best bolt action military rifle of the 20th century

[Glockula]

I am on the fence. With its 10 round capacity the SMLE was probably the best military bolt of the 20th century if we are talking proven combat worth. But man those 1903s and their variants are real shooters. And their sights are second to none.

I can't believe no one has mentioned the Mosin Nagant. Russia did stem the German tide with the help of this rifle because of its enexpensive manufacturing they could pump them out. Their sights are bad and if all else fails it's a great pike.

 

[lysanderxiii]

...If you have ever tried to load a Lee-Enfield quickly you will soon learn the what the opposite of the word "easy" is...

With properly, factory loaded chargers, I cannot see how a charger-loading Lee-Enfield could be described as difficult to load quickly. I find them one of the fastest charger-loading rifles around. And as an added bonus, closing the bolt with the charger in just ejects the charger, unlike the M1903.

The P-14/M1917 are long, and heavy

 

[Stevenvalleyky]

Im partial to a type 38 calvary carbine arisaka. Its stout, drains mud and water naturally by design, pretty accurate even with crappy sights and always goes bang.

 

[tark]

With properly, factory loaded chargers, I cannot see how a charger-loading Lee-Enfield could be described as difficult to load quickly. I find them one of the fastest charger-loading rifles around. And as an added bonus, closing the bolt with the charger in just ejects the charger, unlike the M1903.

The P-14/M1917 are long, and heavy

Interesting comment, but every 1903 and A3 I have ever fired does the same thing. So does the Arisaka. I have owned four Enfields in my life and none of them were very easy to load quickly with chargers. I, too, have seen pics of Brits that were carrying extra mags, I figure there was a reason for that. It was easier to change mags than reload with stripper clips. The Early Enfields had magazine cutoffs that worked exactly the opposite of the way they should have. One bump at the wrong time and your magazine was inoperable and you may not even realize that it happened. Wonder how many men were killed because of that stupid feature? The Enfield was a fine weapon, but complicated and labor intensive to manufacture. I think too many people are swayed in their thoughts by the Enfield's ten round capacity. That's nice, but when your mag is empty, it takes you twice as long to reload......

What century the gun was invented in is irrelevant. If it was widely used in combat in the 20th century it counts.

I still don't see any other rifle overcoming the Arisaka,s Ace in the hole, that chrome lined bore. Mine is pre-war and the bore is still bright and clean as the day it was made. After going through a war and countless corrosive rounds of ammo. Having a bore that is almost ( I DID say ALMOST! ) impervious to rust is a huge advantage.

No Swiss rifles! As beautiful as they are, they never saw extensive combat, if any at all. And they do have problems! My K-31 goes bang every time....except when it just goes "click" . Examining the round shows that the firing pin never touched the primer.! The next attempt might go bang. I can find nothing wrong, everything looks fine, the firing pin is undamaged. A mystery to be solved later.

 

[MartinS]

SMLE. 10 shots, reliable, 10 shots, still in use in places where roads don't go, 10 shots.

 

[chicharrones]

I'm not saying a Swiss rifle should beat out the others, but I also don't think it should be discounted just because the government that issued it stayed out of wars. The Swiss military was going to bet the lives of its soldiers on their Swiss rifles.

Also, something like a K31 was probably not yet worn out in the mid 1940s. But if they were, it's a tool less job to take apart the bolt.

Regarding my vote in this thread though, I'm with Eastbank and others choosing the Lee Enfield.

 

[CoalTrain49]

Why wasn't this a poll?

Then we could actually see which one was the best.....according to the experts.

 

[tark]

Why wasn't this a poll?

Then we could actually see which one was the best.....according to the experts.

Uhhhh....probably because I am so computer stupid I don't know how to do one! LOL I have barely figured out how to post replies and pics. But another reason was this: In a poll, either the 98 Mauser or the Enfield will win, just because everyone has been reading for decades about how they were the best. I want everyone here to factor in all considerations, easy to make, easy to use, easy to fix if broken, ruggedness accuracy, power, you name it. The Arisaka scores high in all of these catagories, and it's chrome bore puts it in a class by itself.

I'm not saying a Swiss rifle should beat out the others, but I also don't think it should be discounted just because the government that issued it stayed out of wars

Sorry, but the Swiss rifles are out for one simple reason. They have no combat record. How will we know if they were good or bad if they were never used in combat? A rifle's faults are quickly exposed in combat, but the Swiss guns never saw any so we will never know how well they would have held up.

 

[readyeddy]

Does the M24 count?

 

[HankB]

Early Arisaka rifles were reputedly some of the strongest made - the Japs had a very good differential heat treating process in their pre-WWII production. P.O.Ackley - who conducted "blow up" tests of various rifles - found that the barrels of early Jap rifles blew off before the action let go. Of course, LATE war rifles were a very different proposition, and some of them are rightly regarded as unsafe to shoot even with standard ammo.

