Sniper Rifles

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

Jon, The only way anyone can definitively state whether your rifle is one of the elusive WWI USMC sniper rifles is to somehow produce a reliable source of the serial numbers of the rifles themselves. At this point in time, all one can do is to state an opinion based on what each believes to be the characteristics of the original rifles based on whatever. To do that accurately, the evaluator would have to know what an original looked like when issued. Essentially the snipers themselves are typical 1903's that were selected by bore gauging and subsequent mounting of Winchester A5 scopes in highly modified #2 mounts in Mann-Niedner bases prior to being shipped to the Marines. When Michael Petrov originally asked me to find the 150 Niedner rifles, I started out doing the usual document search. All the documents being discussed recently are publicly available to anyone who pays for copies. There is nothing mysterious, exclusive, or secret about them. A lot of them appear in Senich's book, but no where near all of them. Countless people possess them. It's how one interprets the documents that leads to differing opinions. I found the document search to be a dead end, and took another tack entirely.

For example; I was surprised to see Smokeeaterpilot's last post. He stated exactly what I have been saying throughout this discussion, albeit one-sided. The document they possess DO NOT PRECLUDE any rifle in that block of serial numbers from being a sniper rifle (rifles NOT shown on that shipping manifest) except for the rifles on the manifest itself. It DOES NOT eliminate other rifles possibly sent in that group from having been converted to sniper rifles. What was Norton arguing about if they agree? Regardless, if you own a possible sniper rifle in that serial number range, you can relax.

Hell of a collection Jon.

[JWM]

My take on the WWI era activities between Winchester and Springfield armory mostly concerned improving the accuracy of existing Springfield rifles like the 1903 and 1917, for example, in order to get the most advanced sniper rifle that could be had for our European forces.

In my limited opinion, to do this would require the focus of such programs to include the testing of ammunition as has been so well noted, to include, the testing of different weight/length of barrels, and an awful lot of different fixed and telescopic sights of varying lengths, plus various mountings and bases for same. The era of telescopic sights was on a roll which is why Winchester got involved with them to begin with and obviously, they were in demand commercially and militarily during this era, right to this day and time.

In line with such rifle and sight tests would be to put the finished product in the hands of military men to get their opinions. In order to do this Winchester would have to know where to ship the finished products. At which time military units would have begun their tests. I and my fellow Marines back in 1961, I think it was, before the Corps adopted the M-14. Our test rifles were from a couple of different countries.

Back during the WWI era, it appears that some field testing was in order, with big contracts in the making, but apparently the end of the war stopped that, nonetheless, some of these rifles appear to have made it from the Winchester factory to the military from what I can gather from Brophy's book on The Springfield 1903 Rifles, and some other research material.

As for evidence of any kind, simply because one type of document does or does not mention that telescopic sights be included, one should not assume that such sights were not ordered to be affixed to the rifles in question. Especially where Springfield rifles are concerned, because their records appear to have left a lot to be desired, and from a historical standpoint, more often than not, existing Winchester records will not show special ordered sights either. That said, when involved in any sort of such research, evidence of any kind should be recorded and viewed and weighed on its own merit prior to making conclusions. To quote one of America's most gifted research scholars, Elizabeth Shown Mills, "Direct evidence may be clearer to grasp, but indirect evidence can carry equal or greater weight."

With this in mind, I don't expect anything at all will be solved until the evidence being discussed is published in it's totality, and referenced in such a manner that it can easily be verified by any interested party...just my two cents. I'm still very grateful to have the discussion being made by each of you fine folks on this forum.

James

[JWM]

Fabulous! (From this to the M.54, with it's BB gun trigger guard?)

Thank you very much! Isn't this stuff interesting?!

James

[JWM]

James, don't do this. Take a very close look at the markings around the patent dates! This is a British issued A5 scope - and I'm pretty sure it were the Brits too, who reblued the scope. Hence my interest in it.

You are absolutely right, Georg! Thank you for looking out for my best interests too! To tell you the truth, before I turned in last night, I checked on it again, and discovered the markings!!!!

Thanks again and good luck with obtaining it!

James

[cplnorton]

My take on the WWI era activities between Winchester and Springfield armory mostly concerned improving the accuracy of existing Springfield rifles like the 1903 and 1917, for example, in order to get the most advanced sniper rifle that could be had for our European forces.

In my limited opinion, to do this would require the focus of such programs to include the testing of ammunition as has been so well noted, to include, the testing of different weight/length of barrels, and an awful lot of different fixed and telescopic sights of varying lengths, plus various mountings and bases for same. The era of telescopic sights was on a roll which is why Winchester got involved with them to begin with and obviously, they were in demand commercially and militarily during this era, right to this day and time.

In line with such rifle and sight tests would be to put the finished product in the hands of military men to get their opinions. In order to do this Winchester would have to know where to ship the finished products. At which time military units would have begun their tests. I and my fellow Marines back in 1961, I think it was, before the Corps adopted the M-14. Our test rifles were from a couple of different countries.

Back during the WWI era, it appears that some field testing was in order, with big contracts in the making, but apparently the end of the war stopped that, nonetheless, some of these rifles appear to have made it from the Winchester factory to the military from what I can gather from Brophy's book on The Springfield 1903 Rifles, and some other research material.

As for evidence of any kind, simply because one type of document does or does not mention that telescopic sights be included, one should not assume that such sights were not ordered to be affixed to the rifles in question. Especially where Springfield rifles are concerned, because their records appear to have left a lot to be desired, and from a historical standpoint, more often than not, existing Winchester records will not show special ordered sights either. That said, when involved in any sort of such research, evidence of any kind should be recorded and viewed and weighed on its own merit prior to making conclusions. To quote one of America's most gifted research scholars, Elizabeth Shown Mills, "Direct evidence may be clearer to grasp, but indirect evidence can carry equal or greater weight."

With this in mind, I don't expect anything at all will be solved until the evidence being discussed is published in it's totality, and referenced in such a manner that it can easily be verified by any interested party...just my two cents. I'm still very grateful to have the discussion being made by each of you fine folks on this forum.

James

From reading them, I am really guessing they were probably used more for like a quality control. I have all the ammo orders the govt was making from WRA in WWI. And I've never really sat down and studied them, but it was just a massive amount of ammo the govt was ordering, and they were making these orders almost every month.

Like one month I rememember they ordered like 245 million rounds, and just a couple weeks before they had made an order for like a 110 million rounds. It was just a tremendous amount of ammo. I imagine they were using these rifles for testing samples from these massive orders. They kept round counts of the rifles on this list, and I know I remember seeing some in the 7000 to 8000 round range. So these rifles were shooting a lot of ammo.

But I guess the biggest thing I can say about this document, these rifles were the Property of the US Army. They were not property of WRA or the property of the US Marines. Winchester was ordered by the Govt during the war to always keep anything that was in anyway US Property seperate, and WRA was held accountable for it. So WRA always notated what everything was, such as Army or Marine, because the govt mandated it.

I guess the other thing I can say, these rifles were all still at WRA in March 1919. Almost a full year after the 500 Marine A5 mounted rifles had already shipped. It also says when a lot of the serials on this list first arrived at WRA, and many didn't even arrive until the Marine A5's rifles were long gone as well.

That is why I say I wouldn't read too much into these serial ranges of these rifles. They weren't Marine, and many didn't arrive until after the WRA Marine A5 mounted rifles had already shipped.

But no I totally understand what you are saying. And what you are saying is exactly right. I have a ton of sniper rifle test reports from SA and the Marines, and they are exactly as you describe. This one though, is just nothing like them.

If I really get motivated, I will get out the WRA correspondance from WWI and go through it. I probably honestly have the document that would detail the ammo tests these rifles were in. But it's just thousands of pages, and you go though it and it about makes your eyes bleed. Because it's so much to do about ammo, and it's soooo boring to read.

Semper Fi by the way!

[cplnorton]

Steve, would be interested in that file. But can't go there so easy. Any other chance I could get those files? I know that the French also used Winchester scopes on their WWI Lebel snipers.

Yeah I think we can get them. Remind me early next week, and we'll see what we can do.

Steve

[cplnorton]

James,

I might have found a pretty big clue. I just glanced through and noticed a chain of internal WRA memos starting around Oct. 1917.

They mention that they are hearing feedback of a "considerable" amount of 1903 Rifles are exploding. And they are worried the cartriages might have excessive pressure, or the primers are defective and causing hangfires, which detonate as the bolt is pulled back, destorying the rifle.

They also seem to wonder if it isn't the uncertaintity of the Case Hardened receivers and bolts, that are used in a upturn and Bolt-action rifle.

