Any known examples of a Warner & Swasey scope mounted on a Patt. 14 (T)? Thanks
Printable View
Any known examples of a Warner & Swasey scope mounted on a Patt. 14 (T)? Thanks
Aside from the picture of the Canadian sniper w/ the Ross-Warner & Swasey all I've seen have been 1903's. However, wbs2111 says there were P'14's and possibly M1917's done w/ W&S scopes. Different bracket, though. He has pics somewhere. The Ross exists somewhere in the States, don't have the current owner's name, not local though.
Based on some quick research, it appears that the Warner & Swasey Model 1913 was used by Canadian forces during WW1 primarily on Ross Model 1910 rifles, and later fitted to the Enfield P14 aka the No. 1 Mk 3* rifle, designated with a (T) when fitted with telescopic scope. According to the sources below, a few hundred of the No. 1 Mk 3* (T) rifles fitted with W&S scopes were deployed during WW2. Below is a picture of one being used in action during 1944 in Italy (photo from Clive Law, reprinted in Martin Pegler's book).
I currently have an un-numbered Warner & Swasey Model 1913 outfit for sale on the "WTS Forum" also on this site (milsurps.com) so this is a timely and very interesting question.
Cheers,
Peconga in Boise, Idaho
References:
1) Sniper Pictures on the WW2 in Color History Forum
2) "Without Warning - Canadian Sniper Equipment of the 20th Century", by Clive M. Law, 88 pages (paperback), Service Publications (2004)
3) "Out of Nowhere: A History of the Military Sniper", by Martin Pegler, 352 pages, Osprey (2004)
I thought the P14 became the No3 rifle not the No1 MkIII*Quote:
Originally Posted by Peconga
The No1 MkIII* was / is the SMLE
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan de Enfield
:surrender: My error, you are correct. I apparently transcribed the designation for the P14 which should have read "Rifle No.3 Mk.1*" (after 1926).
I confess that I am a Springfield 1903 collector (sorry, not Enfields) and have always found the Commonwealth naming schemes a bit confusing (I better run for cover now...) :runaway:
Cheers,
Peconga in Boise, Idaho
The one below is for a Springfield 1903, but 500 were bought buy the Canadian government to mount on the Ross during WW1. Some did end up mounted on P14's at the start of WWII
BTW, this one belongs to ~Angel~, not me. She has two of them and is thinking about mounting one on a 1903 as a shooter. ;)
Model 1913 Warner & Swasey Telescopic Musket Sights
c/w RIA M1908 Pattern Leather Carrying Case
http://photos.imageevent.com/badgerd...20_Medium_.JPG(Click PIC to Enlarge)http://photos.imageevent.com/badgerd...20_Medium_.JPG
Model 1913 Warner & Swasey (lots more more pics ... click here)
Regards,
Badger
A follow up ....
The lion's share of P14's were fitted with PP Co. scopes, however, there was a rare version manufactured by B.S.A. Guns.
With thanks to Advisory Panel members Lance and Wheaty, there's an entry to the England - Milsurp Knowledge Library (click here), complete with a 182 picture photo montage.
No.3 MkI* (T) Rifle (BSA Scope) (click here)
c/w matching Model 1918 (3x) Scope Serial #226763 (Mfg by B.S.A Guns)
http://photos.imageevent.com/badgerd...20_Medium_.JPG
(Click PIC to Enlarge)
Note: Pics of rifle provided courtesy of MILSURPS.COM member ~Angel~.
This is one of only 79 rifles converted by B.S.A Guns, contracted between July 27, 1935 and completed by Dec 9, 1938. The scope and rifle are "all matching" with "all correct" fonts and markings for collector comparisons.
There are several follow up sections with additional pics noted in the "Collector's Feedback and Comments" section of the main library entry, showing the "Fianna Fiel" and BSA font and stamping examples with extreme close-ups, which are helpful in spotting incorrect or reproduction components. There's also a follow up note discussing a No.3 MkI* (T) Rifle (BSA Scope), which was being offered for auction on the Internet in the past.
Regards,
Badger
Completely forgot the WWII pic! Anyway, the thing to make sure of is whether the P'14 bracket is same-same as the '03. One moment, there are books here! Novel concept. (I'm not at work for once). Back shortly.
According to Brophy, the Ross scope bracket has longer feet. No mention of P'14 brackets in his book.
Skennerton shows a picture of a Ross bracket -two long legs and one short(on the receiver ring). Pg 173 "The British Sniper" 1st ed.
Canadian W&S scopes number in their own series- only 3 digits long at most rather than Brophy's stated 4 digit S/N. (At least per the examples shown in print and previously seen w/Mk I eyeballs- not mine- just near by!)
_Apart from zeroing issues, having a spare set of scope guts might be nice- Even after a good cleaning, trash will still get on the lenses inside and drive you mad. The extra hole in the cover was a later service mod to keep the reticle from rotating. The down side is that the sealant is still on the cover screws on the balance of the scope, be a shame to pull it apart if it wasn't resealed recently.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmoore
Although I don't have an Enfield P14 or P17 on hand, I believe the base for the Springfield 1903 may fit without alteration, since the diameter and curvature of the left side receiver rail on both rifles is nearly identical. The mounting base on the 1903 has three "feet", all of which are the same length (unlike the Ross, apparently); as a reference I have attached some close-ups of the W&S base for the 1903.
However, the key question may be whether the "horns" on the Enfield's rear iron sight interfere with the body or rubber eyepiece of the telescopic sight, using the unmodified 1903 base. I intend to do a bit of field research on the question this weekend, by taking the scope and mount with me to a local gun show and doing a trial fit of the pieces on a P17.
As for the serial number, do you know where the Canadian W&S scopes were stamped? On the U.S. contract scopes, the serial number is stamped on the ID plate on the main body. In addition, those that were put into service are also stamped with the corresponding rifle number on the back of the mounting bracket (the female side, attached to the scope); the one shown below was never issued, so only has the scope number (4 digit) but no rifle number.
Cheers,
Peconga in Boise, Idaho
I've got a scan of the original wartime bracket drawings for the P14 / Warner Combo somewhere in my archive files, I'll see if I can find it.
I've also heard some late (Great) war production S.M.L.E. were fitted with the Warner & Swasey scope. I've seen a couple of 1918 dated rifles marked with a C/I\ on the knoxform and other Canadian property marks which appear to have been drilled for a Warner but have never been able to locate a drawing of the bracket.
Cheers,
Simon.
Just as a matter of interest how many here are aware that there was a bracket designed for fitting the No32 to the P14 and that a number of examples did actually make it into production?
Before you ask yes, I've got those drawings in the archive too.
Cheers,
Simon
The P14 bracket/base appears to be a more solid wider "foot" affair without the fancy radius cut in the "foot." The '03 is setting more on sculpted, radiused "feet" and the p14 appears to be on sturdier columns. It also appears to not have the dovetail extended beyond the front "foot" as does the '03 mount. Having all the receivers side by side, a No1, a P14, an '03 and a 1910 it would seem all 4 brackets/bases would be different. The '03 is a "small ring" type action, using mauser terminology, smooth in radius at the mounting point from front to rear. The P14 and the No1 are "large ring", again mauser terminology, stepped receivers, both with a different radius. The Ross has a round chamber "ring" and a flat, right angle to the bore and then angled receiver section. Add in the Ross .22 sniper trainer and the Bennett Mercie mg, Brophys reproduction and the "flat", no "footed" US reproduction and you get 8 different bracket/base possibilities out there. Quite amazing when taking into consideration how inadequate/almost abismal the scope and its mounting system has always been considered.
Just noticed that the Ross sniper in the Quartermaster stores (2008) has a bracket machined differently from the one illustrated in Skinnerton's British sniper book, so yet another variant!
Considering that the Ross rifles were retired before WWII, it might be possible their brackets were robbed and modified to fit the P'14's. Depending on when the P'14 was built it seems more likely that the armourer would use what was at hand or make a new bracket from scratch, rather than trying to find obsolete bits originating in another country.
The extention of the Ross bracket extends forwards, whilst the '03 had a rearward extention from the mounting feet. (A small visual clue, but it might help ID'ing the P'14's bracket origins.):)
A well-informed (ie: expert) friend once told me he saw one in Alberta in the 1950s. According to the book "Without Warning", 80 W&S scopes were taken to the UK by the 1st Canadian Division in 1939, which were to be fitted to P14 rifles. Another 80 were requested in May 1940. As the photos in that book show, some were definitely converted. (Interestingly, the book also mentions a UK request to Canada to supply Ross rifles with telescopic sights in "early 1940". The reply was that there were none to spare)
The second lot of 80 may not have been delivered however, as the returns quoted in the book show 385 W&S scopes in Canada in 1938 and 267 W&S scopes with rifles in Canada in late 1943 (some were used for sniper training in Canada) There should have been only 225 W&S scopes in Canada if the second lot of 80 were shipped to the UK, UNLESS the 385 number was erroneous and more W&S scopes were 'found' in store after 1938/39.:dunno:
That would seem to be possible as only 213 W&S/Ross MkIII sets actually got to France in WWI reportedly, out of the 500 sets made up by 1917. It seems rather unlikely that 115 W&S sights and their matching rifles were lost in action in WWI or ended up in museums etc., though some obviously did, and some were no doubt scrapped after WWI as being B.E.R.
An inventory taken in Canada in 1923 recorded 211 Ross MkIII with bases for W&S scopes, and 357 W&S scopes. The inventory of 1937/38 reported 385 W&S scopes and 208 rifles. So unless the W&S scopes were quietly reproducing in stores, obviously there was some misreporting of totals!
Apparently most of the rifles were held in Ontario and most of the scopes in Quebec! (Canadians will understand:rolleyes:) and it seems likely to me that some of the rifles were not recognized as being sniper rifles, having only the relatively small side rail to distinguish them from normal MkIII Rosses, of which there were over 100,000 in store at that time.
Reportedly 177 more bases for W&S scopes to fit Ross MkIII rifles were to be made up at the "Quebec Arsenal" (Longue Pointe O.D. perhaps?) in 1938/39, so that all the W&S scopes could be fitted to rifles. As the total number of Ross rifles with W&S scopes fitted had 'grown' by 1943 to 267 in Canada, I would guess that either more Ross rifles with bases were 'found' in stores, or at least 59 rifles had bases fitted from the 177 bases possibly made up. If they were, perhaps another 80 or so of those 177 bases were taken to the UK in 1939 with the W&S scopes and there adapted to the P14s, probably by Canadian armourers.
There are lots of little mysteries around these subjects. There's an account by an Australian officer serving in a British battalion in France in 1944 that two of his snipers had "Canadian Ross rifles" and he describes an incident where with the aid of an artillery range finder, they dropped a German officer at about 1000 yards, so it was not just an off-the-cuff remark.
Incidentally, it is often repeated, including in "Without Warning" that the removal of the bullet drop scale from the case of the W&S caused the hermetic seal to be lost. Not correct; the holes are blind. Here's a photo of the guts of one. Amazingly crude and heavy given the complexity and comparative weakness of the adjustment mechanism.
Thanks much for the additional details! Only read "Without Warning" once, mixed good and bad feelings about it are all that remain in the brainpan about the tome.
Your info would help explain the two styles of Ross brackets seen.
It's a good read with a lot of original research, I recommend it. I've heard there was a problem with the proofs being lost in a computer crash and the text having to be reconstructed or something to that effect, which shows in places. Well worth getting though.
Found it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Simon
Cheers,
Simon.
Well, that answers the question about the bases being similar to the Ross base, and made in the Quebec Arsenal. Obviously not!
Do you think the 80(?) W&S scopes were fitted at RSAF Enfield then?
That gives us the screw hole pattern to look out for on P14s as well.
Another varient on the Rifle No3 (P14) base. The picture posted in this thread and in the books "Without Warning" and "Out of Nowhere" has a base mounted on the side of the receiver that is clearly like that of the Ross/03. No visible overbore pad drilled and tapped in the picture as this base would have to be. Interesting to note it is an adaptation of or to the No3 MkI * (T) Patt. 1918 mounting set up. It shows the beveled sectioning of the left ear on the rear sight and would bet that the numbers for spacing on the pad holes would be spot on as well. The drawing is dated 7-2-40, what a step backwards from the Patt. 1918 overbore setup on the No3. Wonder if it was an attempt to re-utilize the rifles with "New/Surplus" scopes in stores.
Simon,
The inevitable question, Does the No32 adaptor/base/pads bear any remarkable resemblance to the W&S and the Patt.18 as well? Might you be coerced into posting those drawings? I haven't been so giddy about info in a long time. Thank you again!
Whoops, forgot to log out. The above is WBS2111. I'm using his computer whilst loitering about the gunstore trying to stay awake (midnight shift guy).
BDL has the user and technical handbook for the Warner and Swasey telescopes.
From a quick browse through our librabry copy, all I can say is that the W&S scope would have stood two chances in the field..... slim and none!
Here's a section of the P14/No32 scope bracket drawing. I've taken the liberty of sanitising it of all dimensional information otherwise before you know it there'll be a glut of "original" P14/No32 combo's appearing for sale.Quote:
Originally Posted by jmoore
Cheers,
Simon.
P.S. I've got other information / drawings in the archives relating to trials installation of the 42 and 53 scopes on both the P14 and No4.
Simon,
Fantastic! Thank you very much! Would love to see any you are willing to share. Quite elegant looking compared to standard No4(t) bracket. Makes you wonder if any were ever purchased on the open market just to have the No32 stripped off to doctor up a 4T. I now have a new "Holy Grail." Simon, Thank you again for sharing.
Here's the P14 with a bracket designed to take the No42 or 53 scope. Interesting that even at the beginning of WWII the powers that be where still considering an offset scope.
Cheers,
Simon.
Very similar to the Frankford Arsenal experimental's for the 1903 around the same time with the forward external adjustments. Frankford went as far as to combine the off set mounting with a prism much like the Zeiss prismatic for the 08/15 MG but had it so the ocular would swing over center line with the scope still off set. I have seen a No4 with the same type of mounting. It looked a bit cobbled but wonder now if someone took a P14 mounting and tried to retro fit it. Great stuff. Thanks again!
Cheers,
Burrell
I'd agree after taking another look. The base shown on the P14 in "Without Warning" does look like it is aligned with the axis of the bore vertically, whereas this mount is considerably higher. Perhaps too much so.Quote:
Originally Posted by wbs2111
So, I go back to the theory that the bases were modified Ross type taken to England with the scopes in 1939.
If the P14 W&S base drawing that has been kindly reproduced above was dated 7th February 1940 that would be before the request to Canada for scope-equipped Rosses made in May 1940 (No doubt made after the German attack in the West on May 10th.)
Perhaps the Ross was considered unsuitable from a maintenance point of view at that quiet point in the war (that is during the "Phoney War" before May 10th) and it was intended to provide for the possibility of re-using the W&S scopes from the Rosses on P14s.
If it was dated 2nd of July 1940, the sense of urgency must have been considerably greater! I still wonder where they thought the Ross sights were going to come from; perhaps the apparent "surplus" in Canadian stores, or from the USA? The 7000 odd US W&S Mod 1913 scopes had all been sold off as surplus long before though IIRC.
Would it have been worthwhile to make up mounts for the 100 odd "surplus" scopes in Canada alone? Would the authorities in the UK not have been advised that extra bases were being made in Canada to refit all the scopes to Ross rifles and/orP14s? Perhaps not.
One wonders if a significant number of the "missing" 100+ W&S scopes from the 500 procured in WWI were still in the UK in 1940 - was the drawing prepared to re-use these perhaps? Or just 'in case' of some other scenario?
Given that there were still plenty of men around who remembered that the great defect of the W&S was the lack of any means of tightening the scope onto the dovetail base, it's surprising the proposed mount doesn't address that with say, a couple of set screws coming through the male dovetail from the bolt handle side. Of course it would have been easy enough to have drilled and tapped the bronze dovetail mount on the scope and put a knurled screw or two in that the soldier could tighten by hand to get the same effect. AFAIK that was not done, so the soldiers using the W&S in WWII had to deal with the same slop in the mounts their fathers did!
It all shows again the folly of breaking up the SMLE sniper rifles after WWI.
Very interesting how they have used a larger spigot on the front pad and a steeper taper on the rear. To prevent attempts to fit the No4 bracket? Only if the center to center distance between the "thumb screws" was same on both mounts, I assume.Quote:
Originally Posted by Simon
If the authorities wanted so much to make clip loading possible, you'd think they could have come up with a long eye relief scope for not much more effort than all this fiddling with different offset mounts trying to use unsuitable scopes. Noske for one, was making them in the States in the 1930s. No harder to make than a No32 - probably easier - judging by the one I had, which had an almost 6 inch eye relief IIRC. FOV might have been an issue though...
I hope it works with the pictures: This is one of the Canadian scopes.