Springfield rifles - well, until WWI began the USA paid a royalty to Mauser, so you know where a good part of the design came from. IIRC, the rifles with serial numbers below 800,000 had questionable heat treating. Otherwise, a very good bolt action rifle.

1917 Enfield? A very large action - many have been successfully converted to big rounds like the .416 Rigby and .460 Weatherby. The only weak point in the basic design is the ejector spring. Bad heat treating and barrel over tightening during production make the overall quality of some of these questionable, but it's not a matter of design, it's a matter of execution.

SMLE - a very successful design, which evolved over quite a few decades. The final mass produced iteration - the No.4 Mk. II from the mid 1950s - is a very nice rifle indeed. Whatever problems the Brit armed forces had, their rifles weren't a part of it.

Mosin-Nagant - stronk like Mother Russia. Ideal for illiterate peasant soldiers and nekulturny members of the proletariat. A blacksmith can perform most needed repairs with a hammer and file.

And finally . . .

M98 Mauser. The only one still being made in one form or another, and still sought after today. (How often do you hear someone say "I'd really like a custom Arisaka/SMLE/Springfield/Mosin"?)

 

[CoalTrain49]

I want everyone here to factor in all considerations, easy to make, easy to use, easy to fix if broken, ruggedness accuracy, power, you name it. The Arisaka scores high in all of these catagories, and it's chrome bore puts it in a class by itself.

Well, it certainly was in a class by itself. Only WW2 rifle I know of that had AA sights.

http://www.wideopenspaces.com/arisaka-rifle-anti-aircraft-sights-explained-video/

I have a Howa rifle. Nothing wrong with that one. Howa was involved in manufacturing Arisaka rifles.

 

[25-5]

Enfield Rifle No.4 Mk1

 

[jim in Anchorage]

They say (whoever "they" are ) that the '03 was the best target rifle, the Mauser was the best hunting rifle and the Enfield was the best combat rifle.
Where the Arisaka fits, I can't say, especially if the outcome was factored in.

Hard for a Arisaka to match a atom bomb. As far as the OPs question I would say the Mauser model 98. It was the father of all the modern bolts, after all.

 

[stoky]

No Swiss rifles! As beautiful as they are, they never saw extensive combat, if any at all.

Which would be an major +, perhaps not entirely attributable to the rifle though.

 

[cdb1]

the lee enfield may not be the best, but its way ahead of the second one. good sturdy sights, enough power, 10 round magizine(stripper clips or quick magizine change), replaceable bolt heads (head space fixed in one minute in the field), replacement butt stocks for lenth and over all very easy to mantain in battle field conditions. you might thing i like enfields and you would be right. eastbank.

I'd forgotten about the bolt head feature.

 

[HankC]

Why wasn't this a poll?

Then we could actually see which one was the best.....according to the experts.

I bet this subject has be discussed many many times and polled many many times! Everyone still have their own opinion, 50 years from now, we may see people ask the same question!

 

[KansasSasquatch]

Well, this ought to start a real dogfight.Which rifle is the best military bolt action rifle of the last century? Here are the ground rules:

Must have actually proved itself in real combat. Sorry, Schmidt Reuben fans, your rifles don't qualify.

Looks and pretty workmanship mean nothing, and how nice of a sporter it can be turned into also means nothing.

How rugged was it, how simple to use was it, how cheaply and easily could it be manufactured, how powerful was it and how accurate was it?? These things mean everything.

Only as-issued rifles count.

Based upon that criteria and nothing else, I'd say the L96. There was no mention of the rifle needing to be a main battle rifle, just a "military bolt action rifle." I think about the only part it loses out on is the cost of manufacturing.

 

[H&Hhunter]

No1 MkIII

Weak bolt stop.

 

[Roadkill]

Since I retired I'm shooting a lot more and make a point to take down an old rifle for range time. I shoot most all mentioned - GW98, 98K, MkIII, MKIV, 1903, 1903A3, M1917, Type 99s, MN 1891, MN1944, Carcanos, 1917 Lebel, MAS 36, but the two that are absolutely best in fit, finish, machining, and above all accuracy are the M96 Swede and Finnish Model 39. The M96 is a 1906 Mfg Oberndorf, the Fin 39 is 1941 VKT (Valmet). Both rifles were in general use in the Winter and Continuation War by the Finns against the Russians. For flat out accuracy the M96, for accuracy and ruggedness The M39.

 

[sage5907]

I vote for the Winchester Model 70. The Marines and Army used these rifle as sniper rifles in Vietnam, and the exploits of Marine sniper Carlos Hathcock are legendary. They were issued to rifle experts for a specific purpose for a job that the run of the mill military rifle like a Model 98 could not duplicate. The accuracy of these rifles was high even though they were later replaced by the Remington 700 which was cheaper to manufacture and easier to maintain.

 

[entropy]

They were issued to rifle experts for a specific purpose for a job that the run of the mill military rifle like a Model 98 could not duplicate.

Which is exactly why they do (or should not) qualify for this "poll". Although tark did not specify, and has not stepped in to clarify when this came up before, his qualifications seem to indicate military standard issue bolt actions only; i.e., the M1903A3 qualifies, but the M1903A4 does not, as it was not standard issue, it was a sniper rifle, as was the Win. M70.
If he submits a ruling on this in favor of issued bolt sniper rifles, I would have to change my pick to the M24.

 

[Dog Soldier]

The 1903A3 was a fine battle rifle. The USMC did not want to give up these arms. As noted Germany sued the U.S. regarding the 1903 rifle. They lost WWI. I think the settlement was in 1928.
The suite was over the Spitzer Bullet design and 3 types of stripper clips extractors and extractor collars. The U.S. paid part of the $200,000 in 1928 based on the number of stripper clips produced during WWI.

 

[salt&battery]

you needed 20/10 vision to use the sights on a 1903 which I think were bad with the front sight being non protected. the 1917 was real heavy and seemed as long as a musket never like the dog legged bolt and cocked on closing feature

 

[lysanderxiii]

I, too, have seen pics of Brits that were carrying extra mags, I figure there was a reason for that. It was easier to change mags than reload with stripper clips.

I have hardly ever seen pictures British troops carrying spare Enfield magazines.

The Early Enfields had magazine cutoffs that worked exactly the opposite of the way they should have. One bump at the wrong time and your magazine was inoperable and you may not even realize that it happened. Wonder how many men were killed because of that stupid feature? The Enfield was a fine weapon, but complicated and labor intensive to manufacture. I think too many people are swayed in their thoughts by the Enfield's ten round capacity. That's nice, but when your mag is empty, it takes you twice as long to reload......

Hardly any, if any at all, No 4's were produced with the magazine cut-off. Production SMLEs (No 1s) stopped having the cut-off in 1916, with the Mk III*.

If you put one charger in an Enfield, you get 5 rounds. It takes the same amount of time to load and you get just as many rounds and any other charger loading magazined rifle. If you put in two chargers, it takes the same amount of time to load two chargers for either rifle. There is no difference -

load one charger, shoot 5 rounds, reload shoot 5 rounds: ten rounds fired, two chargers loaded.

-or-

load one charger, load another charger, shoot ten rounds: ten rounds fired, two chargers loaded

Just because to can load an Enfield with 10 rounds, does not mean you have to load 10 rounds before you can shoot it.... With the Enfield, you have a choice, load one or two chargers, as the situation demands.

I still don't see any other rifle overcoming the Arisaka,s Ace in the hole, that chrome lined bore. Mine is pre-war and the bore is still bright and clean as the day it was made. After going through a war and countless corrosive rounds of ammo. Having a bore that is almost ( I DID say ALMOST! ) impervious to rust is a huge advantage.

The only problem with the chrome plated Ariska barrel is that it was used because they did not have the proper alloying metals (manganese and molybdenum) to make decent high alloy barrels others did. Heavy use destroyed Japanese chrome plated barrels just as fast and Western (good alloy) barrels, i.e., they don't last any longer by rounds count.

It does provide better corrosion protection, that is a plus. But, given the accuracy requirements of a standard service rifle, you'd be surprised how ugly a bore you can have before it fails for accuracy. You should see some of the bores in old Nagants that still hold under 5 inches groups at 100 yards.

(Incidentally, with a little practice with a No 4, it is possible to fire a 40 on the current US Army qualification course. You just have to be able to count to five.)

 

[boom boom]

Tark posed an interesting question with no real answer. My cynical side says that people will vote for the rifle that they like or shoot best. That being said-------!

I have shot, disassembled, cleaned, and owned most of the firearms listed above as a hobby. All of them have strong points and weaknesses. In good conditions with a competent shooter, all are deadly within minute of man at 200 yds or less. In my case, my favorites vary by what I aim to do with them. The guns with open sights are quick to acquire targets but harder to shoot beyond short range for me due to old eyes. Peep sights are great for more precise shooting but a little slower for me to acquire targets. Firing from the bench, I like a heavy firearm but not for carrying or snap shooting. Some rifles are harder to shoot prone in order to work the bolt and some are better for rapid fire. The carbine are more compact but the long barreled ones give you a longer sight radius. Some like leads bullets and others don't. Stock fit varies for me. Ammunition and reloading costs vary.

The moral is get one in good condition but after that shoot it and have fun. Don't worry about what others think of your choice as long as you are having fun and you can always get another one in the future. Peace out.
Btw the real answer is the firearm that Peter designed, I say that because I have more of them including derivatives than any other type so I must like them best.