2nd page, not sure what to post yet, so here's a photo of sniper stuff. There's a lot to learn:
Need help deciding M40A1 build configurations
- Thread starter USMCSGT0331
- Start date
As a M40A1 builder/ historian I can say this is an absolutely amazing thread, thank you Ryan for sharing the information and history, the professional photos are awesome. Can’t wait for the book man!!
Thanks buddy, I really appreciate it! A ton of work went into these posts and it's still not everything! Gotta grab a copy of the book to see the rest of the M40A1 information and other M40xx info!
That first page lasted forever! Probably due to my ridiculously long posts on each A1 topic. For those of you who jumped to the 2nd page, go back and check out my last few posts on the 1st page! Lots of photos and information on the Redfield welded mounts and Unertl mounts, you guys don't want to miss those posts!
Thank you for putting this together @USMCSGT0331 this amazing amount of informations here man! Thank you!
Thanks, I really appreciate it! I'm debating whether or not to do some other threads like this on the other M40xx variations, but I need something left for my book
Thanks, I really appreciate it! I'm debating whether or not to do some other threads like this on the other M40xx variations, but I need something left for my book
Waiting for that book man! Gonna be. wealth of information.
Plus one on the book! get with Forgotten Weapon's publishing place and blam! i'd preorder it! that said I am a sucker for limited edition.
Well gents, I just purchased another original M40 (only the receiver is original)! Here's a link to the auction:
https://www.rockislandauction.com/detail/1042/562
The interesting thing is that I originally commented on the forums about this exact rifle when it was sold by the CMP back in 2017 (sold for about $15k). There were numerous issues with the rifle, but it was still an M40. It appears that the previous owner put in some work and this is what he ended up with. I'll have to go over the rifle to see if anything else is original, but I'm not going to hold my breath. I bet the receiver and bolt are the only 2 original M40 parts.
The CMP has sold numerous 6257xxx M40's over the years in various conditions. Some have been new in wrap, others have been rebuilt into Army AMU target rifles. One was even rebuilt into a short action M24! I can't remember what this rifle looked like, but I remember that there were plenty of issues. Here's a thread about this rifle from 2017:
http://forums.thecmp.org/showthread.php?s=5abf4854e64a3b7e5f962a1c945f4f66&t=217489
Here's my original assessment of this M40 from almost 6 years ago:
"There are multiple issues with the gun and it's definitely not worth $5k+. That being said, the money is going to a great organization and a worthy cause. I just want prospective bidders to know what they're getting into before they drop big bucks on this item.
What you're buying at this auction is essentially just the receiver, since the other parts have been messed with or are missing (satin black Redfield scope). The serial number puts this gun right with all the other known 6257xxx rifles, so at least the receiver is good to go.
The stock is missing the original metal buttplate (part # 16601) and has a rubber pad installed. It is impossible to know when and why this modification was done, it could even have been put on there for a shooting team member as opposed to a sniper. The stock also appears to have a brass pin pressed in on the top of the grip directly behind the receiver. This would have been done by an armorer trying to fix a crack in the stock. I'd imagine you might have issues with this if you were to actually shoot the rifle on a regular basis. The action and the first inch or so of the barrel have also been bedded to the stock.
Looking closely at the pics, I don't see any barrel markings, so it's also possible that the barrel has been cut down and re-chambered or it's a replacement. There is also a ton of rust on the crown, which means that the inside of the barrel is probably rusty and/or pitted. I doubt this rifle would shoot very well. The recoil lug is also unusually thick, definitely something that was added when the rifle was re-barreled.
The base is a Redfield 700SA, which are pretty common. This is correct for the later 7 digit rifles, but aren't anywhere near as valuable as the original 40X bases that the 6 digit rifles had. The rifle is also missing it's scope, which should be a satin black Redfield 3-9x. However, glossy black Redfield scopes from the same time period are easy to come by and can be used to complete the set (tokiwartooth on the forum can also anodize the scope in a matte finish if need be).
This rifle would make an excellent restoration project if you have some original parts laying around. Also, there are more of these that will be coming up for sale shortly. Everything from barreled actions to guns brand new in the Remington factory bag! Can't wait to see what those NOS rifles go for!"
As you can see, this one was sort of a soup sandwich. Now you guys might be wondering why I'm posting a non-USMC M40 in this USMC M40A1 thread. Well, the answer is simple, I'm going to have this receiver built into an M40A1! It's a little blasphemous, since it's not a USMC receiver and we're not aware of ANY 6257xxx rifles being built into A1's, but it's still an original M40 receiver and I think it would be pretty cool as an M40A1! So, this thread is pretty important to me right now, since I need to select parts from the posts on the first page and build an awesome M40A1!
What do you guys think about this project? Any ideas as to which parts should be used on this build? For thos who think I should restore it, please know that I don't have a gen 2 M40 stock and I don't know of any loose ones. I also don't have a later 1968/9 barrel with 7.62 NATO markings either. I'm sure someone out there has these original parts, but this A1 project seems more interesting to me.
Here's what I'm thinking for the A1 configuration, posts with each group of parts are on the first page. I'd love to hear which of these A1 parts you guys would use for a build with this 6257223 receiver! Maybe I should give a prize to anyone who posts their A1 configuration and I choose it for my build! Here's what I'm leaning to right now, but it could easily change for the final build:
Stock #3
Scope #6
Mount #4 or 5
Barrel #2
Or maybe send it to Tac Ops and do something really crazy!
https://www.rockislandauction.com/detail/1042/562
The interesting thing is that I originally commented on the forums about this exact rifle when it was sold by the CMP back in 2017 (sold for about $15k). There were numerous issues with the rifle, but it was still an M40. It appears that the previous owner put in some work and this is what he ended up with. I'll have to go over the rifle to see if anything else is original, but I'm not going to hold my breath. I bet the receiver and bolt are the only 2 original M40 parts.
The CMP has sold numerous 6257xxx M40's over the years in various conditions. Some have been new in wrap, others have been rebuilt into Army AMU target rifles. One was even rebuilt into a short action M24! I can't remember what this rifle looked like, but I remember that there were plenty of issues. Here's a thread about this rifle from 2017:
http://forums.thecmp.org/showthread.php?s=5abf4854e64a3b7e5f962a1c945f4f66&t=217489
Here's my original assessment of this M40 from almost 6 years ago:
"There are multiple issues with the gun and it's definitely not worth $5k+. That being said, the money is going to a great organization and a worthy cause. I just want prospective bidders to know what they're getting into before they drop big bucks on this item.
What you're buying at this auction is essentially just the receiver, since the other parts have been messed with or are missing (satin black Redfield scope). The serial number puts this gun right with all the other known 6257xxx rifles, so at least the receiver is good to go.
The stock is missing the original metal buttplate (part # 16601) and has a rubber pad installed. It is impossible to know when and why this modification was done, it could even have been put on there for a shooting team member as opposed to a sniper. The stock also appears to have a brass pin pressed in on the top of the grip directly behind the receiver. This would have been done by an armorer trying to fix a crack in the stock. I'd imagine you might have issues with this if you were to actually shoot the rifle on a regular basis. The action and the first inch or so of the barrel have also been bedded to the stock.
Looking closely at the pics, I don't see any barrel markings, so it's also possible that the barrel has been cut down and re-chambered or it's a replacement. There is also a ton of rust on the crown, which means that the inside of the barrel is probably rusty and/or pitted. I doubt this rifle would shoot very well. The recoil lug is also unusually thick, definitely something that was added when the rifle was re-barreled.
The base is a Redfield 700SA, which are pretty common. This is correct for the later 7 digit rifles, but aren't anywhere near as valuable as the original 40X bases that the 6 digit rifles had. The rifle is also missing it's scope, which should be a satin black Redfield 3-9x. However, glossy black Redfield scopes from the same time period are easy to come by and can be used to complete the set (tokiwartooth on the forum can also anodize the scope in a matte finish if need be).
This rifle would make an excellent restoration project if you have some original parts laying around. Also, there are more of these that will be coming up for sale shortly. Everything from barreled actions to guns brand new in the Remington factory bag! Can't wait to see what those NOS rifles go for!"
As you can see, this one was sort of a soup sandwich. Now you guys might be wondering why I'm posting a non-USMC M40 in this USMC M40A1 thread. Well, the answer is simple, I'm going to have this receiver built into an M40A1! It's a little blasphemous, since it's not a USMC receiver and we're not aware of ANY 6257xxx rifles being built into A1's, but it's still an original M40 receiver and I think it would be pretty cool as an M40A1! So, this thread is pretty important to me right now, since I need to select parts from the posts on the first page and build an awesome M40A1!
What do you guys think about this project? Any ideas as to which parts should be used on this build? For thos who think I should restore it, please know that I don't have a gen 2 M40 stock and I don't know of any loose ones. I also don't have a later 1968/9 barrel with 7.62 NATO markings either. I'm sure someone out there has these original parts, but this A1 project seems more interesting to me.
