Printable View
Probably too easy, but it might be mildly entertaining.
Identify the milsurp by it's sight picture:
Entry One:
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...tuff0571-1.jpg
Mystery Sight No.1
If y'all think it's worth pursuing, I'll try and round up some "odd ducks" from time to time. Or feel free to make your own entry!
Sterling Mk4.
Sterling it is! L2A3
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...stuff003-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...stuff004-1.jpg
How about an optical unit?:
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...tuff0071-1.jpg
Mystery Sight No.2
Ross rifle scope? Can't remember the designation but the horizontal lines are supposed to represent the width of a man at various distances I believe!
In actual fact, it can be considered a Ross scope, but it's not the rifle with which it's usually associated. And, yes, the stepped lines are for range estimating the distance to (standing) enemy troops. But height, not width...
Almost to an answer, anybody care to identify the maker of the sight and the rifle with which it's most identified? (There's three rifles and an MG that have been associated which this scope.)
I like! I would like to see more of this quiz, guess the sight picture.
Whilst waiting ID of the scope reticle pictured above, here's another iron sight photo taken in the field a while back. Almost easy, but some hints cropped out.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...tuff0061-1.jpg
Mystery Sights No.3
T99 Arisaka.
Is that a Sasquach in that picture?
Yup! I have tried several times to get a realistic view through the peep in the camera, but that's about as close as I've come so far.Quote:
Originally Posted by green
Out in the woods, but no Sasquatch! Just a dead leaf.
Still no takers on ID'ing the scope? (Mystery Sight No.2)
Another easy one (I've got more optics photos than irons right now, but that's subject to change!_:
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...tuff0062-1.jpg
Mystery Sight No.4
mystery sight no 4.... SUSAT(sight unit small arms trilux)?
Assuming it's the right way up, number 4 is a SUIT (Sight Unit Infantry Trilux) for the SLR, precursor to the SUSAT.
:thup:SUIT, or just "Trilux" to the wild colonials. For the UK's "SLR" or L1A1. Didn't figure this one would be all that hard. But it's an unusual reticule pattern not often seen. Makes practical sense, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Strangelove
The SUSAT is for the L1A1's replacement, the SA80 family, including the current L85a2. Which I'm NOT likely to be able to shoot, nor photograph up close. But the SUSAT does have the big pointer coming from the bottom. Backwards step, that.
Still don't have an ID on this scope!:
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...tuff0071-1.jpg
Mystery Sight No.2
Another obscure hint- The scope was sometimes made tighter to it's bracket in the field by jamming thin bits of metal (such as razor blade pieces) between the two and made to rust solid.
Also, the flecks in the view are normal now that the scope has aged. They do move about under recoil! And this one's been cleaned out not too many years ago.:bitch:
Warner and Swazey telescopic sight? The three horizontal lines represent a standing (5'8") man at 1000, 1500 and 2000 yds.
Why, thank you! Thankyouverymuch! And Dr. Stangelove was so close! Especially considering there's a W&S scope mounted on a Ross on the header above. And, yes, the ranges are as noted. Optimistic, weren't they?Quote:
Originally Posted by browningautorifle
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...stuff033-1.jpg
But the mechanical external elevation cam is even more optimistic! I've only ever used it out to 700yds or so, but it tracks well, once you have the dang thing sighted in, and have ammo the rifle likes in the 150gr bullet/ MV @2700fps.
I thought there were more photos, but you can reference the MKL. Badger ought to have the links. (That's a hint...)
This one's easy, too- for some forumers! (if you absolutely already know, hold off answering. Let's string it along and see what happens.)
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...uff04011-1.jpg
Mystery sight No.5
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...ff022111-1.jpg
Bonus photo!
Oh!Oh! I know, I know, pick me! Pick me!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ah, I was pretty close!
The SUSAT is actually being phased out of service now, replaced by the ACOG out in Afghanistan and the long term upgrade project is to replace them with the ELCAN Spectre. Next time I get to play with one (SUSAT only unfortunately) I'll try to remember to get some pics, if you'd like!
