What country had the best bolt action rifle of WW2

The acceptable standard for battle rifle accuracy in the early to mid 1900s was 2 Minutes of Angle. If it shot better than that, fine but not required. Most countries marksmans (sniper if you will) rifles were simply regular battle rifles that shoot better than the others of it's kind. They were all made on the same machines by the same workers. The UK's No.4 Mk1 (T) being a notable exeption as they were worked over by Holland & Holland.

The wood on my M-1903 is walnut while the wood on the Mauser is a birch or possibly beech. The Mauser has more noticable machine and tooling marks than the '03 and so on.

Not all Mausers shot great and not all Springfields were less accurate. Every rifle is different even when made by the same man on the day on the same machines. If you could my two rifles, you would see what I mean.

 

Fair enough then, I have to admit as I was posting it it seemed unusual since I had a nagging suspicion that the 6.5mm was more common.

As for the 6.5mm being upgraded, the same book that refered to some M1938s being rechambered and rebored for 7.92mm Mauser referred to these as being somewhat dangerous due to higher chamber pressures.

Perhaps there was a similar problem with altering the loading for the 6.5mm round? I really don't know, I'm just speculating.

 

Well, the 7.92x57 was a much bigger and more powerful round than the 6.5x52, so I'm not surprised there were problems. This need not apply to the 6.5mm round, though: the standard military loading was a round-nosed 162 grain bullet at 2,296 fps, but Norma offers a modern loading of a 139 grain bullet at 2,580 fps for use in the old military guns. This would have been a big improvement, as pointed bullets tumble to increase the wounding effect.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum

 

It was the 7.35x51 being redone for the Mauser round rather than the 6.5mms, but I see your points, the Mausers fired a heavier bullet at higher velocity and as you say rejigging the shape of the 6.5mm would probably have helped too.

 

The Polish Wz.28 was almost the same rifle as the K98, why isnt it involved in this discussion?

 

check your dates

there were no 03 springfirlds built during WWII, nor any 1917 enfields either. the us had switched over to the M1 garand in the thirties. there were still 03s and 17s in use in asia and rear areas as leftovers or by units that had not yet converted. as far as i'm concerned the us did not field a bolt action rifle in WWII. my picks would be the SMLE M3 or M4 followed by the mauser. everything else was far behind and a lot of it was almost junk. either too long and heavy- japan, russia or junk - italy. france had a fair rifle but it never really got a chance to show what it could do. i've shot all the common WWII bolr action rifles and would not feel underarmed with either the SMLE or the mauser. to tell the truth a like the M1917 endfield the best of the bunch. it has the best ammo, good sights, fast action, is accurate enough for common use [ mine used to shoot about 2" at 100yds with iron sights and surplus ammo, not too shabby] and is about the right weight for a full power battle rifle. as for ammo i would pick 30-06 1st, 8mm mauser 2nd, .303 3rd, 7.62 russian 4th, everything else who cares.

 

I beleive that the USMC used the springfield 03

[quoteIt is noted that U.S. military units like the U.S. Marine Corps and the U.S. Army Rangers preferred the M1903 and the M1903A3 rifles over the M1 Garand on the grounds that the M1903 and the M1903A3 were accurate, hard-hitting at long ranges, and the rifle didn't have the problems the M1 Garand had.[/quote]


Just read it please.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Springfiel ... rld_War_II

 

huh

the 03 springfield, 17 enfield, and the garand all used the same 30-06 round so there is no difference in range or power between the three rifles. average rifle to average rifle there is also no practical difference in accuracy either. both the 03 and the M1 were issued in scoped versions for snipers although IIRC there were more M1s used. as for the marines they did use both the 03 and the 17 but they were quickly replaced by the M1 and the johnson rifle as well as the M1 and M2 carbines. by guadacanal most marines were armed with semi auto weapons of one model or another. the 03 springfield is one of those items that has a mystique about it that is not entirelly earned. it was a very good weapon but not that much better than other rifles. it was not the best rifle ever made as i have heard claimed. ditto for the SMLE, mauser, and others. some earilier 03 had problems with bad heat treating of the recievers but you never hear about that from the 03 lovers. a rifle that blows up in your face does leave something to be desired. as far as i know the only problem the M1 had was the ammo clip system. it couldn't be topped up and it made a noticeable ping when ejected after the rifle was emptied.

 

Let's clear up some of the '03 stuff.

The M-1903A1 was in production by Remington until 1942. At that time the M-1903A3 was adopted as second line rifles while the M-1 Garand filled combat slots. Springfield Armory had stopped making the 03 in the late 30's to gear up for Garand production. The 03A3's were made by Remington and Smith-Corona until 1944.

The USMC used the 03A1 until after Guadalcanal (sp?) and didn't fully bring on the Garand until later 1943. The Johnsons were never used to a major extent by the USMC but were used by the Marine Raiders. They were also used by the special service forces, OSS, and Dutch forces.

There were two sniper versions of the '03 in WW2. The first was the USMC's M-1941 which was a National Match rifle with a Unertl scope attached. The other was the M-1903A4 which was made by Remington and was a standard 03A3 with a Weaver 4X scope and bent bolt handle. The M-1 snipers (M-1C and M-1D were actually used more in Korea than WW2.

The 03 was also the primary rifle for use with rifle grenades. These were normally rifles that had worn barrels but were still good enough for combat.

The part about blowing up is due to improper heat treating. These were on receivers made before 1918 when double heat treatment was introduced. The serial numbers are documented and those that were made before the change over were usually culled and relegated to drill duty. There are some out there on the market and in collections but they should not be fired.

 

ussual source.


Again I do not beleive I have to add anything tot he quote?

 

Maybe the fact that in the heat of combat many infantrymen who had recieved only basic training will have been glad that the reloading system for the Garand was so quick and easy to complete because the clip was in one piece and ejected itself?

 

The clip thing is a non-issue. I can reload my Garand in under 5 seconds. I will bet that a soldier with field experience can do it faster than that. The ping sound does exist but it's not terribly loud and one can get another clip in before too long. I would not assault a position just because I heared that ping as there will be 8 rounds of .30 caliber waiting on you. Besides, as the post above indicated, in a combat situation nobody is paying attention to that little ping sound.

 

Yes and probably they are too busy doing their own things (shooting aiming reloading) to notice such noises.

 

And surely, in any kind of stealth mission, having just fired at the enemy is more likely to give away your position than your empty ammo clip ejecting...

 

Not necessarilly ur position but ur presence yes.

Anyways why isnt the Polish K98a in this discussion? or the wz. 29?

 

1)Lee-Enfield No.4
2)Springfield M1903
3)Mauser K98K
4)Mosin Nagant M91/30
5)Mannlicher-Carcanno M91
6)Arisaka type 99
7)Arisaka 38
8)MAS36

I chose the lee-enfield because the bolt cycles quicker the the K98, it holds a 10-round magazine.
Springfield above K98 as the former fires a smaller(0.3 cal) the the latter which fires the larger 7.92mm round so better accuratcy.
The MAS36 is the last because it lacks a safey catch, a great liabilty in battle, also it has only 5-round clip

 

How does that affect accuracy?

 

The US .30-06 which was used in the M-1903, M-1, BAR, M-1919MG and M-1917 used a 150gr spitzer shaped boattail bullet. The case holds more powder than the 7.92mm Mauser cartridge allowing the '06 to be faster. The Springfield has a 24" barrel with a 1 in 10 inch twist rate which will drive the bullet with good accuracy.

My K98k Mauser from 1944 will shoot very well. It will just about shoot as well as my Springfield. In the Mauser I use 200 grain boat tail hoolow point match bullets and Springfield gets a 155 grain match bullet.

The accuracy of the rifles is determined by it's barrel quality, fit of the stock, ammo quality and sights. This does not the shooter into account.