- Thread starter Ledzep
- Start date
Looks great! And you've got the detail a lot of people miss, the black buttplate sides! What kind of accuracy are you getting? Range pics?
Haven't had it out yet sadly, currently recovering from pneumonia. Hopefully next weekend.
Is that a notch on the top of the comb? Or, just an optical delusion? BTW, NICE RIFLE!
Shadow left by the leaves
Here’s my Vintage contribution.
Top :
6 digit, Smear Return, 40x base and Satin Redfield Accurange
Bottom :
C prefix, Forest Return, Unertl Base and CMP Unertl
Top :
6 digit, Smear Return, 40x base and Satin Redfield Accurange
Bottom :
C prefix, Forest Return, Unertl Base and CMP Unertl
Last edited:
Beautiful. That stocks got character. Love it!
I see it now, I blew it up a couple times and that leaf is very stealthily covering the top of the stock. ...Sneaky little leaf!
Replica XM21 sniper rifle with misc Vietnam era gear:
...and since I had all that Vietnam gear pulled out, I also took a few pics of it with my M40 Chuck Mawhinny (over-run) replica:
Small shim added under rear base to provide some scope cant for long-range matches at Quantico Shooting Club.
...and since I had all that Vietnam gear pulled out, I also took a few pics of it with my M40 Chuck Mawhinny (over-run) replica:
Small shim added under rear base to provide some scope cant for long-range matches at Quantico Shooting Club.
I was flipping through the Death From Afar books the other day looking for names of WWI Scout Snipers to help with research for the SSA's memorial sculpture project, and it's came across this page. I remembered that you frequently use a shim on your M40 clone and I figured that you might be interested in this information:
This is one of the few times I've ever seen documents/sources mentioning or discussing the elevation bottoming out on the Redfield greenies. Not much information, no ide if it's even useful, but still part of the history.
Yes ... those bum bags were occasionally useful but a modern pack with detachable day pack is a far better solution.
Back in 2015 when me and one of my shooting buddies got our new M40 replicas from Marty (BO owner), we took them to a Quantico Shooting Club vintage precision rifle match. The match is 300 and 600 yards on Saturday, and 800 to 1000 yards on Sunday. We had no issues at 300 and 600 yards, but when we went to the 800 yard berm, both of us noted that we had no more elevation adjustments, or maybe my turret moved one tiny 1/4 click, but that was it. The M40s have a zero cant base with a smallish 1" diameter scope, so that's a constraint once you go out beyond 700 yards.
Fortunately the repro green Leupold/Redfieldish scopes had Mil-Dot reticles (yes, that is not historically correct, but much appreciated for this match), and we used reticle-based holdovers for the 800 and 1000 yard stages. My buddy took a pic from 2015 of this M40 at the 800 yard berm.
...afterwards I put a shim at the base of the scope, and now have enough elevation adjustment...
Last edited:
Who did the mill dot cross hairs, IronSite?? Thanks, Charlie112
The Leupold/Redfield "M40 Commemorative" scopes made back in the early to mid-201X era came with Mil-Dots from the factory. Mine is marked "369 of 1000", so I presume 1000 of these scopes were made back then. Primarily marketed for the SSA M40 replicas that were made a few years earlier. (My understanding is that it took Leupold a few years to get the green anodizing consistent enough from a color perspective, and once they figured that out, made these M40 commemorative scopes)
Last edited:
три красотки
Record-1-308, МЦ-13, Тайфун-3
Record-1-308, МЦ-13, Тайфун-3
I think there is a lot of "bottoming" in the greenies. Wouldn't they have had to add a lot of shimming to get the base to provide that zero.
It would be nice if there were a way to do this and in effect create a zero stop.
I would see a lot of Marines making that one extra turn below zero though and breaking the scopes.
I zeroed mine at 9X two mils under.
When I zoom down to approx 4.5 I have enough reticle to get 1000.
Not good enough for work on paper but it will scare a steel plate at 1000.
My M40 copy. It’s just a fun gun to shoot.
This is as far as I got in my “vintage” sniper setup. And decided to go another direction so it sits in the closet 
So if it would do someone else some good lmk.
I’m done with the stalk. Shooting PRS style matches and getting a bright rig lol
So if it would do someone else some good lmk.
I’m done with the stalk. Shooting PRS style matches and getting a bright rig lol
Attachments
Last edited:
This is what I’m going to lol. (Or something similar)
Look man don’t ask don’t tell is sooo 2000s
Attachments
Tried to be a little "artsy" with my M40
Not snipery. But accurate as hell.
Had it out today.
Sirhr
Had it out today.
Sirhr
What R it is? Speaking in Redneckese, so I hope you'll respond.
Winchester 52d target .22 with a Leitschert scope. Shoots holes in holes. See the Ad Topperwein challenge thread for more!
Bought in about 1992. One of the first really nice guns I bought. Called my “money gun” because I are so much with it at 50-50 shoots when I lived in Ohio.
It is a joy to shoot!
Sirhr
Bought in about 1992. One of the first really nice guns I bought. Called my “money gun” because I are so much with it at 50-50 shoots when I lived in Ohio.
It is a joy to shoot!
Sirhr
Looks like it needs to be in the rimfire thread too...even if it isn't military
Check the Ad Topperwein Thread... it's there! With some performance data...
Cheers,
Sirhr
It's here because it's "Snipery" and vintage. The military (AMU) did use these, if only on a limited basis.
Actually a LOT of these were bought by the US Military.
AMU and Marines small bore teams used them. And many bases around the world had small bore rifle clubs. Curtis LeMay had a big rifle program in SAC. Built indoor ranges, filled them up with Winchester 52's and Remington 541? rifles. So that his airmen could shoot for recreation. I would guess that the military probably bought thousands of these over the 50+ years they were in production.
And I am guessing that more than a few future 'snipers' either grew up with these in high school or used them recreationally in the service. Or for training.
The 52 and its Remington equivalent were ubitquitous in services, colleges, high-schools and middle schools, 4H clubs, NRA chapters, etc. A whole generation learned to shoot them.
And, yes, my college rifle team used them. As did hundreds of others.
Reminds me to mention this... Master Sergeant Dana Driscoll... I don't know if you are still alive or not. But, sergeant, you were my coach, my trainer, my inspiration and one of the best most badassed squared-away dudes I ever knew in my whole life. Wherever you are, now, almost 40 years later... Msgt Bull (SF Ret.) and I owe you a hell of a lot! Hope we made you proud! You were one awesome teacher!
Cheers,
Sirhr
No, I wasn't questioning it being in this thread. Notice I used the word "too". I thought D_TROS had a good idea about the military rimfire thread and I like seeing the old rimfires so I start that thread. Just like with this thread, I hope it doesn't get buried too deep so that people don't see it. In order for that to happen people need to post to it once in a while.
Thank you, Sir for posting that. I wasn't aware of Mr. Topperwein,, nor the rimfire section of the Hide
541's came along in the 1980's Remington had target versions of the 510, 511 and 513 series. That I know of. Probably more... I loved my 541S and 541X. The former was traded to get a Browing O/U Citori. The latter was sold to help fund my next aircraft job move.
This one is cool. K31/42. The serial number block set aside for these scoped/sniper/marksman rifles started at 450001. I've found some evidence of 450008 somewhere in Europe on an archived auction site, but haven't been able to drum up anything else for the first 10 rifles. There is a document out there that states that numbers 450011 through 450050 went to the KVA for acceptance testing (basically to accept the 31/42 model as a standard service item), and there's a series of "running changes" to the production of the first ~120-130 or so rifles. As you can see on this one, the first rifles had the scope tubes welded to the receiver (I'm guessing they were shrink/press fit dovetails first, just like the later models, then filled in the gap between rifle and optic with weld). All of the open source references I could find said they were machined integrally but I don't believe that to be the case. There's pretty clear evidence of welding on this rifle, especially the patterns in the finish wear, and undercuts where the material dipped low. You'll also notice that on these early "integral" rifles they're all slightly different in the shaping between the tube and the receiver. I'm confident they were welded up then re-shaped.
Anyway, this was all apparently the result of the Swiss testing various German optic and mounting systems in the 30's and being dissatisfied with their ability to maintain zero and handle harsh use... This particular optic is also different from the reference books I've found on the "standard" 31/42's. There are extra screws in certain places, and features that are missing vs. the later optics. As is typical with these, optics are spotty and cloudy. Might be easy enough to clean, but this model differs from the reference books... so I'm just going to leave it alone. Rifle shoots very well as is, though I doubt I put many more rounds on it. Butt is marked December 1942 under the plate, which is in line with the very beginning of production of these rifles.
Anyway, this was all apparently the result of the Swiss testing various German optic and mounting systems in the 30's and being dissatisfied with their ability to maintain zero and handle harsh use... This particular optic is also different from the reference books I've found on the "standard" 31/42's. There are extra screws in certain places, and features that are missing vs. the later optics. As is typical with these, optics are spotty and cloudy. Might be easy enough to clean, but this model differs from the reference books... so I'm just going to leave it alone. Rifle shoots very well as is, though I doubt I put many more rounds on it. Butt is marked December 1942 under the plate, which is in line with the very beginning of production of these rifles.
For those who own/have experience with both- what would you say shoots better between a M1 Garand vs FN 49?
I would assume that the dual-lugged front locking bolt of the Garand would at least give it the potential to be the more accurate rifle. But thats just an anecdotal opinion..
I would assume that the dual-lugged front locking bolt of the Garand would at least give it the potential to be the more accurate rifle. But thats just an anecdotal opinion..
My FN-49 in 8mm and a 7x57 that I got to shoot were, in general, more accurate than many of the M1's that I've shot. There are a number of variables though, ammunition being #1. People not using the correct load for an M1 is an example. The FN-49's I shot had handloads which I loaded for and helped load for.
Both had very useable peep sights, but sometimes it don't feel like your eyes line up. That's a factor, not a fact. A rifle properly zeroed makes a difference. My 8mm was zeroed. Neither the 7mm or the M1's were zeroed to me.
Nice. Didn't know you owned a FN49 @sandwarrior ..
Ever thought about getting a scope mount for it?
The FN49 snipers are all too cool!
I've always been interested in the AG42 Ljungman as well. Two rifles that had they been born just a tiny bit earlier, would have been enormously popular(IMO) - the AG42 and FN49...
(I've heard "Ljungman thumb" makes Garand thumb look like nothing LOL).
FN certainly had a knack for recruiting true talent: John M. Browning, his protege Dieudonne Saive, and then Saive's protege who went on to come up with the most widely used GPMG in the western world, the FN MAG/M240.
Whats your preferred load for 8x57 if you don't mind me asking?
Last edited:
I also have to qualify that t he FN-49's that I got to shoot were in pretty good condition. The M1's I shot were regular surplus, some mixed and matched. None of them were 'match' grade of any sort.
Is that… an A2 stock?
Can anyone provide some info on this? 03A3 with a Weaver scope. Is this historically accurate?
That’s a legit 03-A4.
The scopes had a few variations and the Alaskan and some Weavers were an alternate.
Where is the bolt?
Im sure he has it. Dad passed a few months ago. I am starting to go through his collection now. I havent found it yet but Im sure I will. He was a military piece collector and there is a good bit to go through. 1911s were his main focus.
I suppose the scope/mount make it an A4?
Thank you for the help!
The reason you can tell it's a legit '03-A4 is the ID lettering is down on the side of the front ring, not on top. They were ID'd as 1903-A3, but when the lettering is down, they are a 1903-A4. The scope mounts are quite commonly like that. A Redfield Junior with the dovetail cut for the rear mount.
Last edited:
That and the lack of a front sight from the get go, the serial number being offset, the C stock and the bolt cut out which took me forever to replicate on mine.
Amazing piece of history. I'd hang onto that one. They are only going up in price. Good luck finding the bolt
Thank you kindly for sharing that with us
Kind Regards,
- Jon