SUIT sight from an L1A1
The irony about the SUSAT is that of all the problems that the rifle ever had, nobody ever complained about the SUSAT. The ONLY ever complaint was that it was apt to mist up. But as I used to report back...... hot eye up against a cold glass (lens) and hey-ho....., you can't defeat the laws of physics!
Mind you, there was/is a lot of politics involved in the SUSAT/Trijicon/Elcan saga that hasn't been resolved yet so we'll leave it at that
Quote:
Originally Posted by gsimmons
OK, OK, Donkey! You're eligible!
You sure have a way of bringing out the ogre in me...
Hahaha! Thank you. It's an 1842 musket with what looks like an 1855 type bayonet(as apposed to the1840 type). Do I get extra points?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Here is a softball.
Softball #2.
Are you smarter than a fifth grader? Bad part is with my old eyes this photo is not far off my actual sight picture.
Is softball #1 a Jungle Carbine?
I'll jump in I guess. Heres one for ya...
Mdrim13
Russian M44 MosinQuote:
Originally Posted by HOOKED ON HISTORY
mdrim13
Now that one has me stumped. Very too round on top. Oh, wait, stupid white photo control bar is concealing the ejection port area (???). Hmmm. ETA: (Ach, I think I got it! That one is definitely "fringe-y".)Quote:
Originally Posted by mdrim13
But two of HOOKED ON HISTORY's Mystery Sights have yet to be correctly ID'd.
Sorry to have been away all this length of time. Took a day off. Went to the range. Computer dramas. Couldn't find some tooling. Yada-yada.
Oy, gsimmons, that's the bayonet I have. It fits. Another fellow thought it was OK, and noted that it was a fairly scarce item. Wouldn't an 1855 be too small? (That's one rifled musket I don't have.) But otherwise, yes, it's an 1842 musket. Last of the US military smoothbores and the first "primary issue" percussion system weapon.
Some links:
US Model of 1842 Musket (A Photo Study in Several Parts)
New and Old: Knight's SR15-E3 IWS and U.S. Model of 1842
JM,
They made the 1855 "style" blade to fit the .69 calibre muskets that were being made and converted in the 1850's. It is absolutely correct for that musket. The older style bayonet was used with the model 1840 flintlock musket(most were converted to percussion) and the early 1842's.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ah, thanks! My few books on these early weapons are not hugely detailed, and are known to be "dated" (i.e. full of errors). If you would care to comment in the photo thread linked above (rather than the range report), I think readers would benefit from your knowledge!Quote:
Originally Posted by gsimmons
As you had not previously viewed the thread (hence your eligibility to answer!) you will find that the lock is dated 1851. So a slightly later bayonet doesn't hurt my feelings at all! Just happy to have one. Have yet to get a bayonet for my late 1816 type flintlock.
On to the next mystery!:
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...stuff058-1.jpg
Mystery Sight P#30
P#30 looks like a Berthier.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
OK, but details! There's clues.Quote:
Originally Posted by gsimmons
Don't forget HOOKED ON HISTORY's two unsolved photos. One of which has me guessing, but it may be due to the photo rather than the rifle type.
Model 1892 Carbine?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You are correct. In spite of my poor photography.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Strangelove
Yes, indeed! The sling ring poking out to the side is a major identifier. It could have been one of the newer Carbines (Mle 1916), but it's snot. Still has it's old barrel (1892 marked under the handguard at any rate) even though it's been upgraded as far as it can and still retain the barrel.Quote:
Originally Posted by gsimmons
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...stuff024-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...stuff030-1.jpg
Happy, happy, joy, joy!:cheers:
Shot it for the first time yesterday. Will have it in bigduke6's competition shortly. (See the Range Report Forum for more.)
Softball #2 is indeed a M44.Quote:
Originally Posted by mdrim13
I like this game.
Good idea for a thread.
Nice carbine JM! Hope it shoots well!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This one is easy.Quote:
Originally Posted by mdrim13
One fine looking rifle of some kind. Beautiful bluing.
A No.5?Quote:
Originally Posted by HOOKED ON HISTORY
Well, then I guessed wrong! I thought No.4 rifle.
Dr. strangelove got it.Quote:
Originally Posted by jmoore
I thought my third photo would be easy. Perhaps not.
Hope you get more players this is quite entertaning.
54 readers so far. Some haven't been on in while, some seem to check in regularly. Well, I don't mind admitting that y'all's photos have been a challenge to the old brainpan.. I hope I've been educational as well!Quote:
Originally Posted by HOOKED ON HISTORY
So far, this is the only "unsolved" mystery:
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...2b751971-1.jpg
mdrim's Mystery Sight P#26
ETA: Oh, and H O H's last photo in Post #24. Which is Mil"like" rather than Milsurp. That's the clue I'll give. The rest is in HOOKED ON HISTORY's court.
Judging by the size of the bolt, I'd say it's a .22. Couldn't tell you what type though!
It is actually a very bubba'ed gun. It's black paint that your seeing and it also has a horrible "custom" stock that is not original. I entered it because the sight picture is still the same as original and has not changed in any way. Any more guesses on it? It's not too obscure but something not everyone has.Quote:
Originally Posted by HOOKED ON HISTORY
Mdrim13
More optics:
Same design, different magnifications and applications. All but one are common military issue types.
Sorry for the fuzzy photos, the optics are actually quite good.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...uff01921-1.jpg
M. S. P#44A
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...uff02611-1.jpg
P#44B at 100yds. 25yd timed and rapid fire pistol target w/ 3/4" black dots scattered about the bull
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...uff01122-1.jpg
P#44C at 200yds Standard SR center
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...tuff0183-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...orestuff-1.jpg
P#44D at 200yds
See if you know for what application each unit is intended.
P#44C&D look like ACOG reticles intended for NATO 5.56x45.
ACOG, yes. And P#44D is for 5,56, yes. Now you have to decide the application!Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Strangelove
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdrim13
I didnt think this was going to be that difficult for some of the more experienced guys here, but maybe there are not that many people looking?
BTW one person did guess the sight picture pretty quick. It was jmoore via PM though, not on the thread for all to see.
mdrim13
Only 62 different readers to date, and not all of those have been on recently. (Can't tell details right now, as the little "last visited on" balloon doesn't want to pop up.) Some folk are afraid of being wrong.
Maybe you can give another suble hint or two. Like a photo of the back of the action showing the cocking piece and bolt handle. If that doesn't do it, then you've "stumped the chumps" in NPR's "Car Talk" parlance.
I figured the ACOG photos would be tough, but I'm running out of "file" photographs of old sights! Too busy to get new ones for a while. Maybe onesies and twoies.
JM you're probably right. I'm not afraid of being wrong( just ask my wife), I just don't know scopes. I don't use them. I mostly shoot Civil War stuff. Great thread I like it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
OK, then! I'll try and round up a few for you. Might be "pre-" and "post-" stuff mixed in. And mebbe a "furrin'" item or two, also.Quote:
Originally Posted by gsimmons
NORINCO JW25 mauser look-a-like?Quote:
Originally Posted by mdrim13
The Norincos have tangent rather than ladder rear sights. But you are correct in guessing it's not a "full size" action.Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Lancer
You are also on the right track in that it's not really "military" issue for combat in wartime. But neither was it made primarily for civilian sales...
One last clue, disregard the "shine". It's been reblued.
Spanish Destroyer Carbine.
Yay! Yup, the rifle in post #26 and repeated in #41 is indeed a Destroyer.Quote:
Originally Posted by green
Its been repainted...I wish it was reblued.Quote:
Originally Posted by jmoore
mdrim13
How about another scope?
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...tuff0122-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...uff00611-1.jpg
MSP#56
I'm gonna take a wild stab in the dark and say a scope for a Garand? I know the Garand snipers had (well, some of them at least) offset scopes..
Arisaka T99 sniper. Did softball #3 get solved?
I do not believe so. Any ideas?Quote:
Originally Posted by vintage hunter
Quote:
Originally Posted by vintage hunter
Quote:
Originally Posted by HOOKED ON HISTORY
From a previous post:"Oh, and H O H's last photo in Post #24. (Softball #3) Which is Mil"like" rather than Milsurp. That's the clue I'll give. The rest is in HOOKED ON HISTORY's court. "
And MSP #56 has not been solved either.
Ooops. The answer to MSP #56 should have read Arisaka T97 sniper, not T99. Softball #3 is one of the Ruger Mini variants, yes?
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...stuff013-1.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by vintage hunter
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...stuff011-1.jpg
Thank goodness for the long horizontal line in the scope's sight picture! All too easy to cant the rifle otherwise. Not how little "off square" the front sight appears.
Yes to both! But extra credit for "softball" #3! I don't know if it's an old GB or a one of the "improved" new Rugers. HOH didn't let me know.
I guess softball #3 was a bit of a trick not being a Milsurp. It is indeed a 181 series Ruger GB in stainless steel. Wonderful concept with the Garand type action 100% reliable although the accuracy is marginal due to the pencil thin barrel. I think this has been addressed in the current production. Its a shame the concept did not find a militaty application.Quote:
Originally Posted by jmoore
I had it pegged as a Ruger Mini early on but held off for a bit trying to sort the variant, had pretty much settled on GB or Tactical. The Remington 742 style direct impingement gas system has lots of negative effects on accuracy as well. Been a while since I owned one but, IIRC the only guide for the op rod is the ridges in the forearm liner. Nice little rifles none the less, keep thinking I'd like another Mini 30.
http://www.accuracysystemsinc.com/index.phpQuote:
Originally Posted by vintage hunter
These folks do some interesting things to minis. Have considered it but a bit pricey.
Yep. They used to be right here in S.C. not too far from me. Edgefield maybe, don't remember now.
Looks like no range trip this week. And the memory card for the camera is off being selectively downloaded so some images can go to Badger and Claven2. Soooo...
Looks like I'll have to dig through the old files a bit. Maybe another scope reticle photo or two left.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...tuff0051-1.jpg
MSP #67a
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...stuff003-1.jpg
MSP #67b
MSP #67a : Mosin Nagant M1891
MSP #67b : Russian PU scope ?
MSP 67a =GEW 88?
No idea on 67b.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That is correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by vintage hunter
That front sight in MSP #67a is about as far off to the side as it can go huh?
mdrim13
Guess it's my turn now.
Vintage Hunter, MAS 49/56?
Do not shoot the oven!Quote:
Originally Posted by vintage hunter
onlycrimson you are correct, MAS 49/56.
H.O.H, no worries, no ovens were harmed while filming this sight picture.
What is up with the tease at the top of the photo. Lets see more.Quote:
Originally Posted by vintage hunter
You mean these old things? Nothing special, just a few stray pups that've followed me home over the years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vintage hunter
In actual fact, #67b is not a PU. And not a reproduction. The down side is that I don't have a real bracket/ mount for it either.Quote:
Originally Posted by mdrim13
Sorry for being away so long, between moving equipment, tooling, and storage stuff plus the Easter holiday, not much computer time since last Wednesday. The new place doesn't even have internet, yet.
Not a PU. Ok, time for plan B. It's a PEM.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vintage hunter
Quote:
Originally Posted by vintage hunter
Good guess!
BTW, the 1891's front sight was staked in that position. By the Finns after counterboring, I guess.
You have obviously snapped up everything on the east coast perhaps there are a few left around here. Very nice collection. Thanks for the pictures. More inspiration to fill the many holes in my small collection.
Here's another one. It's not American
Attachment 32949
That's a Mk.1 Long Lee Enfield!
Nope! But kinda close!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Its definitly an Enfield though. Its got the cartridge cutoff.
mdrim13
Lee Metford.
Yes it's an Enfield. Not a Metford.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Anymore guesses on what model? You're getting warmer.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Lee Enfield Cavalry Carbine MKI*? NZ?
Close
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Not an MLE.
---------- Post added at 07:38 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:34 AM ----------
What I meant was, don't tell me it's an MLE!
I reckon it could be.
Anymore guesses? It is an enfield, you've almost got it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
:surrender::confused:
It's an RIC carbine. Almost the same as the NZ carbine.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Close but no cigar.
What is the chance of a couple of pictures gsimmons.
Cheers
Will do, this weekend.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Here's pictures of the RIC carbineAttachment 33094Attachment 33095Attachment 33096Attachment 33097Attachment 33098
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk