OK, Here We Go

[Promo]

Jim, who is the owner of the bases as pictured in your 3rd post in this thread? The blued ones look like reproductions, while the phosphated ones look exactly identically to the ones I have (staked screwhead markings).
The scope pictured below that bases is clearly a British A5 scope. The Brits also put a lot of red colour on those scopes plus someone even filled the markings on the screw with colour (something what I sniper would never do), hence I wouldn't be too sure if this still is original Winchester.

Tom's rifle looks marvellous, I'm really envy of that piece! And I wouldn't mind seeing a picture showing the inletting of the handguard to make the scope removeable, since there seem to be quite some variants. Are the bases on his rifle phosphated or blued?

I have a yellow lense adaptor myself which seems to be for WWI British scopes, since it came with a British scope I had bought. I however believe they wouldn't be that much of a help, but it might had been worth the try...

[clintonhater]

The scope pictured below that bases is clearly a British A5 scope...

Well, not completely clear to me, though color in the index markings of that rear mount is much too bright to be original Winchester paint. The British-issued scopes had the serial number of the rifle to which they were matched scrawled along the tube with an electro-pencil, with red paint smeared in the scratches; ugly.

[Promo]

I may lead your view on the markings on the scope foot - the broad arrow and the crown over F9 marking more than clearly indicate the British usage of this scope.

And as a small side note: to my knowledge, collection and other sources most British scopes EITHER have the rifle serial number on the scope tube, OR the British acceptance proofs on the scope rings. Which of those two methods was the earlier one I am unable to tell.

[clintonhater]

I may lead your view on the markings on the scope foot - the broad arrow and the crown over F9 marking more than clearly indicate the British usage of this scope.

Sorry, you're absolutely right of course--didn't notice those.

[Promo]

I looked it up and found this statement of Roger Payne regarding British A5 scopes:

They are of two varieties; firstly some scopes bear the broad arrow & Enfield inspector's mark on the mounts; secondly some bear a boldly engraved SMLE serial number on the top of the scope tube (the engraving was originally filled with red paint or kwikfill type material, though this has often come out over the years). I have never seen a scope bearing both military acceptance stamps AND a SMLE serial number together.

He additionally mentioned the scopes were purchased in 1915/16 and the total was 907 scopes.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

Jim, who is the owner of the bases as pictured in your 3rd post in this thread? The blued ones look like reproductions, while the phosphated ones look exactly identically to the ones I have (staked screwhead markings).

I don't know. I have downloaded dozens of pictures over the years. The purpose of the picture was to show what a MN base looked like and that one filled the bill. I might point out that Niedner's bases were quite different from WRA's. The one rifle I have seen I believe to be an original (of the 150), has its bases soldered onto the rifle. You can just see the silver line.

The scope pictured below that bases is clearly a British A5 scope.

Yes it is. Still the same mount.

The Brits also put a lot of red colour on those scopes plus someone even filled the markings on the screw with colour (something what I sniper would never do), ....

Not true.

....hence I wouldn't be too sure if this still is original Winchester.

I have no idea what you mean by this comment. Please explain.

Tom's rifle looks marvellous, I'm really envy of that piece! And I wouldn't mind seeing a picture showing the inletting of the handguard to make the scope removeable, since there seem to be quite some variants.

All the originals I have seen are identical, Niedner and WRA. The variance comes from later day fakers not knowing what an original looked like.

Tom's rifles are remarkable. Tom is a nice guy and I miss his posts.

Are the bases on his rifle phosphated or blued?

Neither, if they are original.

I have a yellow lense adaptor myself which seems to be for WWI British scopes, since it came with a British scope I had bought. I however believe they wouldn't be that much of a help, but it might had been worth the try...

I use mine on my hunting rifle, and it works extremely well. I am good for 30 min after sunset and 30 min before sun rise. The scope combination is excellent in my opinion. The British may well have used them, but so did the Corps.

[Promo]

Hello Jim,

I had hoped that you could tell me where the pictures of the bases are from - too bad you don't have the source! I had both seen bases which are phosphated and which are blued, and I always had wondered what belongs to which period. A part of your answer seems to say that they had neither of those two finishes. Would you then let me know what according to your opinion was the finish chosen for the bases, if neither of them? Or were they left in the white?

As written in my second reply in this thread the 907 scopes which were in the British contract from Winchester were either British marked on the bases, or the rifle serial number filled with red colour on the scope tube. Therefore this is definately true, but we might just spoke of different things.

Note that I split my postings in several passages. Therefore when you cut out a single sentence it might loose the original meaning. If you read it within the whole passage, it is clear to what it is referring to.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

Howdy, George.

The original Corps M-N bases were all casehardened with no other finish applied. You can easily tell the Niedner made bases from the WRA bases (I am speaking of the Corps sniper rifles only).

I agree with you about the British A5's. I cut out each topic so I can be assured I answered all your questions as best as I could.

As for the source of the pictures, I have hundreds of them, some sourced, some not. Besides, there is no way to tell when a finish was applied. It might have been last week. It has always been a side mission of mine to thwart fakers, so I have always been reluctant to supply information I thought was not generally available. That practice has paid off, as I have identified one individual who seems to have made a living faking these rifles. What really burns me just as bad is seeing someone authenticate an outright faked rifle.

You take care, George.

Jim

[Promo]

Jim, might sound stupid but why do you know they were casehardened and without any other finish? Is this due to the finish on Toms rifle?

I had always thought the phosphated bases to be the later type, especially since at the time of the introduction they were still using blued finish on rifles and that would fit to it, but I think I had also seen blued bases (not only in your picture).

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

I missed this post somehow. I hope I am not too late.

Jim, might sound stupid but why do you know they were casehardened and without any other finish?

Not for the reason you might think. It was to facilitate removal of the scope.

Is this due to the finish on Toms rifle?

No.

I had always thought the phosphated bases to be the later type, especially since at the time of the introduction they were still using blued finish on rifles and that would fit to it, but I think I had also seen blued bases (not only in your picture).

Either phosphate or blued soft steel could possibly make scope removal a nightmare. I have seen M-N bases made by people other than Niedner or WRA. I have also seen multiple finishes. Niedner casehardened the bases he installed on the 150 rifles. I am looking at five sets of M-N bases right now, and each of them is different. Even Niedner made variations. For commercial work, Niedner often left the bottom rear base particularly wide (wings), but on military work, he cut down the bottom of the base to match the top portion. He did this to keep from obscuring the rifle's serial number, a big deal in the military ranks. It didn't matter on commercial work, but he still would stamp the obscured SN into the base between the screw holes, including the respective armory initials (RI or SA). To compensate for lost stability with the narrower military base, he would often soft solder them on, including the screws. Niedner was a true craftsman and had a reason for everything he did. He even compensated for barrel taper on the front mount, which I have not seen on M-N bases made by other entities. My personal favorite is the M-N base to replace the WRA "Marine Base" without drilling a third hole in the receiver.

Niedner was the man.

[1903fan]

Hey JT, did the Marines make their own M-N bases, or did they only get them from WRA or Niedner himself?

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

Hey JT, did the Marines make their own M-N bases, or did they only get them from WRA or Niedner himself?

Niedner made all the bases for the original 150 Niedner rifles, and he also made the bases for for the WRA rifles with work starting in Aug 1916.
jt

[JWM]

Hello Jim,

Just dropped in and came across this most interesting thread. I'll have to spend more time at a later date to digest what is being discussed. For the moment, though, would you explain to me where you got the picture you're using on the first page of the thread marked in part as Big Al? Reason I ask is because it appears to be one that I took of one I owned that was sold to one of our esteemed members of this forum.

Best,

James

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

Hello Jim,

Just dropped in and came across this most interesting thread. I'll have to spend more time at a later date to digest what is being discussed. For the moment, though, would you explain to me where you got the picture you're using on the first page of the thread marked in part as Big Al? Reason I ask is because it appears to be one that I took of one I owned that was sold to one of our esteemed members of this forum.

Best,

James

Please excuse the delay in responding, I have been quite busy in other arenas. I cannot acertain which photo you refer to. Please give the date of the post and I will let you know all I know about it.

Jim