M40A1 or M40A3 or M40A5

[deltawiskey]

I will build one later on

Its not perfect, but this has been tempting me for months... you could throw it in that stock and keep me from thinking I need to buy it : )

Firearms - SOLD - Custom Shop 308 Barreled Action

Started life as a Remington Custom Shop Model 40-XS Tactical 416 SS action chambered in 308 Winchester 1:10" Twist barrel at 24" nonthreaded. First trip was to a Clayton Smith at West Texas Ordnance who is a prior USMC Gunsmith and added the following items to convert it to a similar M40A5...

www.snipershide.com

DW

 

[Charlie112]

I hope this is the correct place to ask this question concerning M40A1 scope mounting issue.
I received my M40A1 from Raven yesterday, very happy about that!!!
I am mounting a Weaver T-10 in a TWOMAN ATTACK base and rings, or attempting to. The front bell is touching the barrel, looks like I will have to shim a little.
Where would be the correct place to add a shim, under the front of the base, or both front and rear bases ??? Cut my shim stock and lay out the screw patterns and install??[ I am thinking shim both front and rear base]
I saw a picture of a T-10 installed on another M40A1,it looked nice, What am I missing??
Thanks, Charlie 112

 

[RTH1800]

Shimming is not really a precise operation even with shim stock. If you shim I would suggest you shim both. Also consider other options first.

 

[pmclaine]

The T-10 when mounted on the M40A1 was mounted in a Redfield base and I believe low rings. Its likely a higher ring set up than the Unertl clone. The T-10 was prior to the exostence of the Unertl MST.

When I ran a T-10 on my M40 it was mounted in the Badger M40 clone set up they sell.

Buy a Redfield junior base with low rings and you will be fine.

Actually due to the extra girth of the A1 barrel over the M40 varmint barrel you may need medium rings.

Anyway the cost will not be crushing. Ebay should have options for you.

If you want to try to be totally clone correct with 66 marked rings and period base you may be hunting.

 

[nervous]

A1!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[pmclaine]

PS.......That rifle from Raven will be a hammer and the T10 is a fantastic scope.

 

[pmclaine]

A1!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yep Second Recon had a half dozen or so A1s mounted with the T-10. Legit scope.

They didnt use the Unertl base and rings though.

Likely they recycled bases/rings from the original 40 series.

They also welded them up real funky.

Note not Unertl base rings.

 

[Charlie112]

Yep Second Recon had a half dozen or so A1s mounted with the T-10. Legit scope.

They didnt use the Unertl base and rings though.

Likely they recycled bases/rings from the original 40 series.

They also welded them up real funky.

Note not Unertl base rings.

View attachment 7344097

View attachment 7344098

Thanks for the reply!! I have the Redfield base and rings, Raven just welded and cut the front access slot , I will try that set up, I held them up to the other set on the rifle, looked close, might have to get the med rings. I might have some Mediums now that my brain is working, will follow with some pics when I get it figured out.....

 

[Charlie112]

Well,
Something doesn't seem right. I have what appears to me as two sets of medium Redfield rings, one welded up and the other new in the box. The box is marked 1", spilt [MEDIUM], 522605, these match the other pair I had welded up and the notch cut for access. When I in stalled them back on the rifle, there is no difference. The scope is still hitting the barrel.
Looking at the picture above and knowing I am not getting a complete side view, the scope looks close, just like mine except mine is contacting the barrel.
I placed my machine squares along side the Unertl Base and rings, Redfield base and rings, both sets of Redfields, they are all really close to being the same.
I am be fkeled,,,, is there a taller Redfield ring than the Medium??
Thanks

 

[mcm308]

Well,
Something doesn't seem right. I have what appears to me as two sets of medium Redfield rings, one welded up and the other new in the box. The box is marked 1", spilt [MEDIUM], 522605, these match the other pair I had welded up and the notch cut for access. When I in stalled them back on the rifle, there is no difference. The scope is still hitting the barrel.
Looking at the picture above and knowing I am not getting a complete side view, the scope looks close, just like mine except mine is contacting the barrel.
I placed my machine squares along side the Unertl Base and rings, Redfield base and rings, both sets of Redfields, they are all really close to being the same.
I am be fkeled,,,, is there a taller Redfield ring than the Medium??
Thanks

The only thing I can think of... your setup requires the earlier M40 profile barrel? Which wasn't as heavy for fat as an A1 barrel?

 

[mcm308]

Wheres DW? He may be able to help you...

 

[Charlie112]

Well, pictures don't lie.,I believe it must be the barrel, my barrel is a spec, HART barrel. Mark[RAVEN] started with the blank and I know that this is correct. I have set the bases up with the rings, checked and re-checked.... but I am not going to get the clearance I need with what I have here... beer time now... maybe tomorrow...

 

[deltawiskey]

Your problem has me baffled... Im pretty sure that I used low rings to mount that scope. I have a different scope on that rifle currently but maybe I can get a measurement for you.
DW

 

[mcm308]

How much interference are you talking about here? Was the top of the action machined down or anything? You said the Smith started with a Hart blank, did he turn the profile on the lathe and maybe its not correct? Just thinking of possibilities that could cause your problems...

 

[Charlie112]

How much interference are you talking about here? Was the top of the action machined down or anything? You said the Smith started with a Hart blank, did he turn the profile on the lathe and maybe its not correct? Just thinking of possibilities that could cause your problems...

As far as interference, I will have some .010 shim stock in the mourning and check that. When I set the scope down in both
rings, before I even tighten them, it is contacting the barrel, the bell will not turn and it put a slight mark on my barrel.
I will try and get pics up tomorrow a.m. Charlie 112

 

[mcm308]

As far as interference, I will have some .010 shim stock in the mourning and check that. When I set the scope down in both
rings, before I even tighten them, it is contacting the barrel, the bell will not turn and it put a slight mark on my barrel.
I will try and get pics up tomorrow a.m. Charlie 112

Thats a tough one. .010 is close..lol

 

[Charlie112]

Thats a tough one. .010 is close..lol

Copy on close, lol, I will have to layer up to clear. This is just the material I have to work with. The knurls on the bell are hitting my barrel,,,,,

 

[03duce]

M40A1 for sure.Love the smear stocks

 

[pmclaine]

Copy on close, lol, I will have to layer up to clear. This is just the material I have to work with. The knurls on the bell are hitting my barrel,,,,,

That won't work.

There are tall Redfield rings.

I doubt there is anything screwed with your barrel coming from Hart.

There may be some issues with the rear receiver pad as there is a little difference I guess between early Remington's and later Remington's. I don't know when the difference occurs but I understand 6 digit and earlier vary from say a G prefix.

I say your solution is a Redfield base made contemporary with your receiver and than either medium or tall rings.............and a Triad Tactical stock pack with the riser kit.

 

[mcm308]

He said his guy started with a barrel blank so not sure if its a factory Hart taper or the smith put the taper on it. If the smith turned it, its possible its oversize I suppose. Hes only .010, if the barrel was .020 over where the bell sits, theres his problem and it would be hard to tell by eye. There is an old thread on here and it was said the transition rifles were switched from low to medium rings. The medium rings would be correct so in theory everything should work. Nothing else should be different on the rifles with the Redfield and the ones that got the Weavers. I suppose maybe there could be a slight difference in old rings compared to new? Its not like its .125 off.

 

[pmclaine]

@Charlie112

Maybe someone will have a solution here......

Speaking of Redfield bases....... - M40rifle.com

Anyone have any ideas to help this new A1/T10 owner regards the issue he is having mounting his scope? The problem starts at post 102...... https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/m40a1-or-m40a3-or-m40a5.7006206/page-3#post-8606123

www.m40rifle.com

 

[pmclaine]

He said his guy started with a barrel blank so not sure if its a factory Hart taper or the smith put the taper on it. If the smith turned it, its possible its oversize I suppose. Hes only .010, if the barrel was .020 over where the bell sits, theres his problem and it would be hard to tell by eye. There is an old thread on here and it was said the transition rifles were switched from low to medium rings. The medium rings would be correct so in theory everything should work. Nothing else should be different on the rifles with the Redfield and the ones that got the Weavers. I suppose maybe there could be a slight difference in old rings compared to new? Its not like its .125 off.

My best guess is he bought M40 profile and Raven cut he shank and finished muzzle.

Raven will likely do whatever you ask but for something Hart would consider a bread and butter product why put the unnecessary wear and tear on your machine/tooling.

 

[mcm308]

My best guess is he bought M40 profile and Raven cut he shank and finished muzzle.

Raven will likely do whatever you ask but for something Hart would consider a bread and butter product why put the unnecessary wear and tear on your machine/tooling.

My thoughts as well and only mentioned the possibility because the OP said a blank was used.