I'm missing the tail end of this conversation, so I can't say 100% for certain this lead to rifles to start coming in for ammo testing. But the timing is almost perfect for the very first handful of rifles received from the Army Depots. And then you see them come in random intervals after that, maybe to replace ones being worn out.

But you can tell they are really worried on why the rifles are failing, as they say soliders are getting extremely hurt. And they are very concerned it might be the ammo. Even like the VP of WRA, Mr. Brewer gets involved.

I just glanced through really quick, so I really didn't hit it too hard, but the timigin of it all, seems to really make a lot of sense.

[JWM]

James,

I might have found a pretty big clue. I just glanced through and noticed a chain of internal WRA memos starting around Oct. 1917.

They mention that they are hearing feedback of a "considerable" amount of 1903 Rifles are exploding. And they are worried the cartriages might have excessive pressure, or the primers are defective and causing hangfires, which detonate as the bolt is pulled back, destorying the rifle.

They also seem to wonder if it isn't the uncertaintity of the Case Hardened receivers and bolts, that are used in a upturn and Bolt-action rifle.

I'm missing the tail end of this conversation, so I can't say 100% for certain this lead to rifles to start coming in for ammo testing. But the timing is almost perfect for the very first handful of rifles received from the Army Depots. And then you see them come in random intervals after that, maybe to replace ones being worn out.

But you can tell they are really worried on why the rifles are failing, as they say soliders are getting extremely hurt. And they are very concerned it might be the ammo. Even like the VP of WRA, Mr. Brewer gets involved.

I just glanced through really quick, so I really didn't hit it too hard, but the timigin of it all, seems to really make a lot of sense.

Steve, very interesting information, thank you. From what you have noted it does indeed appear that the primary purpose for these rifles being at WRA had to do with ammunition testing for the Army, with one concern being safety issues as you state. That said, a lot of other activity regarding them might well have been accomplished, too.

One member mentioned that some docs referred to damaged stocks, which causes me to think about two issues, i.e. one being injuries due to firing the rifles like you make, and the other being broken stocks due to grenade testing from the kneeling position. Another note you make is that the rifles were still at WRA in 1919, which is to say, that should the Marines have ordered more sniper rifles while these rifles were at the subject company, then it would good make sense to accommodate such requests, if at all possible.

On authentic Marine sniper rifles in general. It is well known that the Marines used rifles made up for the purpose of sniping or those used for target shooting in combat, which is to say, that although the Marines did have dedicated special mounts and bases for sniper use with the A5 during WWI, they would have probably made use of any scoped rifles with regular commercial mounts and bases they had at that time like we did in WWII and the NAM, should there have been such a need.

Here's a couple of links regarding the safety issues you brought up about the 1903:

http://m1903.com/03rcvrfail/

http://www.snipercountry.com/Article...fieldM1903.asp

Semper Fi,

James

[cplnorton]

Another note you make is that the rifles were still at WRA in 1919, which is to say, that should the Marines have ordered more sniper rifles while these rifles were at the subject company, then it would good make sense to accommodate such requests, if at all possible.

The Marines did make a 2nd order of A5 scopes during WWI. A Month after the last of the 500 Marine WRA mounted rifles shipped. The Marines ordered a second contract of 1000 A5 scopes and WRA mounts for the 1903 Springfield.

These were just the scopes and blocks though, and spare parts for the scopes. After Niedner had been accused of being a potential German Saboteur by the FBI in June 1917. The Marines then turned to WRA to mount the 500 Marine 1903's. While WRA was actually mounting the the 500, they set up a training program to teach Marines who had traveled to WRA, on how to mount them. So after the first 500 mounted at WRA, the Marines were now trained and could mount them themselves back at Philly in their new small arms section.

But even the 2nd Marine A5 order does show shipped while those Ammuniton testing rifles were still at WRA.

But hope this helps.

[JWM]

The Marines did make a 2nd order of A5 scopes during WWI. A Month after the last of the 500 Marine WRA mounted rifles shipped. The Marines ordered a second contract of 1000 A5 scopes and WRA mounts for the 1903 Springfield.

These were just the scopes and blocks though, and spare parts for the scopes. After Niedner had been accused of being a potential German Saboteur by the FBI in June 1917. The Marines then turned to WRA to mount the 500 Marine 1903's. While WRA was actually mounting the the 500, they set up a training program to teach Marines who had traveled to WRA, on how to mount them. So after the first 500 mounted at WRA, the Marines were now trained and could mount them themselves back at Philly in their new small arms section.

