Need help choosing WWII USA milsurp

[rondog]

All the cool kids have one of these.....

 

[Kernel]

The Springfield M1903-A3 was made during WWII, and they were used in combat. Had peep sights and some stamped steel parts replacing those that had been machined on earlier versions. It's still a good quality weapon. I think it would be a perfect complement to your Yugo-Mauser and Nagant.

 

[Ash]

Since the Mauser and Mosin were primary combat rifles, to best match the collection outside of a Garand would be the Springfield, which was a primary combat rifle (the Marines invaded Guadalcanal with it).

Of course, the M1 Carbine was used in vast numbers, too.

 

[USSR]

The Springfield M1903-A3 was made during WWII, and they were used in combat.

Yes, they were made during WWII, but they were not used in combat. The Marines entered the war with the 1903 Springfield (not the 03-A3), and were issued M1 Garands later in the war. The 03-A3 was not an issue weapon for front line troops.

Don

 

[fpgt72]

Bad shoulder. The 91/30 has a much slimmer profile.

It occurs to me, but didn't they make a "tanker" Garand.

Understand fully...I have 5 bits of titanium holding my head on so I do know what you are talking about...my left arm is so weak I really can't support the weight of a garand but do bench shoot it.

I would say that a 1903 is going to be pretty close to a 91/30 in feel and weight. After that it really is a M1 Carbine.

I really think that if you can do the mosin you can do the springfield if you want to stay with that full power cartridge. You also may want to look at an SVT....I know soviet again, but it is lighter then the garand and (he dawns flame proof underwear) a more advanced rifle.

Only down side to the carbine is ammo, but if you reload that is really a non-issue....if you want to shoot that carbine more then just once in a blue moon, look into reloading. You can also do most of the military matches if you are looking for some games to play with the rifle.

 

[Reloadron]

Float Pilot Mentions:

I have a few WWII era US rifles, the one that rings my bell is my 1943 Smith Corona 1903-A3. Nothing says war time more than having a rifle made by a typewriter company.

Now taking into consideration the size restraints of the original poster and Float Pilot's comment all the original poster need to is run out and buy a M1 Carbine manufactured by Underwood.

Ron

 

[j1]

Another ditto to the M 1 carbine. Nice handy little gun. Fun to shoot too.

 

[Reloadron]

Pictured below are an O3A3, M1 Garand and a M1 Carbine, all are US Military rifles:



As can be seen the O3A3 and Garand are about the same overall length and both rifles come in around the same weight. While the O3A3 and Garand are obviously longer and much heavier (about twice the weight of the M1 Carbine) all 3 rifles have the same distance from the heel of the buttstock to the trigger at about 13 inches. While I don't have a M1941 Johnson it would come in around the same weight, length and trigger distance as the M1 Garand and O3A3 rifles.

So in keeping with light weight (bad arm) and being a US Military WWII era rifle the only logical choice I see is the war baby known as the M1 Carbine. That or a very, very expensive sub machine gun.

Ron

 

[sansone]

I remember when those surplus M1 carbines were under $100... I Should have bought 10, no, 100

 

[cfullgraf]

The world is full of "would have", "could have" and "should have"'s.

I wish I had finished out a collection of M1 Carbine manufacturers when CMP still had them. As is, I only have half a set.

Given the OP's stated limitations, I'd go with a M1 carbine.

 

[AlexanderA]

I hate to be the dissenting voice on the M1 carbine, but here goes:

At one time I used to collect M1 carbines by manufacturer, and I managed to get most of them. But eventually I realized that it was a pipsqueak gun, and sold all my carbines. That's a decision I don't regret.

Stick with the Garand.

 

[sansone]

pipsqueak and mouse guns have their place too

 

[Speedo66]

Get a 1911 and duct tape a bayonet to it.

 

[fpgt72]

I hate to be the dissenting voice on the M1 carbine, but here goes:

At one time I used to collect M1 carbines by manufacturer, and I managed to get most of them. But eventually I realized that it was a pipsqueak gun, and sold all my carbines. That's a decision I don't regret.

Stick with the Garand.

yea...heck those guns are not any fun to shoot, can't kill anyone...heck all those marines and parachute troops had to wait for those with garands to kill any germans....that carbine just made them mad.

 

[Slamfire]

Not only was the M1903A3 used in WW2 so was the M1903! The highest concentration in images are in the North African invasion and with the Marines on Guadalcanal. I believe I have seen 03A3’s in D Day pictures. The Marine Corp carried the M1903 exclusively on Wake, Guadalcanal, but no American photographer made it back from Wake. Occasionally I will see pictures of MP’s carrying 03’s in Italy, Germany and I read one combat account, in Germany, where the author found and used a 03 in a house to house fight. A straight grip stock 03 is short, light, and kicks like a mule! Expect the stock to fatten your lip on recoil.

There is one “ghost” rifle that is always in the background and that is the M1917. I have seen lots of M1917’s pictures in the hands of troops in basic training. The M1917 was used in the Philippines by the Philippine Army, the Japanese Invasion period was a very chaotic time, it could have been used by Americans in the collapse that lead to Corregidor. I have read accounts of American’s who escaped the death march, stayed in the jungles, and occasionally a M1917 pops up in their accounts.

I have not found any confirmed uses in Europe , but there is one image, from the PBS series on WW2 . I have seen this footage used in other WW2 programs, there is a burning jeep, a wounded GI being carried, winter gear, snow on the ground, and this unmistakable outline of a M1917.
.

I have no idea where, what, or why, the footage is always used when Battle of the Bulge programs are being played.

 

[Kernel]

The 03-A3 was not an issue weapon for front line troops.

No duh. BTAIM, thousands upon thousands of A3's were used in WWII combat.

 

[USSR]

Not only was the M1903A3 used in WW2 so was the M1903!

No duh. BTAIM, thousands upon thousands of A3's were used in WWII combat.

No way. There are thousands upon thousands of WWII combat photos and reel footage, so it should be easy to come up with a couple. Good luck with that. I have seen exactly one, and that was in Italy I believe and belonged to a rear guard soldier that was in a bombed out city well after the battle was over. The 03-A3 and Remington produced M1903 were NEVER a standard issue rifle. The M1 Garand was standardized on January 9, 1936 and the first production model was issued to the U.S. Army in the summer of 1937. The USMC did not adopt the M1 Garand until March 5 1941, and it was not until nearly halfway through World War II that the Marine Corp was completely changed over from their 1903 Springfields (not the M1903 or M1903-A3 models). So, with the M1 Garand replacing the U.S. Army's 1903 Springfields prior to the development of the Remington M1903 and M1903-A3's, and the Marine Corp turning in their prewar issue 1903 Springfields for M1 Garands during the war, and with the M1903 and 03-A3's being held in reserve or given to U.S. allies, please explain how all these "thousands" of a non-standard issue rifle were used in combat?

Don

 

[Reloadron]

While this seems to have gone a little off topic, the following is a partial quote from the book U.S. Infantry Weapons Of World War II by Bruce N. Canfield.

Many people do not realize that most of the U.S. Marine Corps’ early Pacific campaigns were fought with the old ’03 as the primary service rifle. The Marines on Guadalcanal were armed with the ’03; the newer semiautomatic rifles did not come into use until the latter stages of the campaign, when Army troops armed with the new M1 Garand rifles reinforced the weary Marines. Most of our troops fighting in the Philippines prior to their surrender used ‘03s as well. Many Army troops were armed with ‘03s during the North Africa and Sicily campaigns and surprisingly large numbers were also used in much of the fighting in Italy and other theaters. During World War Two, the ’03 was generally utilized due to a shortage of M1 rifles or other semiautomatic weapons. However, even when other weapons were available, the ’03 remained the weapon of choice for some troops due to its reliability and greater inherent accuracy. As stated in the official History of U.S. Marine Corps Operations in World War II, “Nostalgia for the reliable ’03 was widespread….” A number of ‘03s remained in front line combat duty until the very end of the war. It must be added, however, that the majority of combat troops greatly preferred the firepower of automatic or semiautomatic weapons.
The M1 rifle began to replace the ’03 in Marine Corps service by early 1943. A Memorandum to the Commandant of the Corps, dated January 26, 1943, stated that
M1 rifles are now being received at a rate that will not only permit the equipping of all new Fleet Marine Force organizations but the gradual replacement of M1903 rifles now in the hands of other units. M1903 rifles, as received, will be turned over to the Navy.

There is quite a bit more but I am far from a proficient typist and got my wife to type that small bit for me. The book is very good reading and very informative.

I do know that my father landed on Guadalcanal as a young Marine with the O3 Springfield rifle. They never saw a M1 Garand till well after the island was secured and the Army replacements had the then new rifles, new to them anyway.

Looking at my dad's old unit books I don't see any pictures that include a M1 Garand during the Guadalcanal Campaign (August 1942 through February 1943). However, by the time they got to Peleliu (September–November 1944) there are pictures depicting the Marines with the M1 Garand rifles.

Ron

 

[Speedo66]

Being "issued", and being "in combat" are two different things.

While certain guns may not have been officially issued, they sure were used in combat.

Plenty of M-1 and M-2 Carbines used in Viet Nam although they were never "issued". Hey, there were even Swedish "K's" used over there, and they sure as heck weren't issued.

 

[USSR]

Being "issued", and being "in combat" are two different things.

While certain guns may not have been officially issued, they sure were used in combat.

Plenty of M-1 and M-2 Carbines used in Viet Nam although they were never "issued". Hey, there were even Swedish "K's" used over there, and they sure as heck weren't issued.

So where did the U.S. troops in Viet Nam get the M1 and M2's if they weren't a standard issue weapon? Actually, the select fire M2 was a commonly issued weapon in the early years of the Viet Nam war. One of our own THR members (Vern Humphrey) was issued one (he hated it). As for the Swedish K subguns, a lot of that had to do with spec ops forces within the country, and it's not like they were commonly used by grunts. The simple fact is: the 03-A3's were not a standardized or issue weapon for front line troops because M1 Garand production was ramped up enough to fill the needs of our combat troops. That's why you can occasionally find mint or unissued 03-A3's like my Smith-Corona.

Don

 

[Steel Horse Rider]

I think your argument is one of picking at nits. "Standard issue" removes from the argument rifles which were issued to specialty people, whether you are talking about a squad automatic weapon, armored division, or snipers. I don't have the reference in front of me but it is my understanding that both the 1903 and the 1903A3 were used as sniper weapons, but after 1943 only the M1 Garand was a "standard issue" weapon for front line units. Of course in most occassions just because the army declared a unit as "front line' the enemy did not have to respect that decision which led to a lot of "nonstandard issue" weapons being used in places like eastern Belgium in the winter of 1944. The M1 Carbine was not "standard issue" but it certainly saw a lot of action in both WWII and Korea.

These types of discussions that continually go south over semantics certainly are not a reflection of the supposed "High Road" nameplate on the front of this unit. So would the Garand have been a better "standard issue" weapon had it been in .308 instead of 30-06? Might as well drag this completely into the gutter.

 

[Reloadron]

M1903A3 Rifle

The changes made in the M1903 (Modified) rifle did result in faster production, but some additional changes were necessary to further decrease manufacturing time. Big problem was replacing the M1905 rear sight with its fixed base. Remington’s engineers designed the rear sight that replaced the M1905 sight.

Finally on May 21, 1942 the redesigned rifle was designated the U.S Rifle, Caliber .30, Model of 1903A3. To supplement Remington’s production of the M1903A3 the government contracted with L.C Smith & Corona in February 1942 to also manufacture the M1903A3 rifle. Both firms delivered large numbers of the rifles before the contracts were cancelled in February of 1944, when the production of the rifles finally met the demand.

By the time Remington and Smith-Corona had begun large scale production of the rifles, most of the combat units had been fairly well equipped M1 Garand rifles. Many of the ‘A3s were used as training weapons but a number were employed in combat roles in both Europe and the Pacific. Standard issue M1903 and M1903A3 service rifles as well as the M1903A4 sniper variant were used by the U.S. Army in Italy and the China/Burma/India (CBI) theatre well into late 1944 and early 1945.

The above was taken from the book I linked to earlier. It is condensed.

How many were actually employed in combat? I doubt anyone knows for sure but I have a picture from the CBI campaign where a O3A3 and O3A4 are seen side by side fighting the Japanese in 1944. However, as mentioned by the time the O3A3 was readily available the M1 Garand was also very much available and widely distributed. Did the O3A3 see deployment in combat in the European and Pacific theaters? Yes but as widespread as the M1 Garand.

Ron

 

[rondog]

Well, I have a 1943 Remington M1903A3, and as far as I'm concerned, "it was there and it done that". That's all that matters to me.

 

[cluttonfred]

For what it's worth, I have seen several references to the M1917 as regular issue to mortarmen, artillerymen and presumably other non-rifleman and "second line" troops in North Africa, who certainly sometimes saw combat whether they liked it or not.

To take this in another direction, since the M1A1 Thompson and M3A1 Grease Gun may not be practical options (I can't stand the long-barrel repros, but a semi-auto SBR would be fun), how about a combat shotgun?

From Wikipedia...

More than 80,000 Model 12 shotguns were purchased during World War II by the United States Marine Corps, Army Air Forces, and Navy, mostly for use in the Pacific theater. Riot gun versions of the Model 12, lacking the heat shield and bayonet, were purchased by the Army for use in defending bases and in protecting Air Forces aircraft against saboteurs when parked. The Navy similarly purchased and used the riot gun version for protecting Navy ships and personnel while in foreign ports. The Marine Corps used the trench gun version of the Model 12 to great success in taking Japanese-occupied islands in the Pacific. The primary difference in Model 12 shotguns between the World War II trench gun version versus the World War I trench gun version was that the original design, containing six rows of holes in the perforated heat shield, was reduced to only four rows during 1942.

Unlike most modern pump-action shotguns, the Winchester Model 12 had no trigger disconnector. Like the earlier Model 1897, it too fired each time the action closed with the trigger depressed. That and its 6-shot capacity made it effective for close-combat. As fast as one could pump the action, another shot would be fired.

The trench gun models with bayonet lug and heat shields are harder to come by and very expensive, but the riot gun versions can sometimes be found at a more reasonable price since the don't scream "combat weapon."

 

[Hokkmike]

Thanks for all of the thoughtful and informative replies. Very good reading.