Here's what I'm thinking for the A1 configuration, posts with each group of parts are on the first page. I'd love to hear which of these A1 parts you guys would use for a build with this 6257223 receiver! Maybe I should give a prize to anyone who posts their A1 configuration and I choose it for my build! Here's what I'm leaning to right now, but it could easily change for the final build:
Stock #3
Scope #6
Mount #4 or 5
Barrel #2
Or maybe send it to Tac Ops and do something really crazy!
I think a weathered and salty BTDT build would be cool. All kinds of honest wear. None of your stocks are that “seasoned”
Mount # 4
Unertl 10x
Barrel # 1
Mount # 4
Unertl 10x
Barrel # 1
Definitely be an awesome A1 build. Closest one can get to the real thing since you have all the correct take off parts.
here's my thoughts, its a very hard choice with such awesome components to choose from,
Redfield:
Stock #3 - I really like the weathered look and camo colors on this one, the brown in particular.
Scope #2 - Mostly because the engraving on the tube along with the colour anodizing just match up with the look of the above stock very well i think.
Mount - I'm a sucker for parkerizing so i like mount number 5 but as we need a redfield mount the one already on it would work
Barrel #4 - i realize it will not be worn like the other parts but having a new barrel on it that shoots well will make this rifle even harder to leave at home on range day.
Action: #2 - I like the apparent discoloring on the bolt handle, no other reason.
Unertl:
Stock #5 - Looks more modern to me than the others, while still clearly a classic M40A1 pattern
Scope #6
Mount: # 5 , for the above reasons
Barrel # 4 for same reasons as above
Action #1 , will suit the parkerized base , has a more subdued coloring
most of my thoughts are cosmetic, as much as I love the M40A1's my knowledge is lacking, this was a brilliant post and always fun planning builds.
Redfield:
Stock #3 - I really like the weathered look and camo colors on this one, the brown in particular.
Scope #2 - Mostly because the engraving on the tube along with the colour anodizing just match up with the look of the above stock very well i think.
Mount - I'm a sucker for parkerizing so i like mount number 5 but as we need a redfield mount the one already on it would work
Barrel #4 - i realize it will not be worn like the other parts but having a new barrel on it that shoots well will make this rifle even harder to leave at home on range day.
Action: #2 - I like the apparent discoloring on the bolt handle, no other reason.
Unertl:
Stock #5 - Looks more modern to me than the others, while still clearly a classic M40A1 pattern
Scope #6
Mount: # 5 , for the above reasons
Barrel # 4 for same reasons as above
Action #1 , will suit the parkerized base , has a more subdued coloring
most of my thoughts are cosmetic, as much as I love the M40A1's my knowledge is lacking, this was a brilliant post and always fun planning builds.
I think the issues M1907 slings were only made in batches, and not continuously every single month and year. Also, I think the date stamped on these slings are when they are treated (MRT = Mildew Resistant Treatment), not necessarily when they were “made”.
Oh man, right! at first I didn't have an appreciation for the wood stocked M40s, but they have definitely grown on me. gonna have to clone that too now.
also @USMCSGT0331 what happened to the broken scope? was it able to be fixed? sorry if you answered that question earlier and i missed it.
Fucking hell, bots are just blatantly obvious! No need to worry about Skynet being unleashed or going full bore Butlerian Jihad when AI can't even understand the basic concept of this clone rifle thread. This is the most canned and generic response that could possibly be given, it's pathetic.
I served in STA Plts from 1981-1985 1/3
STA 3/2 87-88 Ran the SS school at Stone Bay under Col Chandler in 89-90 instructor at 2ed SOTG R&S package in 92
Hated the Redfield scopes due to fogging and melted range reticles. Loved the early Unertl mil dot compared to those. But only had 4 min of wind age either way +_. Eye relief was schetchie. Later scopes had 8 min wind age either way which was better. Most shooters had to use modified raised cheek pieces home made to get a good stock weld and eye relief.
The only round count books I remember from that time had a brown cover. In the crappy green rifle cases. The rubber scope covers and brass rods while I understand why we used brass usually broke . Loved the pics you put up. Have a A1 built at Quantico when the 2112s we still allows to do that by Colonel Willis
STA 3/2 87-88 Ran the SS school at Stone Bay under Col Chandler in 89-90 instructor at 2ed SOTG R&S package in 92
Hated the Redfield scopes due to fogging and melted range reticles. Loved the early Unertl mil dot compared to those. But only had 4 min of wind age either way +_. Eye relief was schetchie. Later scopes had 8 min wind age either way which was better. Most shooters had to use modified raised cheek pieces home made to get a good stock weld and eye relief.