 

[Charlie112]

First, Thanks to all of you for taking time to help me.
My receiver is a 6 digit, first numbers, 32....
I will get these pics loaded in an hour or so.. Charlie 112

 

[Charlie112]

Here are a few pics of my rifle and mounts...scroll down, I am not very good at pics, ...View attachment 7344631View attachment 7344631a few pics of my rifle with two different mounts and the same Weaver t-10 scope.

View attachment 7344631View attachment 7344631

 

[Charlie112]

DAM, Pics all over hell.....

 

[Crosshairs6]

Definitely the M40A1.

 

[ChanceDoane]

M40A1 is nice

 

[Charlie112]

I have been wanting to get my new rifle to the range using the Weaver T-10 scope, a little impatient but moving on with mounting issue.
I did locate some " high" Redfield mounts, so, when those arrive, I will get to the range with weather permitting, and post what this scope and rifle combo will do.
The main reason I am starting out with the T-10 is that I had this M40A1 built in memory off my father in law . He was in the USMC in Korea with the 1ST Marine Division, 7th Regiment, 2nd Battalion, Easy Company, that is all he told me about his outfit. He was fighting at a place called Boulder City, they were talking at the truce table then.
He was a machine gunner and after the war ended, they sent him back to machine gun schooling Korea, he said they always kept them busy, but he had a big laugh when told to report to school after being in combat. I do not have this piece of paper, but will have one of his boys send me a pic of the card, but after machine gun school in Korea, he said that Chester Puller signed his card, I thought that was pretty neat.
Funny thing he told me one day" The first thing you learn in the Marine Corp is to KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT!! We had a lot of good times together, he passed last spring, God Bless Him!! Hell of a man....

 

[pmclaine]

I have been wanting to get my new rifle to the range using the Weaver T-10 scope, a little impatient but moving on with mounting issue.
I did locate some " high" Redfield mounts, so, when those arrive, I will get to the range with weather permitting, and post what this scope and rifle combo will do.
The main reason I am starting out with the T-10 is that I had this M40A1 built in memory off my father in law . He was in the USMC in Korea with the 1ST Marine Division, 7th Regiment, 2nd Battalion, Easy Company, that is all he told me about his outfit. He was fighting at a place called Boulder City, they were talking at the truce table then.
He was a machine gunner and after the war ended, they sent him back to machine gun schooling Korea, he said they always kept them busy, but he had a big laugh when told to report to school after being in combat. I do not have this piece of paper, but will have one of his boys send me a pic of the card, but after machine gun school in Korea, he said that Chester Puller signed his card, I thought that was pretty neat.
Funny thing he told me one day" The first thing you learn in the Marine Corp is to KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT!! We had a lot of good times together, he passed last spring, God Bless Him!! Hell of a man....

Lewis Burwell Puller nickname "Chesty".

 

[308pirate]

Gorgeous rifles all over this place

Don't have any of them but the A5 is my choice for the first one.

 

[mcm308]

There's just no comparison...

 

[ChanceDoane]

Thats a super M40A1.

 

[Quarter Horse]

You guys are putting together some great stuff. The cost of a build is an obvious concern. The effort to get everything as correct as possible can add considerable dollars. This link to the sale prices at Rock Island Armory might soothe your angry wallets.
https://www.rockislandauction.com/catalog/79/1/?keywords=sniper%20rifles

The aforementioned M-40A1 realized $10,350.00 and I don't know whether that included any upcharges like an 18.5% buyer's premium. I was pretty much stunned by the prices across the board.

 

[kft101]

Why not all of them?

 

[kft101]

You guys are putting together some great stuff. The cost of a build is an obvious concern. The effort to get everything as correct as possible can add considerable dollars. This link to the sale prices at Rock Island Armory might soothe your angry wallets.
https://www.rockislandauction.com/catalog/79/1/?keywords=sniper%20rifles

The aforementioned M-40A1 realized $10,350.00 and I don't whether that included any upcharges like an 18.5% buyer's premium. I was pretty much stunned by the prices across the board.

That price is just what the winning bid was. The buyer's premium and any taxes are tacked on to that. So the final total, not factoring in taxes, would have been at least $12k.

 

[mcm308]

You guys are putting together some great stuff. The cost of a build is an obvious concern. The effort to get everything as correct as possible can add considerable dollars. This link to the sale prices at Rock Island Armory might soothe your angry wallets.
https://www.rockislandauction.com/catalog/79/1/?keywords=sniper%20rifles

The aforementioned M-40A1 realized $10,350.00 and I don't know whether that included any upcharges like an 18.5% buyer's premium. I was pretty much stunned by the prices across the board.

