Sniper rifles in private hands ???

[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.

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.

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.

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

This rifle also has Mann-Niedner mounts.

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

Ditto.

Ditto.

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.

[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

[/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.

[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