What is the Most Historically Significant Sniper Rifle?

H

hrfunk

Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Apr 18, 2010
622
0
58
Ohio
#1
These threads have been fun, and there has been some very good information put forth by those who have elected to respond. So in the interest of preserving the veracity of the "Vintage Sniper Rifle" section of the hide, I thought I'd throw out one more of these questions: What is the most historically significant sniper rifle, and why?

At first glance, this would seem to limit our analysis to the last century or so. Don't, however, overlook the rifle used by Leonardo Divince, or those used by the Green Mountain Boys during our war for independence, nor those used by the "Sharps Shooters, during the civil war.

So let the debate begin.

HRF
 
#7
Historically significant in what way? To whom? For what?
Do you mean in a rifle design, like the Mauser action; or do you mean to a war, like rifled barrels were to the outcome of the American Civil War?
 
Last edited:
#9
hrfunk said:
I think we can safely figure out your selection, but you have to tell us why?

HRF
Click to expand...

It (M40A1) was the first American sniper rifle built from the ground up as a sniper rifle, along with optics purpose designed for it which was also the first with a mil dot reticle.

(Plus, I'm biased as an American Marine.)
 
#10
Semper Fi, Brother. I hate to pick nits, but the M40 (i.e. wood stocked version) was the first purpose built sniper rifle adopted by the Corps. Technically the A1 was the second. I point this out only because I'm thinking of nominating the M40 myself for that very reason.

HRF
 
Last edited:
#11
ksthomas said:
The 6.5mm Mannlicher-Carcano that Lee Harvey Oswald used to shoot JFK. If we're talking about individual rifles, anyway.
Click to expand...

I agree. But should it be considered as a 'sniper' rifle? The fact that it was used to 'snipe' doesnt make it a proper sniper rifle. The Carcano is a hunting rifle.

A sniper rifle main purpose is to snipe. It was designed to do one thing: snipe, or long distance shots. I think we should stick to that. If not, then any rifle, no matter its main purpose, can be called a sniper rifle.

I would say the Whitworth rifle. One of the first rifle with a telescopic sight. Accurate enough to pick off soldiers up to 600y. A good shot could hit at over 1500y. Black powder muzzle loader. We're in 1860, think about that... The scope blocked the iron sights so forget about close shots. The 'snipers' were dispatched way behind the lines. It had one purpose.. sniping. Significant enough for me.
 
Last edited:
#12
Would anyone agree with me if I said the Sharps rifle, of Berdan's Sharpshooters fame? OP brought it up, and for good reason.

After that maybe the (X)M-21. Not considered a sniper rifle by some, and it always ends up becoming an opinion on whether or not it is, regardless of how many have been killed with a rifle in this configuration.
 
#13
Gentlemen,

I would respectfully submit that the Kentucky/Pennsylvania rifle is the most significant sniper rifle, at least as far as American history goes. Without it, we probably would not be allowed to have this conversation.

Just the somewhat biased opinion of a devoted flintlock shooter...

Steve
 
#14
The patriot in me wants to agree with the nomination of the KY/PN rifle, but as I consider it, I find myself thinking that, though it was employed by skilled rifleman, it is more akin to a hunting arm that was pressed into military service. Maybe if it had some special sights to help target an enemy soldier at long range, but the examples I've seen all have had standard sights. I just don't know. What do you guys think? Yay, or nay on the classic Pennsylvania Long Rifle?

HRF
 
#15
Carcano is a real POS, and is a MILITARY rifle (even if the the worst of his era, at my knowing)_
Carcano is no more a hunting rifle than a Garand or a K98, even if mr.Oswald devised,or not, to mount some cheap optic on it,and hitting his target at around 100yds_ that don't change the nature and the goal of those really poor MILITARY Carcanos_ We know about some humble try from Officine Galileo to sniperize this mil-abortion thank to their glasses,without any following_ (two existing at today,if I don't go wrong)

About sniping, I like remember how, when mr.Napoleon managed to invade Austria, his heavy artilleries and 1st class cavalry, tightened inside the Tyrol's valleys, were badly harassed not only from ol'style resident Schutzen, but even from more silent fighters_These guys employed some kind of musket with the stock full of highly-compressed air, releasing lead balls on the Frenchs without any smoke/flame/burst report from the safest distances_ if/when taken alive, those luft-Schutzen were quickly executed as their black powder buddies,of course_
I've seen some specimen of those weapons years ago,thank to an Austrian collector,and I were really impressed_(no glasses ,of course)
 
Last edited:
#16
MescaBug said:
I agree. But should it be considered as a 'sniper' rifle? The fact that it was used to 'snipe' doesnt make it a proper sniper rifle. The Carcano is a hunting rifle.

A sniper rifle main purpose is to snipe. It was designed to do one thing: snipe, or long distance shots. I think we should stick to that. If not, then any rifle, no matter its main purpose, can be called a sniper rifle.
Click to expand...

A correction and a question for this one; one, the Mannlicher-Carcano was designed from the ground up as a military rifle, not a hunting rifle. And two, by this definition, you're excluding the most prolific, highest scoring sniper in military history, simply because he used a conventional infantry rifle, and shot at rather modest ranges? Simo Hayha racked up something on the order of 550 of Stalin's communists in the space of a bit over three months, using his Finnish modified Mosin-Nagant, without a scope, and at what we'd normally think of as relatively short range. Suggesting that Simo wasn't a sniper in Finland will get you tossed out of the bar and into a snow bank, immediately. And you WILL NOT be invited for a sauna!

I'll stick with my original assesment that the POS Mannlicher-Carcano #C2766 is THE "most significant sniper rifle" in history.
 
#17
wilecoyote said:
About sniping, I like remember how, when mr.Napoleon managed to invade Austria, his heavy artilleries and 1st class cavalry, tightened inside the Tyrol's valleys, were badly harassed not only from ol'style resident Schutzen, but even from more silent fighters_These guys employed some kind of musket with the stock full of highly-compressed air, releasing lead balls on the Frenchs without any smoke/flame/burst report from the safest distances_ if/when taken alive, those luft-Schutzen were quickly executed as their black powder buddies,of course . . .
Click to expand...

Our own Lewis and Clark carried one of these air rifles on their epic westward exploration of the Lousiana Purchase. Aside from the fact that it fired relatively quietly, and gave no cloud of black powder smoke, it could also be fired rather quickly . . . sort of an "assault air rifle" (in libtard lingo). A demonstration of this weapons capabilites to potentially hostile native tribes reportedly caused several to reconsider their plans, and decide to be a b it more accomodating to the Lewis and Clark team. Never previously aware of Napolean's unfortunate exposure to these, but that's interesting stuff right there!
 
Last edited:
#18
What I meant by 'hunting' rifle, is that many people bought surplus Carcanos as hunting rifles.

I think you mis-understood my point. I am NOT excluding the Carcano from the list of significant 'sniper' rifle. I said that I agree with you. I was questionning the purpose of this thread if any rifle can be considered a sniping rifle.

I think it is historically very significant indeed.

And speaking of Mosin-Nagant, I think Vasily Zaytsev rifle has its place in history as well.
 
Last edited:
#20
Anyone have any thoughts on the M2 BMG Carlos Hathcock used for his (nearly) 2500 yard shot on an enemy soldier. That shot, once it became known, virtually ushered in the era of extreme long range sniping, and was directly responsible for the development of many, if not all, of the long range systems in use today. Not to mention, set a record that stood for 35 years.

HRF
 
#21
MescaBug said:
What I meant by 'hunting' rifle, is that many people bought surplus Carcanos as hunting rifles.

I think you mis-understood my point. I am NOT excluding the Carcano from the list of significant 'sniper' rifle. I said that I agree with you. I was questionning the purpose of this thread if any rifle can be considered a sniping rifle.

I think it is historically very significant indeed.

And speaking of Mosin-Nagant, I think Vasily Zaytsev rifle has its place in history as well.[/QUOTE

I would have preferred that those outdoorsmen bought surp Carcanos to use it as fly rod : this way we can name it today, more properly, fishing rifle, without therefore offending the hunting rifles or any other real rifle_ if you try to saw a Carcano barrel or action, you could understand me ( can be done with a wood handsaw, by the way...)
Click to expand...
 
