The Americans.

[dromia]

Pulled some of my Us rifles out of the racks last week for a presentation I was giving on the development of metallic cartridge rifle for the US army.

These rifles are getting quiet desirable over here and command a premium, especially the 03s and 03-A3s.

I'm sure they don't need describing here.


http://i1308.photobucket.com/albums/s618/joe152/The%20Americans/TheAmericans001_zpsec046333.jpg (http://s1308.photobucket.com/user/joe152/media/The%20Americans/TheAmericans001_zpsec046333.jpg.html)

http://i1308.photobucket.com/albums/s618/joe152/The%20Americans/TheAmericans013_zps2a2fe653.jpg (http://s1308.photobucket.com/user/joe152/media/The%20Americans/TheAmericans013_zps2a2fe653.jpg.html)

http://i1308.photobucket.com/albums/s618/joe152/The%20Americans/TheAmericans012_zps9dbcaee1.jpg (http://s1308.photobucket.com/user/joe152/media/The%20Americans/TheAmericans012_zps9dbcaee1.jpg.html)

http://i1308.photobucket.com/albums/s618/joe152/The%20Americans/TheAmericans002_zpsd3ca4dfd.jpg (http://s1308.photobucket.com/user/joe152/media/The%20Americans/TheAmericans002_zpsd3ca4dfd.jpg.html)

http://i1308.photobucket.com/albums/s618/joe152/The%20Americans/TheAmericans003_zpse089721a.jpg (http://s1308.photobucket.com/user/joe152/media/The%20Americans/TheAmericans003_zpse089721a.jpg.html)

[gew98]

What is the sliding sling loop modification on your WW2 era 03 ?. Something for UK target shooters ?.

[dromia]

Just how I rig it single point for my shooting the butt end of the sling is just hooked forward for tidiness in the photo. Not military rigged I know.

[Scharfschuetze]

For those not familiar with slings used for marksmanship, that's a US 1907 sling design on the 1903 and while it will carry the rifle on your shoulder, it's also a great piece of kit for accurate shooting. Instead of me trying to describe how to use it, here's a good article by Ray-Vinf from his website. While it looks complicated, once understood, it's fast and useful, especially in the kneeling, sitting and prone positions.

http://www.ray-vin.com/tech/slinghelp/slinghelp.htm

This sling is still in use by the US Army on match rifles and sniper rifles. We taught its use to the point it was second nature to our advanced marksmen and snipers. I believe that the 1907 sling was also issued with the No 4 (T) sniper rifle by the British. My No 4 (T) and No 7 rifles have a sling swivel forward of the magazine for its attachment, although I'm not quite sure on how the British used it.

Dromia,
That's a very nice collection of US service rifles. Looks like you had your presentation of US cartridge development well covered from the 50/70, 45/70, 30/40 and the 30/06. Sans peur et sans reproche, eh?

Here are some of mine. I've posted the photos before, but they seem apropos for this thread.

[dromia]

That sling is actually off my no 4T, it wasn't popular as they found the leather slippery in the wet. My no 4T currently sports a trials sling similar to the 1907 but made with webbing eventually they just settled on the issue webbing pattern sling although the no 4T was still issued with the 1907.

From what I have been told by ex no 4T military users the 1907 was instructed in it one point use however with the sling swivel on the kingscrew the webbing sling would be slung tween that and the forend swivel giving a good two point target sling, this method was used during the first half of the 20th century by target shooters and the single point only really gaining ground during the late 1950s. I still prefer that two point fixing, just habit I suppose.

[Larry Gibson]

Back in the day when the M1903 was still classed as a "service rifle" for the NMC the rear part of the M1907 sling had to be hooked through the rear sling swivel on the butt of the rifle. Since the m1903 rifle no longer is a "service rifle" (if used you compete in "match rifle" category) one can use the sling with the rear detached as a "single point" sling as dromia has it. That's what most of us do. I'm not sure what the rules are for the CMP "military rifle" matches?

I notice dromia has the main loop going through only one of the keepers twice. Is there a reason the other keeper only has the main loop through it once, dromia?

Larry Gibson

[dromia]

I just find that when the sling is under tension it locks the bottom one in better that way.

[Larry Gibson]

I just find that when the sling is under tension it locks the bottom one in better that way.

Can't argue with success! Hold hard and shoot straight. Those are very nice looking rifles BTW.

Larry Gibson

[dromia]

Thank you and I can confirm that they are all fine cast boolit shooters.

