[westpointranger]

^^^

Please explain why you think so.

 

[Kamatz]

Ah, an interesting topic.

I know I like the No.4 Mk1 (T) better than any of the other rifles (although I really wish I could own one of each....). But, "best" is a bit strong.

The fact that the Mosin-Nagant was rugged and worked no matter how much snow you shoved into the action...and there were plenty of them.

Then again, I have a "thing" for the M98 action. I have a Mauser from the original Mauser factory. It's built in 1941, rechambered for .30-06 in the mid 1950's...and it's still in perfect condition. Says a lot about German engineering...

Meh....I dunno. I'll vote Lee-Enfield simply because it's the WW2 rifle I want the most.

 

[Kiwi]

My vote is for the No 4 Mk1 T....a great rifle.

I drooled over one at our local gun show about 5 months ago....
it was unfired absolutly mint condition and in it's original crate.
The rifle was a Longbranch sent to England for scope etc. and shipped to NZ for the army but never used.

Q#1, What would that fetch in Europe, the UK or the US ofA?

Q#2, would you shoot it if it was yours....even only once??
:?

 

[mele]

The one I like the most is the no4mk1(T). But I will admit it is probably not the best.

I noticed the M1903A1 10x Unertl (USMC) is not listed, that one I would rank at the top of the group, I think it was better than the A4 model.

If I had to vote for a "best" in the list, I would probably go with the nagant. It was a super field rugged rifle, and amazingly enough, very accurate. All things considered, it made a great "system" and proved itself well.

To answer Kiwi's questions
1) Hard to say for an unfired version. Could almost ask what ever you wanted. A good complete no4mk1(t) with full kit is probably $2500-$4000. An unfired might bring an extra $1000 USD.
2) If it was unfired, no, I wouldn't fire it. If it had just one round fired through it, yes, I would fire it!! BTW, I would buy an unfired one. I buy rifles, even collectible ones, to shoot.

MEL

 

[6.5shooter]

I voted for the 98 mauser. I did this because its a rifle i know i can rely on, as i have 2 of them, and nothing has EVER gone wrong with either of them. I do like the 1903's but i have to go with the good old mauser action.

 

[Yimmy]

re

The 1903 is a mauser action isn't it?

 

[Jeff_850]

Re: re

as for the best i chose the Mauser K98
i have friends who have them (still) and yep they are shooting great after all this time!!!
they reload them now and a few of them are doing quite nicely as hunting and even precision rifles

The 1903 is a mauser action isn't it?

yep

 

[K2]

The No 4 Mk1 T is super rugged, acceptably accurate (by WWII standards) and is chambered for a cartridge of adequate power. With a larger magazine capacity, it is also capable of greater firepower than the Mauser or 1903 although that may not come into play in a strictly sniper role. Mostly, it's the rugged aspect that I admire the most. The 1903 is fragile by comparison and the Mauser is a little unwieldy next to the No 4. The other contenders listed all have some positive things going for them, but the No 4 is the best overall compromise IMHO.

K2

 

[westpointranger]

I noticed the M1903A1 10x Unertl (USMC) is not listed, that one I would rank at the top of the group, I think it was better than the A4 model.

Oops ! Sorry guys. Just pretend like I said 1903A1 :wink: .

I went for the 03A4...er...03A1 :wink: . German designed, American built, and chambered for the good 'ol 30-06. Ya just can't beet that!

 

[Yimmy]

re

You are also forgetting the old 7.7mm Type 99 Arisaka sniper rifle.

 

[westpointranger]

You are also forgetting the old 7.7mm Type 99 Arisaka sniper rifle.

Would anybody vote for it? I owned a Type 99 before and frankly was unimpressed.

 

[Kamatz]

Q#1, What would that fetch in Europe, the UK or the US ofA?

Q#2, would you shoot it if it was yours....even only once??
:?

1) A bloody fortune from me, at least. Well, I'd fork out $2500-3000...but not much more than that, I think

2) I'm afraid so. To me, a weapon is an item to be enjoyed in every possible way. Sure, unfired it's probably a very valuable collectors item. But to me, a weapon I cannot fire is simply a useless thingy to hang on my wall. For that I could buy a cheap knock-off...

But, I wouldn't shoot hundreds of rounds through it.

 

[muzzleblast]

I'll go with the K98, great action, reputation for accuracy, and not all that delicate either. Mine 98 k is not a sniper rifle but the accuracy is a lot better than a lot of surplus rifles.

A match accurate M1 Garand would be best of all, if the optics on them were better. In my opinion, that was the only thing holding them back.

In Canada, I think that Enfield would go for 1500 at least, but no more than 2000

 

[Jeff_850]

shot an M1 Garand sniper rifle, not origional but it was very convincing
just the damn scope was teh same... couldnt simply make the scope a lil nicer?
that 2.5x just doesnt cut it for a sniepr scope
atleast it has backup irons which are fine
the rifle was a shooter but it doesnt count its a replica made today not an origional

 

[Zaitsev]

I have to go with the 1903 and i do agree with mel the A1 was better(with the Unertl 10(USMC)). I am a big fan of an 06 and a remington man(sniper conversion done by remington). Only bad thing about the spingfield A1 is there was no front sight, so you bust the scope your screwed(dont get my remington took it off).

And i want to disagree that the 03 action is a mauser. What i was told by a few gunsmiths was that is an action that is based on a mauser action.

Just my $0.02

 

[westpointranger]

The 03 action was designed by tha Mauser company.

 

[muzzleblast]

I'd read that when the Mausers found out about the 1903 they took it to court and were awarded a dollar for every Springfield produced...

Sorry about my last post, that Enflield would be worth at least $2,000...Yep, I think I'd shoot it...I'm dumb like that.

Speaking of "our mausers" its too bad there was no ww2 P17 Enfield sniper rifle. Or a P14 for us.

 

[westpointranger]

I'd read that when the Mausers found out about the 1903 they took it to court and were awarded a dollar for every Springfield produced...

The way understand it, Mauser sold the rights of the 03 to Springfeild for several million dollars.

Speaking of "our mausers" its too bad there was no ww2 P17 Enfield sniper rifle. Or a P14 for us.

I don't think the 17 Enfeilds were as good as the 03

 

[muzzleblast]

Could be they sold the rights too, you're right about them making millions off the Springfields either way...The mausers sure cashed in on that one!

I was pretty sure a p17 Enfield was just as accurate as a Springfield...The Springfield is a handier rifle though...The P17 had better iron sights IMHO. A lot of P14s in .303 Brit were sniper rifles in WW1 but I don't think there was much long range shooting done there...someone could correct me on that though lol.

 

[Max338]

from what i heard, since the mexicans were using mausers in the Mexican/American war, the US govt commisioned springfield armory to make a rifle similar, well it ended up being so similar that mauser sued for patent infringment(sp?) and won. so SA was forced to pay $100,000 (or some amount) to mauser as compensation.
can anyone confirm

Max