anyone ever heard this statement??

[gew8805]

5th And 6th Marines Issued 1903 Springfields

True, the Marines were armed with the '03 but maybe (and that's a BIG maybe) one in twenty or maybe fewer were capable of hitting a man-sized target at 700 yards without a scope. And it wasn't a consistent capability at that but legends die hard. No offense to the USMC, probably the finest fighting outfit anywhere.

[Pelago]

After being sidelined in the deliberations leading up to the Gew.88 commission rifle, the following ten years of development meant that the Mauser bolt action as presented in the Gew.98 can be considered to be the paradigm bolt action, period. Springfield '03 and P14/M1917 actions are based on it.

And the majority of US troop in WW1 were armed with the M1917, as Springfield had totally failed to get its act together as far as production was concerned. Not that Hollywood or US mythology (they're roughly equivalent) goes along with that, but the statistics tell the story (see C.S. Ferris "United States Rifle Model of 1917").

As a shooter I am concerned with accuracy, not rate of fire. And there, BDMP competition results shows that the order for bolt-action rifles is: Springfield 1903-A3, M1917, Enfield No4 (i.e. all those rifle types with peep sights) followed by Swedish Mauser (superb inherent accuracy, but no peep sight) and then the rest. The Enfield No 4 is the only action in the top league that is not Mauser or Mauser-derived.

The trouble with Mausers is the amazing conservatism of the sighting, which means that I have actually fitted a foresight blade intended for a K98k to an M1871. No smithing, no problem. But no progress in sighting over 80 years!

Patrick

maybe so, however the battle history of the 6th and th Marine Regiment included rifles and the 1903 was the issued rifle for the 5th and 6th Regt

[Pelago]

True, the Marines were armed with the '03 but maybe (and that's a BIG maybe) one in twenty or maybe fewer were capable of hitting a man-sized target at 700 yards without a scope. And it wasn't a consistent capability at that but legends die hard. No offense to the USMC, probably the finest fighting outfit anywhere.

the Germans were rather put off that the insolent Marines could actually kill their troops at 700 yards

[Thunderbox]

The other quote about Enfields that you cannot duck is the one about the Germans on the Marne (sometimes another location is cited) "thinking they were facing machine guns," when in fact it was just Tommy and his SMLE. I don't doubt this is true, but must we read about it in every single reference to the SMLE that gets printed? I'm also curious about the earliest appearance of this quote, but I know this one is early. It is mentioned in a BSA publication in 1919, but it could have appeared much earlier.

It is a real quote, from a German officer. I have the full quote here somewhere in my library, but can't find it. I expect it was from Captain Walter Bloem (later a famous novelist) who wrote a detailed account of the start of the war called "Advance from Mons". His unit, the 12th Brandenburg Grenadiers, were one of the eight German battalions that opened the assault on the British at Mons. Because they initially attacked in close formation, they were shot to pieces by British rifle fire - the Germans actually suffering a defeat in the opening battle. The Germans changed their infantry formation and eventually overwhelmed the British by sheer weight of numbers, forcing them to begin the infamous "retreat from Mons".

[gew8805]

the Germans were rather put off that the insolent Marines could actually kill their troops at 700 yards

I understand, even if only 2 or 3 of my people were killed at that range by rifle fire, I would be..... concerned. And then would tell them to get down and quit walking around in plain sight of the enemy. And then I would have my machineguns unload a belt or two on the offending parties.

[jmoore]

The Marines have long overcome great handicaps in their equipment w/ superior training and general hard headedness!

If you note the pictures of WWII Marine snipers using 8x Unertl scopes on their M1903's, those tubes are invariably rather farther forward than they "ought" to be. In fact, the end of the tube was just forward of the bolt handle. This wasn't an oversight in forgetting to return the scope to its full rearward position, but rather a field expedient for working the bolt w/o crashing the tube. They accepted the even smaller (!!) field of view so that they could more quickly knock off the enemy. It took a while to figure this one out, but it surely works!

[bearhunter]

At 700 yards, they were darned unlucky Germans. IMHO of course.

[Jc5]

So can anyone explain what is meant by "the Germans had the best hunting rifle"? The target/hunting/battle rifle quote is repeated so often, I would guess that most people understand what it means, but I'd be grateful for someone to explain it.

Also, any idea when this comparison first appeared?

[Thunderbox]

So can anyone explain what is meant by "the Germans had the best hunting rifle"? The target/hunting/battle rifle quote is repeated so often, I would guess that most people understand what it means, but I'd be grateful for someone to explain it.

Also, any idea when this comparison first appeared?

Its just a reference to the characteristics of those early 20th century rifles:

The Mauser has a slow clunky action, but its massive receiver ring and front locking made it an easy choice to adapt for most calibres of big-game hunting rifles. To a certain extent that still hold true today.

The Springfield '03 - although another Mauser action - had an elaborate rearsight adjustable for windage, etc. US rifles also came equipped with the fancy 1907 sling that lent itself to various types of target shooting position.

The No1 Enfield shoots twice as fast as a Mauser (it was tested under trial conditions), it has the ten round magazine and the simple rear-locking bolt design is far more resistance to mud and other fouling compared to the shrouded lugs in the Mauser action.


The expression appears to date from the 1920s - probably because the pre-WW1 critics of the Lee Enfield had been firmly silenced after its outstanding performance as a battle rifle.

[breakeyp]

The quote has been attributed to and appears in Roy Dunlap's, "Ordnance went up Front", If I remember correctly. The book details his activities as an ordnance sergeant in WWII.