WidenersInline FabricationRepackboxReloading Everything
RotoMetals2Lee PrecisionMidSouth Shooters SupplyTitan Reloading
Load Data
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 80

Thread: Is there a general consensus of what was the most accurate military bolt rifle?

  1. #41
    Banned

    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    1,481
    Quote Originally Posted by Multigunner View Post
    Actually the first bolt action rifle to have twin opposed forwards mounted locking lugs was the American Greene Bolt action manufactured during the US Civil War.
    The Lebel with twin lugs also predated both the GEW88 and the Mauser rifles.

    Most distinctive features of the Mauser actions were not patented by Mauser, the Extractor and magazine along with the stripper clips were Mauser patented designs.
    That's true, but seems Mauser ges all the credit when they speak about any two front lug turn bolt!

  2. #42
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    brisbane ,qld,australia
    Posts
    2,125
    You need to narrow your time frame,otherwise I m going to say whatever the US is using today for a sniper rifle.I suggest you narrow the field to 1914/ 1915 actual military general issue rifles,which was the heyday of the bolt action.This will rule out the P14/M17 twins.These were Kitcheners orphans,which nobody wanted after he was dead.The hands down winner is the Ross Mk III.With a scope and the wood cut down,it was the most accurate sniper rifle of the war.

  3. #43
    Boolit Grand Master Artful's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Valley of the SUNs, AZ
    Posts
    9,254
    Quote Originally Posted by john.k View Post
    You need to narrow your time frame,otherwise I m going to say whatever the US is using today for a sniper rifle.I suggest you narrow the field to 1914/ 1915 actual military general issue rifles,which was the heyday of the bolt action.This will rule out the P14/M17 twins.These were Kitcheners orphans,which nobody wanted after he was dead.The hands down winner is the Ross Mk III.With a scope and the wood cut down,it was the most accurate sniper rifle of the war.
    Umm, the original post said
    Not the most accurate sniper rifle but general issue rifle...

    Such as:

    Springfield 03, 03A3
    Enfield P14, P17
    Mauser 98 (Man....just name some version)
    Mannlicher (Man, just name some version)
    Enfield No. # whatever
    Arisaka
    K-31 (a ringer?)
    je suis charlie

    It is better to live one day as a LION than a dozen days as a Sheep.

    Thomas Jefferson Quotations:
    "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."

  4. #44
    Boolit Grand Master WILCO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    20 minutes from a Tiki Bar!
    Posts
    6,230
    I love military surplus bolt guns.................................
    "Everyone has a plan, until they get punched in the face!" - Mike Tyson

    "Don't let my fears become yours." - Me, talking to my children

    That look on your face, when you shift into 6th gear, but it's not there.

  5. #45
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Boulder CO
    Posts
    783
    If there is not a consensus on the 1896 Swedish Mauser, it can only be the result of ignorance and poor breeding.

  6. #46
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    brisbane ,qld,australia
    Posts
    2,125
    OK,you got me.I plead diminished responsibility,due to reading too many gun forums.Or not reading as the case may be.

  7. #47
    Boolit Grand Master Artful's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Valley of the SUNs, AZ
    Posts
    9,254
    Quote Originally Posted by RPRNY View Post
    If there is not a consensus on the 1896 Swedish Mauser, it can only be the result of ignorance and poor breeding.
    It's OK if you have not shot enough GP11 thru a K31 - we forgive your ignorance
    je suis charlie

    It is better to live one day as a LION than a dozen days as a Sheep.

    Thomas Jefferson Quotations:
    "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."

  8. #48
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    4,900
    Quote Originally Posted by vzerone View Post
    The Mk III* Lithglow had a very nice robust windage adjustable rear sight. I think a U notch and blade front sight to be better in the dark then a peep sight.
    It is petty and pernickety, except under the greatest temptation, to pick on spelling errors. That sort of accident happens to me a bit. But that name does lend some credence to what you say. An M16-style flipover choice of two apertures might be the best of all, but with a daylight aperture and ghost ring rather than different heights.

    I don't think anybody is in great danger from ordinary riflemen at 600 yards, in modern or nearly-modern war. They were, and considerably further, in the Boer War of 1899, the only war in which the breech-loading rifle has ever been the dominant weapon. But the difference was that the soldier then had scarcely anything to learn except drill, keeping clean and musketry. Nowadays demands on the soldier are so multifarious that I doubt if any large army demands better accuracy of the ordinary infantry soldier, than was achievable with the Minié muzzle-loader. Long-range machine-gun fire, either interdictory or for effect, is probably more useful, although it is easier to dodge a burst than a volley.

    It has always annoyed me to hear people pouring scorn on the Carcano. It goes with the old "only fired once and dropped" jokes, although authorities as different as Rommel and British and Imperial private soldiers considered some Italian soldiers as good as anybody's. Those made by Beretta were always well made, and so were most of the others. Shortening the barrel to carbine length was a bad idea, when you cut off the fast part of gain-twist rifling, but purpose-made carbines were fine. The cartridge, although loaded unnecessarily weakly for the rifle, is closer than most people realise to the 6.5x54 Mannlicher-Schoenauer, and interchangeability might have been possible in some rifles. The latter is a highly regarded cartridge (I've got mine), and might be an excellent solution as a rifle-cum-machinegun cartridge for those who think modern cartridges are too big and too small. So, if it comes to that, would the 6mm. Lee Navy.

    Charger-loading, in a form intended for the turnbolt Remington-Lee, had been patented by Remington's L.P. Diss in 1887, within a few days of the sample Remington-Lee's being presented to the Small Arms Committee in the U.K. They didn't adopt charger loading until the new century, though. In 1896 James Paris Lee sued Mauser for infringement, and lost (under German law) on the basis of prior British and American patents for a central box-magazine. But these patents didn't show effective magazine lips, and Mauser never tried to use Lee's magazine detachability until much later. I don't know if anything about charger loading came into Lee's claim.

  9. #49
    Banned

    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    1,481
    Quote Originally Posted by Ballistics in Scotland View Post
    It is petty and pernickety, except under the greatest temptation, to pick on spelling errors. That sort of accident happens to me a bit. But that name does lend some credence to what you say. An M16-style flipover choice of two apertures might be the best of all, but with a daylight aperture and ghost ring rather than different heights.

    I don't think anybody is in great danger from ordinary riflemen at 600 yards, in modern or nearly-modern war. They were, and considerably further, in the Boer War of 1899, the only war in which the breech-loading rifle has ever been the dominant weapon. But the difference was that the soldier then had scarcely anything to learn except drill, keeping clean and musketry. Nowadays demands on the soldier are so multifarious that I doubt if any large army demands better accuracy of the ordinary infantry soldier, than was achievable with the Minié muzzle-loader. Long-range machine-gun fire, either interdictory or for effect, is probably more useful, although it is easier to dodge a burst than a volley.

    It has always annoyed me to hear people pouring scorn on the Carcano. It goes with the old "only fired once and dropped" jokes, although authorities as different as Rommel and British and Imperial private soldiers considered some Italian soldiers as good as anybody's. Those made by Beretta were always well made, and so were most of the others. Shortening the barrel to carbine length was a bad idea, when you cut off the fast part of gain-twist rifling, but purpose-made carbines were fine. The cartridge, although loaded unnecessarily weakly for the rifle, is closer than most people realise to the 6.5x54 Mannlicher-Schoenauer, and interchangeability might have been possible in some rifles. The latter is a highly regarded cartridge (I've got mine), and might be an excellent solution as a rifle-cum-machinegun cartridge for those who think modern cartridges are too big and too small. So, if it comes to that, would the 6mm. Lee Navy.

    Charger-loading, in a form intended for the turnbolt Remington-Lee, had been patented by Remington's L.P. Diss in 1887, within a few days of the sample Remington-Lee's being presented to the Small Arms Committee in the U.K. They didn't adopt charger loading until the new century, though. In 1896 James Paris Lee sued Mauser for infringement, and lost (under German law) on the basis of prior British and American patents for a central box-magazine. But these patents didn't show effective magazine lips, and Mauser never tried to use Lee's magazine detachability until much later. I don't know if anything about charger loading came into Lee's claim.
    I always want to get that **** "L" in that name. The Carcano is very underated rifle. As you said the Berettas were well made. I understand that they used the finest steels and the early barrels were Bofors steel. I know of a test to blow up a Carcano didn't succeed very well. I think some get a false impression that any rifle with a split rear bridge, say Mannlicher, is a very weak action. That's not so.

    So then you don't think that the M1 Garand and M14 had excellent sights? I like them myself and think maybe they may have even been better with a flip peep to offer that larger orifice. We see they did that on the later M16 sights.

  10. #50
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    4,900
    The M1 and M14 rear sight is pretty good, and the longer range of some earlier sights isn't much of a factor in actual military use. But they aren't as well protected from damage as those on the P14 and M1917 Enfields.

    Here is .something else on the Swiss 1889. Rear sights which operate by ramp and slider are easily damaged by a blow from above. But this one simple snaps down to the lowest position, and is unharmed when you raise it up again.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Schmidt-Rubin 1889 rear sight.jpg 
Views:	17 
Size:	54.7 KB 
ID:	207379

  11. #51
    Banned

    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    1,481
    In my opinion the British seemed to want to protect their sights. I can't imagine what went through the U.S's mind when they left that fragile thin blade sight up there on the Krags an 1903's unprotected.

    Yes long range sights and magazine cutoffs have gone to history.

  12. #52
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,167
    Yes the machine gun replaced the infantry volley fire of old. Also at present, is that all of the militaries in the world consider in city street fighting to be the thing to prepare for. So they prefer short barreled weapons for the infantry to be the thing to have. Which is interesting as in Afghanistan and Iraq they had to do a lot of open desert, mountainous terrain longer distance engagements too. But they still have had lots of in city street fighting later though. Except for snipers long distance shooting, it is the machine gun that handles the longer distance shooting at present.

    Yes the Carcano is quite good. I used a carbine as my truck gun for a number of years when I was a teenager. I still have it and had a scope mounted on it later too. People tend to forget that Oswald assassinated President Kennedy using one too. Plus he was a moving target no less as well.

  13. #53
    Boolit Grand Master OS OK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    El Dorado County, N. Ca.
    Posts
    6,234
    Most accurate rifle?

    Simple...any of the above placed in the hands of a Marine! . . .
    a m e r i c a n p r a v d a

    Be a Patriot . . . expose their lies!

    “In a time of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” G. Orwell

  14. #54
    Boolit Bub
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    41
    I have always been partial to the SMLE or 1903a3.

  15. #55
    Banned

    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    1,481
    Quote Originally Posted by Happyguy View Post
    I have always been partial to the SMLE or 1903a3.
    I'm not smiting your choice or anyone elses, but a real eye opener it going to Youtube and punching in Mud Test for ???? and seeing the results. I just watched them for the Mosin, 98 Mauser, Arisaka, and the SMLE and I was totally shocked at how they all did.

  16. #56
    Boolit Master


    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    North central Ohio/Roane County, W.Va.
    Posts
    1,426
    I have or owned all the rifles or variants on the OP list. Most shot fairly well, especially the Springfield and several breeds of Mauser, but none were in the same league as the K11 or better still the K31. I have commercial rifles that have trouble keeping up with either one. But to be fair, I'm no sort of legend in shooting circles.
    “Let us endeavor so to live that when we come to die even the undertaker will be sorry.”
    ― Mark Twain
    W8SOB

  17. #57
    Boolit Master
    oldblinddog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    959
    Quote Originally Posted by OS OK View Post
    Most accurate rifle?

    Simple...any of the above placed in the hands of a Marine! . . .
    Even to six hundred yards.
    <---- see avatar to left.
    USMC 6638

  18. #58
    Boolit Grand Master


    Larry Gibson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Lake Havasu City, Arizona
    Posts
    21,304
    Quote Originally Posted by vzerone View Post
    I'm not smiting your choice or anyone elses, but a real eye opener it going to Youtube and punching in Mud Test for ???? and seeing the results. I just watched them for the Mosin, 98 Mauser, Arisaka, and the SMLE and I was totally shocked at how they all did.
    Given the question of this thread is; " Is there a general consensus of what was the most accurate military bolt rifle?" perhaps you can explain the relevance of that particular "mud test" to the accuracy of a rifle? I have conducted and read a lot of accuracy tests but never have I seen globbing mud on the rifle to be part of the test. Even then I didn't see any "accuracy" testing conducted in any of those videos. Just pondering the relevance is all.......
    Larry Gibson

    “Deficient observation is merely a form of ignorance and responsible for the many morbid notions and foolish ideas prevailing.”
    ― Nikola Tesla

  19. #59
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    4,635
    An advantage of the M1903 was a phenomena that was the subject of much study at the time and should be studied by any modern firearms maker.
    All Bolt Action receivers that have any sort of ejection port have a slight flex when fired. The more open the receiver the more flex and rear locking receivers flex most of all.
    With the 1903 with its front lugs and sturdy left hand wall the flex was miniscule and results in only a few hundreds of an inch of bullet jump at the muzzle. The bullet starts off thrown very slightly to the left in relation to the bore line. As the right hand twist spin drift takes effect the bullet moves ever so slowly to meet the bore line till it coincides with both bore line and line of sight at something less than 600 yards. After that spin drift becomes a factor in longer range shooting, but the leftwards muzzle jump results in far less need to compensate than would other wise be the case.
    I figure this was why the original 1903 combat sight was regulated to 500+ yards. At that range you could generally bore sight the rifle at the factory and expect it to be very close to dead center in the horizontal plane out to 600 yards or more.

  20. #60
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    4,900
    Quote Originally Posted by Multigunner View Post
    An advantage of the M1903 was a phenomena that was the subject of much study at the time and should be studied by any modern firearms maker.
    All Bolt Action receivers that have any sort of ejection port have a slight flex when fired. The more open the receiver the more flex and rear locking receivers flex most of all.
    With the 1903 with its front lugs and sturdy left hand wall the flex was miniscule and results in only a few hundreds of an inch of bullet jump at the muzzle. The bullet starts off thrown very slightly to the left in relation to the bore line. As the right hand twist spin drift takes effect the bullet moves ever so slowly to meet the bore line till it coincides with both bore line and line of sight at something less than 600 yards. After that spin drift becomes a factor in longer range shooting, but the leftwards muzzle jump results in far less need to compensate than would other wise be the case.
    I figure this was why the original 1903 combat sight was regulated to 500+ yards. At that range you could generally bore sight the rifle at the factory and expect it to be very close to dead center in the horizontal plane out to 600 yards or more.
    There was a more pronounced compensation effect in the Lee-Enfields, greatest in the light-barrelled SMLE, but present in the long Lee-Enfield, No4 and even the heavier barrelled target rifles. The SMLE could string inconsistent military ammunition up and down quite badly at 200 yards - not too badly for an exposed human target, but badly for a loophole or a tank slit. But it was inconsistent in the direction of low-powered rounds going high, and high-powered ones going low. At 1000 yards or so they had a very useful tendency to meet up again. Well, useful to the civilian enthusiast or the n

    For many years the main centrefire target discipline in the UK required miltary actions with a barrel of a specified medium-heavy weight, and issued ammunition, first .303 and later 7.62x, althoug51. At the shorter ranges, or at any when the ammunition was good, the P14 Enfield and Mausers probably had an edge, although not a big one when Lee-Enfield bedding was so well figured out. But at the long ranges in a year of bad ammunition, the Lee-Enfields came into their own again.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Abbreviations used in Reloading

BP Bronze Point IMR Improved Military Rifle PTD Pointed
BR Bench Rest M Magnum RN Round Nose
BT Boat Tail PL Power-Lokt SP Soft Point
C Compressed Charge PR Primer SPCL Soft Point "Core-Lokt"
HP Hollow Point PSPCL Pointed Soft Point "Core Lokt" C.O.L. Cartridge Overall Length
PSP Pointed Soft Point Spz Spitzer Point SBT Spitzer Boat Tail
LRN Lead Round Nose LWC Lead Wad Cutter LSWC Lead Semi Wad Cutter
GC Gas Check