But even the 2nd Marine A5 order does show shipped while those Ammuniton testing rifles were still at WRA.

But hope this helps.

This is certainly the kind of knowledge interested parties would find useful where the subject sniper program is concerned. However, all of my posts have been focused upon the arguments that have been made including Jim's comments, that in no way can be dismissed by what has been presented in this thread...IMO.

[1903fan]

I've really enjoyed this thread gentlemen. I've seen pictures of the army using Warner Swasey sniper rifles in France but have never seen one of the Marine A5 snipers in a picture in combat. Does anyone know if there is one out there?

[1903fan]

I guess this would be a question for Marine A5 Sniper Rifle and cplnorton, it seems both of you have done a lot of research on this topic. Did the Marines use Warner Swasey sniper rifles in WWI? Or did they only use the Mann Niedner A5 sniper rifles?

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

I guess this would be a question for Marine A5 Sniper Rifle and cplnorton, it seems both of you have done a lot of research on this topic. Did the Marines use Warner Swasey sniper rifles in WWI? Or did they only use the Mann Niedner A5 sniper rifles?

No, the Marines did not use the Warner Swasey scopes on their sniper rifles. Bear in mind the 5th and 6th Marine Regiments went to France with only the rifles scoped by Niedner, and that 150 rifles more than met the needs of the two regiments. There seems to be a fairly common belief that they took a hodge-podge of rifle team scoped rifles with them, but everything I have uncovered indicates they did not. The powers that be, running the program, wanted consistency above all else, particularly one of them. They wanted all the sniper rifles to be identical in shape and form (they had a valid reason). The 150 rifles scoped by Niedner almost exactly fills the requirement for snipers for two regiments. It was not the habit of the Corps to pick their weapons randomly - still isn't. Besides, prior to the war, the Corps rifle teams predominantly used scopes on their rifles for training for a steady hold, and the occasional match. Some long distance shooters preferred 6" centers and some preferred 7.2" centers, but the most common scope used at the time, ante bellum, was the Stevens. The switch to the A5 was made just prior to the war, and there was a reason for that switch. The Corps may have used scoped rifles at Sea Girt and International matches, but there was a firm belief at that time that an open sighted 03 was as accurate as a scoped rifle. Records indicate the Corps kept their team rifles at home. So, in my humble opinion, the answer to your second question is "yes".

There is a picture of a Marine sighting a 1903 scoped on a 6" center that is commonly attributed as having been taken in France; but if one looks closely at the picture, and has a modicum of knowledge of Corps WWI history, it is obvious the picture was taken before WWI.

jt

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

I've really enjoyed this thread gentlemen. I've seen pictures of the army using Warner Swasey sniper rifles in France but have never seen one of the Marine A5 snipers in a picture in combat. Does anyone know if there is one out there?

There are pictures of them being used in WWII, but I have never seen one being used in WWI. The Corps' habit of taking 60%+ casualties on the front lines most likely discouraged photo hogs from creeping up to the Corps front lines. There exist very few combat photos taken at Belleau Woods, but notice the complete absence of combat photos at Blanc Mont.

The Corps did not get bogged down in trench warfare, nor did any of the more aggressive Divisions like the 42nd.

jt

[cplnorton]

I guess this would be a question for Marine A5 Sniper Rifle and cplnorton, it seems both of you have done a lot of research on this topic. Did the Marines use Warner Swasey sniper rifles in WWI? Or did they only use the Mann Niedner A5 sniper rifles?

The Marines did have 1903 Warner Swasey Sniper rifles pre WWI. I have the purchase orders were they bought them from Springfield Armory. The Marines must have had them for a while as they were requesting parts for them in the late 20's from SA.

I have documents from France in early 1918 that list both the Winchester A5 and Warner Swasey rifles in inventory over there, and both the Marines and Army were both pulling from this Depot. So it's possible. In fact the Army used a lot of A5 rifles.

But what you have to understand that everything you see from this time is usually not specific. 9/10 times when you see a 1903 sniper Rifle up to korea in Marine documents. It is only described as a 1903 rifle with Telescopic sight. So Telescpic sight could mean Stevens, Winchester, Warner Swasey, and then later on, Fecker, Lyman, and Unertl.

It's just us a collectors see 1903 with Telescopic sights and they say well that must be a A5. Because that is all they had. But that isn't true at all. The Mariens had Warner Swasey's as well. And actuall had them in service for longer than the Army did.