Serial Numbers

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

The presentation continues. I have been looking for those 150 serial numbers for over ten years. I have accumulated a large number of them, with even more to come, hopefully. We are going to look at a simple plot of the serial numbers I have accumulated versus their successive number in the series, or list. This gives us a plot that shows us spacial similarities between the serial numbers in a visual form. We are looking for anything that indicates three distinct orders.

Essentially, this plot should indicate groups of rifles as, more or less, a straight line. SA didn't ship rifles in exact sequential order. There is a variation in serial numbers within groups of rifles due to methods of packing, rifles lost that did not pass final inspection, etc. The absent serial numbers will cause a deviation in the straight line that occurs if all the rifles are in exact sequence. I believe the plot depicted clearly indicates the three orders for scoped rifles, Niedner's, the 1st WRA order for 500 rifles, and the 2nd WRA order for 250 rifles. Judge for yourselves.

Plot of Marine Sniper Rifle Serial Numbers.jpg

The red lines depict the three orders. The importance of this plot is that if we can discover the physical makeup of any rifles in each order, we will know exactly which mounts were utilized in each order.

To avoid this thread from degenerating into conflict unrelated to the subject, I ask that any replies not contain personal references. Let's discuss the subject matter only, in a professional manner.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

The Rifles

I have added a group of rifles to the chart in their respective positions by serial number. I used only rifles of which I have pictures. All these rifles have Niedner taper based Marine Mounts. They are more than sufficient to prove the Marine's 1st WRA order, for 500 rifles to be scoped, all had taper based Marine Mounts.

I used some matched sets because several show the serial number stamped into the stocks. At least one has a replacement stock, thus no serial number. If you need better pictures, like close-ups, just let me know. All these rifles belong to members of this forum. In the case of Sgt. LaValley's rifle, one collector owns the rifle and another owns the scope and case. Reckon they send each other Christmas cards?

Plot of Marine Sniper Rifle Serial Numbers - WRA 1st Order with Rifles.jpg

The Rifles;

1. Sgt. LaValley's rifle
Leslie D. LaValley w_Win A5 USMC Sniper Rifle at OSD - Watermark.jpg

2. Maj. Frank Z. Becker's rifle
Maj Frank Z. Becker Instructor OSD SSS Rifle 658092.jpg

3. Pvt. Max Brunstein's rifle
Max Bruenstein Rifle Serial Number in Stock - Annotated.jpg

4. Pvt. William W. Ipson's rifle
WW Ipson Rifle SN 650844 1st WRA Order - Annotated.jpg

I reached my picture limit. I will post the last one later today. I hope the chart approach makes sense to you. It is a nice way to look at large amounts of data at once. Even a novice can see the three groups formed by the data. If you have any questions, just ask and I will try to answer. I will address the third group tomorrow.

Enjoy.

Jim

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

The Last Picture

The Picture of the last rifle.

5. Unknown Sniper - Matched Set
658887 Left Rear View of Rear M-N Mount w_Wings - Annotated.jpg

This rifle shows use in the field. It is a beautiful rifle.

Just for grins, I can prove that a specific sniper rifle from the 1st WRA order was used by a 5th Regiment sniper (name and rifle SN). This fact leads me to believe that Pershing never returned the 90 (90 of 96) sniper rifles he took from the 4th Brigade Marines, and the stateside Marines shipped replacements, from the 1st WRA order, to the 4th Brigade Marines. It's food for thought.

[cplnorton]

I'm not going to argue this out, because it's beating a dead horse. But I want others who might read this to know there is a lot more data out there so please conduct your own research.

Jim's numbers are only 1/3 of the actual contracts of A5's during the war. He is missing a substantial amount of data.

I have found serials in the 200k, 300k, 400k, and 600k range. I have also found serials in the 800k, 900k range which could have also been produced during the war.

Jim is trying to build charts and graphs based on a handful of rifles, when there were likely a couple thousand.

The real truth is, no one can build any reliable ranges of serial ranges as no one knows even 1% of the the total serials.

There were 3 different makers of A5 Sniper rifles in WWI. There were for sure 2 variations of rifles, and there is a chance there could even be a third.

I'm not going to argue this out further than this, but if you are reading this, please fact check everything...

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

I'm not going to argue this out, because it's beating a dead horse. But I want others who might read this to know there is a lot more data out there so please conduct your own research.

Yet you argue anyway.

Jim's numbers are only 1/3 of the actual contracts of A5's during the war. He is missing a substantial amount of data.

You always make these profound statements, yet you NEVER provide a single iota of evidence to support your statements.

I have found serials in the 200k, 300k, 400k, and 600k range. I have also found serials in the 800k, 900k range which could have also been produced during the war.

I don't believe you. That is a ridiculous claim. Prove me wrong. If that old 300K series rifle you have is one of your "serials", please pardon me while I chuckle a bit. There's not one iota of evidence it is even a Marine rifle, much less a sniper rifle, other than your desperate longings for it to be one.

Jim is trying to build charts and graphs based on a handful of rifles, when there were likely a couple thousand.

Jim DID build a chart based on a handful of rifles. So, how do you explain their existence? According to you, they shouldn't exist.

The real truth is, no one can build any reliable ranges of serial ranges as no one knows even 1% of the the total serials.

Have you ever heard of statistical analysis? Let's see...100 is 1% of 10,000. You are now claiming there were in excess of 10,000 sniper rifles made for the Marine Corps? Why do you persist in making insidious claims?

There were 3 different makers of A5 Sniper rifles in WWI. There were for sure 2 variations of rifles, and there is a chance there could even be a third.

We are not talking about all the A5 sniper rifles in WWI. We are talking about Marine sniper rifles. Quite frankly, with your history of making absurd claims, I don't believe you. Prove me wrong.

I'm not going to argue this out further than this, but if you are reading this, please fact check everything...

I thought you said you weren't going to argue this out - period (1st sentence of your post). How can they fact-check your information if they don't know what it is? I posted mine - post yours. What are you afraid of?

Did you not see the part of my post about not making this thread personal?

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

The 3rd Group

The third group represents the 2nd WRA order for 250 rifles to be scoped by WRA, placed by Major Douglas McDougal. I have no matched sets from this group, so I will rely on named scope cases for validation. Have you ever wondered where the named scope cases came from?

In the fifties, the Marine Corps offered a lot of cases with scopes for sale to the general public. An arms dealer by the name of L. Bender bought the entire lot, and sold them at gun shows and by mail order. All the cases contained scopes with modified Marine Mounts with their taper base receptacles. A number of the cases had the names of the snipers written or carved into them. In the early days, the cases with names on them were deemed inferior, and the "clean" cases were more desirable. That has changed. A secondary source of the named cases was the families of the old snipers who kept their scopes, such as the LaValley scope and case sold by his son.

I will use three examples, although I only need a single example to prove my point, as all the rifles in the 3rd group, or 2nd WRA order, were identical. Surely, no one would argue that point.

I will use the named scope cases of John Damrow, Melvin VanCamp, and Gilbert C.Chandler for verification. A picture of Chandler's inner scope case lid can be found below and on page 12 of Peter Senich's book, "U.S. Marine Corps Scout-Sniper", undoubtedly the best book on Marine sniping ever published. VanCamp's case had a second serial number written on the exterior of the case, and it is this second serial number represented here. I do not have a picture of John Damrow's scope case, but Senich verifies its existence on page 12 of his book.

Plot of Marine Sniper Rifle Serial Numbers - WRA 2nd Order with Rifles.jpg

The scope lid from Page 12 of Senich.

GC Chandler Scope Case Inner Lid - Annotated.jpg

The 2nd WRA order of 250 rifles to be scoped consisted of rifles with Marine Mounts on Niedner type taper bases. Case closed.

Thanks for your attention.

[cplnorton]

The presentation continues. I have been looking for those 150 serial numbers for over ten years. I have accumulated a large number of them, with even more to come, hopefully. We are going to look at a simple plot of the serial numbers I have accumulated versus their successive number in the series, or list. This gives us a plot that shows us spacial similarities between the serial numbers in a visual form. We are looking for anything that indicates three distinct orders.

Essentially, this plot should indicate groups of rifles as, more or less, a straight line. SA didn't ship rifles in exact sequential order. There is a variation in serial numbers within groups of rifles due to methods of packing, rifles lost that did not pass final inspection, etc. The absent serial numbers will cause a deviation in the straight line that occurs if all the rifles are in exact sequence. I believe the plot depicted clearly indicates the three orders for scoped rifles, Niedner's, the 1st WRA order for 500 rifles, and the 2nd WRA order for 250 rifles. Judge for yourselves.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]51653[/ATTACH]

There is a lot posted here that is not accurate. Jim's quantities on the number of rifles are not correct. 2nd the rifles that WRA mounted for the Marines, he is not correct on the origin they came from. Third, Winchester never made the Mann Niedner tapered mount. Fourth, I have found serial ranges way outside this 600k range for the Mann Niedner.

But regardless I just want to show why this chart will not work. Jim claims because rifles came from Springfield basically in serial blocks, he can tell just by a serial number who made that Sniper rifle and when.

But the facts are you cannot assume anything just by a serial number. Because you find docs like this that show WRA received serial numbers from the same ranges at Random.

These are rifles that Winchester received from Springfield Armory, and fall into the serial ranges that Jim claims that he can clearly decipher whether WRA or Niedner made the Sniper rifle. BTW every rifle listed below came in AFTER Winchester had already shipped the Marines all their Marine Mount A5's to France. Which WRA shipped them by October 1917.

Before some claims this Doc isn't Winchester, here are the notations from the SRS, this is just a portion of the doc. Winchester found these rifles in March 1919 at the Factory and wrote Army Ordnance asking what do with them.

628116 032619INSP OF ORDNANCE WRA CO
661778 032619INSP OF ORDNANCE WRA CO
626851 032619INSP OF ORDNANCE WRA CO
etc...

[cplnorton]

The truth of the matter is I found serial number 639,6xx built into a brand new sniper rifle in 1940. So just because you find a serial from 1917, it doesn't mean it was built as a sniper in 1917.

The Marines built Mann Niedner rifles at the Philly Depot from 1918 to 1941, and maybe all the way into 1944. A serial number on a scope case doesn't necessarily mean it was a rifle built in WWI, especially when the Marines built them for over 20 years.

[cplnorton]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]51662[/ATTACH]

Just so this is clear. Niedner built his Sniper rifles in May/June 1917. Jim's chart above shows that the 620k range has to be a Niedner rifle. Because that serial range is closest to that date, and SA shipped those serials in blocks.

But the doc I showed above (from WRA) shows SA did not ship their rifles necessarily in order. SA shipped those 620k serials a full six months after Niedner had built his last sniper rifle. So just because you have a 620k sniper, does not mean it is automatically a Niedner built rifle.


These are the dates the 620k rifles shipped to Winchester from SA. A full six months after Niedner built his last rifle.

628116 sent from SA on 12/18/17
620463 sent from SA on 1/24/18

As I stated I found that you cannot assume anything about serial ranges and the A5 snipers. It does not work when you actually have the sniper docs to compare it to.

.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

Just so this is clear. Niedner built his Sniper rifles in May/June 1917. Jim's chart above shows that the 620k range has to be a Niedner rifle. Because that serial range is closest to that date, and SA shipped those serials in blocks.

The day Niedner started his work at Philly, SA manufactured 648698, so we know that rifle, as well as any SN higher, can be eliminated from the Niedner rifles. Your 628116 was manufactured on or about 18 Aug 1916, and 620463 was manufactured on or about 11 Jan 1916. Now we know when they were finally shipped, but not the reason. What has that have to do with anything?

But the doc I showed above (from WRA) shows SA did not ship their rifles necessarily in order. SA shipped those 620k serials a full six months after Niedner had built his last sniper rifle. So just because you have a 620k sniper, does not mean it is automatically a Niedner built rifle.

I believe I stated SA did not ship in sequential order. But you fail to grasp the fact that each of the three orders consisted of rifles with slightly different characteristics. The Niedner rifles did not have wings. The 2nd Order had wings with the serial numbers stamped into the stock. The 2nd WRA order rifles were identical to the Niedner rifles, but had serial numbers that physically eliminated them as Niedner rifles by manufacturing dates. They all had their Niedner type taper bases soldered to the rifle receiver and barrel. And so they formed three distinct groups - not a coincidence.

You are grasping at straws because I believe you are finally realizing you are wrong.

By the way, you have a 300K series rifle you blatantly claim to be a Marine sniper rifle without one iota of provenance. It doesn't even have any characteristics of even being a Marine rifle. Yet you are disturbed by sequential numbers of a tightly grouped set of rifles. My, my.

These are the dates the 620k rifles shipped to Winchester from SA. A full six months after Niedner built his last rifle.

628116 sent from SA on 12/18/17
620463 sent from SA on 1/24/18

Do you have a document to back up your assertion? Do people on other forums not ask you to back up your wild assertions with some form of proof, such as the documents you claim to possess, but never post?

As I stated I found that you cannot assume anything about serial ranges and the A5 snipers. It does not work when you actually have the sniper docs to compare it to.

First of all, I am assuming nothing, as those are real rifles with all the characteristics of a Niedner rifle. It is you who "assumed" that old 300K rifle you own is a WWI Marine sniper rifle, with zero evidence of it being so. By the way, I saw your post on CMP where you compare it to LaValley's rifle and make the silly claim that if you had an Optical Ray Filter, your old 300K rifle would be identical to LaValley's. You didn't even notice the absence of a Grasshopper on Lavalley's Modified Marie Mount rifle on Niedner type taper bases. Now that has got to be a bit embarrassing. I have told you, and told you, you cannot use a side view photo comparison to prove anything. Pay attention.

"...sniper docs to compare it to".

Are those the "docs" you never post for others to see and judge?

As in any court trial, it is the totality of the evidence that counts. You lose.

[nf1e]

Why am I reminded of two cats with their tails tied together and hung over a cloths line?

[cplnorton]

The day Niedner started his work at Philly, SA manufactured 648698, so we know that rifle, as well as any SN higher, can be eliminated from the Niedner rifles. Your 628116 was manufactured on or about 18 Aug 1916, and 620463 was manufactured on or about 11 Jan 1916. Now we know when they were finally shipped, but not the reason. What has that have to do with anything?

But you think you know what rifles are Niedner. You can't. There were 3 makers of the A5 Sniper rifle in the WWI era. The ones by Niedner, the ones by WRA, and the ones by the Marines at the Philadelphia Depot. The Majoirty of the Mann Niedners were bult at the Marine Philadelphia Depot starting very late 1918 and 1919. The Philly Depot never stopped building them either. They continued to build them until 1941, and possibly even as late as 1944. I have found no reliable way to tell what is a Niedner rifle, and what is a Mann Niedner built at the Philly Depot.

But I can prove 100% that Winchester never made a Mann Niedner variant.

[cplnorton]

You are grasping at straws because I believe you are finally realizing you are wrong.

By the way, you have a 300K series rifle you blatantly claim to be a Marine sniper rifle without one iota of provenance. It doesn't even have any characteristics of even being a Marine rifle. Yet you are disturbed by sequential numbers of a tightly grouped set of rifles. My, my.

Winchester created their version of the A5 Sniper that they called the Marine Mount in April/May 1917. They did not have a 7.2'' spacing blocks for the M1903 prior to that date. There are pics of a 2 test pattern rifles and one complete 03 rifle with their 7.2'' spacing Marine Mount in the WRA files.

The serials of these rifles in the Winchester WWI files are:

34215
367312
659062

My rifle is 368496. It is a little over a 1000 digits from the rifle pictured in the WWI Winchester files.

My rifle was built in 1909, the most famous pic of a Winchester Marine mount A5 taken in 1917 in France is also a pre-1910 rifle. You can tell by the traits of the rifle.

There are 2 pictures of this rifle taken in France in 1917.



I made a high definition copy of the original glass slide so I could really tell the details of the rifle. It is a pre 1910 rifle by the traits, as is mine.




My 1909 rifle vs the pre 1910 rifle taken in France.




My rifle compared to serial 659062 in the WWI Winchester files.




There are also more of these rifles that fall into the serial ranges you believe are exclusive to Mann Nienders. These are in a very advanced Sniper Collectors hands, and I will not name him. But these are in the 672,xxx and 678,xxx serial ranges. These rifles are identical to mine, and also the pics of the rifles in the WWI Winchester files.










64

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

Why am I reminded of two cats with their tails tied together and hung over a cloths line?

That's funny.

[cplnorton]

By the way, I saw your post on CMP where you compare it to LaValley's rifle and make the silly claim that if you had an Optical Ray Filter, your old 300K rifle would be identical to LaValley's. You didn't even notice the absence of a Grasshopper on Lavalley's Modified Marie Mount rifle on Niedner type taper bases. Now that has got to be a bit embarrassing. I have told you, and told you, you cannot use a side view photo comparison to prove anything. Pay attention.

As in any court trial, it is the totality of the evidence that counts. You lose.

You claim this rifle is a Mann Niedner. But it's actually the variant produced by WRA during the War.



When you compare a regular A5 scope to the Mann Niedner tapered block Conversion you notice the Mann Niedner has a screw on the outside of the micrometer. The regular A5 has a hole that produces a shadow.




Now look at the pic you claim is a Mann Niender again. IT's a hole with a shadow in the micrometer, which the Mann Niedner doesn't have. Also his handguard is the WRA style as the Mann Niedner needs a handguard that is cut much more as the block slides on from the back.




My rifle compared to the one you claim it's a Mann Niedner. It looks nothing like a Mann Niedner and when you compare it to another one made by Winchester they are actually identical. It's the same type WRA built Marine mount A5, exactly like mine and the one pictured in France in 1917.