#22
ksthomas said:
Nah, only around half the number of kills as Simo, and besides . . . he was a commie!
Click to expand...
never understood if V.S. was a russian propaganda's or a movie's creature, as the major Konrad who hanged the children_
Anyway, the inventor of tha air rifle, following my Tyrol's friend, was a guy named Gilardoni, from Cortina d'Ampezzo,now in italian territory,but once under the Austria,where seems that at his time his design was patented _ those rifle have seen the use of a separate, ball-shaped reservoir, or a huge,cumbersome stock, containing the same compressed air_ for the Frenchs was surely interesting too...even if in the same way the English could have appreciated Boer's Mausers and Italians have enjoyed Austro-Hungaric long Steyr-Mannlichers terminal performances_
 
Last edited:
#24
Keep in mind alot of you love Finnish ammo...pronounced Lap- uah...not La- poo-ah.... The Fins accent the 1st syllable in a word...my father-in-law is from Lapua, btw :D
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2
 
#25
DarkGhost,

Absolutely correct on the pronunciation, and a beautiful little town it is. Nice museum there too, in the old cartridge factory works which is now used as a library and city hall.

Wiley Coyote,
Zaitsev was real enough (I have a copy of his memoirs; "Notes of a Russian Sniper"), but the whole thing with Konig was a bit of a question mark. According to Alan Clark's "Barbarossa", one of the definitive texts on the Russia/German war, the Major was named Heinz Thorwald. I've seen other accounts where he was referred to as the "King of the German snipers". Konig is German for "king" and I suspect that term became a proper noun somewhere during the retellings. In any case, the Germans had no records to verify this. Given the state of their infrastructure at the end of the war, that doesn't mean they didn't have it, but that it could very well have wound up as just another part of the huge ash heap of debris that had once been the Third Reich. I would add, though, that the British Major C. Shore ("With British Snipers to the Reich" another great read) had the opportunity to work with some Russian snipers right at the end of the war, immediately after Germany capitulated. According to Shore, if the shooting skills of this bunch of Russian snipers was typical, their figures for German kills should have probably been divided by ten to come to a more realistic number . . . he wasn't impressed. Given the Communist propensity towards propganda, often bolstered by outright fabrications, who knows? Still makes for an interesting history, and one that Hollywood didn't need to "Hollywood up" the way they did in the movie.
 
#26
ksthomas said:
DarkGhost,

Absolutely correct on the pronunciation, and a beautiful little town it is. Nice museum there too, in the old cartridge factory works which is now used as a library and city hall.

Wiley Coyote,
Zaitsev was real enough (I have a copy of his memoirs; "Notes of a Russian Sniper"), but the whole thing with Konig was a bit of a question mark. According to Alan Clark's "Barbarossa", one of the definitive texts on the Russia/German war, the Major was named Heinz Thorwald. I've seen other accounts where he was referred to as the "King of the German snipers". Konig is German for "king" and I suspect that term became a proper noun somewhere during the retellings. In any case, the Germans had no records to verify this. Given the state of their infrastructure at the end of the war, that doesn't mean they didn't have it, but that it could very well have wound up as just another part of the huge ash heap of debris that had once been the Third Reich. I would add, though, that the British Major C. Shore ("With British Snipers to the Reich" another great read) had the opportunity to work with some Russian snipers right at the end of the war, immediately after Germany capitulated. According to Shore, if the shooting skills of this bunch of Russian snipers was typical, their figures for German kills should have probably been divided by ten to come to a more realistic number . . . he wasn't impressed. Given the Communist propensity towards propganda, often bolstered by outright fabrications, who knows? Still makes for an interesting history, and one that Hollywood didn't need to "Hollywood up" the way they did in the movie.
Click to expand...

+1

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2
 
#27
KSTHOMAS, I'm very interested about that, but I don'want abuse of the patience of hrfunk about utterly "invading" his thread, and I hope can be in the next future the opportunity to treat this specific matter in a dedicated thread_
I've had the impression that the German sniper's record books & killing scores followed the logic of a certain accuracy even near the end (Bruno Sutkus_"SNIPER ACE"), as the " official hit parade" of their reported best shooters, if not all,for nazi prop.purposes only: among them, at my knowing, no Thorwald or Konig , if not with Ed Harris face_ Any info about that matter will be welcomed,of course_
 
Last edited:
#28
hrfunk said:
Semper Fi, Brother. I hate to pick nits, but the M40 (i.e. wood stocked version) was the first purpose built sniper rifle adopted by the Corps. Technically the A1 was the second. I point this out only because I'm thinking of nominating the M40 myself for that very reason.

HRF
Click to expand...

Good point. The M40 certainly does have its place in that regard.
But, while the M40 was a 100% Remington contract rifle, the M40A1 was the first Marine Corps designed AND produced sniper rifle (there's that bias again), the first sniper rifle as such from any military organization (as far as I know).
And, the Unertl being an indispensible part of the M40A1 system, I don't think anyone would disagree that the mil-dot reticle was revolutionary in a big, big way.
Still, the M40 was its daddy, afterall.
Semper Fidelis.
 
#29
Steve Garbe said:
Gentlemen,

I would respectfully submit that the Kentucky/Pennsylvania rifle is the most significant sniper rifle, at least as far as American history goes. Without it, we probably would not be allowed to have this conversation.

Just the somewhat biased opinion of a devoted flintlock shooter...

Steve
Click to expand...

Timothy Murphy (sniper) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Without these men and their rifles would American have ever won freedom or would our founding fathers been hung? There is no question in my mind but that these are the most important rifles in history.
 
#33
ksthomas said:
Nah, only around half the number of kills as Simo, and besides . . . he was a commie!
Click to expand...

Finland was allied with Nazi Germany at the time. It really doesn't diminish the effect that either one had on the battlefield, though. It's irrelevant what political stance either one was however, because politics eventually means dick when you and your friends, and fellow soldiers are getting shot at, and killed, and the guy who is suppose to be your end line leader, the ultimate head honcho, is in a more comfortable spot then you are, i.e. not outside in the elements, and temperature extremes, and very comfortable. Wasn't Zaitsev a conscript? No matter.

I also heard a blurb, some little tidbit of info, that Simo Hayha didn't have a scope mounted because they kept fogging up from the cold, and that supposedly included the Carl Zeiss scopes of that time.

-----------
Sent via a combination of styrofoam cup and string, and telegraph.
 
#36
M1903 Springfield - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The M1903A4 was the U.S. Army's first attempt at a standardized sniper weapon. M1903A3 actions were fitted with a different stock and a Weaver Model 330 or 330C 2.2x telescopic sight in Redfield Jr. mounts; the front and rear iron sights were removed.[10] Barrel specifications were unchanged, and many M1903A4s were equipped with the two-groove 'war emergency' barrel.[17] By all accounts, the M1903A4 was inadequate as a sniper rifle.[18] The Weaver scopes (later standardized as the M73 and M73B1) were not only low-powered in magnification, they were not waterproofed, and frequently fogged over or became waterlogged during humidity changes.[10][18] When this occurred, the M1904A4's lack of open front or rear sights rendered the weapon useless. Normally used with ordinary M2 ammunition with a 152-grain flat-base bullet, accuracy of the M1903A4 was generally disappointing;[19] some Army snipers who came across Japanese or German sniper rifles quickly adopted the enemy weapons in place of the Springfield.[20] The Marine Corps declined to issue the M1903A4, favoring instead a modified M1903A1 rifle fitted with a Unertl 8x target-type telescopic sight.
Click to expand...

...So it appears the M-40 may not have been the USMC's first attempt at fielding a dedicated Sniper Rifle.

The Soviets' interpretation of the term Sniper has probably never been equivalent to our Western understanding of the concept. Much the same as the way they equipped entire WWII Infantry Units with the PPSh-41 machine pistol; the Sniper wasn't intended as a singular, surgically precise asset performing battlefield interventions of a strategic and/or psychological importance, but rather as a form of distributed and relatively common incrementally more accurate infantry asset. My view of them is as almost, but not quite, as proficient as the current Western military Designated Rifleman; possibly imbedded in a basic unit, perhaps fielded in massed groups. Similarly, their rifles only represented an incremental improvement over the common infantry implement, and seldom performed (nor was intended to perform) on a conceptual par with a modern Sniper Rifle.

Mosin-Nagant - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Model 1891/30 (винтовка образца 1891/30-го года, винтовка Мосина): The most prolific version of the Mosin–Nagant. It was produced for standard issue to all Soviet infantry from 1930 to 1945. Most Dragoon rifles were also converted to the M1891/30 standard.

It was commonly used as a sniper rifle in World War II. Early sniper versions had a 4x PE or PEM scope, a Soviet-made copy of a Zeiss design, while later rifles used smaller, simpler, and easier-to-produce 3.5x PU scopes. Because the scope was mounted above the chamber, the bolt handle was replaced with a longer, bent version on sniper rifles so the shooter could work the bolt without the scope interfering with it.

Its design was based on the Dragoon rifle with the following modifications:

Flat rear sights and restamping of sights in metres, instead of arshinii.

A cylindrical receiver, replacing the octagonal (commonly called "hex") receiver. Early production 91/30s (from 1930 to 1936) and converted Dragoon rifles retained the octagonal receiver. These rifles are less common and regarded as generally more desirable by collectors.

A hooded post front sight, replacing the blade on previous weapons.[12]
Click to expand...

My own limited experience with scoped M-N 91/30's suggests that they were (at best) 2MOA rifles using steelcased issue 148gr military ball ammunition. While this would impose real limits on distance and target selection, the consequent effect would still represent a major improvement over the basic Soviet Conscripts' Infantry Musketry effectiveness.

Movies and political propaganda aside, the WWII Russian Sniper was very probably a genuinely significant force to be reckoned with.

Greg
 
Last edited:
#37
Greg Langelius * said:
M1903 Springfield - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



...So it appears the M-40 may not have been the USMC's first attempt at fielding a dedicated Sniper Rifle.
Click to expand...


Here is where I draw the distinction between the M40 and everything that came before it. Everything used by Snipers prior to that design was either a battle rifle (1903A4, M1C & D, Mosin 91/30, etc.), A hunting rifle (KY long rifle, Sharps, etc), or a target rifle (Win. M70), that was modified to a greater or lesser degree, and pressed into military service. The Marine Corps' M40 was the first rifle designed from the ground up as a tool for Snipers (albeit on an existing M700 action). I don't think I'm splitting hairs when I call it the first ourpose built Sniper rifle. When that rifle later evolved into the M40A1, it established a format that is with us, in active service, to this day.

HRF
 
#38
on the europen theather, without goin'back to Adam and Eve, I have the impression that the first real attempt to field and issue a real dedicated sniping rifle (scope and even night sights) belong to WWI Austro-Hungaric Empire, with their scoped Steyr-Mannlicher, a straigh-pull long affair that for the first time teached to all,and to italian adversaries first, the danger of a device like this_ said that,at their time it was common thinking, even among highest army brass, that takin'away someone's life from a long distance was only a dirty trick _

Mr. Haya don't used scopes because the justified fear to be spotted from adversaries from the glass shine, because the limited field of wiew of this device and related slowing effect to pinpoint a fast-moving enemy,in HIS combat environment, and because the SNOW, when not the fogging, was his main problem, at the point that a main feature of Finnish Moisins was the removal of the front ring,to avoid that the snow could clutter it and the front post_ no Zeiss employed on F-Ms,at my knowing_ ( AJACK and AGA devices, and very scarce,anyway)_

About Finnish "alliances", I'm sad that Mr. Gen.Mannerheim can't today say more and better about this matter_
 
Last edited:
#39
ArmaHeavy said:
Finland was allied with Nazi Germany at the time.
Click to expand...

Not true. Simo fought in the Winter War, in which Finland faced the Soviet Union alone, and without allies. Finland ultimately fought three wars during the period of 1939-1945; the Winter War,'39-40, the Continuation War (in which they were aligned with Germany agaisnt the Soviets) '41-'44, and the Lapland War in 1945. Interesting note to this in that Finland was the only democracy that sided with Germany during the war. They didn't subscribe to the Nazi ideology, and Mannerhiem conducted the war in a very commendable fashion. It wasn't a war of aggression, and the Finns never pushed an offensive beyond the original 1939 boundry of their nation. In short, all they wanted was the land stolen from them by the Russians at the end of the Winter War, roughly 10-15% of their territory. When the Germans launched Barbarossa in June of '41, the Finns signed on with considerable trepidation, somewhat along the lines of the "enemy of my enemy is my friend" principle.

Today, the territory lost to the Soviet Union as a result of their invasion during the Winter War remains under the control of the new Russian Federation.
 
#40
I believe I remember reading that many of Simo's kills were with the Suomi sub machine gun. I believe he had more kills with that weapon than he did with a rifle. Anyone?
...which begs the question of whether those kills were sniper kills...all academic as it shows that Simo was able to adopt widely different weapons to his purpose...
an incredible man. My fuzzy memory also tells me that he was only in service for 90-120 days (?)...help me out. I read a recent survey that said the Finns were
the happiest people on earth, a combination of close to the highest average income, close to no unemployment, at least 70% of the female population
working, universal healthcare and government childcare...and they like to drink...but I digress...

I believe Mannhiems family family had been "Swedish" for at least 3 generations when Russia controlled Sweden & he was in the Russian Military.
OK, getting a little foggy here...help me out.

Swede 6.5x55 model 41 A, but not purpose built...but the Swedish 6.5x55's do have a place in the evolution of the AIAW family.
Corrections, comments, additions, ripostes are all welcome...and anticipated with relish...mustard, kraut and a Kaiser roll.
 
Last edited:
#41
Simo did use the Suomi quite a bit, which is not surprising when you look at the tactics the Finns used along much of the front. Most of his kills though, were with the rifle. He was an avid hunter before the war, and had served in the Finnish Home Guard, something like our reserves. It should be noted that Finland had NO standing army at the time of the Winter War, just small Home defense units of local militia. You're correct about the term of service, as the Winter War lasted a total of 105 days, if I recall correctly. Simo was severely wounded in the final days of the war, hit in the face with one of the Russian's exploding bullets (a Geneva Convention violation, not that the Russians would care) that horribly mangled his jaw. He underwent reconstructive surgery for many years afterwards, but only died fairly recently (want to say 2002, but I'm not sure and would have to look it up). He didn't take part in the Continuation War, though he continued to hunt and shoot throughout the remainder of his lifetime once he'd recovered.

Don't know if the Finns are the happiest people on earth (you'd have to ask them!), but it's a wonderful country and they're very neat people. Highly intelligent, very friendly once you get to know them and a very civilized society. Their gun laws aren't too bad, they're avid hunters and sportsmen and have a wonderful collective sense of humor. A bit standoffish when you first meet them, but once they decide that you're okay, you're in the club and "one of the gang." Been my experience, anyway, and I truly love working with them. I think I could live there quite comfortably, aside from the fact that Finnish is probably one of the hardest languages on the planet to learn. Fortunately for me, most of them speak very good English. Funny that since their language is so difficult to learn, they're incredibly appreciative for foreigners even learning the basics like "hello", "good morning", "thank you" and so on. That's about the extent of my Finnish, despite having been over there several times.
 
#42
Gentlemen,

One could make the argument that any rifle, used to good effect by a sniper against the enemy, is a "sniper rifle". With a multitude of combat environments, the requirements for a sniper rifle constantly change.

More points in favor of the Kentucky rifle-
Colonists captured in battle with a rifle were ordered bayoneted on the spot by the British, such was their fear of the colonial "sniper", Ferguson was arguably one of the most effective officers for the British, and don't forget...he passed up a shot at a colonial officer because he did not believe in shooting men in the back; most authorities agree that the officer was Washington. Things would have been much different had he put aside gentlemanly ideas of war and taken that shot. Had he not been killed by "snipers", I think we would have heard much more about him. Ferguson was a rifleman and was fast adapting to the guerrilla tactics employed by the colonial frontiersmen...much more so than any other British officer, in my opinion.

