Re: M40 Build - Donor Rifle Found!
Have the trigger guard and it is a dull finish on aluminum. Not like anything at Remington now. We put a different looking black coated guard on the rifle until this one could be repaired. Still not sure how to do this but I accepted the challenge.
Thought the rifle should be back to what it was. Possibly not 100%?? as I have nothing to compare it to here.
Help is appreciated.
Have the trigger guard and it is a dull finish on aluminum. Not like anything at Remington now. We put a different looking black coated guard on the rifle until this one could be repaired. Still not sure how to do this but I accepted the challenge.
Thought the rifle should be back to what it was. Possibly not 100%?? as I have nothing to compare it to here.
Help is appreciated.
Re: M40 Build - Donor Rifle Found!
Ok Vinv, now I am a little confused, the picture you just posted shows what I consider to be a M40, except perhaps for the trigger guard which seems a lttle oversized. But this is not the same rifle that you posted pictures of earlier which you stated before was yours and an original M40.
Ok Vinv, now I am a little confused, the picture you just posted shows what I consider to be a M40, except perhaps for the trigger guard which seems a lttle oversized. But this is not the same rifle that you posted pictures of earlier which you stated before was yours and an original M40.
Re: re: vinv is a fucking liar
Don't have any idea. You guys are going to think I was a Marine or something?
Let us get this straight. I would never pretend to soil that great badge of honor by implying that I was a Marine. No suggestion.
I was asked to quantify the Pedersen Device in their museum by the curator. Which I did.
I was invited to visit the warehouse at Quantico and did not visit the museum, which is on my list for this Winter. I was presented with the items to be inspected and and photographed and did so. Gave them a completed document of the history of the Device. Which, if any of you are interested is an extremely rare lettered ( A-Z) prototype of the original group produced. So far, there are less than 5 that are known to exist at some point since the 1960's.
As a guest to enter, I was to go direct to the building as designated. Never passed a boathouse. Would have liked a tour there. Who wouldn't?
Passed NCIS though and slowed down at that small building. Kinda neat.
Now you guys gonna lighten up?
Don't have any idea. You guys are going to think I was a Marine or something?
Let us get this straight. I would never pretend to soil that great badge of honor by implying that I was a Marine. No suggestion.
I was asked to quantify the Pedersen Device in their museum by the curator. Which I did.
I was invited to visit the warehouse at Quantico and did not visit the museum, which is on my list for this Winter. I was presented with the items to be inspected and and photographed and did so. Gave them a completed document of the history of the Device. Which, if any of you are interested is an extremely rare lettered ( A-Z) prototype of the original group produced. So far, there are less than 5 that are known to exist at some point since the 1960's.
As a guest to enter, I was to go direct to the building as designated. Never passed a boathouse. Would have liked a tour there. Who wouldn't?
Passed NCIS though and slowed down at that small building. Kinda neat.
Now you guys gonna lighten up?
Re: re: vinv is a fucking liar
I am looking for info on this rifle. I am in no way an expert on this rifle.
I am on this site to get help.
The rifle was in pieces when I got it. A complete set but not a "whole rifle". The package was represented to be original components. The data that I have , so far, indicates that many changes were made to original rifles in the field. Some reports are from the books and some from persons involved with the original rifle at the factory. More info with varying additional stuff.
The scope is USMC marked. The rifle serial number is 3643XX late number.
Not in the USMC numbers. Not a USMC rifle. But others were sold with the US military spec. No numbers available, so far. Looking. Need help if any others exist close to this with U.S. serial numbers.
The mount is not numbered but this seems to not be rare. Especially on non USMC rifles. The Remington Museum rifle has no matching penciled numbers as it did not go to the USMC.
There is a need to get all information possible to fill in the blanks on all of this. My rifle included.
Help!
I am looking for info on this rifle. I am in no way an expert on this rifle.
I am on this site to get help.
The rifle was in pieces when I got it. A complete set but not a "whole rifle". The package was represented to be original components. The data that I have , so far, indicates that many changes were made to original rifles in the field. Some reports are from the books and some from persons involved with the original rifle at the factory. More info with varying additional stuff.
The scope is USMC marked. The rifle serial number is 3643XX late number.
Not in the USMC numbers. Not a USMC rifle. But others were sold with the US military spec. No numbers available, so far. Looking. Need help if any others exist close to this with U.S. serial numbers.
The mount is not numbered but this seems to not be rare. Especially on non USMC rifles. The Remington Museum rifle has no matching penciled numbers as it did not go to the USMC.
There is a need to get all information possible to fill in the blanks on all of this. My rifle included.
Help!
Re: M40 Build - Donor Rifle Found!
Now to get to the real reason that I posted the pict.
I wanted a bunch of critique. Only way to find answers.
The rifle is described as in later posts. Please check them.
Any more info is appreciated.
I am no expert on the M40 but very interested in this item.
Now to get to the real reason that I posted the pict.
I wanted a bunch of critique. Only way to find answers.
The rifle is described as in later posts. Please check them.
Any more info is appreciated.
I am no expert on the M40 but very interested in this item.
Re: re: M40 Build-Donor Rifle Found
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vinv</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I am looking for info on this rifle. I am in no way an expert on this rifle.
The rifle was in pieces when I got it. A complete set but not a "whole rifle". The package was represented to be original components. </div></div>
vinv---You had stated that your rifle was "original". Understand why there are/were questions about how it is setup when compared to actual M40's when it looks different? You then mention the above!!! Being "original" and being sold to you "in pieces" and being "represented to be original" is a long way from being an "original" USMC M40 rifle, correct??
Some of your comments, references appeared to me at least to seem you were/are well informed and 'in the know' so to speak about the USMC M40 rifle. You later now mention that you "are not an expert". Not trying to bust your balls but conflicting info and statements is what brings about 'accusations' etc. Hope you understand where the rest of us are coming from on this???
Many of us are very interested and intrigued with the M40 and later M40A1 USMC rifles and like you want to learn as much about their history, design, specs etc as possible but question things different than most stuff we have seen prior. As for possible other agencies acquiring a rifle built close to the USMC M40 rifle they would really NOT be an M40 version unless actually acquired by the Corp. I know it is being nit picky but they are basically just a heavy barreled 308 if not Corp property!
mjh- I only currently have one of Sennich's books and it is The Long-Range War-Sniping in Vietnam. I do not have The One Round War but need to find a copy. I haven't read about Remington making/testing any steel bottom metal but it could be entirely possible. Was what you read for sure for the M40 or the M40A1 possibly?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vinv</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I am looking for info on this rifle. I am in no way an expert on this rifle.
The rifle was in pieces when I got it. A complete set but not a "whole rifle". The package was represented to be original components. </div></div>
vinv---You had stated that your rifle was "original". Understand why there are/were questions about how it is setup when compared to actual M40's when it looks different? You then mention the above!!! Being "original" and being sold to you "in pieces" and being "represented to be original" is a long way from being an "original" USMC M40 rifle, correct??
Some of your comments, references appeared to me at least to seem you were/are well informed and 'in the know' so to speak about the USMC M40 rifle. You later now mention that you "are not an expert". Not trying to bust your balls but conflicting info and statements is what brings about 'accusations' etc. Hope you understand where the rest of us are coming from on this???
Many of us are very interested and intrigued with the M40 and later M40A1 USMC rifles and like you want to learn as much about their history, design, specs etc as possible but question things different than most stuff we have seen prior. As for possible other agencies acquiring a rifle built close to the USMC M40 rifle they would really NOT be an M40 version unless actually acquired by the Corp. I know it is being nit picky but they are basically just a heavy barreled 308 if not Corp property!
mjh- I only currently have one of Sennich's books and it is The Long-Range War-Sniping in Vietnam. I do not have The One Round War but need to find a copy. I haven't read about Remington making/testing any steel bottom metal but it could be entirely possible. Was what you read for sure for the M40 or the M40A1 possibly?
Re: re: vinv is a fucking liar
Vinv, now I am confused even more, you first posted pics of a Remington 700 with green parkerizing I have to add, with a stripper clip cut unseen by any on this forum on a USMC M40. Not we all knew Remington made M40 style rifles, I am not sure what to call them at this point, but I will call them as senich described them "Remington 700 7.62 sniper rifles", for various other Services and for private companies, as the Corp had no propriety rights to the rifles design.
When you first posted, I thought that was your interest, in determining how many of these rifles Remington may have produced and sold to others. The rifles serial numbers and any data concerning them, would give the avid USMC M40 collector a chance to have a rifle made by Remington to same specs as those issued to the Corp. You stated the stripper clip cut was of your rifle which was late Remington rifle made towards 68-69, if I am not mistaken this is the time Remington switched to the seven digit serial numbers (you later say your rifles serial is 3643XX).
Then you posted a picture of your rifle which you stated was orginal. Now not to knock your rifle or anything but it had some glaring differences that were pointed out to you, and you stated your rifle was an orignal M40. Now, if you had stated your rifle was one of those made by Remington to the same specs as the USMC M40 then perhaps others would not have been so critical of it.
You posted pics of the correct rings and base, then you stated you inspected this rifle, and posted a pic of an M40. Perhaps there was more than a little confusion in that statement because it was a picture of Dave4201's rifle. You did state that you had the opportunity to inspect the two M40 style rifles sold at auction, which might have added to this confusion, perhaps if you had put it a little more clearly that you had inspected the Remington rifle then things would have been more understood.
Now you posted the picture of the Remington 700 on display at the Remington small arms museum, obviously this was the rifle you inspected, its serial number is documented in Senichs book (page 169) and if you had of mentioned that you had inspected those rifles sold at the James D Julia auction might have lessened the confusion. Now you mentioned the Remington rifle had a USMC marked scope, I for one didn't know they were marked except to the rifle and base, If you mean its a green anodized Redfield scope such as those sold to the Corp that would be much more clearer.
Vinv, I for one would be delighted for any more infromation on the M40 or M40A1 rifles made for the Corp, you mentioned you were invited to the Marine Corp museum to quantify their Pedersen device, then perhaps you could glean as much info from the curator as possible on the M40 or M40A1 and what treasures they might have hidden there, and that would be great.
Dennis as for the Remington steel bottom metal it was provided for testing and evaluation for the M40A1.
Marty
Vinv, now I am confused even more, you first posted pics of a Remington 700 with green parkerizing I have to add, with a stripper clip cut unseen by any on this forum on a USMC M40. Not we all knew Remington made M40 style rifles, I am not sure what to call them at this point, but I will call them as senich described them "Remington 700 7.62 sniper rifles", for various other Services and for private companies, as the Corp had no propriety rights to the rifles design.
When you first posted, I thought that was your interest, in determining how many of these rifles Remington may have produced and sold to others. The rifles serial numbers and any data concerning them, would give the avid USMC M40 collector a chance to have a rifle made by Remington to same specs as those issued to the Corp. You stated the stripper clip cut was of your rifle which was late Remington rifle made towards 68-69, if I am not mistaken this is the time Remington switched to the seven digit serial numbers (you later say your rifles serial is 3643XX).
Then you posted a picture of your rifle which you stated was orginal. Now not to knock your rifle or anything but it had some glaring differences that were pointed out to you, and you stated your rifle was an orignal M40. Now, if you had stated your rifle was one of those made by Remington to the same specs as the USMC M40 then perhaps others would not have been so critical of it.
You posted pics of the correct rings and base, then you stated you inspected this rifle, and posted a pic of an M40. Perhaps there was more than a little confusion in that statement because it was a picture of Dave4201's rifle. You did state that you had the opportunity to inspect the two M40 style rifles sold at auction, which might have added to this confusion, perhaps if you had put it a little more clearly that you had inspected the Remington rifle then things would have been more understood.
Now you posted the picture of the Remington 700 on display at the Remington small arms museum, obviously this was the rifle you inspected, its serial number is documented in Senichs book (page 169) and if you had of mentioned that you had inspected those rifles sold at the James D Julia auction might have lessened the confusion. Now you mentioned the Remington rifle had a USMC marked scope, I for one didn't know they were marked except to the rifle and base, If you mean its a green anodized Redfield scope such as those sold to the Corp that would be much more clearer.
Vinv, I for one would be delighted for any more infromation on the M40 or M40A1 rifles made for the Corp, you mentioned you were invited to the Marine Corp museum to quantify their Pedersen device, then perhaps you could glean as much info from the curator as possible on the M40 or M40A1 and what treasures they might have hidden there, and that would be great.
Dennis as for the Remington steel bottom metal it was provided for testing and evaluation for the M40A1.
Marty
Truce with vinv
OK vinv, am calling a truce for now and will edit my earlier post. The photos do look close. You need to be a lot more careful with you cataloging of photos you take off of the internet.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vinv</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You should be very careful with accusations. Could be a reason for the pict being what it was. Ask and the problem can usually be corrected.
Do it here and I am good with that.</div></div>
I tried sending you a PM to discuss this off line. You still have that blocked. I asked a couple of times for clarification and additional info on the rifle (mine) posted. I included the photo to make sure you understood which rifle I was asking about.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vinv</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You got the pict here, I found it with my rifle picts and posted it.</div></div>
I took the original photo in my bathroom in 2006!
If you really do have access to the rifle from the Remington Museum and have detailed photos of it disassembled, then we are all very interested and appreciate any info you can give on it. It is accepted to be a rifle from the original M40 contract that Remington kept for reference. As such, it is an invaluable reference point as it is the only remaining unaltered M40 in the configuration as shipped to the USMC by Remington.
Dave P
OK vinv, am calling a truce for now and will edit my earlier post. The photos do look close. You need to be a lot more careful with you cataloging of photos you take off of the internet.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vinv</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You should be very careful with accusations. Could be a reason for the pict being what it was. Ask and the problem can usually be corrected.
Do it here and I am good with that.</div></div>
I tried sending you a PM to discuss this off line. You still have that blocked. I asked a couple of times for clarification and additional info on the rifle (mine) posted. I included the photo to make sure you understood which rifle I was asking about.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vinv</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You got the pict here, I found it with my rifle picts and posted it.</div></div>
I took the original photo in my bathroom in 2006!
If you really do have access to the rifle from the Remington Museum and have detailed photos of it disassembled, then we are all very interested and appreciate any info you can give on it. It is accepted to be a rifle from the original M40 contract that Remington kept for reference. As such, it is an invaluable reference point as it is the only remaining unaltered M40 in the configuration as shipped to the USMC by Remington.
Dave P
Re: M40 Build - Donor Rifle Found!
vinv
I have edited my post and I have also sent PM's to the other members asking them to edit the tile that was automatically added to their post.
Dave P
vinv
I have edited my post and I have also sent PM's to the other members asking them to edit the tile that was automatically added to their post.
Dave P
Re: M40 Build - Donor Rifle Found!
Titles of my posts edited.
I believe Dennis' post most eloquently and thoughtfully expresses my sentiments.
Titles of my posts edited.
I believe Dennis' post most eloquently and thoughtfully expresses my sentiments.
Re: M40 Build - Donor Rifle Found!
Totally agree Xarmor, probably going to have to build another and will try to get it right this time, and if anyone has pictures of the gem at Springfield museum, I would like to see them.
Totally agree Xarmor, probably going to have to build another and will try to get it right this time, and if anyone has pictures of the gem at Springfield museum, I would like to see them.
Padersen device
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vinv</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I was asked to quantify the Pedersen Device in their museum by the curator. Which I did.
I was invited to visit the warehouse at Quantico</div></div>
Vinv
I talked to my buddy, the fellow who built my rifle and told him you have allot of knowlage about the Padersen devices. He is well into Pedersens. He currently has an original operators manual and factory blue prints. He also has a listing of all known devices and serial numbers in US collections. Please note that is "known" devices and he concedes it is not all of them out there are known. He has numbers off a few 1917 units and Nagant units as well as pictures. He was interested in knowing who you talked to at Quantico in both the "warehouse" and who you know as a 2111 or 2112. If you don't feel like making public the names of the folks you "know" please PM me.
Thanks
Dave P
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vinv</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I was asked to quantify the Pedersen Device in their museum by the curator. Which I did.
I was invited to visit the warehouse at Quantico</div></div>
Vinv
I talked to my buddy, the fellow who built my rifle and told him you have allot of knowlage about the Padersen devices. He is well into Pedersens. He currently has an original operators manual and factory blue prints. He also has a listing of all known devices and serial numbers in US collections. Please note that is "known" devices and he concedes it is not all of them out there are known. He has numbers off a few 1917 units and Nagant units as well as pictures. He was interested in knowing who you talked to at Quantico in both the "warehouse" and who you know as a 2111 or 2112. If you don't feel like making public the names of the folks you "know" please PM me.
Thanks
Dave P
Re: M40 Build - Donor Rifle Found!
I can't believe I missed this thread. Made for some interesting reading. Since I'm late to the party I'll refrain from any comments/thoughts
I can't believe I missed this thread. Made for some interesting reading. Since I'm late to the party I'll refrain from any comments/thoughts
Re: M40 Build - Donor Rifle Found!
The only genuine M40 part I possess i a bolt. Elecroetched with serial# 322709.
Many years ago (around '80-'81) when I was getting started in high power competition I purchased a new Remington 40XB solid bottom (no provision for a magazine) single shot barreled action in .30-.338 Magnum. These rifles have a VERY short barrel life and you need to stay "a barrel ahead" so that when the current barrel wears out, you can replace it quickly. At the Inter-Service Matches held at Quantico I mentioned to one of the USMC armorers that I would like to find a bolt with the standard .308 bolt face which would allow me to easily convert to .308 Palma.
That same year at the Nationals at Camp Perry Ohio this same Marne hands me a oily bolt #322709 wrapped in plastic. I was told by him "that the receiver had beed scrapped as unserviceable and he had kept the bolt, it had been in his toolbox for years". Later on that week I showed the bolt to one of the civilian competitors and he told me "that is an early bolt and you will need to have the anti-bind groove machined in the right bolt locking lug to fit into my action. I had the machine work done around that time, and since the bolt was in such a rough and rusted condition, I had it professionally refinished (phoshated). It appeared to me that it may have been originally polished and would have had the characteristic swirls. But I am not positive, like I said it was in rough shape and had seen a lot of hard use.
In 2008 I converted the rifle into 6.5X.284, a much more pleasant cartridge to shoot, beleive me. I still had to actually sand the bolt smooth with 2000 grit oil sandpaper to polish it enough to work smoothly in the receiver. A real piece of USMC history which I plan to shoot at Quantico at 1000 yards soon.
When I first bought the barreled action , I had to find a stock for it, and someone to finish building it. McMillan told me that they had made a fiberglass copy of the Anschutz 1413 prone smallbore stock for the Marine Corps. Six position adjustable cheek piece and buttplate with an aluminum fore end stop (hand stop) too. The Marine Corps had ordered 100 of these stocks. But McMillan had made 101 in case the Marines rejected one of them. The Marines accepted all 100, and the last one was offered to me. I bought it and had McMillan finish building the rifle. They sleeved the action for me to strengthen it and did an outstanding job of it. The sleeve is heated, and the action frozen, then they are also glued together at the moment of assembly. It really is a neat rifle. The unfortunate thing is that this process permanantly eliminates the safety. But this does not really matter when shooting prone with a long range target rifle.
I never really thought too much about the heritage of the bolt until I accidently ran across this excellent thread.
That's my story!
Thanks,Andy
The only genuine M40 part I possess i a bolt. Elecroetched with serial# 322709.
Many years ago (around '80-'81) when I was getting started in high power competition I purchased a new Remington 40XB solid bottom (no provision for a magazine) single shot barreled action in .30-.338 Magnum. These rifles have a VERY short barrel life and you need to stay "a barrel ahead" so that when the current barrel wears out, you can replace it quickly. At the Inter-Service Matches held at Quantico I mentioned to one of the USMC armorers that I would like to find a bolt with the standard .308 bolt face which would allow me to easily convert to .308 Palma.
That same year at the Nationals at Camp Perry Ohio this same Marne hands me a oily bolt #322709 wrapped in plastic. I was told by him "that the receiver had beed scrapped as unserviceable and he had kept the bolt, it had been in his toolbox for years". Later on that week I showed the bolt to one of the civilian competitors and he told me "that is an early bolt and you will need to have the anti-bind groove machined in the right bolt locking lug to fit into my action. I had the machine work done around that time, and since the bolt was in such a rough and rusted condition, I had it professionally refinished (phoshated). It appeared to me that it may have been originally polished and would have had the characteristic swirls. But I am not positive, like I said it was in rough shape and had seen a lot of hard use.
In 2008 I converted the rifle into 6.5X.284, a much more pleasant cartridge to shoot, beleive me. I still had to actually sand the bolt smooth with 2000 grit oil sandpaper to polish it enough to work smoothly in the receiver. A real piece of USMC history which I plan to shoot at Quantico at 1000 yards soon.
When I first bought the barreled action , I had to find a stock for it, and someone to finish building it. McMillan told me that they had made a fiberglass copy of the Anschutz 1413 prone smallbore stock for the Marine Corps. Six position adjustable cheek piece and buttplate with an aluminum fore end stop (hand stop) too. The Marine Corps had ordered 100 of these stocks. But McMillan had made 101 in case the Marines rejected one of them. The Marines accepted all 100, and the last one was offered to me. I bought it and had McMillan finish building the rifle. They sleeved the action for me to strengthen it and did an outstanding job of it. The sleeve is heated, and the action frozen, then they are also glued together at the moment of assembly. It really is a neat rifle. The unfortunate thing is that this process permanantly eliminates the safety. But this does not really matter when shooting prone with a long range target rifle.
I never really thought too much about the heritage of the bolt until I accidently ran across this excellent thread.
That's my story!
Thanks,Andy
Similar threads
