Which Rifle? MOSIN-NAGANT, ENFIELD, M1 GARAND, K98, G43?

[Hosenfield]

which rifle would you carry to battle? Western front, 1944? you only have around 100 rounds.


mosin 5x20

k98 5x20

enfield 10x10

m1 8x12

g43 10x10

[student-scaley]

For acuracy i'd say the enfield but as an overall weapon it has to be the Garand, brilliant piece of kit, good rate of fire, easy serviciblilty.

[Mars]

The Garand with no doubt.
Only thinking that he fire half automatic...

[Firefly]

I have to go for the garand as well. For the reasons stated above.

[Charles]

I vote for Enfield, although I don't know how much better is the garand but a 10 round would be better, you have to reload less...

[Hanz Lutz]

G-43 10 rounds ,thats in clip ,thats all you need.

[DerMann]

Can I have my Mauser with a Trench magazine?

Even without the Trench magazine I'd take a Mauser. I am most familiar with the characteristics of the 7.92x57mm cartridge.

[Man of Stoat]

Having fired all of the rifles in question, I feel that I can speak with some authority.

The main concern for a battle rifle is the ability to maintain rapid, accurate fire. Given that all the rifles in question have acceptable battle accuracy and acceptable reliability, then the order of preference would unquestioningly have to be:

Garand, G43, Enfield, K98, Mosin-Nagant

The Garand beats the G43 because although the magazine only holds 8 rounds, it is significantly quicker to reload than the G43 (The G43 comes with 3 10-round magazines, and when these have been exhausted the reload is done with 2 5-round stripper clips. In any case, inserting a new 8-round clip into the Garand is significantly faster than changing the magazine on the G43, let alone putting two stripper clips in.).

Of the bolt-actions, the Enfield is the fastest by far and does have the added advantage of the 10-round magazine. The K98 is marginally faster than a Mosin-Nagant.

Of those that I've fired during a mad minute (one minute of firing, unlimited rounds), I've fired 25 rounds out of the Enfield in a little under a minute (I ran out of ammo) and I've had 17 out of the Mosin-Nagant.

[student-scaley]

Man of Stoat, what's the servicibility like on these weapons? Are they easy to learn on?

[mike M.]

My vote goes to the M1 Garand, one pull on the trigger guard and the rifle is ready for cleaning. I would hate to be down range to any of these rifles but the Garand is tops in my book.

[Hosenfield]

my late neighbor, a ww2 army ranger, told me about hiscombat experience in normandy. He was a rifleman, and he qualitfied well with the m1 rifle. He grew up around firearms.

but in hissubsequent actions in the war, he told me he almost never really aimed at the enemy. All he did was fire off the 8 rounds as fast as he could pull the trigger in the general direction of the enemy targets. In his first action, he told me that he expended almost all his ammunition and hit nothing. He ended the war not even knowing if he killed or wounded anybody!

a fallshirmager maxim: Those who fire needlessly to comfort themselves are men of straw and not worthy of a parachutist.


my grandfather handled a k98 occasionaly in combat (his main weapon was an MP) and he hated it. "Too much exposure to hazardous elements.. with dissappointing results" as he said. I guess he wasn't a good shot either.

[Man of Stoat]

Man of Stoat, what's the servicibility like on these weapons? Are they easy to learn on?

They're all servicable. The semi-autos are obviously far more complex than the bolt-actions. Mike M. is being overly simplistic about the Garand. Small Arms of the World illustrates 12 different steps to field-strip the Garand (a couple of which aren't really necessary in the field). Compare this to the single step to remove the bolt of a bolt-action to ready it for cleaning. Does that answer your question? If not, please expand on it.

[Twitch1]

M-1 Garand. Secondarily, anything semi auto. Bolt actions of any brand were so WW I and totally eclipsed by semi auto fire that could be laid down.

[StalingradK]

k98 handsdown

[student-scaley]

If anyone is interested one of my modules on my course this year is entitled 'how weapons work' a real spotter course, anyway from it I was told of this website which has the training/servicing manuals on a large number of weapons including the Lee Enfield and the Garand.

Have a look;


www.biggerhammer.net/manuals/

[Blackdaddy]

From having a Mosin Nagant I would say its not the greates to have as far as recoil but that is the carbine (M1944) and also a very big flash. Also I have fired the lee enfield and I liked very much especially the bolt. So hands down I chose the Lee Enfield.

[Cuts]

k98 handsdown

Why do you say that Stalingrad ?

[Twitch1]

I'm really curious why the folks are voting bolt action when the Garand has the same or better stopping power and is semi auto? I have a K-98 and there is absolutely no advantage to bolt action in modern combat.
http://www.emotipad.com/newemoticons/Ask.gif

[Cuts]

I'm really curious why the folks are voting bolt action when the Garand has the same or better stopping power and is semi auto? I have a K-98 and there is absolutely no advantage to bolt action in modern combat.
http://www.emotipad.com/newemoticons/Ask.gif

I think the question was set in 1944.
The major advantage of a good bolt over a semi would be accuracy, but as we're only considering battle rifles it's pretty academic.

[DerMann]

I'm really curious why the folks are voting bolt action when the Garand has the same or better stopping power and is semi auto? I have a K-98 and there is absolutely no advantage to bolt action in modern combat.
http://www.emotipad.com/newemoticons/Ask.gif

A K98 has more power. Well at least the FPS is higher. A 30-06 has about 2500-2600 (I'm at school right now and can't check my gun book for the exact number) while 7.92 is 2850 (if you use surplus Turk ammo it's about 3000+ sometimes).

Snipers on the field of combat usually use a bolt action because they are simpler than an automatic. The shooter can also control when the round is extracted for even more stealthiness.

[Man of Stoat]

A K98 has more power. Well at least the FPS is higher. A 30-06 has about 2500-2600 (I'm at school right now and can't check my gun book for the exact number) while 7.92 is 2850 (if you use surplus Turk ammo it's about 3000+ sometimes).

Snipers on the field of combat usually use a bolt action because they are simpler than an automatic. The shooter can also control when the round is extracted for even more stealthiness.

All the rifles in question are overpowered. The small differences in ballistics between .303 at the bottom of the range and 7.92 at the top of the range are irrelevant - they all possess more than you could ever need when fired from an infantry rifle. British ideal calibre tests came to the conclusion that a 7mm round of intermediate power (.280 British) was ideal.

You'll note that most of the Western world is now using 5.56mm NATO, which is vastly less powerful than any of the cartridges in question. Also, DerMann, be very careful when discussing FPS. This was a mistake that our dear departed friend liked to make. Muzzle velocity on its own does not indicate the muzzle energy of a projectile. You have to also know the projectile weight.

Snipers using bolt rifles because they are more simple??? Snipers tend to be highly trained and thus the complexity of a weapon is not terribly relevant. They tend to use bolt action rifles because they are more accurate. In the case of WWII sniping rifles, both the German and Russian semi-auto sniping rifles had shorter barrels than their bolt action counterparts, leading to more noise, blast and flash.

[StalingradK]

K98 handsdown for myself, I like german rifles, what's more to it?

[Cuts]

K98 handsdown for myself, I like german rifles, what's more to it?

Yes. You told us that yesterday too. :roll:


But do you have a reason for choosing the 98 ?

What makes the 98 specifically, or German wpns in general, better than others ?

If it's because you like German wpns, what are it's advantages over the '43 ?

[Twitch1]

With all due respect, if ballistics are the only redeeming factor I can't see how it's a real world comparison if the original question was "which rifle would you want to carry into battle in 1944 with 100 rounds." Sniper use and other long -range squint 'n squeeze scenarios were very limited in occurance. The need for a quick follow up shot that the auto or semi-auto offers is what matters in real combat not speedy bullets.

[Hanz Lutz]

K98 handsdown for myself, I like german rifles, what's more to it?

Yes. You told us that yesterday too. :roll:


But do you have a reason for choosing the 98 ?

What makes the 98 specifically, or German wpns in general, better than others ?

If it's because you like German wpns, what are it's advantages over the '43 ?

He dont need to have a reason for chosing k-98 if he like germans weapons so what, :P and i like too.

Enfield or Grand is maybe better but we choose germans weapons.

My reason is i am shot only from K-98 , :roll:

[StalingradK]

Thank you Clauss

[Cuts]

Clauss and Stalingrad, I understand that you like German weapons and that is why you chose the '98, but it still doesn't answer my last two questions.

Is the reason for liking the German wpns just because of the national origin ?

[DerMann]

I remember reading somewhere that most of the G43's where constructed in forced labour camps, and would therefore be worthless because of the poor craftsmanship.

I like the K98 because it's very rugged and dependable. A British friend of mine once told me that the only thing wrong with the K98 is that it was too "German" and too functional. Then he later went to tell me to fire a real gun, like the Lee-Enfield.

I like German weapons because they're very well made (I am part German, but that has nothing to do with it ;) ).

[bas]

which rifle would you carry to battle? Western front, 1944? you only have around 100 rounds.

mosin 5x20
k98 5x20
enfield 10x10
m1 8x12
g43 10x10

Either a m1 Garand or a No4 Mk1*.

Why? Simple really, that's the winning side. Now, after D-Day who had less causalties, the Brittish or the US forces? That'll be the deciding factor between the m1 and the No4.

All else is academic as infantry don't get much choice in personal arms anyway.

[Hanz Lutz]

Clauss and Stalingrad, I understand that you like German weapons and that is why you chose the '98, but it still doesn't answer my last two questions.

Is the reason for liking the German wpns just because of the national origin ?

In west front if i been in ww2 ,i choose german weapons becuse i am a german,i am not nationalist but i like weapons from my country,like you from yours. :wink:

[Cuts]

Clauss and Stalingrad, I understand that you like German weapons and that is why you chose the '98, but it still doesn't answer my last two questions.

Is the reason for liking the German wpns just because of the national origin ?

In west front if i been in ww2 ,i choose german weapons becuse i am a german,i am not nationalist but i like weapons from my country,like you from yours. :wink:

That's incorrect Claus, if given the luxury to choose a weapon, the very last reason for my choice would be it's national origin.

Anyway, we've established that you like the 98 purely because it's German, but what are it's advantages over the '43 ?


By the way, I see no harm in describing yourself as nationalistic, no harm whatsoever.
If other people try to twist that label towards more sinister political connotations then they've got a problem, not you mate.