Forget the 40... thats a peanut compared to some of those others. That PSG-1...

 

[Quarter Horse]

Like many, if I were to pick a favorite it would be from my era which would be the M-40. I was over there in '68, '69 and '70 and I don't know whether any of the A1s had made it over yet. The most interesting item for me was the the Dragunov with capture papers from RVN. While in school we were briefed by Langley on the capture bounty program. The Dragunov was on the list in '68. The mis-identification could have been an atttempt to get the papers approved. Tokarev handguns and the SKS were the most common bringbacks when I was there. As for the Major and his associations, who knows. You needed a score card to keep track of who was who.

 

[mcm308]

A couple pics of the old girl the way it would've looked back around 1980.

 

[Random Guy]

couple pics of the old girl the way it would've looked back around 1980.

Good looking rifle, but I think the era would be more of a 1990s look. Back in 1980 the early M40A1 would still all be smear stocks and the Redfield 3-9x scopes. The Unertl scope was adopted in 1980, 25 early scopes were delivered that year for testing, but deliveries really sarted in 1982. I have an old defunct magazine calld ' Gung-Ho' from Oct 1981 that shows the very first Unertl scopes delivered for use on the early M40A1s. The first 25 scopes purchased in March 1980 had a slightly different windage knob with a protusion on the end. During 1981 only a few M40A1 rifles had those first 25 Unertls, but most of them still had the Redfields. Just an fyi re historical chrobology.

FWIW. my M40A1 return stock has the same pattern as your stock, and I consider its an early-to-mid-1990s era woodland camo pattern, based on what I have been told by retired USMC armorers. The last pic of 4 M40A1 stocks shows the progression of McMillan camo patterns from roughly 1977-79 (bottom greenish smear stock) to the 1980s (middle two smear stocks) to the early-to-mid 1990s (top woodland pattern). I hope that info is helpful

 

[sandwarrior]

Good looking rifle, but I think the era would be more of a 1990s look. Back in 1980 the early M40A1 would still all be smear stocks and the Redfield 3-9x scopes. The Unertl scope was adopted in 1980, but deliveries started in 1981. I have an old defunct magazine calld ' Gung-Ho' from Oct 1981 that shows the very first Unertl scopes delivered for use on the early M40A1s. The first 10 or 20(?) scopes had a slightly different windage knob with a protusion on the end. By mid-1981 only a few M40A1 rifles had Unertls, but most of them still had the Redfields. Just an fyi re historical chrobology.

FWIW. my M40A1 return stock has the same pattern as your stock, and I consider its an early-to-mid-1990s era woodland camo pattern, based on what I have been told by retired USMC armorers. The last pic of 4 M40A1 stocks shows the progression of McMillan camo patterns from roughly 1977-79 (bottom greenish smear stock) to the 1980s (middle two smear stocks) to the early-to-mid 1990s (top woodland pattern). I hope that info is helpful

All the ones I saw had Unertls. That was '81-'85

 

[Random Guy]

The first 25 Unertls, serial # 1006 to 1030 were purchased in March 1980 for field testing. (The first 5 serial # were prototype/test scopes and not purchased by the USMC). The 25 delivered in 1980 had the funny windage knob. These were delivered I think mid-1980, and the pics from that Oct 1981 magazine show one of these early scopes - note how much of the finish was already worn off. So there were a small number of M40A1s in 1981 with Unertls that were being extensively tested at Quantico. The USMC apparently didn't care for the windage knob protusion after testing them, so it was omitted after serial #1030, and the next order for production scopes didn't come until January 13, 1982. Presumably delivered in the spring of 1982, so that era is when they were deployed into the fleet en mass, and went to places like Beirut/Lebanon, Grenada, etc.. (The vast majority of the next 550 scopes were ordered in 1982-1983, serial # into the upper 15XX). The Redfields were replaced by the end of 1983. A few deliveries of Unertls occurred in 1986 & 88 as well. (Source: Chandler, Death from Afar, Vol 1).

 

[sandwarrior]

The first 25 Unertls, serial # 1006 to 1030 were purchased in March 1980 for field testing. (The first 5 serial # were prototype/test scopes and not purchased by the USMC). The 25 delivered in 1980 had the funny windage knob. These were delivered I think mid-1980, and the pics from that Oct 1981 magazine show one of these early scopes - note how much of the finish was already worn off. So there were a small number of M40A1s in 1981 with Unertls that were being extensively tested at Quantico. The USMC apparently didn't care for the windage knob protusion after testing them, so it was omitted after serial #1030, and the next order for production scopes didn't come until January 13, 1982. Presumably delivered in the spring of 1982, so that era is when they were deployed into the fleet en mass, and went to places like Beirut/Lebanon, Grenada, etc.. (The vast majority of the next 550 scopes were ordered in 1982-1983, serial # into the late 15XX). The Redfields were replaced by the end of 1983. A few deliveries of Unertls occurred in 1988 as well. (Source: Chandler, Death from Afar, Vol 1).

I have to say that in my timeframe, I did not even know about the Unertl's when I got to the 1st Ranger BN. Sightings of these during joint ops was minimal at best at the time. I first really started to understand these scopes in '83 when my two friends went to the Marine Sniper School. In the meantime I was in Ft. Bragg and Key West attending SFUWO. So, I never saw them much. So, yeah, I can't say they were deployed in any mass numbers early in my time frame. Keeping in mind joint ops were a rarity as well.
Sightings ranged from 3-8 months. A number of sightings were from the MTT teams that came down to teach Scout Swimmer. So, my first actual sighting was probably spring of '82 as support (private on a detail) for the Scout Swimmer class. I did not have my tab yet, so attending anything other than Ranger school was not an option. Apparently, Ft. Stewart seemed to be a favorite for the snipers to come down and shoot at (?). 3 yrs. later I had to pull teeth to get an 800 yd. range set up for a train-up.

 

[Stevo86]

Was able to score another Unertl 10x Friday night from CMP.

 

[Random Guy]

One anecdotal I heard from a middle aged guy (late 50s) at Quantico a few years ago (who was apparently a Scout-Sniper, or maybe a MOS 2112 precision armorer) back in the early 1980s - was that he remembered when the Unertls were first introduced. He said specifically “Man, we thought those scopes were basically Star Wars technology at the time.” He went on to say the BDC feature was really innovative at the time. Just an FYI.

 

[Rhongman]

That price is just what the winning bid was. The buyer's premium and any taxes are tacked on to that. So the final total, not factoring in taxes, would have been at least $12k.

Actually, that price is including the BP. I was bidding on it until it reached 5500 and stopped. I couldn't believe it kept going!

 

[Toftwo]

Here are a few pics of my rifle and mounts...scroll down, I am not very good at pics, ...View attachment 7344631View attachment 7344631a few pics of my rifle with two different mounts and the same Weaver t-10 scope.View attachment 7344646View attachment 7344653View attachment 7344647View attachment 7344647View attachment 7344647View attachment 7344631View attachment 7344646View attachment 7344647View attachment 7344631View attachment 7344646View attachment 7344647View attachment 7344653

Is it touching with your Redfield or lugged mount? What’s the history on the lugged mount, repro or take off?

 

[Charlie112]

Is it touching with your Redfield or lugged mount? What’s the history on the lugged mount, repro or take off?

It is touching both my Redfield and my twoman attack repro mount. After looking around and reading, I can purchase a HI set of rings and at least get to the bench to shoot.
I believe I will be fine with the Unertl scope...[ I have a extra base for the hi rings}

 

[Toftwo]

It is touching both my Redfield and my twoman attack repro mount. After looking around and reading, I can purchase a HI set of rings and at least get to the bench to shoot.
I believe I will be fine with the Unertl scope...[ I have a extra base for the hi rings}

Right on, I asked a couple of buddies that have multiples of each version and they said their T10’s will touch on in an Unertl mount. One said Med rings should work in the Jr mount.

 

[Charlie112]

Right on, I asked a couple of buddies that have multiples of each version and they said their T10’s will touch on in an Unertl mount. One said Med rings should work in the Jr mount.

I used my machinist square and set it up to measure the center line of the rings, it was a little less than 3/4 from the top of the base, to the centerline of the rings. It looks like if the bell was smooth and no knurls, it would fit, but, no dice,, I do have a jr. mount and the correct rings, this has been a pain in the ass.. Thanks to you and your buddies for the info, ordered the tall rings today, will up load a pic when I have the rifle set up, Thanks, Charlie112
[ if something different that I am missing shows up, I will post, I have made mistakes before.}