Unertl 8X scope SN 1114 - was it USMC?

[Seaforth72]

Thanks Neal. Dealing with anything that is non-standard including unexplained extra or absent markings, possible prototypes, experimental, trials, evaluations of any military scope, rifle etc. is a nightmare due to lack of documentation in most cases. Sadly it is an area where fraudsters run amuck, where Bubba ruins a good rifle and then tries to sell it as an "experimental model" for an inflated price.

Even in production we find that some early examples were not always marked "by the book", but as long as it worked, that was the main thing for the purchasing service. As mentioned above, "Red Star (confusingly this refers to the firearms retailer business rather than the Soviet Union) Springfield 1903 SN 3051776 was sent to the UK, and was later bought in a crate of unused rifles with the red band painted on the rifles (British marking to alert users that it was .30/06 not .303). For an odd reason did not have the standard "U.S." marking. Reference: https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=15358 where the author wrote "As to the unique property of rifle 3051776 that was discovered only recently...the receiver ring markings are, "REMINGTON MODEL 1903 3051776", with the conspicuous, (now, anyway!), lack of the "U.S." government ownership stamp. Research on the most prominent 1903 web-site forum has, as yet, failed to reveal another specimen so marked. Thought it a bit of patriotic irony that a rifle that is "U.S."-free, should have a serial number ending in 1776."

Exceptions do occur. Maybe scope 1114 was produced early on a Monday morning or late on Friday afternoon just before Happy Hour at the local tavern?

Some other examples of out of place markings or parts:

Canadian Sten guns Mark II produced in Canada at Long Branch. These had Chinese markings. Not all were sent to China and we sometimes see these Stens in Canada.

The Canadian Inglis Browning High-Power came in two basic models - one with shoulder stock and long range sights and one with no stock slot and fixed sights. My old company commander in the army was issued with one that had the frame of the stock model and the slide of the second model and this was as it left the factory.

Then there was a P-38 German pistol that I had. Battle captured with holster and spare magazine. Nice Walther factory code and 1943 year. However it had NO serial nunbers anywhere and it NEVER had any! I sold it to a P-38 collector and he and the other P-38 collectors are still trying to figure that one out!

[browningautorifle]

the frame of the stock model and the slide of the second model

I left Gagetown in '96 and they still had one of these in stores for common issue. We used it on the SAIC courses...

[Brian Dick]

Most if not all Inglis No.1 pistols that were left in Canadian Army inventory post WWII went back to Canadian Arsenals and were converted to No.2 configuration. Some of the original Mk.1 slides had the rear sight base milled off and a new fixed sight soldered in. Others were just replaced with late replacement No.2 slides. You can usually tell by serial numbers on the slide. Mine is CH9745 and the frame serial number is original but the slide and barrel are post war replacements with the tricornered Canadian Tech Services proof and serial number stamped on instead of pantographed. It's seen service with the Brirtish Army because it sports the Suncorite 259 baked paint over phosphate finish. It came to the USA with a load of surplus No.2 pistols direct from the British Disposals Unit at Donnington via Val Forgett of Navy Arms in the mid 1990's.

[Seaforth72]

I just picked up a copy of the magazine "Military Surplus 2015" at a Barnes & Noble bookstore yesterday. Bruce N. Canfield wrote an article in it about the "M1903A4 SNIPER". I found a comment of his on page 58 of the above mentioned article to be of special interest I.e. "Early production M1903A4s left the factory with 'off the shelf' 330C scopes acquired from Weaver and from various commercial suppliers."

Mr. Canfield also mentioned the ongoing great difficulties that the U.S. Army had in getting scopes. He wrote that rifles, both Springfield and Garand, were sitting ready, stockpiled, awaiting scopes. M1903A4 sniper rifles were issued with Weaver scopes in WWII as the M81 and M82 were in in very short supply. Canada had the same problem for Long Branch No. 4 Mk. I* (T) sniper rifles, as the REL factory was slow in making C No. 32 scopes, which is why Canada bought 350 Lyman Alaskan scopes (with post and crosshair) which were designated (but not marked) as C No. 32 TP Mk. I (TP = Trade Pattern). Even those seem to have be ordered in 1943 and but were not available to be mounted on rifles until 1945. After WWII the British had perhaps 3,000 or so Lee-Enfield No. 4 rifles, mostly Stevens-Savage made, that had been partially converted to snipers but were never completed [known as No. 4 MK.I (T LESS TELESCOPE) or No. 4 MK.I* (T LESS TELESCOPE)].

By the way most of those Alaskan scopes have a British broad arrow issue mark (even though they were made for Canada not the UK) following the serial number (including mine 4407S) but not all had the /|\. There too is an exception to a rule in markings. Remember the Springfield rifle I mentioned in an earlier listing here with its serial number ending in 1776 which was in the middle of production, yet it has no "U.S." marking as "all" the others do and as all are supposed to have.

Given the troubles that both the U.S. Army and the Canadian Army were having obtaining enough sniper scopes in WWII, and as I understand it, the USMC was usually left behind the U.S. Army at the feed trough for equipment, it would actually be very surprising if the USMC received all the scopes they wanted on time.

In more recent times, the Canadian Army ordered some Unertl scopes. Delivery was painfully slow and with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the USMC swooped in on Unertl and commandeered all the scopes that were there awaiting delivery to Canada and others. Ironically Canadian snipers later saved many American lives during Operation Anaconda in Afghanistan.

We can safely assume that the USMC would have wanted all of their Unertl scopes marked to their specifications, however at he time there was a high demand for sniper rifles, there was the urgency of war and scope production was much slower than desired. How do we know that "ALL" Unertl scopes they bought were marked 'USMC-SNIPER'? Does someone have a USMC inspector's report that he had inspected every single one or are people assuming that they were all marked? Would the desperate USMC have rejected an otherwise perfect sniper scope just because it was not marked "USMC-SNIPER"?

How do we know what serial number range the USMC bought? Is there a purchase order or some similar document, or an inventory listing from USMC sources?

Did the USMC receive every scope in that serial number block or were there exceptions? Again a USMC purchase receipt or inventory list would be ideal.

If we do not have the primary documentation from archival sources and are working only from reported examples, then caution must be exercised about making conclusions.

I would encourage anyone who has primary documents (e.g. Unertl or USMC records) to share copies of them.

I know from doing research on Lee-Enfield No. 4 snipers that I much prefer to see the actual rifles or at least photos of markings rather than depending upon people's descriptions of markings as mistakes can occur. E.g. Most, but not all, No. 4 (T) rifles are stamped TR on the left side of the butt socket. Some that went through Factory Thorough Repair (arsenal rebuild) are also stamped F.T.R. In the same location, sometimes overlapping.

[JGaynor]

You might find this interesting.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...%20unertl.jpeg

Although highly problematic in the early part of the Pacific Theatre the '03/Unertl combination did somewhat better in later parts of the war. By then the Target scope's fate had been sealed.
In 1950 when the USMC wrote new specs for a snipers rifle they selected a relatively short, rugged hunting scope with internal adjustments and a quick detachable mount (the MC1952 with MC1 scope).

Incidentally Lyman's Delivery problems early in the war were not confined to the UK and Canadians. When the M1903A4 was approved Two scopes were selected - the Lyman Alaskan (M73) and the Weaver 330C (M73B1).
Lyman depended on Bausch and Lomb to provide the special matched lens sets. However, B&L was busy with other high priority war work such as making binoculars for the navy. No M73 Scopes would be delivered before M1903A4 production ended although some 36,000 had been ordered in anticipation of finishing out the A4 deliveries and replacing the M73B1.

The M81 ans M82 were modifications of the M73. None of those saw the light of day until late 44 or early 45. Most of the Lyman Alaskan derived scopes were used on M1C's


The Springfield Research Service used to offer a file of USMC correspondence, a9 about 50 pages of stuff from 1940 to 1950 or so. Most of these documents are also republished in Senich's "The USMC scout-Sniper in WWII and Korea". The information as it appears in Senich is a little more useful as the copies are better and are organized.

Clark Campbell's "The '03 Springfield Era" (2003) has a lot of useful information.

[Curt]

PM sent on screws

[Col. Colt]

I think the Black Anodized rear Micrometer mount screams "USMC Unertl", all by itself.

The special Black Anodized, Non-Split Rear mounts, with screws on the tops of the adjusters and the upper right side micrometer frame (only) having a groove in it, were only used on USMC 8X Unertls, right??

Was this style ever used on the Unertl Commercials - weren't they all polished aluminum color, with the right side "top grove/trough" rounded all the way off? It is always possible the whole thing was assembled from miscellaneous parts, but if the wear patterns are old and match, maybe it is an original that was simply not marked conventionally. Perhaps pulled from existing stock to get the order out sooner? Who knows - it could well be.

I could easily go along with an Evaluation model, very early, pulled from regular Target/Combination scope production. Second possibility in my mind was a post war overrun built up from left over parts in the factory bins, or a scope purchased for post war target work. CC

[diirk]

Sorry to bump an older thread...

But, I have recently come into possession of an Unertl 8x and would appreciate any recommendations on restoration. It looks to be fully intact although the cross hair is damaged and a slight amount of surface rust. I'll try to post up pics and info later today.

TIA

[Leggett71]

TJA
Iron Sight in Tulsa Oklahoma does excellent restoration work. Fairly long backlog but Mike & his staff are experts. He has rebuilt 3 scopes for me, I think if you search this forum you will see him recommended by several other members.

Iron Sight Inc.

Leggett71 in Tulsa

[diirk]

Leggett71, thanks for the recommendation. That matches what I was turning up with my research, but I like having corroborating opinions.