1941 USMC clone?

[DVSride]

[highpower]

An 1903-A1 is nothing more than a standard '03 with a "C" stock. If you are looking for something with a better scope than an 'A4, then you could probably do a copy of a Marine sniper rifle with a Unertl scope. Be prepared to shell out some big bucks for the scope and mounts though.

[DVSride]

An 1903-A1 is nothing more than a standard '03 with a "C" stock. If you are looking for something with a better scope than an 'A4, then you could probably do a copy of a Marine sniper rifle with a Unertl scope. Be prepared to shell out some big bucks for the scope and mounts though.

Hey Highpower, I got my info mixed up. I meant to say looking for a 1941 USMC clone to use for the matches. I heard that James River Armory and Creedmore Sports use to make them but see that Creedmoore just makes the 1903a4 currently. I prefer the 1941 due to the larger scope which I know will got more $$$. Any recommendations to who makes the 1941 clone?

[highpower]

Hey Highpower, I got my info mixed up. I meant to say looking for a 1941 USMC clone to use for the matches. I heard that James River Armory and Creedmore Sports use to make them but see that Creedmoore just makes the 1903a4 currently. I prefer the 1941 due to the larger scope which I know will got more $$$. Any recommendations to who makes the 1941 clone?

No clue as who makes a clone. If I wanted one, I would just build it myself.

[Discogodfather]

Gibbs made the most of the reproductions out there and they used drill rifles which many don't like, but there are many out there and I shot one once and it seemed good.

There were a few different scopes used:

1) M84 (this one is awful)
2) Weaver 2.5x 330C (Pretty bad)
3) Unertl (both 5x and later 8x- very good scopes)

Hi-Lux sells the Malcolm 8x which I think is a copy of the Unertl. You could get a custom shop to make one for you using that scope. Would be a great rifle for competition. The originals are too valuable to shoot these days. James River will do the job but there are many others out there.

I'd say not wasting time on the other optics is a good idea.

[dfletcher]

^
The Malcolm scopes made by Leatherwood have excellent optics but I keep reading (including here) about lousy mounts and screws, inconsistent adjustments and poor overall quality. There are lesser brands than Unertl, such as Litschert, that would do better than the current repro. Albeit with 60 year old optics.

[Mustang]

My saga with regards to creating a 1903A1...

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=1463042

To my knowledge, no one is building these faux 1903A1 USMC sniper rifles anymore. As I recall, James River was selling them a few years back using the HiLux faux Unertl 8x scope. I believe that James River was charging about $2200 for them when they stopped selling them.

I used Chuck Moline (ChuckinDenver) at Warpath Vintage to put the bits together. He has a sterling reputation when it comes to working on 1903's and seems to specialize in building the USMC sniper rifles. He advised on what parts to replace on the HiLux scope to enhance the usability of the scope. Even with his advice, I still had issues with the scope and it is currently at Hilux having warranty work done.

Including the work that Chuck did, the RI 1903 that I used, the Hilux reproduction scope (the most expensive single component) and the various additional parts needed, I'm in at about one half of what James River last sold their repro USMC rifle for.

The final chapter of my saga is yet to be written, but I will update as it is finished.

[DVSride]

Gibbs made the most of the reproductions out there and they used drill rifles which many don't like, but there are many out there and I shot one once and it seemed good.

There were a few different scopes used:

1) M84 (this one is awful)
2) Weaver 2.5x 330C (Pretty bad)
3) Unertl (both 5x and later 8x- very good scopes)

Hi-Lux sells the Malcolm 8x which I think is a copy of the Unertl. You could get a custom shop to make one for you using that scope. Would be a great rifle for competition. The originals are too valuable to shoot these days. James River will do the job but there are many others out there.

I'd say not wasting time on the other optics is a good idea.

^
The Malcolm scopes made by Leatherwood have excellent optics but I keep reading (including here) about lousy mounts and screws, inconsistent adjustments and poor overall quality. There are lesser brands than Unertl, such as Litschert, that would do better than the current repro. Albeit with 60 year old optics.

Sounds good; I appreciate the info

[DVSride]

My saga with regards to creating a 1903A1...

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=1463042

To my knowledge, no one is building these faux 1903A1 USMC sniper rifles anymore. As I recall, James River was selling them a few years back using the HiLux faux Unertl 8x scope. I believe that James River was charging about $2200 for them when they stopped selling them.

I used Chuck Moline (ChuckinDenver) at Warpath Vintage to put the bits together. He has a sterling reputation when it comes to working on 1903's and seems to specialize in building the USMC sniper rifles. He advised on what parts to replace on the HiLux scope to enhance the usability of the scope. Even with his advise, I still had issues with the scope and it is currently at Hilux having warranty work done.

Including the work that Chuck did, the RI 1903 that I used, the Hilux reproduction scope (the most expensive single component) and the various additional parts needed, I'm in at about one half of what James River last sold their repro USMC rifle for.

The final chapter of my saga is yet to be written, but I will update as it is finished.

[Discogodfather]

My saga with regards to creating a 1903A1...

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=1463042

To my knowledge, no one is building these faux 1903A1 USMC sniper rifles anymore. As I recall, James River was selling them a few years back using the HiLux faux Unertl 8x scope. I believe that James River was charging about $2200 for them when they stopped selling them.

I used Chuck Moline (ChuckinDenver) at Warpath Vintage to put the bits together. He has a sterling reputation when it comes to working on 1903's and seems to specialize in building the USMC sniper rifles. He advised on what parts to replace on the HiLux scope to enhance the usability of the scope. Even with his advise, I still had issues with the scope and it is currently at Hilux having warranty work done.

Including the work that Chuck did, the RI 1903 that I used, the Hilux reproduction scope (the most expensive single component) and the various additional parts needed, I'm in at about one half of what James River last sold their repro USMC rifle for.

The final chapter of my saga is yet to be written, but I will update as it is finished.

Yeah, I think the only real option is to go with someone who does custom work you can trust.

The repro scopes are definitely not up to the originals, but my experience is that even the originals were not what we would call GTG today. Any scope that isn't nitrogen sealed and has an internal erector is pretty ancient, and you can see why they went away from these designs. The old scopes were intended to be field rebuilt even, with things breaking and coming loose all the time. When I rebuilt my M84 it was comical how simple everything was in there- ever element held in place with some ring and a little goopy thick oil, etc. They were designed to be easier to take apart. But with that comes the special tools they set up for the scopes (the US Military had so many) for collimation and service.

The modern stuff requires a clean room to dissemble and tons of insane special machines to work on.

I've had to tweak every single vintage scope I owned over the years. Never had the Unertl but I did have an older 3x Winchester version of it years ago. They all require you to travel with tools!

It's worth it though, you can definitely make it work considering the cost of the real thing:

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/780030019

[gibbet]

As a satisfied customer, i too recomend chuck. The experience he has vastly outpaces other smiths and his reputation speaks for itself. I would trust him for servicing these rifles as well as complete builds.

One improvement he wanted to perform was to silver solder the steve earle blocks if you plan on using it as a shooter. Chuck states the blocks will come lose if its not done, so keep this in mind. I chose to keep my m1941 as a shooter rather than a museum piece and i greatly appreciated his input when he serviced my rifle.

Its amazing how much these rifles have gone up in price, esp the optics, best wishes on your project.

[Mustang]

Yeah, I think the only real option is to go with someone who does custom work you can trust.

The repro scopes are definitely not up to the originals, but my experience is that even the originals were not what we would call GTG today. Any scope that isn't nitrogen sealed and has an internal erector is pretty ancient, and you can see why they went away from these designs. The old scopes were intended to be field rebuilt even, with things breaking and coming loose all the time. When I rebuilt my M84 it was comical how simple everything was in there- ever element held in place with some ring and a little goopy thick oil, etc. They were designed to be easier to take apart. But with that comes the special tools they set up for the scopes (the US Military had so many) for collimation and service.

The modern stuff requires a clean room to dissemble and tons of insane special machines to work on.

I've had to tweak every single vintage scope I owned over the years. Never had the Unertl but I did have an older 3x Winchester version of it years ago. They all require you to travel with tools!

It's worth it though, you can definitely make it work considering the cost of the real thing:

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/780030019

I've got several Fecker, Lyman and Litschert external adjustable scopes. Several of them do not have power markings on them. Anyone know how to determine the power in the absence of such markings?

[Discogodfather]

I've got several Fecker, Lyman and Litschert external adjustable scopes. Several of them do not have power markings on them. Anyone know how to determine the power in the absence of such markings?

Ah yes, I had the same problem on a zoom scope years ago.

1) Determine what the minimum distance is for focus. On these old scopes 50 feet is usually the best you can do, but it it's shorter that's fine.

2) Put the optic up on something to hold it semi securely.

3) Take a tape measure or yard stick and put it at 50 feet or wherever the minimum distance is to focus and make sure it's on the smallest magnification.

4) Look through the scope then look from the side of the scope down at the measuring stick. The difference in it's size should be apparent and this is your minimum magnification. It's a bit of a guess but just compare the two images, one from your eye and one through the scope.

5) Next zoom in on the yard stick all the way. It helps if the stick or tape takes up the field of view. If say we started with a 48" field of view and ended with a 24" field of view, then we know the zoom ratio is 1:2, or 2x. If we went from 48" to 16", then we know it's 1:3, or 3x.

6) So if we take out first guesstimate on the minimum power, let's say it's 1.5x, then we take our second measurement, which let's say was 3x, then we know we have a 1.5x-3.5x scope.

7) If we then want to graduate magnifications and mark the tube, again look at the yard stick. As we zoom from min to max, let's say in this case the measure looks like 48" to 16", then we can calculate when the scope is at specific powers. If 48" is at 1.5x and 16" is at 3.5x, then 2.5x is where the FOV in the scope will show the yard stick at 32".

[Mustang]

Hmmm...will this work on a fixed power scope? If so, I wonder if the CMP would accept this method for determining the actual power of an unmarked scope.

[Discogodfather]

Hmmm...will this work on a fixed power scope? If so, I wonder if the CMP would accept this method for determining the actual power of an unmarked scope.

Ah, other than naked eye comparison of an object, switching back and forth, there is no real easy way. I know this method, which is a very complex and more precise version of what I outlined above:

http://precisionrifleblog.com/2014/06/30/how-to-measure-the-apparent-magnification-of-a-scope/

If you could figure out how thick your reticle is at 100, you could do a mathematical comparison of the pixels a given measurement in a photo. It's hard, I usually just estimate. It's easier with these old scopes because they all fall between 1-4x for the most part.