My 1903 Sniper collection

[cplnorton]

I'm getting closer to getting my collection complete. There are still a few variations of the 1903 sniper I wouldn't mind adding, but it's getting closer.

It's taken me about 10 yrs to put this together. All rifles are real and not clones. A lot I actually pulled the actual documents from the archives to make sure they were real as a lot of the 1903 sniper info in books is wrong.



But first is the 1913 Warner Swasey Sniper. There were two variations of the Warner Swasey sniper. The first being the 1908. This is the later 1913. This rifle is a rare one to find as it's all original. Most of these had the mounts removed and turned back into a regular service rifle as SA ordered them all removed in the late 1920's. I suspect this one was one of the ones you could buy off the old DCM in the mid 20's that I see advertised for sale. It would have also been one of the last Warner Swasey's built in 1918

Serial 932873 barrel date 7/18

Next is the one I'm the most passionate about. Because I knew by reading the books something was wrong with the info you see on the WWI Marine A5 sniper rifles from WWI. The info in the books didn't add up, plus there was usually two or three paragraphs on them and that was it. So it actually took me a few years, but I found the docs. Even though everyone thinks of the Mann Niedner Variation as the main WWI Marine sniper. It really wasn't. Not in any great number at least. Adolph Niedner converted 150 in 1917, but was fired as being a potential German Saboteur. Next Winchester received the contract and made their own version which was called the Springfield Marine. Not only did the Marines receive 500 of these in 1917. But the Army actually received 900 in 1918. There is no difference between the ones the Army and Marines received. The Army actually even made this their official sniper in July 1918. Or at least it replaced the Warner Swasey and was a placeholder waiting for the Winchester Model of 1918 sniper that was never completed and cancelled at war's end. This is actually the A5 sniper of WWI that was used the most in WWI and not the Mann Niedner.

Serial 398496 Barrel date 6/09

It's interesting to note there is some connection between 1909 rifles and the WRA snipers. I think because the Marines received 400 NM in 1909 and some of these were the ones used in the conversion into snipers. The first pic below was taken in France in 1917. It is also a pre 1910 rifle by the features. There is also one serial in the Winchester Sniper docs that is within a 1000 digits of my rifle above.

Another WRA built sniper.

Next is one not discussed in books that much either. But is probably why there is a lot of confusion on the Unertl snipers. As these rifles looked like standard rebuilds from all available evidence and they ran almost at the same time as the Unertls. The Marines for sure now seemed to have built 150 Mann Niedner snipers for WWII. These were new builds using parts leftover from rifles torn down for parts inbetween the war. What we call the Mann Niedner conversion, the Marines actually called them the Marine taper block design. These rifles even though long thought of as WWI, really didn't start to make appearances till very late in WWI, or at least didn't make an appearances in great numbers during the war. It is more likely they would have been used as Team rifles in between the wars for training or competition. This rifle was probably initially made into a Free High Pressure rifle for the Marine rifle teams. Which utilized a heavy barrel and Lyman 48 sights. I believe this rifle was shipped to the Marines as a NM in 1928 and built into one of these "Free" rifles, as nicknamed by the Marines. It later would have been broken down for parts as all Free rifles were when the Marines bought their first Model 54 Winchesters. At the start of WWII the Marines had a considerable amount of loose loose drilled and tapped receivers that had been set up for the Mann Niedner blocks. All available evidence shows they pulled these receivers and built sniper rifles for training and the Marine Raiders.

Serial 1257998 barrel date 5/38

Next are both variations of the Unertl Sniper rifles.


Next is probably my personal favorite as this started it all for me. This one is a Marine Special Target rifle built into a Unertl Sniper. This one went to the Marines as a NM in 1935/36, for the Marines to use in the National Matches. Then it was was rebarreled by the Marines with a standard barrel and became a Marine Special Target. The Philly Depot returned all MArine team rifles at the end of each season and the ones where the barrel were worn out, had them replaced with a standard barrel. Once replaced, the rifles still retained other NM features and were sat aside for all Marine Competitions like the Elliot Cup. So this rifle would have been a NM on a Marine team, rebarrled by the Marines after the barrel was shot out, and then was used in Marine competitions against other Marines. Then finally it was converted to a sniper after Jan 1943.

Serial 1459600 Barrel 4/38 Unertl Scope serial 1775

 

[cplnorton]

Next is the other variation of Unertl Sniper, the National Match. This one would have still been on the Marine team rifle as it retains it's original star gauged barrel. This one would have been shipped to the Marines in 1937 for the Matches. This is also in the serial range that you see the heaviest concentration of Unertl Snipers, the mid to late 1.49 range.

Serial 1498646 Barrel date 3/37 Star Guaged. Scope serial 2034

Lastly the 1903A4 sniper. I think these are pretty well known, but just a really nice example of one.

 

[earthquake]

OMG! Amazing collection....thanks for sharing!

 

[kentuckyMarksman]

Pretty cool collection! Thanks for sharing!

 

[sandwarrior]

cplnorton,

In the past you had talked of the confusion between the Win. A5 and the Unertl and how the system was written about as being "fragile. To me they look pretty much like the same type system. Was it just that the scope was more durable or the mount? That big 'ol long scope hanging out there would seem to me to be pretty fragile as well the the rear, adjusting mount would also seem to be prone to getting dirt and dust in and in short order becoming unreliable in field conditions. Not that I'm right, but could you expound on that a bit?

Awesome collection, BTW! ? For target competition, I'd say they were definitely cutting edge in their day for accuracy. Durability????

 

[cplnorton]

They are very similar in looks but to be honest in quality, the Unertl blows the A5 away. The mounts on the A5 are not that sturdy. The Mann Niender taper block conversion only make them a fuzz better than normal. But the difference really isn't much. They just don't hold the scope tube well and they easily get banged around causing zero issues. Also the A5 scope really wasn't made to handle the repeated recoil of the 30CAL round. They had a hard time breaking under recoil.

My biggest complaint on them is there are no clicks. So you basically have to guess as you dial in the scope. If you know how to read the numbers on the dials on the A5 (both WRA and Mann Niender) I'm sure it helps. But both seem even really hard to read.

On the Unertl it is much more robust and heavily designed. It's not easy to bang around. The scope tube is held a lot more firm. Also there are audible clicks. So It's easy to adjust for windage and elevation.


On the scopes themselves, the A5 has terrible eye relief on the M1903. Even pulled all the way back, it's uncomfortable as you have to get so close to the eyepiece to see a field of view. The Unertl isn't like that.

The other big thing is the recessed lens in the Unertl. It has a sunshade that helps keep dirt and rain from the lens. It's such a trivial idea today, but back then this was sort of revolutionary. I know it's mentioned very highly in the Lloyd and Van Orden Report from 1941. The A5 lenses are at the ends and easily got dirty and you couldn't see anything

The A5 wasn't even water resistant, so they had a horrible problem water. The Unertl wasn't water proof by any means, but it just was a lot better sealed than the A5.

When we get past the holiday I will pull some more docs and post them. I had this one already to go, so I will post this as I knew right where it was. But I will post more when I get time after the holidays to pull them.

By the way whenever it says lyman 5A in the Marine docs, it means A5. They confused the two, as Lyman made a copy of the A5 startng in 1928. But the Marines only had five lyman 5A I can track compared to 887 WWI era A5's. Even in the docs they detail they had Lyman 5A's leftover from WWI. lol So the Marine typing up these docs was just confused. Except for very minor differences they are the same scope. Just a copy made of the original WRA A5 by Lyman

 

[Defender3]

Amazing collection, I'm jelly.

 

[E.Maker]

Enviable collection.

Ephram

 

[cplnorton]

I had about an hr and pulled a few docs that might interest you. There is so much more I could pull but ran out of time.

 

[cplnorton]

On the A5 vs Unertl confusion.

This is literally the report that damned the Unertl Sniper. This was a report by the Marine Raiders in the fall of 1943. This is ALWAYS the report referenced in the Marine docs as what sealed the fate of the Unertl.

It's really unclear if the Raiders had any Unertl Snipers at this point at all. There is no mention of them getting them. But they did have 80 A5 snipers that were built around Feb/ March 1942.

This report that cancelled the Unertl Contract never details which sniper they didn't find effective, though I am very certain the A5 is the rifle referenced here. The Marines later address they think it is possible they confused it as well.

Here is a doc where they detail the report above damned the Unertl. Below where it mentions the 1st Div couldn't use snipers on Cape Gloucester, it should be noted that any of the 1903 snipers could be detailed in that. As the 1st Div had the A5, 1903A4, and the Unertl all at that time, though it should be assumed they mean the A4 and Unertl. The 2nd Division on Saipan had both the A5 and Unertl, but it should be assumed the Unertl is the one referenced. As the A5 was in very small numbers for the 1st and 2nd Div. They each received 20 A5 snipers in 1941 for training. It is not for sure they took those A5's to the Pacific but it's very possible.

Here the Marines are starting to wonder if there is confusion on the Raider report above that damned the Unertl.

I will try to pull some more when I have more time.

 

[Teach Me Sensei]

You are my hero

 

[Dougie308]

Pretty damned nice my friend. I’ve got an ‘03 with ladder sights. But it doesn’t look as good as those.

 

[E.Maker]

Great info. Thank you!

Ephram

 

[sandwarrior]

On the A5 vs Unertl confusion.

This is literally the report that damned the Unertl Sniper. This was a report by the Marine Raiders in the fall of 1943. This is ALWAYS the report referenced in the Marine docs as what sealed the fate of the Unertl.

It's really unclear if the Raiders had any Unertl Snipers at this point at all. There is no mention of them getting them. But they did have 80 A5 snipers that were built around Feb/ March 1942.

This report that cancelled the Unertl Contract never details which sniper they didn't find effective, though I am very certain the A5 is the rifle referenced here. The Marines later address they think it is possible they confused it as well.

View attachment 7083607

Here is a doc where they detail the report above damned the Unertl. Below where it mentions the 1st Div couldn't use snipers on Cape Gloucester, it should be noted that any of the 1903 snipers could be detailed in that. As the 1st Div had the A5, 1903A4, and the Unertl all at that time, though it should be assumed they mean the A4 and Unertl. The 2nd Division on Saipan had both the A5 and Unertl, but it should be assumed the Unertl is the one referenced. As the A5 was in very small numbers for the 1st and 2nd Div. They each received 20 A5 snipers in 1941 for training. It is not for sure they took those A5's to the Pacific but it's very possible.

View attachment 7083608



Here the Marines are starting to wonder if there is confusion on the Raider report above that damned the Unertl.

View attachment 7083611



I will try to pull some more when I have more time.

cplnorton,

It almost seems that along with the confusion, someone is in the mix that isn't all gung-ho about sniping. The opinion in the second pic you post sounds not only like they need clarity on the Unertl, but someone needs to shut up about how they think sniping is ineffective. As the author of that opinion makes a point to clarify that sniping is effective. It also sounds like he's not believing the report on the Unertl as being unsatisfactory. I think he thinks it is, but needs more units and time to show that.

I have often run into the attitude that sniping isn't effective, or at best limited. We try to stretch it out and all I hear is "We'll just call in Arty or air beyond x-distance." How many times have we been out there and it isn't available. Or, "You can't hit that far anyway." We sure as hell can too, if we are allowed to practice that far. And, by shooting that far, we get to see what isn't working so we can change it.

At least the author of that opinion was able to convey that one useless opinion of someone basing one unit's report on one operation is not a satisfactory reason to can sniping. I'm glad it is much more accepted today than it was back then.

 

[Defender3]

cplnorton,

It almost seems that along with the confusion, someone is in the mix that isn't all gung-ho about sniping. The opinion in the second pic you post sounds not only like they need clarity on the Unertl, but someone needs to shut up about how they think sniping is ineffective. As the author of that opinion makes a point to clarify that sniping is effective. It also sounds like he's not believing the report on the Unertl as being unsatisfactory. I think he thinks it is, but needs more units and time to show that.

I have often run into the attitude that sniping isn't effective, or at best limited. We try to stretch it out and all I hear is "We'll just call in Arty or air beyond x-distance." How many times have we been out there and it isn't available. Or, "You can't hit that far anyway." We sure as hell can too, if we are allowed to practice that far. And, by shooting that far, we get to see what isn't working so we can change it.

At least the author of that opinion was able to convey that one useless opinion of someone basing one unit's report on one operation is not a satisfactory reason to can sniping. I'm glad it is much more accepted today than it was back then.

Old habits, traditions and mindsets are hard to change, and seem to introduce a not so subtle bias.

 

[cplnorton]

Well and you are spot on Sandwarrior. The terrain of the battles up to this point, except for Saipan were not great for a sniper. You see in the docs that a lot of school trained snipers were given a regular M1 and used those to great effect.

Almost all the after action reports except for Saipan and later Okinawa, state the same thing over and over. Fighting was very close and very violent. They mention over and over that the most effective weapons in combat were rifle grenades, grenades, mortars, artillery, and flame throwers.

It mentions so many times rifle or machine gun fire was used for suppression as someone would move up with a grenade or flamethrower.

I read one report and I thought this was really neat, they mention on Tarawa that on the line, the individual Marines did not reload. What they did was they rotated rifles. A couple Marines sat back behind the line and their only job was to reload the rifles and hand them back. They mention the shots were so close it didn't matter at all if the rifle was sighted in to the individual Marine or not. That way they had constant fire on the Japanese without reloading.

The whole sniper program was really effectively cancelled in February 1944. If it wasn't for Okinawa where the Unertl reigned supreme with over 1000 yard kills, the Unertl would have been a small footnote in the war.

Okinawa really proved how effective the Unertl sniper was. The Unertls also did a great job in Korea. The only issues were the 1903 rifles were getting worn out and they were running out of parts.

I love this pic in Korea of a Unertl Sniper. Not only do they look like they have something around the scope tube, probably to help with waterproofing, as that was really the weakest part of the scope for water. But I love the pic of the broken handguard that almost looks taped together.

 

[Random Guy]

Nice collection and very informative post. Thanks.

 

[cplnorton]

Here's a good one. The Marines made 40 Mann Niedners around May 1941 and they went to the 1st and 2nd Div for training.

Here is a doc with feedback from the 2nd Div Sniper school.

 

[cplnorton]

Here is the trials of the M1C vs Unertl in Korea. There is more to this but what it came down to, was there was not an offiical sniper school in Korea, so they mention that the 1000 yard capable Unertl was really overkill compared to the 600 yard M1C.. As the Marines were not trained on how to shoot at a 1000 yards. Also the Marines were not trained on the M1903 any longer and the Unertls were running out of parts and getting worn out. Also having the 03's in the theater required another table of parts for logistics.

But I love the name at the end of this report.

 

[acudaowner]

thank you for sharing the pics of the guns they are really nice as well as the pics of the letters .

 

[Forgetful Coyote]

Do you have any pics/docs on USMC Winchester 54's?

 

[craigos]

wow, wonderful - thanks for sharing

 

[cplnorton]

Do you have any pics/docs on USMC Winchester 54's?

Yeah, they are buried though. But what happened they bought some for the teams. But only a few. Like I want to say 5 or less. I'm pretty sure I have the purchase orders. But they replaced the heavy barrel M1903's that the Marines called the Free rifles. I want to say this was like 1935/36. They were going to be used in the 1000 yard any sight, any rifle matches. Then if I remember right, they only used them one season and went with the new model 70 when it came out. They only bought a few of those as well, like 5 in 1936/37. None were in 30:06. All were like 300 H&H and some other magnum caliber.

Now that is by memory, it's been a while since I read that series of docs.

 

[Forgetful Coyote]

Yeah, they are buried though. But what happened they bought some for the teams. But only a few. Like I want to say 5 or less. I'm pretty sure I have the purchase orders. But they replaced the heavy barrel M1903's that the Marines called the Free rifles. I want to say this was like 1935/36. They were going to be used in the 1000 yard any sight, any rifle matches. Then if I remember right, they only used them one season and went with the new model 70 when it came out. They only bought a few of those as well, like 5 in 1936/37. None were in 30:06. All were like 300 H&H and some other magnum caliber.

Now that is by memory, it's been a while since I read that series of docs.

Were any 1917-actioned rifles ever used by the shooting team? I know the Navy bought up a ton of the Remington 720's and gives them out as trophy rifles now(or atleast they used to) to the winners of one of the Camp Perry matches, can't remember which match specifically. Sweet old rifles those 720's are, wish I had one.

Also, any documents on what the shooters thought re: M54/M70 vs 1903?

 

[cplnorton]

The Marines had some M1917's in WWI. They received them in 1918, but gave back all they had in 1920. They gave them back to the Army. After that, you never see a M1917 mentioned ever again by name, or in any weapons count ever again in the Marines.

The Model 54, I see the purchase orders, but don't see very much on if they liked them or not. They were only around one year and disappear from the docs. The Model 70 they really liked. They wanted that to be the sniper, the NM M1903 team rifles being the runner up. The Marines finally chose the NM M1903 as the sniper for WWII, mostly because they already had them, plus they had the spare parts to keep them running.

They just didn't want to invest in what probably was the better rifle, plus all the replacement parts they would have had to buy as well.

But the opinion of the Model 70 heading into WWII, was that the Model 70 was the finest bolt action that existed at the time. Also even though they bought the standard sporter type Model 70's in 1942 and all the books hit on that 373 order. They also did buy target models and a few other styles in 1942 that none of the books have found yet. I found the orders for them. They were after the initial 373 purchase.

The Marines did not ever intend to use the sporter style rifle as a sniper. They planned on using the Target model as a sniper with the target barrel and Unertl "sniper"scope.

 

[Forgetful Coyote]

I read somewhere a long time ago, that in Nam the M70's had to be turned over to the armorer for maintenance more often than the M14's..? Is this true? Why/how on earth were the M70's breaking down more than a gas gun?

Also, is there any mention on whose barrels they used for the 1903 free rifles?

 

[Forgetful Coyote]

Also @cplnorton - meant to ask, whats your favorite vintage rifle and whats your best shooting vintage rifle? Load(s) used?

Also, do you compete in CMP Vintage Sniper? From the pics it looks like USMC Unertl-1903's dominate that match..? Excluding them and '03A4`s... which vintage snipers perform best? I'd reckon it mainly comes down to optics? Though I can't imagine the M41b's don't give the Springfields a run for their $$$ considering the lower recoil and slick slippery 6.5 projos available ?

 

[cplnorton]

I read somewhere a long time ago, that in Nam the M70's had to be turned over to the armorer for maintenance more often than the M14's..? Is this true? Why/how on earth were the M70's breaking down more than a gas gun?

Also, is there any mention on whose barrels they used for the 1903 free rifles?

I sort of doubt it was the rifle, possibly they meant the scope? The Unertl scopes aren't waterpoof. So I could see how the moisture and humidity could be troublesome for the scopes. But no everything I have read has been pretty favorable of the M70 and Unertl scope over there.

On the Marine "Free" rifles, I see orders to both Winchester and Remington as providing heavy barrels to the Marines.

 

[cplnorton]

As to my favorite that is a tough one as I like each one for a certain reason.

As my favorite overall. It has to be the first Unertl I ever found. I found it long before that much info was public on these rifles and really that much info was known. It also has re-written a lot of the info we have on them and sort of became the Gold standard I've compared every rifle to since. The rifle is also just salty. It looks like it was drug behind a truck, so you can only imagine where it's been or what it's done. I later found USMC Unertl Scope serial 1775, which requires no explanation to a Marine. But to everyone else it's the date the Marine Corps was founded and always holds a special place in our hearts. The scope is also super salty and just matches the rifle perfectly. This rifle is also the one that encourage me to start researching in the archives, so many of my accomplishments I can all trace back to this one rifle. So to me if I could only ever own one rifle, it would be this one. It's my absolute favorite and probably always will be.

My favorite of these above that I shoot a lot is really the 1903A4. But not how you think. I have a Numrich .22 conversion kit and put that in my 03A4 and have shot thousands of rounds of .22 out of it. I'm really more a plinker than a long range shooter. So any of these rifles above I can put my numrich .22 kit in and shoot .22 out of it. Heck last summer my oldest son shot at least a thousand rounds of .22 from my 2nd Unertl Sniper. lol But out of all of them if I'm shooting long distance, it's actually not one pictured above. I have a Model 70 that was rebuilt by the RTE shop in 1971 and was owned by a famous Marine Colonel. It's a straight up rebuild in everyway possible, heavily sanded stock, and refinished everything. But boy it can shoot. I've never tried handloads or anything in any my rifles, but with just standard M2 USGI surplus I can really put them in there with this.