Not to discount Tim Murphy's shot (if it really happened the way history has chose to remember it) but I think that Ferguson was by far a more high value target.

Just my thoughts...

Steve
 
#43
I am leaning heavily toward the PU as the most influential sniper. With over 400,000 made they made a huge impact in WW2 and still are seen in service today. Quantity has a quality all its own, not to mention the quality is much better than many non-owners may appreciate. The lowly PU is capable of near MOA accuracy, occasionally better than MOA with good ammo. It is robust and reliable. It is simple to use and maintain. Optics are about average compared to WW2 contemparies but include windage unlike the German scopes. The have range estimation capability and trajectory compensation. They are tough and weather resistent, unlike a Unertl or M73b1. They are light and offer use of the metal sights when needed. They were often used by the Germans and the ZF4 was designed with the PU scope in mind. They served in Korea and Nam. Carlos shot the Cobra through a PU scope. They are still seen in use in Afganistan. Never underestimate a PU, Carlos did not.
 
#44
It has to be the Mosin, based on pure numbers of kills.

It (M40A1) was the first American sniper rifle built from the ground up as a sniper rifle
Click to expand...

Um.............someone forgot the M1941 (Marines Sniper Rifle based on the M1903a1, just as the M40 was based on the Remington M700.

Besides, its the shooter that makes the sniper rifle, not the manufacture.
 
#45
I am going to vote for the germans, and the K98K they used in world war two since they were one of the few armies after world war one to continue its program for marksmen(snipers) while we americans fell behind and had to start all over again in world war two.
 
#46
Well then you can't rule out the British. They've been in the game since the Boer Wars if not before. But the Boer's really taught them the need of sharpshooters.
 
#48
OK, OK...the parts I forgot about the Finns being one of the happiest/most content nation on earth: a small population, appreciation of their natural world, an incredibly high literacy rate and
a live and let live attitude about extra-marital affairs...Gospel.
 
#50
kraigWY said:
Well then you can't rule out the British. They've been in the game since the Boer Wars if not before. But the Boer's really taught them the need of sharpshooters.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I vote for the Brits and their Lee Enfield. The term "most historically significant" implies a political viewpoint, even if unintentionally. What is historically significant to one man is not to another due in part, at times large part, where the man's allegiances lie and underlying political philosophy. In this way of looking at things, I'm generally on the side of the Brits and looking at the list of conflicts that the Lee Enfield has fought in, I would put it as very historically significant:

Second Boer War
World War I
Various Colonial conflicts
Irish War of Independence
Irish Civil War
World War II
Indonesian National Revolution
Indo-Pakistani Wars
Greek Civil War
Malayan Emergency
French Indochina War
Korean War
Arab-Israeli War
Suez Crisis
Mau Mau Uprising
Bangladesh Liberation War
Nepalese Civil War
Afghanistan conflict

No American rifle spans this range of historical action, so unfortunately, I can't vote for a US rifle, although think the M-40 is a great choice, and wish the XM-21 had been used more extensively, as I think it is a great all-around sniper rifle.

Sure, the Lee Enfield has not been used exclusively as a "Sniper Rifle", but it has pulled that duty and pulled it well when called. Long live the 303!!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

lonegunman762x51
M 24 Advanced Sniper Accessory kit?
Replies
6
Views
699
Random Guy
R
GS455
Good Score Sunday (SR90 + ACOG)
Replies
22
Views
693
GS455
GS455
JM4590
Vortex Impact 4000 in Comps
Replies
14
Views
873
taliv
taliv
R
Ukrainian sniper who claims new world record. He’s 58 years old. (WSJ article)
Replies
50
Views
4K
Edsel
Edsel
cplnorton
Likely one of the first Marine M1903 Sniper rifles, M1908 Warner Swasey
Replies
7
Views
1K
USMCsean
USMCsean
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts