• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Alternative Vietnam Sniper rifles

MTFalconer

MTFalconer

Peckerhead on a mountain.
Banned !
Full Member
Minuteman
Mar 10, 2014
313
14
Little Belts, Montana
Let me preface this post by saying that my father was an Army sniper in Vietnam. He has lots of pictures that he won't let me have to make copies of so I will pose this here. I am still working on this but I am 1,000 miles away and he refuses to copy or send them to me.

I know that there were many "alternative" rifles used in Vietnam. Many being sent by family members or "borrowed" from other services and the like. Case in point: My father was issued the accurized M-14 but hated it and had my grandfather send him a Remington 700 in 30-06 with heavy barrel for use there. He says there was plenty of good 30-06 ammo available at the time. He fitted the ART ranging scope to it and later "acquired" a redfield 3-9 accurange and said that he much preferred it over the Arty. Apparently whiskey and other trades would buy most anything you wanted.

He has told me on many occasions that they were allowed pretty much anything they could qualify with as long as it was approved by their armorer and command. He saw lots of Winchester 70's, Remington 700's and others that he can't remember. Even M-1 carbines and M-16's were fitted with day and night optics for use.

Does anyone have any pics of these alternative use rifles? Not issued rifles persay but stuff that was carried and used none the less. I have picked my dads brain as far as it will go at this point but remain interested in what they could get away with using.
 
There were rules against private weapons in Vietnam. Doesn't mean they weren't used. The unofficial rule was "out of sight-out of mind". That worked with pistols/revolvers but not so much with long guns. It easy to hide pistols/revolvers in care packages, not so much with long guns.

There were Model 70s in '06, but at the time it was a NSN item used by service teams. There were M1903A4,s M1941, M1C/Ds. As well as carbines and M16's used in the sniper roll In addition to the M21 & M40.

Vietnam is mostly jungle. As thick as any in SE Asia/Pacific theater. Extreme long range shots were rare as hen's teeth. Not saying they didn't happen but it was rare.

I was in I Corp. Our most common tactic were stay behind operations. Or covering a re-supply LZ. You didn't need nothing but a M16a1 and with irons in the day time and Starlight scopes at night. Either were quite effective to 400 yards.

The problem with un-authorized weapons was logistics. We went to the field for anywhere from 30-60 days requiring re-supply. A night or two before the re-supply you called in the supply list to S-4, and prayed you got what you asked for. You certainly weren't getting ammo for un-authorized weapons.

You couldn't stock up in the rear and expect to carry enough to last 3--60 days with everything else you're required to carry.

I'm not saying un-authorized long guns existed, but their weren't any in my unit.

'06 was common since the ARVNs were issued a lot of M1s, plus the ROK Marines used them, as well as Carbines.
 
Kraig,

That is pretty much what my dad says as well. They were officially told don't do it but were not held to the standard. I think he told me the most popular non issue was a shotgun. He also mentioned finding the 30-06 match ammo to be comparatively easy to find.
 
The 06 match, M72, and M118 were not hard to find. It also depended on what kind of unit you were in as to what you could get away with finding or having. The SF guys could get more flexibility. The Son Tai raiders bought stuff out of a Fayettville, NC shop, off the shelf. That was unheard of at the time. Plus SF had weapons available from any country from any time frame. The light weapons guys were trained on everything you can imagine and they helped select the weapons a given mission which could be needed, and that included weapons of foreign origins before or after WW2.

In other words, not a simple question.

The Art one system was not unlike a Redfield accurange, both are Redfield scopes and both had 3-9X capability. The issue I have with the Art I is that you use the power the sytem says what power you must use at a given range for the ballistics cam you were stuck with. It was simple for simpletons IMO. With a accurange, you set the power as you like, after you guestimate the range. I have both.

Many things were used in Nam. We had never had an official sniper program, just scoped rifles. We learned from the Soviet, Brit, German, etc. sniper training, not to mention our mistakes, and the M40 plus sniper training was began. The stigma of the sniper was soon to fall. Now a sniper is a good title to have in the US military. Before Nam, not really.
 
I know of another. I posted a question similar to yours a few years ago and got no info. In late '68 or early '69 I was visiting our guy on LZ Uplift. It was a small LZ that was the AO of the 3rd or 1st/503rd. Anyway, he had a Sako, .223 with a 3-9 Redfield. He said there were a total of three on the LZ. I took the team over in '70. Never saw another Sako.
 
That's good info. right there thanks! For some reason I was thinking that there were some European rifles used, seems I remember one of the pics in my dads photos of one of his team members that had a rifle I could not identify. He doesn't remember what it was and the pic isn't that great.
 
So to tack on to this discussion, what rifles were used post WWII, that used M2 Ball or 30-06 besides the M1941, 1903a4, and the Garand?
 
That is the crop. I think there were still M1919s in service at that time as well and they would have been 30-06. Don't forget the original model 70 Winchesters for the Marine Corps were also 30-06.
 
The '06 was quite popular in SE Asia using American Weapons. We supplied Uncle Ho when he was fighting the Japanese, and we supplied the South Vietnamese when they were fighting Uncle Ho.

The VC, before they were absorbed by the NVA used more American weapons then AK/SKS/Mosin's.

The 30 Cal. Carbine was also quite popular, it was actually a better weapon in jungle warfare then the Springfield's and Garand's.
The Carbine was also a better fit for the smaller Vietnamese people.

And of course when the ROK Marines (South Korea) became involved the brought with them the Garand's we gave them.

Except for a smidgen of Model 70's there were few non-US Military Rifles in '03 in SE Asia.
 
We had an amazing collection of WW2 arms up in the hills. MACV/SOG armed thousands of CIDG's plus the ARVN units were all armed with WW2 arms. 1919's BARS M1 and 03's. SOG Kontum had several scoped 03's and M1's They would haul out during the first Tet. They seldom hit anything and we youngsters were pinning hits on mortars and individuals at 500 yards with our M14's. So it was not unheard of to see 30 06 rifles in the hands of Americans I just don't think it have much value away from the base camps .The 1919's and BARS were awesome defensive arms with the black tip ammo was used in towns and against occupied buildings.
 
classicshooter said:
So to tack on to this discussion, what rifles were used post WWII, that used M2 Ball or 30-06 besides the M1941, 1903a4, and the Garand?
Click to expand...
This list isn't "that is the crop", the BAR was used in Viet Nam, the Johnson rifle M1941 was used all over in fact there were suppose to be some use at the Bay of Pigs.
 
pawprint2 said:
This list isn't "that is the crop", the BAR was used in Viet Nam, the Johnson rifle M1941 was used all over in fact there were suppose to be some use at the Bay of Pigs.
Click to expand...
Most of the time when you see a reference to "M1941" on the internet the weapon being reffered to id the "Rifle (Snipers), Cal. 30, M1903A1 w/ Telescope, Sighting, Unertl 8X". Where the M1941 terminology came from is a mystery since none of them saw the light of day until well into 1943.

Clark Campbell suggests that the nomenclature may have have stemmed from the original USMC sniper rifle recommendation of then Capt Van Orden and Master Gunner Lloyd which was a Winchester Model 70 with heavy barrel and the 8X Unertl. USMC brass declined to procure a new rifle for logistical reasons but went with the Unertl scope only installed on National Match and Special Target Rifles that were in inventory.
 
Slightly off-topic questions here, but I figured they didnt necessitate their own thread.

For one, you always see it in the movies, but did SF/MACV-SOG/etc units really go into and complete certain risky operations purposefully using/equipped with enemy or Soviet Com-bloc weapons(IE AK47`s, SKS`s, RPK`s, PKM`s, or maybe even Mosin`s)?? No doubt I think it may have happened and could be clever in some small unit operations way out in Injun Country but IMO it would just be a friendly fire hazard with bigger units.


Also, I cant remember where I read it, but somewhere along the way I remember reading that when the SVD Dragunov was first fielded, the Soviets sent over some the best Russian snipers they could come up with to go to Vietnam and test out the rifles/their abilities against America. Obviously there were Russian advisers in `Nam, but do yall think the above statement is accurate/were there ever any accounts by our guys of firefights with "Caucasian"-looking troops or men that otherwise probably didnt grow up/live in `Nam?


Thanks.
 
In Nov maybe early Dec '67 two guys were killed via (un)-friendly fire because of that. One guy had picked up an AK and let loose with a burst.

Understand two things. Nothing sounds like an AK but an AK. Quite a bit different the an AR. (M16A1). Second that shit (jungle) is thick over there, most of the time you never saw who you were shooting at.

It this case guys opened up on the sound of an AK,,,,,,,, bandits carry AKs, good guys carry 'A1s.

After that they were banned in our unit (2/502nd INF. 101st Abn Div) and rightfully so.

As to the scenario you mentioned, not saying it didn't happen, but I've never heard of it. Even the ARVN's carried M1/M1 Carbines, or later M16A1's.
 
The M1 carbine was a good jungle weapon....???? WWII weapons had their window of time in the Indochina wars and the M1 Carbine was only relevant in a short
envelope of time. No one I ever knew was lamenting its demise.

As to SVD Soviet Snipers in VN war....I'd toss a BS flag on that all day long. However its fashion these days to re write history so have at it. Don't let facts get in the way.

Of course, I am biased with having been in that war a few tours and nothing screws up this SVD Soviet Sniper war story like a eye witness. t
 
We had a vietnam era starlight scope with a pac 4 on a xtra m-16 on our amtrack during oif. It was clumbsy, but it got the job done.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scooter
Thanks for replying yall.

Just one more thing, would you say that there were any instances of Soviets directly participating in combat? Outside of maybe aiming SA-2`s, but actually shooting at/getting shot at by ARVN and/or Americans in `Nam??

Also, Mr Kraig, I know you probably haven`t faced down any talibs or towelheads, but from what you`ve heard from younger troops who have been over to Iraq/Afghanistan, would you say the average individual VC or NVA soldier was a better skilled fighter than the terrorists our boys are facing today? I havent read much on the effectiveness of enemy Vietnamese but I have read that the Afghan insurgents are usually much better marksman/better tactics/better communication overall than the Iraqi insurgents were.
 
Last edited:
Forgetful Coyote said:
Just one more thing, would you say that there were any instances of Soviets directly participating in combat? Outside of maybe aiming SA-2`s, but actually shooting at/getting shot at by ARVN and/or Americans in `Nam??
Click to expand...
Yes, some were captured by the Americal division in South V/N, others were caught/snatched in Cambodia and Loas.
 
The M1 carbine was a good jungle weapon....????
Click to expand...

don't under estimate that little carbine, it WAS an excellent "jungle weapon". In the SP during WWII, you seldom could see more then 25 yards. Early the American Army had the M1903, then the M1 Garand's became available and then the Carbines. The Carbine was faster to shoot (15 rd mags compared to the 8 rounds in the Garand) faster to reload. The were light, easier to handle in the jungles and the little carbine round was plenty effective at short range). The M16A1 had the same advantage as the carbine.



Forgetful Coyote said:
Thanks for replying yall.

Also, Mr Kraig, I know you probably haven`t faced down any talibs or towelheads, but from what you`ve heard from younger troops who have been over to Iraq/Afghanistan, would you say the average individual VC or NVA soldier was a better skilled fighter than the terrorists our boys are facing today? I havent read much on the effectiveness of enemy Vietnamese but I have read that the Afghan insurgents are usually much better marksman/better tactics/better communication overall than the Iraqi insurgents were.
Click to expand...

I would compare the VC with the insurgents. There is a HUGE difference between the VC and NVA. The VC were in fact insurgents, farmed rice during the day, VC at night. The NVA were professional soldiers, effective soldiers at that. The VC pretty much ceased to exist after TET '68. They were adsorbed by the NVA after TET and came under NVA leadership. Being a professional army the NVA came under a central command (like other modern armies). Gen. Gaip was a pretty good military strategist.

The main difference is the VC/NVA were communist. Their main weapon is terror. There is nothing more cruel then communist. Take a look at the writings of Stalin, Mao, and Uncle HO.

Of all the communist, the Asians were the most cruel.
 
At pistol/SMG distances the Carbine was a viable weapon, and since that was it's design/employment regime, I'd say it was a solid success.

However, my deployment in The 'Nam was up on the Northern Plateau, and the mainly jungle terrain was way far away from my AO. 3MarDiv was not as involved in Jungle Warfare, not nearly as much as the Army further South. IMHO, that's why Marines really felt they got screwed out of their M-14's, and Army may have had a better experience with the M-16.

Considering that there was neither an official SWS nor an official Sniper Training or Employment activity until the RVN Conflict was well underway, and that the rifle first selected for the activity was a Win 70 .30-'06 out of the Da Nang PX; calling anything an alternative may be a misnomer.

During my assignment at the Cua Viet Naval Activity in mid/late '67, I saw round eyed folks in black with Madsens who I was told 'do not exist', so maybe the UDT/Proto-SEALS had stuff going on that could probably never be called 'Standard' or 'Conventional'. Can't say with any certainty...

Greg
 
Last edited:
There is an impressive debate on the combat effectiveness of the M1 carbine on milsurps.com. I have been involved in several debates on the subject and you will get a lot of contraversy.

This conversation does go into the fact the carbine was supposed to replace the M1911 but was employed way beyond its designed roles. It did pretty well in many of these roles but it was not a full powered weapon so comparing it to an M1 Garand at long ranges is a bit silly. Hey, would you prefer a M1911 at 200 yds or even 300yds, or how about a Thompson?

They were a very good choice for the indig who SF trained and armed, especially in the environment employed and the size of the troop to whom they were issued.
 
Tazaroo said:
I didn't notice anyone mention the M1D Garand with it's M84 scope.
Click to expand...

Around 1966 there were a couple of articles about the USMC sniper program published in general interest gun magazines. The rifles depicted included M1D's, a hodgepodge of Winchester model 70 Target rifles mounting Unertl 8X target scopes or a Japanese manufactured "Marine Scope". The "Marine Scope" looked like variable power hunting scope.

The following year there was another round of articles describing the introduction of the Remington 700's with Redfield 3x9 Accurange scopes.

The one thing which I have always found a little odd was that in these articles and the reference books there is never any mention of the USMC M1952 version of the M1C. It was intended to replace the so-called "M1941" and eliminate the inherent weaknesses associated with using a target scope on a combat rifle.

If any of the Vietnam vets or USMC personnel have any information on the M1952 in Vietnam I would be interested.

Thanks,

Jim
 
As we've gotten a bit away from the sniper rifles here are a few somewhat unusual weapons we had. M-14 with selector, I don't remember if it had the pistol grip stock but it did have the folding butt plate. M3 sub-gun, I think this was the later version as I remember using the hole in the bolt to cock it. Swedish K, we had a number of mags but no 9mm until I met some guys from NZ. A SF 1Lt. came through carrying a paratroop M2 carbine with a shortened barrel and a bolt ( as in nuts and bolts) brazed to the operating slide. He said the bolt reduced the rate of fire.

I had 1911s and a Colt Detective Special that were government property but also had a Charter Arms Undercover and a PPK that were not.

I doubt the Dragunov saw much if any use in RVN. In 1968 there was still a capture bounty for the Dragunov from the CIA.

I was told one of the team leaders from N Co. 75th Rangers carried an AK. He would reputedly wear NVA garb and take point moving to and from laager sites which would give him an edge if he walked into one of the bad guys. I met him but never discussed it with him so I can't confirm.
 
Greg Langelius * said:
.....During my assignment at the Cua Viet Naval Activity in mid/late '67, I saw round eyed folks in black with Madsens who I was told 'do not exist', so maybe the UDT/Proto-SEALS had stuff going on that could probably never be called 'Standard' or 'Conventional'. Can't say with any certainty...

Greg
Click to expand...
MTFalconer - This could be why your dad does not want those pics distributed......
 
I really doubt they busted any bunkers with a 444 marlin.

But lots of stories came out of that war that would fit the cartoon chennel rather then reality.
 
During a short leave stateside in 1968, fellow Green Beret Larry White hung out with Shriver, whose only real interest was finding a lever action .444 Marlin rifle. Purchasing one of the powerful Marlins, Shriver shipped it back to SOG so he could carry it into Cambodia, "to bust bunkers," probably the only levergun used in the war."
 
During a short leave stateside in 1968, fellow Green Beret Larry White hung out with Shriver, whose only real interest was finding a lever action .444 Marlin rifle. Purchasing one of the powerful Marlins, Shriver shipped it back to SOG so he could carry it into Cambodia, "to bust bunkers," probably the only levergun used in the war." This is a verb to which I asked, sir, respectfully, thank you.
 
bigazboomstick said:
During a short leave stateside in 1968, fellow Green Beret Larry White hung out with Shriver, whose only real interest was finding a lever action .444 Marlin rifle. Purchasing one of the powerful Marlins, Shriver shipped it back to SOG so he could carry it into Cambodia, "to bust bunkers," probably the only levergun used in the war."
Click to expand...

The problem I have with such a scenario is logistics. Can't shoot the weapon if you don't have the ammo. How could this soldier keep himself stocked with such an oddball cartridge in Tim-buck-Cam-bow-deeuh? Unless he essentially viewed it as a disposable weapon once he ran out of what he brought with him.
 
Many weapons were available on a 'black market'. I personally had hands on a Thompson M1A1 sub-gun.

Such firearms were typically sold to newer troops in-country by ones who were rotating back home. Many of them originated from ARVN sources.

Greg
 
Last edited:
I have a friend, recently retired from work, who spent some time in VN in 70 or 71. Small teams, inserted by helicopter, job was to find the enemy and pull back while calling for air strikes or larger unit backup.

He told me he went through several weapons before settling on the Grease Gun. He said the Thompson was just too heavy, the M16 didn't get the job done quickly enough, etc. He said he really liked a "Swedish K" but the grease gun won out over it due to power and ammo availability when he needed it.

He did say that sometimes one guy would carry an AK47. The reasons? If the point guy had an AK and was seen by the enemy they believed it gave him a moment or two before things went down hill due to confusion created when the enemy saw some one with one of "their" rifles. He also said something similar about the sound of the AK. They believed that it caused that same moment of doubt/confusion that might give them a few seconds to either kill, or run, if they walked up on the enemy by accident.

He ran across one of his old buddies a couple of years ago who sent him some pictures of them back at their base. He said they wore camouflaged jungle fatigues in the jungle and plain OD colored ones back at their post. Anyway, one of the pictures he showed me was his buddy holding a grease gun, magazine in it, ejection port cover open and bolt back pointing it at him. Both of them had a big grin on their faces and he had his finger stuck in the muzzle.

When he showed me the picture he shook his head and said, "You know, when I look back on it, I can't believe some of the stupid shit we did back then."

Nothing about sniper rifles. They did their stuff up close with grenades, claymores, and automatic weapons.

Oh, he did mention "liberating" an M60 one time, from a tank. He said they cut the barrel off right in front of the gas system. They test fired it at the post firing range before the mission but didn't really see anything wrong with it at the time. Then, when they got out in the jungle they had an occasion to use it. He said they walked up on a big bunker complex and started taking fire. They broke contact with the M60. He said every place he hit the dirt and went through a belt of ammo, he started a fire. He said he really didn't realize it till the bigger force got there and they went into the complex. As they moved down the trail he noticed the still smoking vegetation in front of the pile of empties and links. When they talked about it later they figured the fires, the noise/muzzle blast, etc. scared the enemy and maybe kept them from following them back down the trail.

He said they never took the chopped down M60 with them again.
 
I only saw one guy use a AK in my unit. They were banned for GI use and for good reason.

1: Only one thing sounds like an AK, and that's an AK.
2: In the jungle, you often don't see who's shooting at you and who you are shooting at, nor do you see all the people in your unit.

One had an AK and opened up with it, and the other fire team that was close but out of sight opened up on the AK and that AK got three of my friend's name on the wall.

I was in a Recon Unit as mentioned above, we were out from 30-60 days at a time meaning we had to be re-supplied, we only carried guns we could get ammo from the system. Meaning 5.56 and '60 ammo, seldom could we get 45 ACP as space was limited on the choppers. Which was alright since the only time we used 1911s was inspecting tunnels, and in the rear, to be armed while going through the chow line. (Pistols are far better then dragging a '60 through the chow line).

As I said before our "sniper rifles" were M16A1s with starlight scopes. They were effective because most of the time, you couldn't see very far.

Only odd stuff I seen by GIs were REMF's in the rear.
 
Every Soldier is always looking for an edge and because of this some weird things show up on the battle field

Caliber debates have gone on as long as calibers have existed. I know it took me year to fore give the 9mm for 115grain silver tips.

I say some weapons in Iraq and Afghanistan that should not have been there. RVN was a lot looser on shipping stuff so no doubt some real weird stuff showed up.

I remember someone saying hey you wont be able to ship that home and the response was "I am just looking to get myself home" Not my words but I certainly try to live by them

You RVN guys than you so much for your service to our country.
 
Last edited:
This has been an interesting thread. Not only from the perspective of what was available as a sniper weapon/round but of what was out there to use as a standard personal weapon. For calibers I had heard of 6mm,.25 cal, 6.5mm, and 7mm rifles. What the exact cartridges were I do not know. I am aware of the .243 Win and 7mm Rem mag being used. As was mentioned above, in a defensive situation where you could have ammo stockpiled they would be great. Out in the field, it would be next to impossible to keep them supplied. Not to mention both were barrel burners and not light to carrry. At least in comparison with the 5.56.

In my years in, we often talked about an alternative round to the 5.56. Also about going back to the 7.62x51. Fortunately, quite a number of our senior NCO's had VN experience and simply put it in terms of "Okay, all you in favor of going back to the 7.62 take three extra boxes of 60 ammo." Nobody volunteered at that point... But, that makes a good point. If the 5.56 is effective, why push for a heavier round? In the case of sniping Kraig said several years ago about staying behind and using the M16 to great effect. Lowlight pointed out on a different thread the average range of a shot is around 400m. Well within the limits of an accurized M16 variant.

I'd love to walk into a secret museum/arms room one day where all the variations used in VN were kept and you could handle and evaluate them for yourself.
 
Recently, I have pretty nearly suspended all of my projects with various chamberings in favor of the .223/5.56. The reason is component cost and availability. My .30BR match rifle enjoys a small abundance of handloading components, and will be supported, but only for as long as preferable components remain.

My distances these days rarely exceed 250yd, so more energetic chamberings become somewhat of a case of overkill.

Greg
 
sandwarrior said:
.I'd love to walk into a secret museum/arms room one day where all the variations used in VN were kept and you could handle and evaluate them for yourself.
Click to expand...
Years back Anniston Army Depot (AAD) had such a place, but don't know about now. Many guys that retired from small arms repair at AAD still live in the area. Met a few over the years and traded info. They said many were never touched as they had a special room for those. The one they were most interested in was an old grease gun that had a POS flash hider welded onto the barrel, and was returned w/ 3 mag stacks that were welded together. When I explained the CO we had used one for shifting fire, they just gave me the look. He would load it up w/ nothing but tracer and a 45ACP tracer is very easy to see in daylight and at night it becomes a becon. Hence the attempt to kill the flash. I know what your thinking, but he would spit 8-10 rds and quickly find another home.
He carried a M1 carbine w/ tracer (un-modded) as well and used it to signal a tactics change from the base plan.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

buffalowinter
Israeli Mauser M-66 SP sniper rifle shooting video
Replies
0
Views
169
buffalowinter
buffalowinter
H
My 1917 and M40
Replies
0
Views
267
Harleystoo
H
0
Vietnam M40 Build
Replies
17
Views
1K
EOD100
EOD100
USMCSGT0331
A thread with links to suitable donor rifles?
Replies
5
Views
373
RIGREG
R
R
Ukrainian sniper who claims new world record. He’s 58 years old. (WSJ article)
Replies
49
Views
3K
1bonspy
1bonspy
Top Bottom
Back