Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 456789
Results 81 to 85 of 85
  1. #81
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Robertsdale, AL / Gulf Coast region
    Posts
    1,649

    Default

    I have an editor for a magazine interested in publishing my research on the Winchester A5 snipers. So I'm saving a lot of my info for the article.
    Be sure and let us know when that happens !! I don't buy magazines off the rack but sometimes make an exception, like John Beards article on Red Star Remingtons a few years ago.

    Emri

  2. #82
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Crawfordsville, Arkansas
    Posts
    470

    Default

    Who all else in here is authors? I would like to make a list of new books to read, maybe even a magazine if they can be found. Think it is great we have famous authors in here! Is Bruce Canfield or Scott Duff by chance one of the screen names? I enjoy there books.

  3. #83
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Crawfordsville, Arkansas
    Posts
    470

    Default

    I did not see anyone post a photo of their own one of these rifles, but are there any in museums? There are some in the book "U.S. Marine Corps Scout Sniper World war II and Korea" by Peter R Senich. It seems like you guys would like this book!

  4. #84

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 1903fan View Post
    I did not see anyone post a photo of their own one of these rifles, but are there any in museums? There are some in the book "U.S. Marine Corps Scout Sniper World war II and Korea" by Peter R Senich. It seems like you guys would like this book!
    I'd honestly be highly skeptical of any WWI era sniper in private hands and even in some museums.

    In November 1929 Brig General Samuel Hof issued a Ordnance Bulletin for the care and maintenance of Ordnance small arms and equipment. Stating the following concerning the care and maintenance of rifles fitted for telescopic sights: "Telescopic sights, M1908, M1913 and Winchester 5a having been declared obsolete, rifles fitted with these types of sights will be modified as funds become available and placed in storage as rifles, caliber .30, M1903. Modifications will consist of removing the bracket and plugging the holes in the receiver wall."

    In spring of 1942 the USMC QM placed a substantially large order for replacement parts (primarily with Sedgely) to rebuild 20,000 receivers into complete rifles (for obvious reasons considering the time). In that list it noted that there were also over 500 "receiver assemblies [note not complete rifles] drilled for telescopic sights" and only "receiver assemblies 3 fitted for telescopic sights."

    There were rifles fitted with A5 telescopic sights that were used by the Marines early in the PTO (particularly the Raider battalions), that is not in question. However, one particular example popped up (I believe on this forum a year or so ago.) And the receiver SN was in the post WWI range.

    As far as WWI examples surviving (I'm talking in the condition, parts and variation issued during that conflict).

    I'm not saying it's not possible. But what I've seen at the archives, most data points that during the post WWI demobilization and Great Depression era documentation(and there's a lot more than these two examples) that they were taken out of service after being declared obsolete and cannibalized for parts or turned back into service rifles (obvious reasons, funding is significantly reduced and these sniper rifles are considered obsolete). So as far as looking for an example (as shown in the photographs) without proper documentation I'd be more skeptical that it would be a genuine example.

    Of course I'm sure some slipped through the cracks. But how to tell a genuine example from a very convincing fake (and there are plenty of those), would be next to impossible in my opinion, (without paperwork.)

  5. #85
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Crawfordsville, Arkansas
    Posts
    470

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by Smokeeaterpilot View Post
    I'd honestly be highly skeptical of any WWI era sniper in private hands and even in some museums.

    In November 1929 Brig General Samuel Hof issued a Ordnance Bulletin for the care and maintenance of Ordnance small arms and equipment. Stating the following concerning the care and maintenance of rifles fitted for telescopic sights: "Telescopic sights, M1908, M1913 and Winchester 5a having been declared obsolete, rifles fitted with these types of sights will be modified as funds become available and placed in storage as rifles, caliber .30, M1903. Modifications will consist of removing the bracket and plugging the holes in the receiver wall."

    In spring of 1942 the USMC QM placed a substantially large order for replacement parts (primarily with Sedgely) to rebuild 20,000 receivers into complete rifles (for obvious reasons considering the time). In that list it noted that there were also over 500 "receiver assemblies [note not complete rifles] drilled for telescopic sights" and only "receiver assemblies 3 fitted for telescopic sights."

    There were rifles fitted with A5 telescopic sights that were used by the Marines early in the PTO (particularly the Raider battalions), that is not in question. However, one particular example popped up (I believe on this forum a year or so ago.) And the receiver SN was in the post WWI range.

    As far as WWI examples surviving (I'm talking in the condition, parts and variation issued during that conflict).

    I'm not saying it's not possible. But what I've seen at the archives, most data points that during the post WWI demobilization and Great Depression era documentation(and there's a lot more than these two examples) that they were taken out of service after being declared obsolete and cannibalized for parts or turned back into service rifles (obvious reasons, funding is significantly reduced and these sniper rifles are considered obsolete). So as far as looking for an example (as shown in the photographs) without proper documentation I'd be more skeptical that it would be a genuine example.

    Of course I'm sure some slipped through the cracks. But how to tell a genuine example from a very convincing fake (and there are plenty of those), would be next to impossible in my opinion, (without paperwork.)
    Great response, makes sense why we don't see them! Thank you for your efforts

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •