USMC Sniper on James Julia Auction

[Big Larry]

You have to remember that these rifles were in the hands of Marines, and even though conditions were poor, a Marine always took care of his equipment. One of mine was certainly a beater and I got it from a Navy Officer in San Diego. I sold it years ago for $4,000 with the scope, to a friend. He sold it last year for $10,000. It was a 60% rifle at best. Most I have examined were in really good condition. Look at how many 03-A4's are found in new condition. I don't think there was a lot of sniping going on, some, but not a lot. My Dad was on Okinawa and he does not even remember seeing a sniper. His 7th Marines overtook Shuri Castle. He was a Gunny at the time. Vintage pics show very few Marine Snipers as well as those Marines carrying Trenchguns. Big Larry

[Ls6man]

I believe Steve Norton (cplnotrton) has done a tremendous amount of research on the rifles...a lot of it through the National Archives or similar archives. It is my understanding there were around 1047 rifles in USMC inventory as RTE equipment at the beginning of WW2. I believe there is also a memo from around the beginning of Korea (1951?) stating something about needing 100 rifles per division but there weren't enough (there were 4 division at that time) to fill the request. Therefore IMO the maximum number would be @1047 and due to battlefield loss, un-serviceability, etc. the number was less than 400 at the start of the Korean war.

Condition wise IMO a couple of the contributors to some of the rifles being in very good condition might stem from the timeline of their build and where they were being used. I believe they were converted in late 1941 to mid 1942. So for 3 years more of less these rifles would have been available for use during WW2. Not a lot of time given the campaigns lasting a few months in most cases. In garrison the Marines would have taken excellent care of their rifles. Also bolt action dedicated sniper rifles didn't always align themselves to the type of fighting taking place. I would guess given the tradeoffs of distance and accuracy vs. speed and additional firepower (5 vs. 8 rounds) the 1903 snipers more than likely was often regulated to a 2nd or 3rd tier behind Garands and M1 Carbines.

Just my opinion btw.

[cplnorton]

You never really get a exact count on how many were made. All you can really do is a guesstimate. But I think there were a lot less than most people would think.

They first started to assemble them in Jan 43 and the first shipment was sent a couple months later. The first time they saw actual combat is questionable if it was at Bougainville or Tarawa. Almost every after action report from each Division who got them, details that a normal Garand was more effective than the Telescopic sighted rifle. So they didn't exactly have a steller following. And by Feb 44, the Unertl contract was cancelled in favor of the Army 1903A4.

Looking at the actual counts of them in each Division in the Pacific. I can add up a total of around 250. And I think that number is pretty close to what was actually over there.

While those rifles were still in the Pacific, Philly did a inventory and specifically mention that they had roughly 800 in Depot stocks, some with blocks, and some without blocks. This is early 1945. So if you add the 250 overseas and the 800 at the Depot, that makes up your 1047 starting number. But it unclear how many of those 800 were actually converted.

This is about the same time the Navy is approved to be sent a 100 rifles for minesweeping, but even though that was approved, I have never seen an actually shipping log on them.

At the end of the war the directive is to have 108 rifles issued per Division, which at this time was 6 Divisions. But a couple months later after this is passed, the Marines dropped the 5th and 6th Divisions and downsized to only four.

As Greg said in April 1951, the Marines state that they do not have enough of the Unertl rifles to outfit 100 per Division. Which at that time was 4 Divisions. So it appears they are saying they have less than 400 Unertl rifles.

Today I think the running total of known rifles is about 30-40. I have seen about half of these, and the ones I've seen I don't think I question to much. But it makes you wonder where the rest of them went and how many actually still exist.

We are going on nearly 70 years and we don't seem to be finding too many undocumented ones anymore. So it does make you wonder how many more are out there.

[cplnorton]

And I have to give mad props to Big Larry. He actually did a amazing job researching these rifles. I find very little that Big Lary wrote back then that I don't agree with 100% now.

He did a amazing job researching them.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

I believe Steve Norton (cplnotrton) has done a tremendous amount of research on the rifles...a lot of it through the National Archives or similar archives.

Do you have any idea how many people on this forum have had those same documents pulled? No one is trying to diminish Cpl Norton's efforts to my knowledge. But be aware others have made that same effort. This forum represents some of the most knowledgeable people anywhere when it comes to 1903's, and did so many years ago when I came on board. Jim Gaynor, JB, and Big Larry are three excellent examples.

It is my understanding there were around 1047 rifles in USMC inventory as RTE equipment at the beginning of WW2. I believe there is also a memo from around the beginning of Korea (1951?) stating something about needing 100 rifles per division but there weren't enough (there were 4 division at that time) to fill the request. Therefore IMO the maximum number would be @1047 and due to battlefield loss, un-serviceability, etc. the number was less than 400 at the start of the Korean war.

In 1945, the Corps QM stated there were NO sniper rifles in storage and 975 scopes in storage. He was asking for permission to dispose of them. Allow me to point out that there was no shortage of rifles, and that is was the availability of the scopes that determined the number of completed sniper units that could be fielded. As has been pointed out many times, the Philly Depot at that time could turn out match quality rifles in a heartbeat.

Condition wise IMO a couple of the contributors to some of the rifles being in very good condition might stem from the timeline of their build and where they were being used. I believe they were converted in late 1941 to mid 1942. So for 3 years more of less these rifles would have been available for use during WW2. Not a lot of time given the campaigns lasting a few months in most cases.

FYI, the Marines were fighting in the jungles of the Pacific with little time for breaks. They fought 24 hrs/day with little time to clean their rifles. I'm not sure what you are implying, but if you are trying to say the conditions were not detrimental to the men and equipment, you need to do more research - a lot more.

In garrison the Marines would have taken excellent care of their rifles.

We are aware of that, but how much time do you think they spent in garrison? I am an ex-Marine who fought in a SE Asia jungle. The climate ate holes in our M109's armor plate, our clothes rotted on our backs, but the little M16 did admirably well due to its finishes. An 03 would not have faired as well. It rained for the first three months I was in country. I mean every day and every night. We had no washing machines or dryers. They gave us new uts about every 90 days. Everything corroded or rotted. The biggest problem with the Unertl equipped Model 70's was moisture (read Land's book). If they weren't put in a hot box overnight, they were useless the next day. You, nor anyone else, is going to convince me that Pacific jungle combat and the climate didn't damage the 1903's wood and metal.

Also bolt action dedicated sniper rifles didn't always align themselves to the type of fighting taking place. I would guess given the tradeoffs of distance and accuracy vs. speed and additional firepower (5 vs. 8 rounds) the 1903 snipers more than likely was often regulated to a 2nd or 3rd tier behind Garands and M1 Carbines.

I'm not certain what you are trying to say here, but a unit puts it snipers on the line or forward of the line to find enemy snipers, disrupt enemy movements, and find and take out machine gun emplacements. From what I have read over the last 40 years, that is exactly how snipers were used in the Pacific. And if you believe that first sentence, you need to read through the Corps sniper school curriculum.

jt

[Ls6man]

wow....

Thanks for the info. Are you upset because you didn't get credit for something?? BTW...I was on this board in 1998 and Larry helped me document the rifle I have in 2000. No one is taking anything away from Larry...or the many people who were working on this back then. For what it is worth...I have copies of emails I sent from 2000, when the rifle I have now was being documented. They make for interesting reading...you might be surprised..lol Whether we say 975 scopes or 1047 rifle....either way not too damn many.

I have not studied the Pacific theatre as much as the ETO, but I'd bet the average combat Marine actually spent less time in actual combat than the average solider in the ETO (post 6/6/44). The USMC was involved in island hopping which necessitated much more planning, an actual landing, and then fighting. How long was the actual fighting on Tarwara? On Iwo? The solider in the ETO stayed on the line much longer and under combat conditions for greater periods than the USMC did. The point is during these down times the rifles would have been in garrison and not as heavily used. Have you ever seen the "Guam Garands," or Duff's Iwo rifle? Do they look rusty? There are countless examples of weapons which saw extreme use, but still are in 90% or better original finish...Look at German rifles from the Eastern front...Do they all look crappy? Extreme combat conditions don't also equate to rust or wear. Ever collected LSR's or HT's...many saw multiple years of use in extreme conditions...yet are in 90% original finish today (and they are often all blued...)

Since it sounds like you were also an 0311...you know when not lootin and scootin...you are cleaning your weapon...

As far as the last paragraph...the point is simply these were tools...and as such the best tool would have been used to accomplish the mission. A target inspired rifle with a fragile scope might not have been the best tool for combat usually within 100-200 yards. Given the terrain and conditions I'm sure a lot of the Marines issued with Unertl rifles would have found a Garand a much better tool for their needs. Since we are discussing the sniper tactics as well...the majority of pictures showing Unertl rifles in combat show them being used "set up" from vantage points...and not being dragged around...Stands to reason they might have been carried into action and then deployed.

BTW..Semper Fi..

Do you have any idea how many people on this forum have had those same documents pulled? No one is trying to diminish Cpl Norton's efforts to my knowledge. But be aware others have made that same effort. This forum represents some of the most knowledgeable people anywhere when it comes to 1903's, and did so many years ago when I came on board. Jim Gaynor, JB, and Big Larry are three excellent examples.



In 1945, the Corps QM stated there were NO sniper rifles in storage and 975 scopes in storage. He was asking for permission to dispose of them. Allow me to point out that there was no shortage of rifles, and that is was the availability of the scopes that determined the number of completed sniper units that could be fielded. As has been pointed out many times, the Philly Depot at that time could turn out match quality rifles in a heartbeat.



FYI, the Marines were fighting in the jungles of the Pacific with little time for breaks. They fought 24 hrs/day with little time to clean their rifles. I'm not sure what you are implying, but if you are trying to say the conditions were not detrimental to the men and equipment, you need to do more research - a lot more.



We are aware of that, but how much time do you think they spent in garrison? I am an ex-Marine who fought in a SE Asia jungle. The climate ate holes in our M109's armor plate, our clothes rotted on our backs, but the little M16 did admirably well due to its finishes. An 03 would not have faired as well. It rained for the first three months I was in country. I mean every day and every night. We had no washing machines or dryers. They gave us new uts about every 90 days. Everything corroded or rotted. The biggest problem with the Unertl equipped Model 70's was moisture (read Land's book). If they weren't put in a hot box overnight, they were useless the next day. You, nor anyone else, is going to convince me that Pacific jungle combat and the climate didn't damage the 1903's wood and metal.



I'm not certain what you are trying to say here, but a unit puts it snipers on the line or forward of the line to find enemy snipers, disrupt enemy movements, and find and take out machine gun emplacements. From what I have read over the last 40 years, that is exactly how snipers were used in the Pacific. And if you believe that first sentence, you need to read through the Corps sniper school curriculum.

jt

[cplnorton]

In 1945, the Corps QM stated there were NO sniper rifles in storage and 975 scopes in storage. He was asking for permission to dispose of them.

You are missing the second page of that one Jim. The 975 scopes was item 3 on that document. Item 4 was on the next page, and that was the 800 rifles they had sat aside in storage.

[cplnorton]

For what it's worth, Greg is actually dead on in his earlier statements. These rifles were not well regarded in the Pacific. The reports coming back from the field from each division usually stated that a regular M1 rifle was far better suited for the terrain than the telescopic equipped 1903. Not many were shipped over there to begin with, and reading some of the reports, some even mention that they didn't field them. Instead they decided to issue their snipers M1's.

But I can only think of two positive comments on them, and both were at the end of the war when it didn't matter. One by a Division who didn't even have them. They were just saying how useful they would be if they could get them. But all the rest were honestly really negative. That is why you see them request permission to basically scrap everything in early 1945.

But this is the first report that came back after the Unertls were fielded. This is from the 1st Raider Battalion. When you read the Commandants files after they read this, they specifically mention this as the reason why they condemned the whole Unertl sniper program. It wasn't long after this, the contract with Unertl was cancelled and the 2 sniper schools closed. There is a little bit of a back story on this, and it was probably a bit of a confusion, but it didn't matter. The Raider's report had so much weight that it damned the whole Unertl program almost from the time the Unertl rifles reached the field.

But this was the first negative report of many. The Terraign of the jungle and the fighting style of the Japanese weren't the best place to test a 1000 plus yard capable rifle with a 8x scope. And when the terrain finally opened up on say Okinawa, and they could finally stretch the Unertl's legs, the war was over.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

....Are you upset because you didn't get credit for something??....

What gives you the idea I am upset about anything? This is a forum where we discuss issues that we may not necessarily agree upon. I didn't agree with your statements - nothing more, nothing less. That is the second time you have tried to make a forum discussion personal. If you had bothered to read my initial post in this thread, I stated I know little about this subject, so where did you get the idea I wanted credit for something, and what was that something? If you have a personal issue with me, please use the private mail avenue.

BTW...I was on this board in 1998 and Larry helped me document the rifle I have in 2000. No one is taking anything away from Larry...or the many people who were working on this back then. For what it is worth...I have copies of emails I sent from 2000, when the rifle I have now was being documented. They make for interesting reading...you might be surprised..lol Whether we say 975 scopes or 1047 rifle....either way not too damn many.

I don't think I said you were taking anything away from Big Larry, or anyone else. And I wasn't questioning the number of rifles. I have no idea how many there where, and neither do you. I was discussing the condition of returned rifles.

Don't let this stuff get to you. Everyone is not always going to agree with you, nor me. Let it run off like rain water.

jt

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

You are missing the second page of that one Jim. The 975 scopes was item 3 on that document. Item 4 was on the next page, and that was the 800 rifles they had sat aside in storage.....

No, I have the second page, I just didn't read it. I have it saved page by page, as I do all documents; and I was too lazy to open up the other files. I think this document is in Senich's book, too. Maybe not. Mea Culpa.

Thanks for setting me straight.

jt