most accurate military bolt action rifle

[tark]

So which bolt action military rifle is the most accurate? Here are the rules:

Any bolt action rifle, straight pull or turnbolt, will qualify.
No .22s, must be a centerfire military caliber.
I want firsthand accounts of rifles you have actually fired.
No scope sighted sniper rifles, I want standard issue milsurps.
NO AUTOLOADERS. bolt action only (worth repeating)
Must be as-issued. No accurizing allowed.
Any bolt gun will qualify, whether or not it was a successful design.
The gun must have a bayonet lug.

Now, I know a lot of you are going to vote for the Swiss K-31. That gets my second place vote. Number one in my book is the Ross Mk III straight pull in .303. Yes, that one....the gun that failed miserably in the trenches in WWI. Mine will throw five shots into one ragged hole at 100 yards.

Before anyone starts, I know all about the Mk III. There are a lot of myths and untruths out there about the safety of the gun. It didn't jam in the trenches because of mud, it jammed because of a small design flaw. The locking lug (it has seven) that contacts the bolt stop would become battered and deformed over time, resulting in the bolt sticking when in battery. A hot gun only made it worse. This was corrected but too late to save the guns reputation.

An incorrectly assembled bolt will resist reassembly into the receiver and if you do get it in, it strongly resists being cycled. A clear signal that something was wrong.

The reason for the gun's accuracy is obvious. It has a heavy contour barrel that is thirty one inches long. The sighting radius is just over three feet. The rear sight is a micro-adjustable peep sight.

It is the most accurate milsurp I have ever fired

 

[Joshua M. Smith]

Most rifles that were supremely precise failed in the trenches due to close tolerances.

In my experience, the Gewehr 88/05 is supremely precise. Mosin-Nagants, either Finnish or with good bores and Finn principles applied, will be right up there. (We're not talking run-of-the-mill refurbs here.)

I've not fired the Swiss rifles. I almost ended up with one once and should have taken it. However, reports and first-hand accounts tell me that the above two and the Swiss Rifles are all right up there in the same league.

By the way, though, are you talking accuracy or precision? In one part it looks like you're talking precision, but then you refer to the Ross's long sight radius, which only helps with accuracy. Clarify what you mean, please!

Regards,

Josh

 

[Uncle Nubbs]

I have a 1938 Turk mauser which seems drawn to the bullseye. Even with really crappy sights. That thing just wants to shoot.

 

[tark]

OOPS! It helps to post a pic or two. The four most accurate milsurps I have. The Mk III Ross is next to the M-10 .280 Ross. Same action. I really can't tell much difference between the two Swiss rifles. The K-11 seems to be about as accurate as the K-31

 

[Sunray]

"...I know all about the Mk III..." Wasn't the Mk III that had the 'incorrectly assembled bolt' issue. Was the Mk II. Issue with the Ross in general was that it didn't stand up to the trenches due to close tolerances. And it was selected by our then Liberal Party Minister of Militia and Defence, Sam Hughes who was giving money to a buddy. Liberals were corrupt even then.
"...Mine will throw five shots into one ragged hole at 100 yards..." With what ammo? Any rifle in decent condition will shoot like that with carefully reloaded match bullets. Have an '03A4 that does it regularly.

 

[carbine85]

1st - SMLE
2nd - 1903 The best longer range rifle.
3rd - Mauser 98
I'll put the Mosin Nagant towards the bottom. They are too inconsistent but better then some other WW2 Era rifles. I haven't used the K31.

 

[aarondhgraham]

Well, Back in the day,,,

Well, Back in the day,,,
Thanks to the Alden's Mail Order Catalog,,,
I owned four basic military surplus centerfire rifles.

• Enfield .303 with standard(?) peep sights
• 7.7 Japanese with standard irons
• K-98 Mauser with standard irons
• 6.5 Italian with standard irons

All I ever used in them was military surplus ammo,,,
Except for the K-98 which I hunted with,,,
And I was of your young soldiers age,,,
So I still had sharp eyes.

All given, it's not a bad test scenario.

I always hit a bit better with the .303,,,
The peep sights were to my liking,,,
That long sight radius worked.

That was followed by the K-98,,,
If I could get something to lean against,,,
The rifle would make 100 yard coke can hits.

The other 2 were not even coke can at 50 yards,,,
At least not with any consistency.

Aarond

.

 

[Kabal]

Military bolt action rifle competitions are very popular here in Germany. The rifles that are most highly regarded are the Swedish Mauser rifles (m/96 an m/38) and Swiss rifles based on the Schmidt-Rubin action (K31 and the model 1911 or model 1896/11 rifle).

My personal rifle of choice is a Swedish Mauser m/96. The long sight radius along with the good trigger and smooth action make for excellent practical accuracy. There's also a sniper version called the m/41B which uses the m/55 precision iron sights. This version is definitely a contender for the title of "most accurate 'as-issued' military bolt-action rifle".

In terms of mechanical accuracy, there are obviously all kinds of Mauser and other milsurp rifles that can achieve the same results.

 

[Panzerschwein]

Swiss K-31, or a Swedish Mauser 6.5.

 

[rcmodel]

I think the 1903 Springfield would have to fall in this group somewhere.

They won the Wimbolton trophy several times pre-WWII against the best military rifles in the world.

rc

 

[Art Eatman]

My first-ever center-fire, back in 1950, was a DCM in-cosmoline 1917 Enfield. Star gauge barrel. With my father's handloads, it was one MOA.

 

[Handyman79]

Just about every year the Vintage Bolt match at Camp Perry is won with a 1917 or K31. However the 1903A3 with a Smith Corona barrel is hard to beat!

 

[Laphroaig]

Here's my list from my experience:

Swedish M96 and M38's are most accurate, but suffer a little from the sights.

US GI bolt guns are tops in practical terms, due to the aperture sights. I'd rank the 1903A3 a little bit ahead of M1917's.

K31 would be fourth.

Check the Vintage Military results from the CMP matches at Perry. A big sample size with some top notch shooters. Of course, Springfields aren't allowed in that match but have their own classification.

Laphroaig

 

[ontarget]

My M17 is a great shooter. But so are my mosins and SMLE. Hard to judge since they are surplus and all used to one extent or another. But I love them all.

 

[Normandy]

My Brazilian Mauser model 1908 (7 X 57) is able to hit anything I can see. At 100 yards, a 1/2 piece of a 'clay'. on its side, broke it with one shot. I have a 1943 Springfield Garand that is that accurate. Who knows what either one would do with a good scope?

 

[mshootnit]

My K31 can shoot same sized groups at 100 yds with open sights that my scoped Ruger m77 varmint. The sights and comb fit on the K31 combine to make a very good shooter. Better than any milsurp I have had.

 

[2zulu1]

The Marines earned their nickname “Devil Dogs” from the Germans in WW1 at the Battle of Belleau Wood. They used 1903 Springfield Rifles with such effective marksmanship that they decimated German troops from a distance of over 800 yards.

I also have a 1919 Carl Gustav M96 sniper rifle that is also extremely accurate with iron sights......but the '03 Springfield is historically #1.

 

[Kaeto]

I have a 1938 Turk mauser which seems drawn to the bullseye. Even with really crappy sights. That thing just wants to shoot.

I have a '43 K Kale Turk Mauser that I've covered a 5 shot string at 100 yds from bench rest with a quarter. Using the military irons no less.

 

[Arkansas Paul]

My dad has an old small ring Spanish mauser that was re-chambered for the 7.62 nato round. It was sporterized back in the 80s when you could get them for $50 each all day long. It actually was done quite well though. Now it wears a nice synthetic stock and a Weaver scope.

We don't shoot full throttle .308s in it anymore since becoming educated on the 2 lug vs 3 lug mausers, but we load 125 grain ballistic tips at youth load levels per Hodgdon data and it is a very nice shooter. Same barrel that has been on it since the Spanish converted it from the 7x57 round.

Here is a target I shot to test some loads out. It is a 3 shot group. Now this target was not shot at 100 yds. It was probably more like 75 yds. Even so, this will tell you how the old rifle shoots.

 

[Arkansas Paul]

I just re-read your OP and saw where you didn't want scoped versions but standard issue milsurps. I should have read the entire post instead of just posting away.
Sorry about that.

I will say though that the optic is the only thing that was added for added accuracy. There has been no bedding of the stock or free floating of the barrel. The darn thing still has the original trigger with what seems like a half inch of creep. As well as it shoots I'm tempted to order him a Timney trigger for the thing.

That will certainly tell you the accuracy that some of the old things are capable of, even though I wouldn't get anywhere near that with the irons.

He does have another small ring mauser that is still in 7x57 and it is all original. With my handloads with Nosler Accubonds I could get about 3"-4" groups at 100 yds. I'm sure the gun is capable of better, but as I said, I suck with open sights.

 

[Don357]

I had a M48 Yugo Mauser in 8mm or 7.92x57js if you wish, that with 1957 vintage Yugo mil-surp, would consistently do 3" 5 shot groups at 100 yds, and 1 1/2" - 2" groups with Seller and Belloit 196gr spce ( soft point cutted edge) hunting ammo. All with stock irons.

 

[tark]

Hi, Sunray. The Ross group was shot with Remington factory ammo. And I must disagree with you about the "any rifle in good shape" comment. I have many rifles that won't group that small no matter what you feed them!

The Mk II was a successful design. It's major shortcoming was the lack of a guide for fast clip loading. You will notice the Mk III in the picture has no finish left. That is because I decided to see if the stories about the mud were true.

They were not. The gun handled mud and grit as well as any gun I have ever seen. What it couldn't handle was the left rear locking lug crashing against the bolt stop when the bolt was worked in a hurry. It was starting to deform ever so slightly, and it didn't take long before it was starting to bind. The bolt stop was enlarged for more contact area and that fixed the problem Too late to save the reputation of the gun.

The incorrectly re-assembled bolts were probably not rendered dangerous because of any re-assembly problems. If you have ever tried to strip and re-assemble a Mk III bolt, you know what I mean. It takes three hands, a vise, and a priest to confess to after you take the Name of the Lord in vain, numerous times. The bolts could be made unsafe simply by pulling the bolt head forward and rotating it counterclockwise ever so slightly. This gave you a bolt that resisted going back into the receiver. If you did get it in, it strongly resisted movement. The fact that this condition did injure and kill some soldiers is indisputable. Ross fixed that problem too, but again, too late to save the gun's reputation.

It is Ironic that the Mk III was universally cursed, while the M-10 Sporters in .280 Ross were highly praised. (Sigh. If only someone had told poor Mr. White not to try to stop a charging lion with one.)

They both shared the same action.

 

[MachIVshooter]

The Swiss Schmidt-Rubin rifles and any quality version of the Mauser, including the G98, K98, M93, M96, M1903.....

 

[kBob]

As it comes out of the rack with the sights issued......

US M 1903 A3.

Sure this individual fluzinjammer might be more accurate than that individual whosits shootits.

However if you had a rack of one hundred of every rifle mentioned here and just pulled one out at random, my money would be on the 03 A3.

Most of the rifles mentioned have open/tangent sights that with the rear sight on the barrel loose half the available sight radius. Those other sights also do zip to help one center the sights. Sitting at a table all bagged in in perfect weather and light those rifles with open rear sights out on the barrel can be impressive, but lets shoot them all unsupported and in various light shall we?

-kBob

 

[adcoch1]

My first-ever center-fire, back in 1950, was a DCM in-cosmoline 1917 Enfield. Star gauge barrel. With my father's handloads, it was one MOA.

+1 for the 1917 as issued. Using mil surplus 150 gr ammo I managed to put a cold bore shot in a 4" circle, on purpose, from 800 yds with the military flip up peep sight set to 800. The rifle just did the job while I was there. That was personal experience and so is this one. Managed to put ten rounds into a shotgun hull with a Chilean Mauser in 7x57 with Remington hunting ammo at 100 on a slow day hunting. I couldn't believe it. It shot beautifully. Same gun and ammo consistently hit clay pigeons laid on the hillside out to 300. Didn't try it farther. Both guns had bayonet lugs and were all original.