Good Day at the Range :)

[Elessar]

So last Sunday me and some friends went shooting and I took some pictures. Not too many, but I did some shooting that was quite excellent if I do say so myself and I was pumped



Rifle: 1943 U.S. Springfield M1903-A3
Ammo: 4 - shot group - Hornady 168 gr BTHP .30-06
Range: 100 yards
Optics: iron sights
Rest: front rest only
Group: .8125" (center to center of furthest apart rounds)


For reference, a US penny is .75 inches in diameter.



Some of my buddies:





I actually got sunburned on a day when it was 24 degrees when I woke up!

[Aquarius]

Nice!

[Alelou]

I actually got sunburned on a day when it was 24 degrees when I woke up!

Around here that's usually a maple sugaring burn.

Yay, more powerful late winter sun.

[justTripn]

So did you fix the scope?

[Distracted]

Wow! Great grouping!

[Elessar]

So did you fix the scope?

Nope... nothing wrong with the scope per se, just with the way I tried to mount it -- but that was a different rifle. I never had optics on this one.... I was attempting to put the scope on my 1943 Enfield No.4 Mk1.

Under "Optics" it says "iron sights" that means 'no scope'. Iron sights are the fixed blade sights... like the rear peep hole/notch and the front blade sight that you line up in the middle you know? Real WW2 style

The scope is going to go on it soon. I found a gunsmith/accurizing service that's going to do some work to this rifle to make it even smoother, and drill a base into the top of the receiver upon which to mount the scope. The "drill/tap base" mount is standard for hunting, tactical and sniper rifles. Sometimes, I guess, on a really high end sniper platform, the base is actually an integral part of the receiver, as in the case of the Barrett M82A1... but I digress...

No this rifle did not have a scope. What I'm very excited about is that, while a scope does not make a rifle more accurate, I am also going to have accurizing work done to it. And while a scope doesn't make it more accurate, it DOES usually allow the shooter to better resolve the details of the target so that once you've mastered the skills related to breathing, trigger control, and timing, you can take even better advantage of those skills by having a clearer view of the target and being able to even FURTHER hone those skills.

For instance, with just a sight blade, at 100 yards, you could look out over your sights and think you're keeping your weapon perfectly still, when in reality the sight blade could be moving ever so slightly with uncontrolled or poorly controlled breathing, but you can't tell because the relative angular size of the sight blade at that distance is practically the entire target.

I mean imagine trying to keep the top edge of this sight blade still when the "top edge" of the sight blade, which in real life is somewhere around 1/20 of an inch wide, covers the entire central 6 inches of the target. You have to try and resolve with your eyes the difference between the dead center bullseye, and 3 inches to the left or right, each time you re-acquire the target. That's pretty tough.

With a 10 power scope, which I have a 3.5-10, so max power is 10, at 100 yards your relative perspective is from 10 yards, so it's much easier to see the center rings of the target. It will also allow the shooter to see all the little flinches and flutters and bouncy motions of the crosshairs so that you can further work on controlling your breathing and your movements to become even more stable. In other words, with no magnification, you won't see a lot of your accidental movements that will offset your shooting by a few fractions of a degree of arc. With magnification, you will. Another helpful advantage is that in using iron sights, you don't get much light transmission. Lot of times you have to squint or close one eye completely to maintain a tight target picture, which reduces the amount of light coming into your eye and the target starts to darken. Every once in awhile you have to open both eyes wide and look out over the muzzle of the rifle to re-acquire a total picture in front of you, using all the ambient light, to sort of wake up your eyes.

With a scope you don't have this problem, at least not nearly as intensely. Your light saturation IS limited to the size and efficiency of the optics and particularly the objective lens size, but I've got an excellent piece of optical quality scope (a Leupold), and the one time I did get to use it on my Enfield (when the mount turned out to be junk), it gave me a big, bright, beautiful picture.

It'll be a few months before I have this setup all complete. I have to negotiate with the gunsmithing company (Hill Country Rifles LLC) on pricing, and work out some other particulars, and get a base I can ship them, and the whole process takes like 4-6 weeks for them to do, soo.... it might be awhile

[Navigator]

From your photos, the Springfield is in superb condition. Please don't drill and tap it for a scope. The old girl is at least 65 and they are getting rarer and rarer. Shooting it is OK, but please leave this one in original condition. Hornady makes some darn fine ammo, don't they?

[Elessar]

From your photos, the Springfield is in superb condition. Please don't drill and tap it for a scope. The old girl is at least 65 and they are getting rarer and rarer. Shooting it is OK, but please leave this one in original condition. Hornady makes some darn fine ammo, don't they?

Absolutely. Had an old friend who's a reloader say he took his brother to the range with some rifle and they were shootin Hornady and he shot about 1 MOA and his brother was like hot damn imagine what I'll get reloading... and Tim was like, I honestly don't think you're going to see much improvement... I think they're probably the best as far as factory ammo for ~.30 cal rifle.

BTW, though, my Springfield isn't even close to being in original condition anyway... It's got a 1943 Smith Corona receiver and a 1944 Remington Arms barrel... not to mention a C-stock w/ the pistol grip that came after the war... I think it's kind of a frankenrifle already man

Besides, you know what else I think about it? I ask myself, if you were in the Pacific theatre, or in Europe, and you were hanging out with some army or marine marksman units and they wouldn't bat an eye at drilling the receiver and doing some work to it if it made it a more accurate tool, right? I mean it kept them alive, I figure they could appreciate doing whatever was in your power to make it more effective.

[Navigator]

Hey, if it's "frankenrifle" go for it. I've got one S&W, whose parts span a 60 year time period. I do want to see the results.

[enterprikayak]

From your photos, the Springfield is in superb condition. Please don't drill and tap it for a scope. The old girl is at least 65 and they are getting rarer and rarer. Shooting it is OK, but please leave this one in original condition. Hornady makes some darn fine ammo, don't they?

Absolutely. Had an old friend who's a reloader say he took his brother to the range with some rifle and they were shootin Hornady and he shot about 1 MOA and his brother was like hot damn imagine what I'll get reloading... and Tim was like, I honestly don't think you're going to see much improvement... I think they're probably the best as far as factory ammo for ~.30 cal rifle.

BTW, though, my Springfield isn't even close to being in original condition anyway... It's got a 1943 Smith Corona receiver and a 1944 Remington Arms barrel... not to mention a C-stock w/ the pistol grip that came after the war... I think it's kind of a frankenrifle already man

Besides, you know what else I think about it? I ask myself, if you were in the Pacific theatre, or in Europe, and you were hanging out with some army or marine marksman units and they wouldn't bat an eye at drilling the receiver and doing some work to it if it made it a more accurate tool, right? I mean it kept them alive, I figure they could appreciate doing whatever was in your power to make it more effective.

Definitely you should do it.

I have no idea what you two are talking about. Except this part:

.... 1943 Smith Corona ...

That's old beer.

[Elessar]

Smith-Corona, hun, the arms manufacturer not CORONA

[enterprikayak]

Now I'm just confused.

[Alelou]

Wasn't Smith-Corona also a typewriter brand?

[Distracted]

Same guys, apparently.

http://www.answers.com/topic/smith-corona

[Navigator]

Same guys, apparently.

http://www.answers.com/topic/smith-corona

Yep, they were the typewriter people. During wartime you'd be surprised who made weapon. Smith-Corona the typewriter people, made Springfields. Remington-Rand, also typewriter, but related in someway that I forget to Remington Arms, made 1911s. Rockola, who made juke boxes, made M-1 carbines. You'd be surprised today as to who is making firearms or parts of them and you'd be surprised as to what else firearms makers make.

Interestingly, sometimes the firearms makers don't make the best ones. During the '50s M-14s were made by Harrington&Richardson (firearms), Winchester (firearms) and TRW (not-firearms). The TRWs were the best of the bunch and are highly prized.