Which sniper rifle for the US army and German army during fightings in Europe?

The Springfield
The Mauser Karabiner 98k

I think it would depend on who was pulling the trigger. Both fine weapons.

Later

Extremely similar weapons. I believe we had to pay the Germans a fine in the early 1900's because the Springfield was so similar to the k98 Mauser which was made first. Not positive on that but I think I've heard it.

__________________

Miller,

The overall design was different from the get-go. However, the bolt-action itself for the M-1903 Springfield was specifically derived from the Mauser design. However, there were slight differences. Two being that Springfield Armory improved its longevity and its durability.

In a dual however, U.S. Sharphooter vs. Japanese, Italian, or German Sniper....rifle-wise M-1903 Springfield hands down. Long range and accuracy slightly superseded the abilities of the Mauser.

Now if we were to slide into the factor the British .303 Enfield No. 4 Mk. 1....then you'd have a whole new ball-game. Bad-ass rifle for snipering. Boys down in Bristol, U.K. been busting bulls at their annual rifle shoot and the Enfield is still the reigning champion at 2,300 yards!!

If its anything the Brits built EXTREMELY WELL It was the Spitfire, Hurricane and the Enfield No. 4 Mk. 1....

Regards,
MARNE

__________________

"ROCK OF THE MARNE"
Sgt. James Dunigan III
Able Co., U.S. 30th Infantry Regiment
U.S. 3rd Infantry Division(Reenacted)

Miller,

The overall design was different from the get-go. However, the bolt-action itself for the M-1903 Springfield was specifically derived from the Mauser design. However, there were slight differencestwo being that Springfield Armory improved its longevity and its durability.

In a dual however, U.S. Sharphooter vs. Japanes, Italian, or German Sniper....rifle-wise M-1903 Springfield hands down. Long range and accuracy slightly superseded the abilities of the Mauser.

Now if we were to slide into the factor the British .303 Enfield No. 4 Mk. 1....then you'd have a whole new ball-game. Bad-ass rifle for snipering. Boys down in Bristol, U.K. been busting bulls at their annual rifle shoot and the Enfield is still the reigning champion at 2,300 yards!!

If its anything the Brit built EXTREMELY It was the Spitfire, Hurricane and the Enfield No. 4 Mk. 1....

Regards,
MARNE

__________________

"ROCK OF THE MARNE"
Sgt. James Dunigan III
Able Co., U.S. 30th Infantry Regiment
U.S. 3rd Infantry Division(Reenacted)

How about the Russian snipers? Were there Finnish snipers too during the Finnish and Russia war?

There were certainly Finnish snipers, and here's a link to an old thread with information about the greatest of them all : -

http://www.ww2forums.com/cgi-bin/ubb...=000685#000000

__________________
"Stand by to pull me out of the seat if I get hit" - Guy Gibson

I think technically the springfield is better. But personally i think the mauser is better because it came first and was more effective. I mean, the springfield is the mauser but an american tweaked version. But the mauser had a fast bolt-action and was more powerful and effective. The reason the springfield was so good was because of its high accuracy. But the mauser was just a tad less accurate but was stronger and more effective.

__________________
German Stuff is freakin sweet!!!

A superior sniper with a mediocre rifle will ALWAYS outperform a mediocre sniper with a superior rifle. Its the talent not the tools that count!

I have to agree. It is the SKILL of the sniper not the weapon.

__________________


For the first time I have seen "History" at close quarters,and I know that its actual process is very different from what is presented to Posterity. - WWI General Max Hoffman.

Thank you falkenberg. talking about individual weapon capabilities is academic. its the skill of the operator that counts.

Its the same as asking which country has the best. It all depends on the skill and opportunities of the individual. Also on the situation,length of time in service and amount of combat.

__________________


For the first time I have seen "History" at close quarters,and I know that its actual process is very different from what is presented to Posterity. - WWI General Max Hoffman.

Absolutely. who's "best"?

waffen-ss cherkassy pocket

101st battered ba**ards of bastogne

I think both were good weapons. I think however that I'd pick the Springfield, because of its longer distance and its accuracy.

I have fired both and I perfer the Springfield as a "sniping" weapon, but as a rifle, the Kar98

Karabiner 98 Kurz was a fantastic rifle. Very reliable, accurate and an all round great rifle.
The Springfield 1903 was also a very good rifle a almost a direct copy of the Karabiner 98 Kurz.
The Karabiner 98 Kurz’s action was so good the M40A3 (a modern sniper rifle) uses very similar one.

Personally I’d rather a Springfield 1903 for a sniper rifle and a Karabiner 98 Kurz as a standard one (with iron sights). But to be perfectly honest, there isn’t much difference.

do not forget the poor gewher 43 that was in some cases a sniper but just not a good one and not as reliable

“Now if we were to slide into the factor the British .303 Enfield No. 4 Mk. 1....then you'd have a whole new ball-game. Bad-ass rifle for snipering. Boys down in Bristol, U.K. been busting bulls at their annual rifle shoot and the Enfield is still the reigning champion at 2,300 yards!!”

Interesting, in that in The Great War Tommies preferred to use their P14's, aka U.S. Model 1917, as a sniper rifle over the SMLE 1 III*. My own Eddystone M1917 with its 5/18 dated barrel is (ironically, along with my 1888 Commission Rifle) the most accurate of 20 some military rifles I own.

Seamus

Seamus

I think you mean BISLEY Surrey England not Bristol.

~Steve

what does a m1917 look like I have never seen one before

both weapons only work as good as the solider who handles the weapon, german soldiers may have been better trained and skilled than the american soldiers.
so in this case,the german sniper gun may take the title!

In practice, both are hand-picked weapons from the factory assembly line. So there wasn't really any substantial qualitative difference between them.

One veteran member of our forum said he had a scoped Garand. Now that would have been a dangerous weapon in a city fight. If he is reading this read, I would really like to ask him how he got it. Did the armorer toy around with the scope mount?

Rifle, Cal. .30-06, M1, Garand

I have also seen M1's retrofitted with scopes/mounts. They're readily available. M1-Garand Military Rifle Scope Mounts

__________________

"I do not have to tell you who won the war. You know, the artillery did." - Gen. George S. Patton
"In 9 months and 3 days of combat on the Continent the 949th FA Bn had fired 51,000 rounds of ammunition, approximately 2,550 tons." - Unit History

Another point that should be considered is the quality of the scope used or whether the rifle is being used with it's standard sights.

Cheers

The M1903A4 was issued with an M73B1 2.5X scope made by Weaver, or as a substitute standard the M73 made by Lyman. The M1903A1 that was used by the Marines had an 8X Unertl target scope and was not used in the ETO

Perhaps someone familiar with German snipers could provide info about what they used.

__________________

"I do not have to tell you who won the war. You know, the artillery did." - Gen. George S. Patton
"In 9 months and 3 days of combat on the Continent the 949th FA Bn had fired 51,000 rounds of ammunition, approximately 2,550 tons." - Unit History