver ring? If not, where was the rear scope block mounted?

(4) It is well-documented that Adolph Neidner personally mounted some of his tapered blocks on M1903 rifles for the USMC during WWI. Did anyone one else besides Neidner also mount Mann-Neidner style tapered blocks on M1903 rifles for the USMC during WWI? And if so, who?

Please advise. Thanks for your answers and your patience.

J.B.

Jim,

Since you asked, here's how I would answer the questions I posed based on information, reports, and records I have on file.

(1) Yes.

(2) WRA.

(3) Yes.

(4) Yes. USMC armorers at Philadelphia.

I respect and appreciate the answers you provided. I have no intention of challenging your answers or stirring up controversy. Take it for what it's worth.

J.B.

p.s.,

And I express my thanks to cplnorton for his generosity and willingness to share!

p.p.s.,

I have little doubt that the USMC may have had some shooting team rifles fitted with A5 scopes mounted on 6" centers that were pressed into service when the U.S. entered WWI. But those rifles were pre-existing and not wartime production.

[cplnorton]

For the record, my answers to John's questions would be identical to what John just stated. John and I conducted our own independent research of this topic and came up to the same conclusions about the use of the blocks for the Marine Corps 1903. But to be completely honest he had figured it out before I started to research it, I just was able to hit some new locations looking for more info on it.

I as well am not interested in fighting this out either anymore. It's just pointless as people will believe what they want. And I know John has a lot of time invested in this reseach as well. And it's not fair for me to just throw it out and detail it, when I know what he has invested in this as well.

My only challenge is if a picture of Marine with 6'' spacing exists. Tim Plowman cleaned out the Marine team photo section at the archives. There were a lot of team pics in there, and it's the same ones you see in the Man at Arms, Marine Gazette, or any Marine magazine pre WWI. Bascially anything officially taken, every team photograph is in that location. The first Telescopic sight photo of a Marine team rifle isn't until after WWI.

So if a picture exists of a Marine team rifle with 6'' spacing, it would have to be some type of unofficial photo, like a private photo or something like that.

So I am very curious if a photo exists of a Marine with 6'' on center spacing. I seriously doubt one exists.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

Jim,

Since you asked, here's how I would answer the questions I posed based on information, reports, and records I have on file.

(1) Yes.

Are you saying there was a third type of A3 base utilized by the Corps in WWI other than the two sets of bases used prior to the war that fit the unaltered Win A5 #2 mounts? The reason I ask is that if one considers the unaltered #2 mount as having a receptacle that fits/clamps over a base that screws to the receiver, and one does not change the receptacle, the only dimension that can change for a new set of bases is the height of the base. I cannot fathom a reason to make a base higher than the base that was being used on 7.2" centers.


(2) WRA.

If such a base was made, it seems reasonable that WRA made it since it is their scope.


(3) Yes.

Seems reasonable. I think I see where this is going.


(4) Yes. USMC armorers at Philadelphia.

All I have read indicates the armory at Philly was created after WWI. Do you have specific information that states otherwise?


I respect and appreciate the answers you provided. I have no intention of challenging your answers or stirring up controversy. Take it for what it's worth.

J.B.

This is a forum, and I always take it for what it is worth. I hope discussing specific issues isn't considered too controversial.

John, you seem to be indicating the "Marine Mounts" as depicted by the WRA drawing in Brophy as having been adopted during WWI. If so, how do you account for the 1903's with A5's on 7.2" centers that existed before the war?


I have little doubt that the USMC may have had some shooting team rifles fitted with A5 scopes mounted on 6" centers that were pressed into service when the U.S. entered WWI. But those rifles were pre-existing and not wartime production.

Actually, that isn't what I stated. I do not think team rifles were ever required to be pressed into service. The Corps had sufficient newly constructed sniper rifles without having to use old team rifles. The 150 Niedner rifles would have met the 4th Brigade's needs quite handily, and the first WRA order of 500 rifles met the needs of OSD.

[John Beard]

Are you saying there was a third type of A3 base utilized by the Corps in WWI other than the two sets of bases used prior to the war that fit the unaltered Win A5 #2 mounts? The reason I ask is that if one considers the unaltered #2 mount as having a receptacle that fits/clamps over a base that screws to the receiver, and one does not change the receptacle, the only dimension that can change for a new set of bases is the height of the base. I cannot fathom a reason to make a base higher than the base that was being used on 7.2" centers.

I'm not sure I understand your question, and I don't know how to answer it.



All I have read indicates the armory at Philly was created after WWI. Do you have specific information that states otherwise?

I have information that strongly suggests otherwise.


John, you seem to be indicating the "Marine Mounts" as depicted by the WRA drawing in Brophy as having been adopted during WWI. If so, how do you account for the 1903's with A5's on 7.2" centers that existed before the war?

I do not indicate that the "Marine Mounts" were adopted DURING WWI. I have reason to believe the "Marine Mounts" were adopted BEFORE WWI.

J.B.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

....I do not indicate that the "Marine Mounts" were adopted DURING WWI. I reason to believe the "Marine Mounts" were adopted BEFORE WWI.

J.B.

I agree.

jt