The only round count books I remember from that time had a brown cover. In the crappy green rifle cases. The rubber scope covers and brass rods while I understand why we used brass usually broke . Loved the pics you put up. Have a A1 built at Quantico when the 2112s we still allows to do that by Colonel Willis
I have a Unertl MST100 #1011. Bought it from the CMP, looks brand new still had the red caps on it, although I think it has the spring mod. Need to dig that rifle out of the safe.
How do I get in line for one of these? And is it true the price is in the thousands?
Scouring the internet, places like GunBroker and for sale sections in forums and eventually you will find one, and Yes, it will cost you Thousands.
DW
Put that in the context of the $3000 I spent for my USO than waited 18 months or so for.
Which of the two will retain or grow in value.
I love my USO made one but had I known CMP was going to be selling I would have spent the money to outbid someone and owned a piece of history.
Which of the two will retain or grow in value.
I love my USO made one but had I known CMP was going to be selling I would have spent the money to outbid someone and owned a piece of history.
Yes, but that USO will still be going strong when dozens of other scopes are piles of worthless rust...
So it's not like it was wasted. Just bought a bit too early.
Cheers,
Sirhr
Glad to see this pop up, been thinking about putting one together for decades. not sure the exact model of this one is. Chuck Mawhinney's issued M40
Last edited:
M40. No dash, no follow on numbers. That one does show evidence of decades of mix and match as wells as some "Its not legit but they will never know". The receiver is pure gold though.
I saw a recent post indicating Beever is occasionally selling stocks if you need one for a clone.
My thought is wood that looks the part is the hardest thing to come by.
Awesome info, and along with the re-release of the smear stocks, have motivated me to start collecting parts.
What’s the story on the T10 equipped M40A1’s? Was this early in the program—the transitional period? I assume the Redfield 700 base and medium rings was used on this version? Anyone have any T10 knowledge? Thanks.
What’s the story on the T10 equipped M40A1’s? Was this early in the program—the transitional period? I assume the Redfield 700 base and medium rings was used on this version? Anyone have any T10 knowledge? Thanks.
No expert, but from what I have read online, in the very late 1970s the early M40A1s still had the 3-9x Redfield scopes, but a Marine Recon unit (that escapes me at the moment), apparently mounted some T10s to their M40A1s, as it was a better scope with much better turrets than the old Redfield 3-9x scopes. The T-10s with precise and repeatable 'Mirco-Trac' turrets came out in 1977, and it was considered one of the best US target scopes at that time. I think this picture might be the only one I've seen with a T10 mounted on an M40A1. If I had to guess, I suspect its from the 1978-1979 era.
The revolutionary Unertl 10X sniper scopes with the brand-new Mil-Dot reticle were first delivered to the USMC in 1980/81, and the rest is history, so to speak. Fwiw, I overheard one middle-aged former USMC sniper at a Quantico vintage rifle match say that back in 1981 when the Unertl scopes first showed up, they were considered "Star Wars technology." Anyhow, the Weaver T10 is a good "poor mans" scope for an early M40A1 with a smear stock circa late 1970s.
Attachments
This needed to be in color to bring that stock to life lol.
I used to shoot metallic silhouette, late 70'ies/80'ies, with a M700 BDL varmint with a T10 and later a T16.
The scope in the picture seems to be too long for a T10. Might it be a T16?
Leupold had a long base for short action that placed the forward ring over the barrel and the turrets over the forward receiver bridge that fitted the T16 perfectly.
With the regular M40 ring spacing the T10 is not fit for use in the field. I used the BDL as a sniper rifle for a short time, in the Norwegian national guard, with a Kahles ZF69 6x42 in 26mm Redfield rings. In the field this scope is, to put it mildly, superior to the Redfield and T10.
Here is a pic from the net showing the Leupold base I used to fit the T-scopes on the BDL:
The scope in the picture seems to be too long for a T10. Might it be a T16?
Leupold had a long base for short action that placed the forward ring over the barrel and the turrets over the forward receiver bridge that fitted the T16 perfectly.
With the regular M40 ring spacing the T10 is not fit for use in the field. I used the BDL as a sniper rifle for a short time, in the Norwegian national guard, with a Kahles ZF69 6x42 in 26mm Redfield rings. In the field this scope is, to put it mildly, superior to the Redfield and T10.
Here is a pic from the net showing the Leupold base I used to fit the T-scopes on the BDL:
Last edited:
