Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Sounds plausible


Recommended Posts

You ever hear about something that sounds plausible but you cannot find any corroborating evidence to verify it?

 

A few years ago, a very knowledgeable Mauser rifle collector told me that the width of the front sight on the 1903 Springfield (and I assume the Mauser) was approximately the width of a normal person at a distance of 300 yards (I think) so that the front sight could be used as a rudimentary range finder. 

 

I searched and searched for any information to back up his statement but so far - zilch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I seem to recall someone saying something like that but the range was 100 yards and it was in regards to 1903 & 1917 rifles. I think…

Maybe it was Garands too…

 

I’ll be in a rabbit hole if you need me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay…

Found this:

The reason being, is the average front sight of the Garand is .076. Using the 19 inch e-target, the front sight is the same size as the target at 250 yards ( 19/.076 = 250) making the front sight relation to the target as a Range Finder, since a 

man's average shoulder width is 19 inches.

 

Here:https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/m1-garand-best-sights-ever-put-on-a-military-rifle.6559453/

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I will have to measure the thickness of the '03 front sight to see if it matches the Garand. 

 

I will admit that I never searched for this information as relating to a Garand.

 

I have a good write up of the rear sight of the '03 Springfield. As shown in the picture and table below, the rear sight notch in the lowest position is calibrated for 400 - 530 yards. To get below that, you have to raise the ladder and use the peep sight.

 

image.png.8e208742a6e500a2d6c7dea36e513fb5.png

image.thumb.png.6d65a18dae60293e3e7378edf7b9580d.png

 

After learning this, I (and others) were hitting clay pigeons at 100 yards.

 

(As an aside, I remember watching a History Channel marksman competition a few years ago and none of the participants could hit the 100 yd target with the '03 Springfield!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

everything i ever heard was regarding the backslights , but then i sold all of my M1903-A1,-A3 ,A4s a long while back and gave away my library of reference with them , ido recall that 300/600 was the normal ranges most battle rifles were set up for , it would seem that your premise ,might obfuscate the longer range abilities 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the subject of "that makes sense but does anyone really know", we went into Cuba with the Krag. The Mauser the Spanish were using was a much better rifle. So much better, in fact, that after the war we started using our own Mauser rifle - the 1903 Springfield.

 

That much is true.

 

We went to herr Mauser and negotiated a deal where we paid him so much per rifle royalty for using his design.

 

We just jumped in and started making our own version, because we're the United States and by damn we can do whatever the hell we want to, and Mauser took us to the world court and sued us, and won, and that is why we paid him a royalty.

 

Two explanations that have the United States paying a royalty to mauserwerk for the use of their design. Both of these explanations actually make sense. And I have heard them stated by many different people over the years. But I do not know if either is correct, and if one is, which one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, watab kid said:

everything i ever heard was regarding the backslights , but then i sold all of my M1903-A1,-A3 ,A4s a long while back and gave away my library of reference with them , ido recall that 300/600 was the normal ranges most battle rifles were set up for , it would seem that your premise ,might obfuscate the longer range abilities 

Obfuscate?  You been watching educational TV programs again, ain'tcha? :P

 

I was an English teacher in one of my earlier iterations (Hey, if you can use big words so can I....so there!) and I had to look that one up.  :o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Injun Ryder, SASS #36201L said:

I guess I will have to measure the thickness of the '03 front sight to see if it matches the Garand. 

 

I will admit that I never searched for this information as relating to a Garand.

 

I have a good write up of the rear sight of the '03 Springfield. As shown in the picture and table below, the rear sight notch in the lowest position is calibrated for 400 - 530 yards. To get below that, you have to raise the ladder and use the peep sight.

 

image.png.8e208742a6e500a2d6c7dea36e513fb5.png

image.thumb.png.6d65a18dae60293e3e7378edf7b9580d.png

 

After learning this, I (and others) were hitting clay pigeons at 100 yards.

 

(As an aside, I remember watching a History Channel marksman competition a few years ago and none of the participants could hit the 100 yd target with the '03 Springfield!)

 

In the Pacific theater the USMC replaced the front sight on the M1903 with one that was shorter taller and wider. It changed the battle sight notch to a 200 yard zero. They did this because island fighting was at much closer ranges than those encountered in the European theater.

 

I have one installed on my M1903 as it is a lot easier to see.

 

I'll have to measure mine and see how it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Sedalia Dave said:

 

In the Pacific theater the USMC replaced the front sight on the M1903 with one that was shorter taller and wider. It changed the battle sight notch to a 200 yard zero. They did this because island fighting was at much closer ranges than those encountered in the European theater.

 

I have one installed on my M1903 as it is a lot easier to see.

 

I'll have to measure mine and see how it is.

 

Just measured it and it is .1015 wide.  19 / .1015 = 187

 

My day is complete I learned something useful :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Sedalia Dave said:

 

In the Pacific theater the USMC replaced the front sight on the M1903 with one that was shorter and wider. It changed the battle sight notch to a 200 yard zero. They did this because island fighting was at much closer ranges than those encountered in the European theater.

 

I have one installed on my M1903 as it is a lot easier to see.

 

I'll have to measure mine and see how it is.

I believe the USMC front sights were taller not shorter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Pat Riot, SASS #13748 said:

Okay…

Found this:

The reason being, is the average front sight of the Garand is .076. Using the 19 inch e-target, the front sight is the same size as the target at 250 yards ( 19/.076 = 250) making the front sight relation to the target as a Range Finder, since a 

man's average shoulder width is 19 inches.

 

Here:https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/m1-garand-best-sights-ever-put-on-a-military-rifle.6559453/

 

 

 

 

So if my shoulders are 25 inches across...does that mean they'd be aiming under me or over me? :blink: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Noah Mercy, SASS #29066 said:

 

So if my shoulders are 25 inches across...does that mean they'd be aiming under me or over me? :blink: 

Well, I guess we’re gonna have to have you run out a ways and then we’ll test it… :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Cowtown Scout, SASS #53540 L said:

I believe the USMC front sights were taller not shorter.

 

Yep my mistake. Should have said taller. 

 

In total there were 5 different heights of front sight for the M1903. The B height was for a 200 yard zero.

 

1903-Blade-USMC-Sizes-pdf.thumb.jpg.527ed28f174100226eb3b8a003ca98f7.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Found another one regarding front sight width and shoulder with at a specific distance.

 

What I found:

 If your front blade measures 0.050" wide, it is an Enfield #1 blade (and subtends 5 MOA for purposes of range estimation -- when it fits a soldier's 20" torso, that soldier is 400 yards distant, the same zero as the battlesight). 

Where I found it:

https://forums.thecmp.org/showthread.php?t=16360

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.