Finest Sniper Rifle of WWII?

[Centuriator]

Interesting article by Bruce Canfield on the M1903A1/UNERTLE USMC Sniper Rifle.

An Official Journal Of The NRA | The M1903A1/Unertl USMC Sniper Rifle

Adopted by the Marines after Pearl Harbor, the combination of the M1903A1 Springfield with a Unertl riflescope was arguably the finest sniper rifle of World War II.

www.americanrifleman.org

 

[Sooter76]

I have to respectfully disagree... The 1903A1 rifle the Marine Corps used was a perfectly ‘capable’ rifle topped with a scope that more than doubled the magnification of almost any other optic used by any other country. I think more than anything else the scope blinds many to how average the rifle was compared to other contemporary sniper rifles.

For my money the best sniper rifle of the war was the British Lee Enfield No4 (T). While all countries hand selected their sniper rifles based on tested accuracy, only Britain then took those rifles to be further accurized and hand fitted by professionals who understood what it took to really squeeze the most mechanical accuracy out of a rifle. This isn’t to say that there weren’t 1903A1 rifles (or Mausers or Russian PU’s, etc) that one for one weren’t more accurate than some British (T) rifles, but no other sniper rifles were hand built for its purpose.

 

[cplnorton]

Some of the facts that were written in the Canfield article are completely wrong. The thing that I'm discouraged with is the similarities of an article that I wrote a year ago on the same subject for the Fall 2018 Garand Collector's Journal.

 

[Centuriator]

Some of the facts that were written in the Canfield article are completely wrong. The thing that I'm discouraged with is the similarities of an article that I wrote a year ago on the same subject for the Fall 2018 Garand Collector's Journal.

Were you plagiarized? And what were the factual errors in the article?

 

[mongoosesnipe]

when we think of sniping from the modern ideal of a lone man or pair wandering into the combat zone to take a single shot at extreme long range the 03a1 sniper rifle seems great but in actual combat use the 8x uertl has a very narrow field of view

 

[cplnorton]

I'm going to post my article when I get home on here and then I will discuss what I saw that is not correct...

 

[cplnorton]

This is my Article from the Garand Collector Journal in the fall of 2018, contradicting the info that is stated in all of the books.

 

[Son of Dorn]

The USMC 1903 was probably the best American sniper rifle of the war (which is what the article says at the end, not that it was the #1 overall best) but I agree with @Sooter76 about the Lee-Enfield being better. Integral cheekrest, specially rebuilt by Holland & Holland, a windage-adjustable scope designed for the task and to withstand military use (and a scope mount likewise), and if you wanna add the 10-round magazine, there's something of an advantage there.

 

[Centuriator]

I'll look forward to reading your article, thanks for posting it.

 

[Ledzep]

The USMC 1903 was probably the best American sniper rifle of the war (which is what the article says at the end, not that it was the #1 overall best) but I agree with @Sooter76 about the Lee-Enfield being better. Integral cheekrest, specially rebuilt by Holland & Holland, a windage-adjustable scope designed for the task and to withstand military use (and a scope mount likewise), and if you wanna add the 10-round magazine, there's something of an advantage there.

I'm going off of foggy memory here, but wasn't the No.32 scope repurposed to fit on the No.4? I had thought it was originally meant for machinegun/tripod use.

At any rate, the No.4 mk1(T) probably makes the most sense for WWII era ammunition and rifle accuracy. The 91/30, SVT40, K98k, G41, G43 variations I think left much to be desired either in windage adjustment, accuracy, cheek weld, etc. I don't think the M1903a4 has enough zoom with the little 2.5x Weavers. With all of that said, I don't have another surplus rifle that I've taken to 1000yd and reliably hit torso plates with, but I have with my 1903 Unertl clone build. A relatively frail scope, sure, but probably the MOST capable/repeatable for long range of anything fielded in WWII.

 

[Son of Dorn]

I'm going off of foggy memory here, but wasn't the No.32 scope repurposed to fit on the No.4? I had thought it was originally meant for machinegun/tripod use.

At any rate, the No.4 mk1(T) probably makes the most sense for WWII era ammunition and rifle accuracy. The 91/30, SVT40, K98k, G41, G43 variations I think left much to be desired either in windage adjustment, accuracy, cheek weld, etc. I don't think the M1903a4 has enough zoom with the little 2.5x Weavers. With all of that said, I don't have another surplus rifle that I've taken to 1000yd and reliably hit torso plates with, but I have with my 1903 Unertl clone build. A relatively frail scope, sure, but probably the MOST capable/repeatable for long range of anything fielded in WWII.

I cannot answer that; I don't know myself. But either way, the No. 32 was designed for military application whether for a machine gun or for a rifle, instead of the civilian market like the Unertl and Weaver scopes. But yeah, I didn't mention it in my post but each rifle had its advantages and disadvantages to the point that I don't think there's really a clear winner. Springfield with the C-stock had (imo) the best grip and magnification if it was a USMC model; M91/30 was at least rugged and easy to take care of but the recoil and length weren't so beneficial; Kar98k had the strong Mauser action and the 8mm ammo had better energy vs the .30-06 but it had so many teething issues with scope mounting until late in the war. But I do lean towards the Lee-Enfield as #1 and (maybe I'm just biased, being a Mauser fan buuut...) the Kar98k as #2. They're what I would choose, if I had to.

 

[Sooter76]

I'm going off of foggy memory here, but wasn't the No.32 scope repurposed to fit on the No.4? I had thought it was originally meant for machinegun/tripod use.

At any rate, the No.4 mk1(T) probably makes the most sense for WWII era ammunition and rifle accuracy. The 91/30, SVT40, K98k, G41, G43 variations I think left much to be desired either in windage adjustment, accuracy, cheek weld, etc. I don't think the M1903a4 has enough zoom with the little 2.5x Weavers. With all of that said, I don't have another surplus rifle that I've taken to 1000yd and reliably hit torso plates with, but I have with my 1903 Unertl clone build. A relatively frail scope, sure, but probably the MOST capable/repeatable for long range of anything fielded in WWII.

The first generation of the no32 scope was originally meant for the Bren machine gun. Regardless it offered real in the field adjustment for the shooter.

The point I was trying to make was that the strength of the 1903A1 was its scope, not the rifle itself. Rifle for rifle if all the WWII sniper rifles were topped with the Unertl scope all would be capable of hitting out to 1000 yards, but because the (T) was actually purpose re-built to be a sniper rifle (and because the .303 cartridge actually get more accurate farther out) it would probably prove to be the most consistently accurate.

 

[fdkay]

Not WWII, but late WWI vintage, likely the equal of most in WWII.

 

[sirhrmechanic]

Despite what the movies show... the Americans (Marines included) had a relatively poorly-evolve program of military sniping in WW2. And even the pre-war Marksmanship team Marines who went on to help evolve the Scout Sniper concept during Guadalcanal had to back down because Vandegrift did not like 'elite' Marines. He wanted all Marines to be elite. So after he took over as Commandant from Holcomb, who had embraced the concepts, he got rid of para-Marines, Raiders and lots of other interesting concepts that have since come back into being. I interviewed Ed Bearss a few years ago for a book project and he was one of the Scout Sniper plankowners. Interesting guy. I tried to get Frank to do an interview or podcast with him, but they never got together.

The P14 certainly is a great contender. As is the Marine 03. The Garand had the fast-follow-up and 'stillness' advantage. And we can't forget the Japanese Arisaka's. They had a very evolved pre-war program, though it was a little to 'kamakaze' for most of our liking... tying one's self in the top of a banana tree was not a strategy for snipery survival. And towards the end of the war, the German G-K43 had the potential to be remarkable, but they ran out of... everything.

But the real ones to look at, IMHO, are the German 98's and the Russian Nagants. In the hands of very evolved sniper programs. The Germans used sniping on the defensive like noone before or since.

And don't leave out the Finns. Though I am not sure they were what we would call 'snipers' vs. very evolved partisans or unconventional warriors with a long history of being able to shoot holes in holes. IIRC, they had a Sako-made Nagant variant that was about off-the-shelf.

That's the problem with trying to pick history's best. Always shades of gray.

Sirhr

 

[Jscb1b]

The first generation of the no32 scope was originally meant for the Bren machine gun. Regardless it offered real in the field adjustment for the shooter.

The point I was trying to make was that the strength of the 1903A1 was its scope, not the rifle itself. Rifle for rifle if all the WWII sniper rifles were topped with the Unertl scope all would be capable of hitting out to 1000 yards, but because the (T) was actually purpose re-built to be a sniper rifle (and because the .303 cartridge actually get more accurate farther out) it would probably prove to be the most consistently accurate.

How does the .303 get more accurate farther out?

 

[TonyTheTiger]

How does the .303 get more accurate farther out?

Thats when I became confused as well...

 

[Hairy Biker]

How does the .303 get more accurate farther out?

There is black magic involved with the rear locking action. In recent history the No4 action has been preferred for the "longs" on Full Bore ranges in some Commonwealth countries due to this attribute. The SMLE is faster on the rapids but the No4 brings it together as a single shot. But there is a lot of tuning work that is done and can be done with both a SMLE and No4 to get them to sing on a rifle range.

But for actual war fighting, given the ranges, the No4 (T) is a robust beast designed around and for a mix of stress and unconventional positional shooting. It has a cheek weld for a start!

 

[Jscb1b]

I'm not understanding. Is it the .303 round or the rifle that gets more accurate? How can a rifle and ammo combination go from a 1.5 MOA(MILS) combo at 100 yards(meters) to a 1 MOA(MILS) combo at 500 yards(meters)?

 

[Sooter76]

How does the .303 get more accurate farther out?

I don’t pretend to understand how it works... However, after the war the US Army tested the accuracy of all the major powers sniper rifles and found that the LE and the .303 groups tightened up farther out. If a rifle shot 2 MOA at 100 yards it might shoot 1.5 MOA at 400.

 

[Random Guy]

I really like my 1903 with 8x scope, but I agree British No 4 T was superior during WWII:

1. Military designed/heavy duty scope with BDC drum out to I think 800 yds. Most - but NOT all - other scopes of WWII were fragile commercial scopes, and water leaked into most of them.
2. No 32 Scope also had windage adjustments and scope mount was strong/bullet proof.
3. Rifles custom made by H&H and were carefully fitted together.
4. Stock actually had a effective and purpose built cheek piece(!) - so it was hands down winner in ergonomics.
5. Magazine held 10 rds.
6. Rifles were tested for accuracy.

(As an aside, the wooden transport cases for the No 4 snipers were better than anything I’ve seen from WWII).

My 2cts.

 

[Jscb1b]

I'm switching all my rifles to .303. F-class here I come!

 

[Son of Dorn]

"The No4 (T) is a robust beast"

Well the Lee-Enfield was designed by a Scotsman, after all, and the Scots had some absolute mad lads in that war. If the rifle wasn't a "robust beast", it would be a disservice to the Scottish people as a whole!

 

[Sooter76]

I'm switching all my rifles to .303. F-class here I come!

Lol... That it gets more accurate farther out isn’t the same thing as saying there aren’t better options.

 

[Jscb1b]

Just messing around! I don't understand how something becomes more accurate the futher away your target is.

 

[Huskydriver]

Just messing around! I don't understand how something becomes more accurate the futher away your target is.

It doesn't

 

[Jscb1b]

It doesn't

Thanks for calling BS!

 

[Hairy Biker]

Accuracy does not degrade to the same degree at long range. This is replicated in both .303 and in .308 but is more evident in the .303. During the late 1920, the British Army reviewed this at Bisley and apparently determined that .303 ammunition shot tighter, less vertical, groups at longer range.

It is quite complicated, based on the design of the rifle, the nature of wood, and barrel harmonics. As I said above, target rifle shooters have spent a lot of time exploiting this for long range shooting and there is a black art to building and tuning a good No4. But with the passing generations, this knowledge is evaporating.

 

[Huskydriver]

Accuracy does not degrade to the same degree at long range. This is replicated in both .303 and in .308 but is more evident in the .303. During the late 1920, the British Army reviewed this at Bisley and apparently determined that .303 ammunition shot tighter, less vertical, groups at longer range.

It is quite complicated, based on the design of the rifle, the nature of wood, and barrel harmonics. As I said above, target rifle shooters have spent a lot of time exploiting this for long range shooting and there is a black art to building and tuning a good No4. But with the passing generations, this knowledge is evaporating.

Snake oil horse crap. Bullets travel in an arc. They don't change direction midflight. If you shoot a 5 round group at 100 yards and they are in a 2" circle the dispersion of their flights arcs don't somehow magically all curve back from a 20" spread to a 10" spread at 1000 yards. All the bullets would travel along their respective arcs and move the direction wind pushed them

 

[Ledzep]

Have the reports/documentation Biker?

I've seen testing done and what I saw was the same groups shot through paper at 100 and again into paper at 500 and the groups were the same shape just bigger at 500. In other words, it would suggest that there is no eccentric movement about an axis that could result in tighter groups further down range.

Seen similar effect on accoustic targets at 100 and 300.

 

[Hairy Biker]

As I said it is complicated and relates to barrel harmonics and rear locking actions not to mention cordite rounds - the research is from 1929. Suggest some research required on your part - a lot of this is Target Rifle knowledge. But this is off topic to the question of WWII and the sniper rifle. My bias is to the No4 (T).

 

[tunaman]

Finn M28 - read up on Sino and then check back in.

 

[silhouette]

I used to shoot a lot of Service Rifle comps years ago and the 2 most common rifles on our range were the SMLE and the Swedish Mauser M96.
The SMLE with its 10 rd mag and slick action had a distinct advantage over the M96, but the 303 cartridge was no comparison to the venerable 6.5x55.

Over 100 years ago Lee Enfield came up with a 10 round, staggered feed, detachable magazine that could be reloaded while still in the action and to this day, nobody has been able to improve on it.

Personally I prefer (and still have) the SMLE for nostalgic reasons, but that just my 2c.

 

[cplnorton]

If you guys are interested in the USMC Unertl Snipers. I don't know if you guys know about this. Tim put up all our research on his website. Which includes all the actual source documents so you can fact check our findings...

The information that is in the articles above is detailed in much greater detail below in this link. Also if you are interested in the 1903 A5 Winchester Snipers. That info is on that website as well.

USMC NM M1903s, M1903A1 Unertl Sniper Rifles & M1903A4 Sniper Rifles

The most iconic sniper rifle of the Second World War, the USMC M1903A1 8x Unertl equipped sniper rifle was the backbone of Marine snipers in WWII and Korea. Born of the Marine Corps’ elite Na…

usmcweaponry.com

 

[pmclaine]

Some of the facts that were written in the Canfield article are completely wrong. The thing that I'm discouraged with is the similarities of an article that I wrote a year ago on the same subject for the Fall 2018 Garand Collector's Journal.

I was thinking the info regards use of other than C stocks and the information regarding use of A5 rifles at Guadalcanal as well some of the archive documents referenced had the air of Steve Norton about them.

Plagiarism is the sincerest form of flattery.

 

[Son of Dorn]

Finn M28 - read up on Sino and then check back in.

Do you mean Simo Häyhä? I was under the impression he used a basic infantryman's rifle, not a scoped one. Yes, he racked up an impressive kill count; yes, he was a sniper; but does that really mean a unscoped M/28-30 was the best sniper rifle?

 

[1500varmint]

Accuracy does not degrade to the same degree at long range. This is replicated in both .303 and in .308 but is more evident in the .303. During the late 1920, the British Army reviewed this at Bisley and apparently determined that .303 ammunition shot tighter, less vertical, groups at longer range.

It is quite complicated, based on the design of the rifle, the nature of wood, and barrel harmonics. As I said above, target rifle shooters have spent a lot of time exploiting this for long range shooting and there is a black art to building and tuning a good No4. But with the passing generations, this knowledge is evaporating.

This is where I land as well.

If you lined up paper targets one behind the other from 100 to 500 yards i don't understand the physics/math that would somehow change the larger MOA group at 100 yards to a smaller one at 500???

 

[tunaman]

Do you mean Simo Häyhä? I was under the impression he used a basic infantryman's rifle, not a scoped one. Yes, he racked up an impressive kill count; yes, he was a sniper; but does that really mean a unscoped M/28-30 was the best sniper rifle?

Yes, that Simo. True that he didn’t use a scope, but he was considered one of the greatest snipers in that era and results are what make the man, no?

Most of the M96 rifles were fitted with iron sights - there were only 5300 fitted with scopes during WWII.

 

[Sooter76]

Snake oil horse crap. Bullets travel in an arc. They don't change direction midflight. If you shoot a 5 round group at 100 yards and they are in a 2" circle the dispersion of their flights arcs don't somehow magically all curve back from a 20" spread to a 10" spread at 1000 yards. All the bullets would travel along their respective arcs and move the direction wind pushed them

You’re misconstruing what is actually being said. It’s not that the dispersion tightens and gets smaller between 100 yards and 500 yards, it’s that the dispersion doesn’t enlarge to the same degree. The accuracy of the round doesn’t degrade as much over the same distance. A LE that prints 2” at 100 yards isn’t going to print 2” at 500, but instead of printing 10” at 500 it might print 7” because the accuracy doesn’t degrade to the level you would expect.

 

[Huskydriver]

You’re misconstruing what is actually being said. It’s not that the dispersion tightens and gets smaller between 100 yards and 500 yards, it’s that the dispersion doesn’t enlarge to the same degree. The accuracy of the round doesn’t degrade as much over the same distance. A LE that prints 2” at 100 yards isn’t going to print 2” at 500, but instead of printing 10” at 500 it might print 7” because the accuracy doesn’t degrade to the level you would expect.

Lol....riiiiiight. The bullet just magically slows its vector mid flight got it This is almost as funny as talking with a flat earther

 

[Centuriator]

But we have a person here who says he put 3 rounds into a group just over 1/2" at 700 yards.

 

[Huskydriver]

But we have a person here who says he put 3 rounds into a group just over 1/2" at 700 yards.

1/2" moa or literally 1/2"?

 

[Centuriator]

He claims 1/2"

 

[Huskydriver]

He claims 1/2"

Who claims that and let me guess it was with a mosin too?

 

[natdscott]

But we have a person here who says he put 3 rounds into a group just over 1/2" at 700 yards.

He probably did, within a pattern of 100 rounds.

 

[acudaowner]

any weapon in the right hands could pull off incredible feats . look at
Ivan Sidorenko
With 500 confirmed kills, diligent training of 250 other snipers, and a rank of major by the end of the war, Sidorenko was the most accomplished of the Soviet he was lucky he was even given ammo let alone shoes and his story is amazing with a nothing fancy gun , and there are many other stories of others pretty much in the same boat with not uber expensive guns , or incredible glass just the will to live and a drive do so and skill

 

[Son of Dorn]

Yes, that Simo. True that he didn’t use a scope, but he was considered one of the greatest snipers in that era and results are what make the man, no?

Most of the M96 rifles were fitted with iron sights - there were only 5300 fitted with scopes during WWII.

That's a fair consideration and Simo's track record speaks for itself. But I personally would not consider a rifle indistinguishable from the default infantryman's arm to be a true "sniper rifle" regardless of who used it and how.

 

[Centuriator]

Who claims that and let me guess it was with a mosin too?

https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/500-yard-and-700-yard-groups.6967243/

 

[steve123]

I agree that each vintage sniper rifle I shot had things I liked and disliked about it.

In vintage silhouette my best score and a match win was with the Swedish M41B. Why, mostly the higher BC projectiles, the low recoil, and it was as accurate as my modern tactical rifle was at the time. Practicing at a 421Y turkey I was hitting it but couldn't tell where, drove down and all the rounds were in the base of the leg!!!

I did like the extra magnification of the 8x Unertl on the Marine, the ergos, and the trigger. The 2.5x scope wasn't enough mag for me.

The K31 was post war right? It's my favorite of the unscoped old rifles.

 

[TonyTheTiger]

The K31 was post war right? It's my favorite of the unscoped old rifles.

No, but its non-combatant status keeps it out of these discussions. By far my favorite mil-surp rifle though.

 

[hlee]

I didn't read every comment, but "In before any mention of 'sleeping bullets...'"