[Hanz Lutz]

Clauss and Stalingrad, I understand that you like German weapons and that is why you chose the '98, but it still doesn't answer my last two questions.

Is the reason for liking the German wpns just because of the national origin ?

In west front if i been in ww2 ,i choose german weapons becuse i am a german,i am not nationalist but i like weapons from my country,like you from yours. :wink:

That's incorrect Claus, if given the luxury to choose a weapon, the very last reason for my choice would be it's national origin.

Anyway, we've established that you like the 98 purely because it's German, but what are it's advantages over the '43 ?

If you ask me what i am choose betwean 43 and K-98 i will choose G-43,
why .... becouse i think its best then you have 10 rounds in your clip,
then 5 ,i like K-98 so what do you think then i am a nazi or nacionalist becouse this.

I apologise for my english,if i dont write something correct.

[Sturmtruppen]

Clauss and Stalingrad, I understand that you like German weapons and that is why you chose the '98, but it still doesn't answer my last two questions.

Is the reason for liking the German wpns just because of the national origin ?

In west front if i been in ww2 ,i choose german weapons becuse i am a german,i am not nationalist but i like weapons from my country,like you from yours. :wink:

That's incorrect Claus, if given the luxury to choose a weapon, the very last reason for my choice would be it's national origin.

Anyway, we've established that you like the 98 purely because it's German, but what are it's advantages over the '43 ?


By the way, I see no harm in describing yourself as nationalistic, no harm whatsoever.
If other people try to twist that label towards more sinister political connotations then they've got a problem, not you mate.

You are a dullard,he is Clauss,GO GERMANY!!!.

[Cuts]

If you ask me what i am choose betwean 43 and K-98 i will choose G-43,
why .... becouse i think its best then you have 10 rounds in your clip,
then 5 ,i like K-98 so what do you think then i am a nazi or nacionalist becouse this.

I apologise for my english,if i dont write something correct.

If you'd read on to the last part of my post you'd have seen that I don't think you're a nazi.
In fact I said that there is nothing wrong in describing yourself as a nationalist.

Personally I like the 98 too, that's why I have a couple of them, but I also know that there are better weapons out there.

[Cuts]

Clauss and Stalingrad, I understand that you like German weapons and that is why you chose the '98, but it still doesn't answer my last two questions.

Is the reason for liking the German wpns just because of the national origin ?

In west front if i been in ww2 ,i choose german weapons becuse i am a german,i am not nationalist but i like weapons from my country,like you from yours. :wink:

That's incorrect Claus, if given the luxury to choose a weapon, the very last reason for my choice would be it's national origin.

Anyway, we've established that you like the 98 purely because it's German, but what are it's advantages over the '43 ?


By the way, I see no harm in describing yourself as nationalistic, no harm whatsoever.
If other people try to twist that label towards more sinister political connotations then they've got a problem, not you mate.

You are a dullard,he is Clauss,GO GERMANY!!!.

Oh dear, now the personal playground has been shut we seem to have to endure childishness here too...
:roll:

[Hanz Lutz]

If you ask me what i am choose betwean 43 and K-98 i will choose G-43,
why .... becouse i think its best then you have 10 rounds in your clip,
then 5 ,i like K-98 so what do you think then i am a nazi or nacionalist becouse this.

I apologise for my english,if i dont write something correct.

If you'd read on to the last part of my post you'd have seen that I don't think you're a nazi.
In fact I said that there is nothing wrong in describing yourself as a nationalist.

Personally I like the 98 too, that's why I have a couple of them, but I also know that there are better weapons out there.

Ok soory i dont see last part from your post and i dont see it now maybe its some error,do you read my post when we start this i also said:,,Maybe have better rifles then 98' but i like it''.

So no fighting and still friends. :wink:

[Sturmtruppen]

Clauss and Stalingrad, I understand that you like German weapons and that is why you chose the '98, but it still doesn't answer my last two questions.

Is the reason for liking the German wpns just because of the national origin ?

In west front if i been in ww2 ,i choose german weapons becuse i am a german,i am not nationalist but i like weapons from my country,like you from yours. :wink:

That's incorrect Claus, if given the luxury to choose a weapon, the very last reason for my choice would be it's national origin.

Anyway, we've established that you like the 98 purely because it's German, but what are it's advantages over the '43 ?


By the way, I see no harm in describing yourself as nationalistic, no harm whatsoever.
If other people try to twist that label towards more sinister political connotations then they've got a problem, not you mate.

You are a dullard,he is Clauss,GO GERMANY!!!.

Oh dear, now the personal playground has been shut we seem to have to endure childishness here too...



:wink:

Re-edited by Dani.

[BDL]

:wink:

Will you stop changing people's posts in your quotes please? It's just annoying and doesn't prove anything.

[Dani]

Erwin, changing of the original posts quoted are no longer tolerated.

Admins and Mods are the only allowed to edit, re-edit and delete posts and threads (as you probably remember).

[Cuts]

...

So no fighting and still friends. :wink:

Yup, I agree with that. :wink:

[Firefly]

Erwin, please stop being a complete Arse, get rid of that stupid signature and join in with the reat of the forum. If you cant do that, then please just leave. Youve been Trolling for months now and Im sure everyone is bored with it as I am.

Get back to WW2 man, this is after all what this site is about. Take your Malvinas arguments elsewhere please as it has just become more and more childish. Learn from your Mate Eagle who posts reasonable things.

[Twitch1]

By 1944 anyone in Europe with anything beside a G43 or M1 was completely outclassed. I'd surely rather go in with a G43 over a K98!
http://www.websmileys.com/sm/violent/sterb323.gif

[Sturmtruppen]

Erwin, changing of the original posts quoted are no longer tolerated.

Admins and Mods are the only allowed to edit, re-edit and delete posts and threads (as you probably remember).
But also a brit did! (i don't remember who,they are all the same thing for me :D ).
please also give an advice to that guy,before he edits it!

[Man of Stoat]

It has been awhile since I've made a long post due to medical reasons. But my employer has finally given me voice control for my computer.

When this thread first started, I went down a range to test the Mauser in rapidfire has only had one charger. I decided that the best course of action would be to time how long it takes to go from an empty case in the chamber to the same state again having reloaded and fired five rounds. I did this three times with two attempts at 16 seconds and one of 17 this gives me a rough rate of fire of around 20 rpm, tops.

It should be noted that in the fifth round of the charger and into the magazine was harder than I anticipated due to the spring being stiff, and there being only just enough room in the magazine for five rounds it should also be noted that 20 rpm with a lee Enfield is a very leisurely rate of fire for a trained shooter.

I should also mention here that the best way to use a lee Enfield in rapidfire is to start with 10 rounds in the magazine, fire all 10, and then load five and fire five trying to get the second charger into the magazine in a hurry is hard and wastes time and since the magazine is designed for 10 rounds, loading it with five is very easy this also reduces the chance of a rim jam because the thumb can follow the fifth round into the magazine a fair distance and let the cartridges jump up sharply, thus ensuring that the rims are in the correct order.

[Twitch1]

With all due repsect to everyone's choices due to national fervor or weapons you own the original question was one alluding to the best weapon for survivability in the field in 1944- post D-Day I imagine.

By that time bolt action rifles were completely outclassed and antiquated for use in the mobile fire fight scenarios that were occuring with greater frequency. No one can operate a bolt action long arm with greater rate of fire that a semi-auto. It cannot match the firepower of the G43 or M1. It can't be loaded and made ready as fast. It has no advantage in range or accuracy. No one can deny this.

It's swell to pick a favorite rifle for esoteric reasons but if you planned to stay alive in country in 1944-45 you'd be lame to pick any bolt action arm.

[Hosenfield]

With all due repsect to everyone's choices due to national fervor or weapons you own the original question was one alluding to the best weapon for survivability in the field in 1944- post D-Day I imagine.

By that time bolt action rifles were completely outclassed and antiquated for use in the mobile fire fight scenarios that were occuring with greater frequency. No one can operate a bolt action long arm with greater rate of fire that a semi-auto. It cannot match the firepower of the G43 or M1. It can't be loaded and made ready as fast. It has no advantage in range or accuracy. No one can deny this.

It's swell to pick a favorite rifle for esoteric reasons but if you planned to stay alive in country in 1944-45 you'd be lame to pick any bolt action arm.

The marine professionals initially rejected the M1 rifle, and preferred the Springfield (very simiiliar to the k98) due to its enhanced accuracy and ammo conservation ( marine squads are armed with three BARS, and need most memembers of the squad to carry BAR magazines) and that the M1 rifle simply just caused ammo wastage with no appreciable increase in lethality.

[Twitch1]

Dude, that mindset was back on Guadalcanal in 1942 where the M1 was in such short supply the Marines HAD to equip with Springfield 03s. That ammo saving= bolt action rifles was an old fashioned BS myth that Gunnys from WW I believed in along with armchair generals! Works swell on the firing range but in combat 1944 it was all different. Why were German grunts clamoring for th STG 44 too if the old Mauser was so good? Trading fire-and-cock shots on both sides is/was fine at the early stages of the conflict. But by 1944 that was way over.

The question remains what would you and I and others reading this thread want in 1944 conditions to stay alive? By that time bolt action arms were SO 5 minutes ago. Would anyone honestly want to be in a squad of bolt action riflemen against a squad of M-1 or G43 equiped lads?

[Man of Stoat]

The marine professionals initially rejected the M1 rifle, and preferred the Springfield (very simiiliar to the k98) due to its enhanced accuracy and ammo conservation ( marine squads are armed with three BARS, and need most memembers of the squad to carry BAR magazines) and that the M1 rifle simply just caused ammo wastage with no appreciable increase in lethality.

Read Hatcher's Notebook p.139 for a really good explanation of why a semi-auto is desirable.

[Hosenfield]

US post war studies and german pre-war studies showed the relative insignificance of the rifle in battle. A small percentage of bullet wounds were caused by rifle fire, only around 20-30%.

An american study done after the war showed that most US soldiers never fired their rifle in combat, and (this is similar to german study) that crew served weapons with two or more people dictated the fight and were far more active, firing all the time.

[Gen. Sandworm]

Another good thing about the garand was that the germans got used to hearing the distintive cling noise when the clip was ejected announcing you where out of ammo. Therefore alot of soliders would take a empty one with them. Fling the clip make the noise and wait for Jerry to stick his head up. Boom.

[Hosenfield]

Another good thing about the garand was that the germans got used to hearing the distintive cling noise when the clip was ejected announcing you where out of ammo. Therefore alot of soliders would take a empty one with them. Fling the clip make the noise and wait for Jerry to stick his head up. Boom.

where did you here that? In the noise of combat, I don't think the ping sound was that recognizable.

[Man of Stoat]

Another good thing about the garand was that the germans got used to hearing the distintive cling noise when the clip was ejected announcing you where out of ammo. Therefore alot of soliders would take a empty one with them. Fling the clip make the noise and wait for Jerry to stick his head up. Boom.

One of the many "garand ping" myths, I'm afraid. I've even seen people on the range not realise that their Garand had gone "ping"!

[Gen. Sandworm]

Another good thing about the garand was that the germans got used to hearing the distintive cling noise when the clip was ejected announcing you where out of ammo. Therefore alot of soliders would take a empty one with them. Fling the clip make the noise and wait for Jerry to stick his head up. Boom.

where did you here that? In the noise of combat, I don't think the ping sound was that recognizable.

Ive never heard it from the horses mouth if thats what your getting at but ive heard it and read it loads of times. So if its a myth its a good one. However yea dont think it would work in a normandy like battle. Hell i would be surprised if you could heard the guy screaming next to you. A small clash of platoons maybe.


One of the many "garand ping" myths, I'm afraid. I've even seen people on the range not realise that their Garand had gone "ping"!

Bullshit. You can here the ping thru the ear covers. Plus it ejects from the top so I dont see how you could miss it. Maybe they just really wherent paying attention.

I might add this is a tactic that would work in close quarters. Your not going to hear is from 300yds away. Anyhow im convinced that it would work and that some have done it. Maybe we should write Mythbusters.:D

[Man of Stoat]

One of the many "garand ping" myths, I'm afraid. I've even seen people on the range not realise that their Garand had gone "ping"!

Bullshit. You can here the ping thru the ear covers. Plus it ejects from the top so I dont see how you could miss it. Maybe they just really wherent paying attention.

Seriously. Seen it happen. Of course you can hear it, but I've seen people shooting the rifle not notice it!

[pdf27]

Ive never heard it from the horses mouth if thats what your getting at but ive heard it and read it loads of times. So if its a myth its a good one. However yea dont think it would work in a normandy like battle. Hell i would be surprised if you could heard the guy screaming next to you. A small clash of platoons maybe.
It's probably worth adding that I (and I suspect quite a few other board members) am being taught to yell "magazine" when I run out of rounds and change magazines. I can't help suspecting this may be a little more noticeable than a ping...

[Man of Stoat]

Ive never heard it from the horses mouth if thats what your getting at but ive heard it and read it loads of times. So if its a myth its a good one. However yea dont think it would work in a normandy like battle. Hell i would be surprised if you could heard the guy screaming next to you. A small clash of platoons maybe.
It's probably worth adding that I (and I suspect quite a few other board members) am being taught to yell "magazine" when I run out of rounds and change magazines. I can't help suspecting this may be a little more noticeable than a ping...

And also to yell stoppage, when the rifle jammed as it invariably did...[/quote]

[pdf27]

And also to yell stoppage, when the rifle jammed as it invariably did...
To be honest I was too busy to have time to think to yell stoppage, but while I think about it you're quite right. Being very, very new REME TA I haven't exactly fired a lot of rounds yet...

[Twitch1]

Hosenfield- that's likely that actual rifle rounds were not a major wound causer in WW 2. But a rifle company is not actively engaged in manning crew weapons. They supported them often. If you are alluding to MGs they were not active all the time. You must remember once you open up a weapon like that it becomes the goal of every enemy soldier to kill you.

Often rifle fire was used to supress the enemy fire so part of the squad could use grenades or lastly move an LMG into place. Often times it was simply necessary to use suppressive firepower as we did in Vietnam and that's where the M-1 outclassed any bolt action arm. We were able to expend massive amounts of rounds due to the fact that we could could get resupplied fast in most instances while Charlie had to wait for the Hanoi express to trot some down from the north.

On D-Day+60 for example, rifle companies moving in platoon and squad strengths inland in France at best had BARs with them since mobility was the key to their survival.

How many people never fired their rifle in combat may coincide with cooks, barbers, motor pool mechanics and whatnot too since all the support personnel were issues arms. Replacement companies, support batallions and mop up platoons moving in after an area is secured might never have a reason to fire for sure. I simply never interviewed or talked to anyone who never used their weapon in combat if they were in a combat zone.

I was in a recon outfit and we saw far less firefights than the average squad in Vietnam and everyone brought their weapon to bear to increase firepower when needed. If anybody woulda been NOT firing his weapon he woulda got is ass fragged!

[George Eller]

Probably the M-1 Garand. Being a semi-auto, it is easier to keep the sights on target if follow up shots are needed or to sight in on additional targets after each hit.

I have fired the M-1 Garand (my brother's) and my Lee-Enfields (both the No. 4 Mk I* and SMLE Mk III). I have not fired a Mauser 98k, but I have fired the Springfield Model 1903A3 (which I used to own many years ago). The 1903 Springfield was very similar to the Mauser 98k as it's action was based on the Mauser design, but with some features carried over from the older Krag-Jorgensen such as the cocking piece and the round stem of the wing safety. I have not fired the Russian Mosin-Nagant M1891 yet, but plan to buy either a M91/30 or M44 in the near future.

The Lee-Enfields are the fastest of the bolt-actions and are enjoyable to shoot. My No. 4 Mk I* was made at the Long Branch Arsenal near Toronto, Canada in 1942 and my SMLE Mk III was made at a BSA (Birmingham Small Arms, Co.) controlled company near Birmingham in Shirley, England in 1940.

[Hiddenrug]

Enfield all the way
http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/1926/smle4mk1t5so.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[Man of Stoat]

Enfield all the way
http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/1926/smle4mk1t5so.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Why?

Oh, and by the way, there's a least two things wrong with that picture you've posted. Spotters, out you come!

[George Eller]

Oh, and by the way, there's a least two things wrong with that picture you've posted. Spotters, out you come!

My guess is the sling and missing magazine.

"The US M1907 leather sling was standard issue for this weapon, since it made a better adjustable arm brace than the British web sling."
From the "World War II Tommy - British Army Uniforms European Theatre 1939-45 in Coulour Photographs", by Martin Brayley & Richard Ingram (The Crowood Press, 1998, p 89)
-

[George Eller]

Hiddenrug:

Thanks for the picture. I'm a big fan of the Lee-Enfield too. Those No 4 Mk I* (T) sniper rifles can be expensive.

[Hiddenrug]

Even if there are two things wrong it's still a good rifle!

[Cuts]

Even if there are two things wrong it's still a good rifle!

Shot a No. 4 (T) much ?
What other scoped military rifles have you used ?

[mike M.]

Oh, and by the way, there's a least two things wrong with that picture you've posted. Spotters, out you come!

For one..to me it looks like the scope is on backwards???

[BDL]

Oh, and by the way, there's a least two things wrong with that picture you've posted. Spotters, out you come!

Foresight still mounted on a rifle with a scope?

[Firefly]

Oh, and by the way, there's a least two things wrong with that picture you've posted. Spotters, out you come!

For one..to me it looks like the scope is on backwards???

I initially though this too Mike, but they come in all varieties:

http://www.gunaccessories.com/scope-mounts/misc.asp

[Man of Stoat]

Oh, and by the way, there's a least two things wrong with that picture you've posted. Spotters, out you come!

Foresight still mounted on a rifle with a scope?

Nope, they still had iron sights just in case.

There's no mag, no target sling swivel, and the sling is wrong.

[mike M.]

I initially though this too Mike, but they come in all varieties:

What makes me think this is the adjustments knobs for the scope are normally found closer to the end you look through, sometimes in the middle. Do they make them with the knobs at the far end of the scope? I'm no expert in scopes but that is what ive seen, any other opinions concerning this?

[mike M.]

To answer my own question, it looks like the m1c and m1d sniper scopes had the knobs toward the end of the scope. :? Now...show me a pic of an M1 carbine and Ill tell you whats wrong with it...thats the rifle I know. :)

[George Eller]

What makes me think this is the adjustments knobs for the scope are normally found closer to the end you look through, sometimes in the middle. Do they make them with the knobs at the far end of the scope? I'm no expert in scopes but that is what ive seen, any other opinions concerning this?

I have several pictures of the No 4 Mk I* (T) and the position of the adjustment knobs is correct. Would be glad to scan the pics and post later.
-

[George Eller]

Various Australian and British snipers and sniper rifles. All B/W photos are from the book "Out of Nowhere - A History of the Military Sniper" by Martin Pegler (Osprey Publishing, 2004). Color photos are from the book "The World War II Tommy - British Army Uniforms - European Theatre 1939-45 In Colour Photographs" by Martin Brayley & Richard Ingram (The Crowood Press,1998, pp88-89). All captions are quoted directly from the books.

http://img275.imageshack.us/img275/496/australiansniper14kz.jpg
Australian Sniper 1, WWII, Sniper P. Ennis, First Australian Infantry, about to go on patrol with No. 1 Mk. III* rifle and P18 scope. p204

http://img275.imageshack.us/img275/5376/australiansniper20yc.jpg
Australian Sniper 2, Korea, 1951, Private B. Coffman of New South Wales checking the sight on his Lithgow No. 1 Mk. III*. He is wearing US pattern ammunition pouches and webbing. p273

http://img275.imageshack.us/img275/4579/australiansniperrifle11je.jpg
Australian Sniper Rifle 1, An Australian Lithgow manufactured SMLE No. 1 Mk. III, with pattern 1918 scope on low mounts. This combination was to remain in service until the end of the Korean War. p222

http://img275.imageshack.us/img275/3204/britishsniper16oz.jpg
British Sniper 1, WWII, Later in the war Britain began to catch up with Germany in producing practical camouflage clothing. Here Sergeant Furness wears the two-piece windproof jacket and trousers introduced in 1944. His scrim covered helmet is slung over his shoulder and he holds his No. 4 (T) rifle. p245

http://img275.imageshack.us/img275/9613/britishsniper1c14ek.jpg
British Sniper 1c1, [WWII Re-enactor] This sniper wears the camouflage version of the windproof smock and trousers; in cut these followed the general pattern of all windproof clothing. The smock was a popular garment among such specialist troops, but was also on general issue towards the end of the war; being widely seen in photographs of infantry. (Denison smocks and captured German items of SS spotted and Wehrmacht splinter camouflage pattern also saw use among British troops.) While this windproof suit had an excellent camouflage base, individual snipers often made up their own 'ghillie" suits using hessian scrim, netting, or any other available fabrics that would help blend in with their environment. Camouflage face veils - 3ft x 3ft 6in nets, dyed in a grass green and brown pattern -were a general issue item. They were intended for spreading over the helmet, shoulders and pack to break up the outline agaimt observation from the air or ground. Many soldiers wore them as scarfs in the opened neck of the BD blouse.

http://img275.imageshack.us/img275/3188/britishsniper1c23dh.jpg
British Sniper 1c2, [WWII Re-enactor] The No. 4 Mk. I* (T). Snipers' rifles were selected weapons, chosen for their tighter than average grouping; a cheek piece was added to the butt and the receiver was modified to take the No. 32 telescopic sight, graduated to 1,000 yards. The US M1907 leather sling was standard issue for this weapon, since it made a better adjustable arm brace than the British web sling. Snipers were deployed to dominate the ground between the lines during the brief periods of fairly static confrontation.

http://img275.imageshack.us/img275/6663/britishsniper21yg.jpg
British Sniper 2, WWII, British Private Francis Miller, posing with his Enfield Rifle. As the sole survivor of his sniper section, he was universally known as 'Borrowed Time'. p22

http://img275.imageshack.us/img275/701/britishsniper32yu.jpg
British Sniper 3, WWII, A British sniper with No. 4 (T) in Italy. He has adopted the long Bren-gun webbing sling in preference to the issue leather pattern. p229

http://img275.imageshack.us/img275/544/britishsniper41ai.jpg
British Sniper 4, WWII, House-to-house fighting became a matter of routine in the days following D-Day. A British sniper takes refuge in a loft and watches for movement. Snipers wore what suited them and this man carries the practical and large Bren-gun magazine pouches instead of small ammunition pouches, as well as carrying a pistol on his hip. p256

http://img275.imageshack.us/img275/7838/britishsniper59rs.jpg
British Sniper 5, A British sniper in Aden in the mid-1960's. He has the usual No. 4 (T) rifle, with webbing scope case, but carries his ammunition in a looped hunting belt around his waist. p277

http://img275.imageshack.us/img275/3029/britishsniper69cc.jpg
British Sniper 6, Snipers' course, England, April 1956. There is nothing to tell the casual observer that this is not a course from 1942, as little has altered in the way of clothing or equipment. p278

http://img275.imageshack.us/img275/9311/britishsniper77gy.jpg
British Sniper 7, An SAS rifleman in Oman, c. 1974 with L42 rifle and M79 grenade launcher on his back. All are trained in basic sniping techniques but only a few are fuly accredited snipers. p282

http://img275.imageshack.us/img275/8751/britishsniperrifle18si.jpg
British Sniper Rifle 1, The Enfield No. 4 Mk. I (T) rifle and No. 32 Mk. I scope. Solidly built, many believed it to be the best sniping rifle available during the war, on any side. p228

http://img275.imageshack.us/img275/6708/britishsniperrifle23kl.jpg
British Sniper Rifle 2, An early variant of the 7.62 mm Enfield L42 rifle. Basically a pared-down No. 4 (T) with heavier barrel, it still used the No. 32 scope. p281

[Bladensburg]

Actually contrary to the blurb for the 1956 snipers course it is easily possible to tell it from a wartime course because all of the soldiers are wearing ties whereas before the end of WWII only officers wore ties in battle-dress.

[Twitch1]

George- thanks for posts those quite interesting pics.

[Cuts]

What's the capbadge in the 1956 photograph ?

[George Eller]

British Sniper 6, Snipers' course, England, April 1956. There is nothing to tell the casual observer that this is not a course from 1942, as little has altered in the way of clothing or equipment. p278

spottermode] Actually contrary to the blurb for the 1956 snipers course it is easily possible to tell it from a wartime course because all of the soldiers are wearing ties whereas before the end of WWII only officers wore ties in battle-dress.[/spottermode]

Bladensburg, Thanks for the clarification. :)

[George Eller]

Thanks Twitch, it took some time to find, scan and tweek the images, but OCR (optical character recognition) did help to reduce the work in typing the captions. :)

[Bladensburg]

What's the capbadge in the 1956 photograph ?

It looks suspiciously like an RM capbadge. IIRC they still provide sniper training for parts of the Army, don't know whether they did back then.

[Cuts]

What's the capbadge in the 1956 photograph ?

It looks suspiciously like an RM capbadge. IIRC they still provide sniper training for parts of the Army, don't know whether they did back then.

That's what I thought, but I could discern no other devices to confirm this.

There is always an RM prescence amongst the instrs in the Spec Wpns Wg at Dering Bks.

[George Eller]

Bladensburg wrote:
Cuts wrote:
What's the capbadge in the 1956 photograph ?


It looks suspiciously like an RM capbadge. IIRC they still provide sniper training for parts of the Army, don't know whether they did back then.


That's what I thought, but I could discern no other devices to confirm this.

There is always an RM prescence amongst the instrs in the Spec Wpns Wg at Dering Bks.

Guys, the photo was courtesy of Malcolm Fox. Reference is made to him on page 275 of the book, quoted as follows:

"Malcolm Fox, in receipt of a letter in 1953 requesting him to join Her Majesties Armed Forces as a conscript, opted to join the Royal Marines, and as an enthusiastic shot in his school army cadet force; volunteered for a sniping course at Browndown in Hampshire. Issued with that old workhorse, the Enfield No.4 (T), he successfully completed his training before being sent to Cyprus with 40 Commando where he spent his days in a hot camouflaged hide observing the activities of the Greek-Cypriot community, who were supplying EOKA rebels living in the hills."

-

[Bladensburg]

Why didn't you tell us that in the first place, eh? Rather than make us squint at our monitors trying to spot other RM insignia... :lol: :roll:

[George Eller]

I know, old George was a little slow on the uptake :wink:

[Rinx]

I'll take this (http://www.simpsonltd.com/images/LongGuns/D5779D.jpg) beauty.

Scoped Mosin-Nagant.

[Panzerknacker]

Hayha did not use a scope...is that true..? :?


Mosin-Nagant M91/30 sniper-rifle with 3.5 power PU telescopic sight

http://www.kmike.com/KWjpg/mnsniper.jpg

[Rinx]

Hayha did not use a scope...is that true..? :?

Yeah, did not use a scoped Nagan.
But still more kills than the ones with a scope :P
He didnt take a scoped rifle from the russians even tho he could'ce, but he was used to the non-scoped one and he liked how his head could be a little lower than with a scoped one.

[Panzerknacker]

Amazing marksmanship ... :shock:

[Nickdfresh]

Amazing marksmanship ... :shock:

And the scope on the Nagant sniper variant could be sighted in much faster than the German K98 sniper version's scope.

The History Channel had an excellent "Battlefield Detectives" episode on Stalingrad recently...

[bas]

And the scope on the Nagant sniper variant could be sighted in much faster than the German K98 sniper version's scope.

The History Channel had an excellent "Battlefield Detectives" episode on Stalingrad recently...

And it was typical TV crap. They didn't even use the correct tools or technique to sight in the Mauser.

Besides what difference does that actually make to a sniper? It's not like he'll be sighting his rifle in on the front line.

[CDN3RD_Canadian]

I'd take the Ross rifle Mk I before it was modifyed. It was an excellent sniper, the later versions were junk scine the production was rushed.

[Man of Stoat]

I'd take the Ross rifle Mk I before it was modifyed. It was an excellent sniper, the later versions were junk scine the production was rushed.

What, the one that was never used in combat and had that silly controlled-platform loading system?

:roll: A perfect example of the Bisley school of thought...

[Panzerknacker]

It was not used in WW1 ? :?

[CDN3RD_Canadian]

http://world.guns.ru/rifle/ross_1905_1.jpg

Ross Mk II

The origins of the Ross rifle lie in the late-1890s patents of the noble Canadian Sir Charles Ross, who developed his own pattern of the straight pull rifles, broadly based on Austrian Mannlicher M1890 / 1895 system. British and Canadian forces tested Ross rifles circa 1900-1901.

[Man of Stoat]

It was not used in WW1 ? :?

No, the Ross Mk. III (M1910) was, and it was absolutely kak. Long, heavy, complicated, and exceptionally prone to jamming due to dirt.

Concerning the Mk. I Ross:

http://www.chuckhawks.com/ross_rifle.htm[/url]]The first 1000 Mk. 1 rifles were issued to the Royal NorthWest Mounted Police. Routine inspection found 113 defects warranting rejection. The rifle was found unsatisfactory for many reasons. One of these was a poorly designed bolt lock that enabled the bolt to fall from the rifle and be lost, thus rendering the rifle useless. Another was poorly tempered component springs that were described as being "soft as copper." In 1906 the R.C.M.P. reverted back to their Model 94 Winchesters and Lee Metfords.

And in any case, the Mk.II (M1905) also had that silly magazine system, and was also not used in combat -- as far as I'm aware.

[George Eller]

-
Regarding Canadian Snipers and the Ross Rifle

From: "Out of Nowhere: A History of the Military Sniper", by Martin Pegler,Osprey, 2004, (pp 134-139) and "Small Arms of the World", by Edward Clinton Ezell, Stackpole Books, 1977, (pp 196-197)

-

http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/5038/rossrifle012bh.jpg
-

http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/2037/rossrifle023tq.jpg
-

http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/7130/rossrifle039vh.jpg
-

http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/7214/rossrifle049gv.jpg
-

http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/720/rossrifle055cy.jpg
-

http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/5944/rossrifle064tq.jpg
-

http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/745/rossrifle074zs.jpg

-

[Panzerknacker]

No, the Ross Mk. III (M1910) was, and it was absolutely kak. Long, heavy, complicated, and exceptionally prone to jamming due to dirt

All right thanks for the info.


Nice gallery of pics George, the Ross always look as a good desing to me. 8)