[Scharfschuetze]

I'm getting a bit off topic, but didn't Jeff Cooper propose and write about a similar sling that the British used? I think he may have even called it a "Ching Sling." Perhaps he got the idea from our fine friends and comrades from across the pond.

I found this photo on the web.

[Larry Gibson]

Have to research it but I thick the Col. referred to some kind of arrangement where the Brits hooked the rear of the sling in the metal loop in front of the magazine on SMLEs or No4s forming a 2 point loop so all pressure holding the rifle was applied to the fore stock. I added a sling swivel stud to a scout rifle I had years ago and used a US web sling as such and it worked very well when hunting. My M700 ADL 22-250 used for coyote hunting is still set up for that sling arrangement. It is very fast and solid, especially in a sitting position; let the loop hang down, insert the arm through the loop so the loop is under the arm pit, bring the hand and wrist down and around the sling (as with the M1907 sling) and assume a normal hold on the fore stock just behind the front sling swivel. If the sling loop is adjusted correctly the loop tightens up and holds the rifle stead just as it does with the M1907 sling. The difference is the rear of the loop is not tightened around the arm. Hence it is very fast to get into as a hasty sling but more secure and it does not want to twist the rifle to the side as does a tight hasty sling.

The "Ching Sling" is a commercial adaptation of the which also keeps a separate strap secured to the butt stock. The Ching Sling works well butt is not as good on 2 piece stocks (SMLE, No 4s and non-tubed ARs) because it still adds tension to the butt stock (as in the picture you posted). With a tight enough Ching Sling the front end of the rifle can be torqued down adversely affecting the zero.

Larry Gibson

[JeffinNZ]

Adam, I sure like that 03. The rear sight on the 03 is a thing of beauty and FINE engineering.

[Scharfschuetze]

JeffinNZ,

As you enjoy fine engineering, you would appreciate the PJ O'Hare micrometer device for that 1903 sight. It gives precise elevation adjustments to that sight. It and the 1907 sling were standard equipment for match shooting with the 1903 back in the day.

[gew98]

oi ... the rear sight is a tragetshooters dream but a soldiers nightmare !.

[JeffinNZ]

oi ... the rear sight is a tragetshooters dream but a soldiers nightmare !.

Absolutely. I have an elderly friend with a nice 03 and we discussed the magnificent rear sight. We agreed for the average soldier is was a total waste of money and time.

[Larry Gibson]

Lots of Germans in WWI in particular, Japanese on Guadalcanal and Mexicans would argue that along with a lot of Moro's and others around the world.......if they could that is. Fact is the "battle sight" was most often used, and used well.

Larry Gibson

[dromia]

JeffinNZ,

As you enjoy fine engineering, you would appreciate the PJ O'Hare micrometer device for that 1903 sight. It gives precise elevation adjustments to that sight. It and the 1907 sling were standard equipment for match shooting with the 1903 back in the day.

I find these essential for fine setting of the sight, I have a modern manufacture one.

[dromia]

You can clearly see the 03's rear sight lineage in the Trapdoor's Buffington sight.

[Scharfschuetze]

Yep. That Buffington DNA evolved from the Buffington sight of 1884 through the model 1901 sight of the US Krag-Jorgensen rifles to finally mature into the 1903 Rifle's sight.

[Multigunner]

The standard 1903 Rifle battle sight for the Army was for ranges up to a bit under six hundred yards. The Marines modified their battle sight for a much shorter range for more precise close range shooting without the need to hold low. The righthand rifling canceled out the small leftwards bullet jump at around 600 yards, so if you bore sighted the rifle at six hundred yards it was good to go in the horizontal plane at any closer ranges. At ranges over 600 yards the spindrift was compensated for by the angled track in the ladder sight.The complicated sight was only a problem for those not properly trained to use it. Like any ladder sight it could be damaged by moving about with the ladder up. Hesketh Pritchard pointed that out in his instructions on the use of the P-14 rifles.Plenty of bent or otherwise damaged LE, 93 Mauser and Mosin Nagant ladder sights out there as well .I've seen a few No.4 rifles with one stanchion for the sight pivot pin broken away so ladder sights appear to have been vulnerable no matter how they were mounted.Tangent sights are a little more durable but unless they also have a windage adjustment, and few do, they aren't as good for precise extreme range shooting.

[gew98]

You forget my engineer worm that the 03 sight is of the most delicate nature and hardly in time of war can a recruit be trained to be a proficient target shooter and keep such a delicate thing in working order.
The USMC rear sight consited of a thicker and taller front sight blade..much harder to damage and a larger peep in the filp up ladder , and was only issued to shooting teams. The 1918 Rock Island 03 I had many years ago sported that sight with it's commensurate higher front sight cover. But yet still the rear sight assy was ever so delicate and so easily damaged in the field.

[PAT303]

Look at the second photo and the last on the first page,the M17/P14 action has a well protected rear sight,then look at the '03,the rear sight has no protection at all,no wonder they call them a '98 thats been buggered up. Pat

[Multigunner]

The P-14 rear sight guard only protects the sight when the ladder is not raised.The 93-94-95-96 mauser and Lee Metford and LE ladder rear sights have no protection either, yet no one seems to complain about that.The SMLE MkIII had an excellent tangent sight with windage adjustment but the slender threaded rod of the adjustment wheel was easily broken despite the sturdy rear sight guards. The windage adjustment was deleted from MkIII* rear sights. The GEW 98 Lange sight is unprotected, bulky, and frankly ridiculous looking. The Germans were well shut of that when they went to the more compact tangent sights.The Italian sights were also a bit flimsey.The British had considered using a fixed barrel mounted large diameter apeture sighted for 600 yards for a shortened Volunteers rifle made up from obsolete MLM and LE rifles, but nothing came of that.Fixed barrel mounted apeture sights were later used for some WW2 production Italian and Japanese short rifles and carbines.To avoid damage to a ladder sight just don't run around with the sight raised, the battle sight is there for good reason.

[robertbank]

Very nice collection you have there. Good on you for putting it together.

Now if you want to go on a search for a decent P - 14 for me we can talk. :bigsmyl2:

Take Care

Bob

[nekshot]

very nice indeeed! So, thats what they look like before ole bubba gets on them? The ones I see nowadays look a little differant then those pristine pieces!

[dromia]

Very nice collection you have there. Good on you for putting it together.

Now if you want to go on a search for a decent P - 14 for me we can talk. :bigsmyl2:

Take Care

Bob

I have four in stock at present sir.:wink:

[Larry Gibson]

But yet still the rear sight assy was ever so delicate and so easily damaged in the field.

We hear that a lot from lovers of the MN, Enfields and Mausers owner/lovers........especially after they are out shot by M1903s..........

Fact is I like all of them and have played with and used all of them on the range and "in the field" and I have several of each (except the Enfield of which I only have 1). I haven't seen more damage to any one type of sight over the other. BTW; the Marine mods to the '03s sights did nothing to make them sturdier, just more visible is all. The ladder of the '03 when folded down for Battle Sight use is as protected as many of the other military rifles sights were.

The sight being "delicate" is just so much wishful thinking that never panned out in reality.............

Larry Gibson

[Multigunner]

One USMC accessory that improved front sight protection was the sturdy clip on sight protector.The Army had used a sight protector intended only to protect the sight during transit . That protector was too small to aim through when in place.The USMC version was a full sized sight hood and did not interfere with aiming the rifle.If the Springfield 03 sights were much like the Buffington sight used on the Trapdoor Springfield then it was a design already well proven by decades of guerilla warfare under the most grueling conditions and against a savage and resourceful enemy.

[Larry Gibson]

Multigunner

There you go attempting to confuse the issue with facts:groner:

Larry Gibson

[robertbank]

I have four in stock at present sir.:wink:

Now if getting a P 14 fron the U.K. was easier than me building Canada's next fighter plane I would be all over you like a damp shirt in the tropics.

Thinking.....nope I don't have enough years left to pull it off.:-o

Hoarder!:bigsmyl2:

Take Care

Bob

[Multigunner]

But yet still the rear sight assy was ever so delicate and so easily damaged in the field. We hear that a lot from lovers of the MN, Enfields and Mausers owner/lovers........especially after they are out shot by M1903s..........Yep they simply can't get over the fact that the Springfield was always the most accurate battle rifle.The Springfield sight was designed to be used by dedicated and highly trained marksmen, while most other battle rifles had sights designed for ham handed inbred peasants and the developmentally disabled who weren't expected to be able to hit the ground with a rifle if they dropped it.Those with a prejudice against the Springfield will find some way to damage the sight if they possibly can. They've heard the sight can be damaged and by the great horned toad they will prove that to their satisfaction if they have to take a hammer to it.They also can't be bothered to search for instructions on how to use it properly.If anyone here doesn't respect the Springfield then they certainly should never own one. If they have one they should donate it to the VFW before they wreck it trying to duplicate some accident they read about.I've seen jokers who having heard that firing a 7.92 cartridge in a .30-06 chamber will blow up a rifle, something that has happened in the distant past to the M1917 rifle, then by cracky they just have to try it themselves so they'll have a good story to tell.I once caught a guy grinding the muzzle of a shotgun into the mud intending to see if you could really split the barrel by firing a 12 ga with mud in the barrel. It wasn't his shotgun of course. Some people are just plain stupid and are poster boys for gun control.One much like that managed to shoot the end of his finger off practicing his quick draw, killed a neighbors cow when he thought a stack of hay bales was a good back stop for a .308, and had when a youngster actually put one of his eyes out with a BB gun.He insisted I try out some 12 ga shells he had reloaded. After he left I cut those shells up and burned the powder.Theres no way I'd try firing anything that yahoo had reloaded.Also you have those who have heard that dry firing without a snapper cap can't possibly damage a firing pin. Then they break their firing pin by using the gun like it was a cap buster and blame the manufacturer or the design or both.Just because worn firing pin holes can cause cratered or blown primers or tips worn on one side till the point is like an awl that can pierce a primer is no reason to doubt what they've been told.Not to mention those who will do the same to a cap& ball gun and batter the nipples and the hammer into uselessness without giving it a thought.They fire 80 year old MG range pickups they bought by the bucket full at a gunshow and decry the poor quality control of the manufacturer or blame the rifle.They'll tell you that hangfires are nothing to be concerned about, and will ignore incidents where men have lost fingers or an eye when a hangfire detonates while they are opening the action or when ejecting the supposed dud, sometimes after waiting for minutes.Its bad luck to let them even see a rifle much less hold it.

[dale2242]

WHAT??? No M1 carbine nor M1 Garand in that beautiful collection?......dale

[gew98]

But yet still the rear sight assy was ever so delicate and so easily damaged in the field.

We hear that a lot from lovers of the MN, Enfields and Mausers owner/lovers........especially after they are out shot by M1903s..........

Fact is I like all of them and have played with and used all of them on the range and "in the field" and I have several of each (except the Enfield of which I only have 1). I haven't seen more damage to any one type of sight over the other. BTW; the Marine mods to the '03s sights did nothing to make them sturdier, just more visible is all. The ladder of the '03 when folded down for Battle Sight use is as protected as many of the other military rifles sights were.

The sight being "delicate" is just so much wishful thinking that never panned out in reality.............

Larry Gibson

Larry ; I have to disagree with you on this ocmpletely. As a collector and shooter I have come across more rear sights on 03's that were so loose as to travel left or right under recoil. Some were crudely peened to abate that issue, I have seen gobs with bent ladders and damaged knobs and slides bent that put the tiny rear notch in a rather odd position. It's one of the last rifles I would ever want to be saddled with in combat. Not to mention I have encountered more than once front sights flopping around as the tiney screw backed out and went awol with only the loose fitting sheet metal "protector holding it on the base. It's a range queen..that is all.

[Multigunner]

If you judge all Springfield 1903 rifles by a few wall hangers and slam danced ROTC rifles offered at inflated prices you might as well judge all Lee Enfields by the DP'ed and seized Afghan guerilla rifles they stacked on pallets for fifty years.Most SMLE rifles don't have their original rear sights. I've found up to five lined out serial numbers on SMLE sight rails.I've also found No.4 sights with a 1/32 inch lateral play. Some had shims that may have come from the factory.I've found a few SMLE sights with side play and a couple that would bind tight in the bed on one side when at lowest elevation. When the rear handguards shink up recoil can push the guard up under the sight so it won't stay at the lower elevations from one shot to the next. Thats usually only a problem with those that have the hand guard fingers cut away but can happen regardless due to shrinkage of the wood. A quick fix is to trim away some wood from the offending surface of the rear handguard.I've found some where a improperly fitted replacement handguard prevents the sight from being fully lowered.I've found Mauser and SMLE sights with the pivots cranked, buggered and loose so the zero shifts in the horizontal plane at anything other than point blank range. The Germans sometimes found that rifles sighted in at the factory couldn't get on paper beyond 300 meters. They blamed that on sabotage by slave labor. No rear sights were immune to damage.

[gew98]

If you judge all Springfield 1903 rifles by a few wall hangers and slam danced ROTC rifles offered at inflated prices you might as well judge all Lee Enfields by the DP'ed and seized Afghan guerilla rifles they stacked on pallets for fifty years.Most SMLE rifles don't have their original rear sights. I've found up to five lined out serial numbers on SMLE sight rails.I've also found No.4 sights with a 1/32 inch lateral play. Some had shims that may have come from the factory.I've found a few SMLE sights with side play and a couple that would bind tight in the bed on one side when at lowest elevation. When the rear handguards shink up recoil can push the guard up under the sight so it won't stay at the lower elevations from one shot to the next. Thats usually only a problem with those that have the hand guard fingers cut away but can happen regardless due to shrinkage of the wood. A quick fix is to trim away some wood from the offending surface of the rear handguard.I've found some where a improperly fitted replacement handguard prevents the sight from being fully lowered.I've found Mauser and SMLE sights with the pivots cranked, buggered and loose so the zero shifts in the horizontal plane at anything other than point blank range. The Germans sometimes found that rifles sighted in at the factory couldn't get on paper beyond 300 meters. They blamed that on sabotage by slave labor. No rear sights were immune to damage.

There you gfo again with more protectionist yawnings of a mediocre issue rifle. Plus they way you dither left right and about in a non sequitir fashion makes for soem dizzy reading.
Anyhow I have lampooned the "quality" of the 1903 line and verse from books I have of well respected shooters from back in the day. They were not that impressed with the issue springy and ammo. Was that sabotage or just lowest bidder get's the job. Obviously the latter.

[Multigunner]

The WW1 ammo could be a serious problem, as it was for the British with both American commercial contract ammo and British "New factory" ammunition.
At least when a defective lot of Remington ammo showed up Remington shipped it back to the U S and remanufatured it. The Military arsenals also produced a bad lot of primers due to the war interfering with obtaining pure uncontaminated Chlorates. Luckily U S sporting cartridge manufacturers had earlier developed a primer compound that nuetralized the contaminates and the offending lot was remanufactured with good primers. None of that bad lot made it into the war zone.

In WW2 some M2 ammo was of mediocre quality, if grouping no better that the average for MkVII ball is considered mediocre. Normally the Mean Radius/ "Figure of merit" acceptance specifications required .30-06 ammo to group twice as well as British .303 MkVII.


Don't know who's books you've been reading but the only complaints I've heard about the accuracy of any Springfield has been that the 03A3 was usually a tad less accurate than a 1903 at longer ranges.
Another complaint was that the Garand was better suited for modern warfare.

British publications of the WW1 era are often full of praise for the accuracy of the 1903, and the 03A3 grew out of a prototype of an improved 1903 requested by the British and chambered for the .303 cartridge.
French and German officers also praised the accuracy of troops armed with the M1903. Germans were falling like flies from single rounds fired at ranges up to seven hundred yards and despite the primitive scopes of the day one USMC sniper nailed six officers and gunners in a row at 1400 yards before they wounded him with artillery fire.
In WW2 an American sniper who had lost two brothers to German snipers became a sniper hunter, killing 56 German snipers and officers before he too was wounded by artillery fire and taken prisoner.
A German officer who had found an issue of Stars and Stripes with that man's photo and his story when his score had stood at 36 looked him up in the POW camp because he wanted to talk to the man who had killed so many of his men.
Sniping field phone wire laying parties and shooting at anything that moves can make for higher scores but U S snipers saved their shots for high risk targets of true value.
One U S sniper on seeing a Chinese soldier sent out to deepen a trench where he had nailed a few men earlier took pity on him and simply put a round through his shovel every time he raised it, the Chinese soldier soon crawled away leaving the job unfinished.
With an army of talented marksmen the sniper often found his scoped rifle was not necessary, the regular Joes could knock off most targets of opportunity without his help.
The British with the cheapo dingy STEN Guns had to rely on a Sniper to even the odds. With no autoloaders and often few rifles and those few rifles often bearing the overly simplied L sight their individual marksmanship was seldom put to proper use.
The Germans and Russians also found that the SMG was noreal substitute for the rifle, but at least they had the firesight to begin developing a proper autoloading infantry rifle while the British sat on their hands.
The British wanted a Springfield chambered for the .303 when they could more easily have asked Remington for a restart of production of the P-14. As it was the British bought thousands of new production 1903 rifles from Remington and shipped many to New Zealand and other allies and kept some in England.
The U S also supplied some new production 1903 and 03A3 rifles to allies, never heard of any complaints from any of those users.

[Garyshome]

Now that's some fine hardware!

[dromia]

Thank you, I don't really own my guns, I am just keeping them in trust for future generations