quote:

Originally posted by JustC:
As I stated, I made reference to 3rd hand info. That being said,..you telling me you served with him and my pard pics of the two of them arm in arm equate to possibilities either way. You may wish to build your reputation as someone who has been immersed in the company of an icon,..but that and 37 cents gets you a stamp. I stated that I had been told something,..and put the appropriate disclaimer on that statement. Now,..you are telling me something,..so am I supposed to drop all suspicion of your statements? Congratulations,..you are another "I was there" person. Have Carlos send me a letter,....OHHHH that's right,..he can't. I'll file your info right next to the other info I presented.

Oh yeah,..and if you had waited more than 1min after I posted,.you would have noticed that I edited my post due to the fact that I was unsure of Land's "appropriate" rank designation and therefore eliminated that from the post all together.

Sooo,..how many confirmed did you get with your model 70?

You know, have you ever sought any professional help for that attitude.

Please show me one single part of anything I posted that could be interpreted as my trying to “build a reputation†of some kind based on something as silly as having served in the same outfit as someone else? That puts me in a group of probably several thousand people...not something real unique or special to base a reputation on.

All I said, and I will stand by it, was that I served in the same outfit as Carlos Hathcock (7th MARINES), and personally saw him carrying a model 70 in 1969 on several different occasions. I was not a “friend†of Hathcock’s (and never claimed to be) we just happened to both be in the same outfit and the same time. I also saw several other 7th Marine snipers carrying model 70‘s in 1969...as well as some carrying M700’s.

Since you never served in the Corps you may not be aware that when something “new†is adopted it sometimes takes quite sometime before it replaces its predecessor 100%. The Corps didn’t start issuing M700’s in Vietnam until 1967...and they certainly didn’t immediately throw away all the model 70’s, and M1D’s they had in service when that happened.

In 1969 Hathcock was hardly the “legend†that he may be now, except with guys he served with and who might have heard of his exploits, which not all had.

Your two brash and bold statements were both incorrect and you seem to have a problem admitting that fact.

When and where were your friends pictures taken with Hathcock...during Vietnam in the 1960’s, or stateside in the 1980’s? Why do I think its the latter and not the former?????

If you, or your friend, are trying to base your “reputations†on some pictures hanging on your wall with someone considered “famous†in the shooting world then perhaps it is you two that have some problems to work out.

I admitted to relaying 3rd hand info,..prior to your objections. I have nothing to admit,..as I stated quite clearly it was info from another source.

The “transition†from wood to fiberglass stocks happened WAY [!!!!!!] after the Vietnam war had ended.


All I said, and I will stand by it, was that I served in the same outfit as Carlos Hathcock (7th MARINES), and personally saw him carrying a model 70 in 1969 on several different occasions. I was not a “friend†of Hathcock’s (and never claimed to be) we just happened to both be in the same outfit and the same time. I also saw several other 7th Marine snipers carrying model 70‘s in 1969...as well as some carrying M700’s

Now what happened to the adoption of the rem700 being wayyyyy after vietnam? Or was that a typo? Explain my misinterpretation and I'll apologize for my mis-statement. The rem700 got it's start BECAUSE of vietnam and it;s extreme temp/hummidity changes and the mcmillan stocked 700 came into play due to warpage being nill in the fiberglass stock. The action was not the decideing factor,..it was the STOCK. And the rem company just happened to place a bid with the mcmillan stock, and uncle sam liked the idea.

Now,..what attitude was it that you interpreted from me defending against your "I was there" attack? I'll share 50% of the blame Rick,..but you are meeting me half way on that one. And yes. the pics are from stateside due to the fact that my pard and Carlos became friends at the 1000yd matches,..not in vietnam. (although he is a marine "ret") I even had him get the gunny to sign my book,..but he died soon after and some sumbitch stole it before I ever got it back.

quote:

Originally posted by JustC

Carlos used a model70 because that was what he was issued. Then he got a rem700 issued. It was the transition period from the wood stocked mod70's to the fiberglass stocked rem 700's. He used both.

JustC,

Pardner, I think you just want to argue so I’ll oblige you for a moment. Read your own original post and honestly tell me that this does not sound like something coming from someone with personal knowledge of the topic and the person mentioned.

No matter how hard you try...and no matter how many friends with pictures you have...the fact remains that both of the above statements you made are total hog-wash.

If I recall correctly, Hathcock was a SSGT in 1969, and was probably the highest ranking NCO in the 7th Marine Snipers that worked in the bush on a regular basis. Knowing the Corps as I do, and knowing Hathcock’s relationship with his CO at the time, I find it very difficult to believe that Hathcock was “issued†anything he didn’t want to use.

In addition to his own CO (Captain Land at the time) Hathcock also had a Rabbi in the person of Lt.Col Dowd the CO of 1/7, the batallion that Hathcock worked with on a regular basis in 69 and the outfit he was working with when he got blown up.

Bottom line...if Hathcock wanted to go into the bush armed with a sling shot, there wasn’t anyone above him in rank that was going to tell him no...so the statement that he only used a certain rifle because that’s what he had to use because it was issued to him is absurd.

I was with A/1/7 and there were more than a few times that Hathcock rode in the same chopper, rode on the same AMTRAK, and participated in the same ops as I did. We were not friends or buddies and I doubt we ever exchanged more than a casual word or two in passing, we just happened to be in the same war at the same time, and at many of the same places...along with thousands of other guys.

That has no meaning or value, and is not intended to convey anything other than the fact that I personally saw what I related to you and I was not relying on 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th hand information, or stories told to a friend by a man dying from MS many years after the fact.

Your juvenile litle comments about my attempting to “build a reputation†through association with Hathcock just shows me what kind of man you really are, or perhaps aren’t!

quote:

Originally posted by mho:
Gents,

Can a 6.5x55 be fit into a "standard" action (like a M700 or a M700 clone), or are modifications necessary??

Feeding: will a magazine and feed rails intended for a .270 Win or .30-06 let a 6.5x55 feed with no problems??

Bolt face - the 6.5x55 is slightly different from a standard (.270 Win/.30-06) bolt head. Enough to worry about?? I believe 6.5x55 Lapua brass is different in the case head to US manufactured brass?? I'd like to be able to use the Lapua brass.

In a M700, I'd need a long action (around 3.7" mag length). Will that lead to problems with feeding??

Is it easy (cheap) to have the bolt handle changed on a M700?? If yes, are there better ways of attaching an aftermarket handle (compared to the factory handle)??

Anybody care to suggest a M700 clone (the better mouse trap) action, that would do the trick?? I'd prefer CM steel. Are Ed Brown actions for sale, and what do they cost?? Anybody else build long M700 clones at present??

- mike

Have you given any thought to a HVA [commercial small ring Husky] as a basis for your project? They are fine actions.

Jordan

quote:

Originally posted by mho:
Gents,

Can a 6.5x55 be fit into a "standard" action (like a M700 or a M700 clone), or are modifications necessary??

Feeding: will a magazine and feed rails intended for a .270 Win or .30-06 let a 6.5x55 feed with no problems??

Bolt face - the 6.5x55 is slightly different from a standard (.270 Win/.30-06) bolt head. Enough to worry about?? I believe 6.5x55 Lapua brass is different in the case head to US manufactured brass?? I'd like to be able to use the Lapua brass.

In a M700, I'd need a long action (around 3.7" mag length). Will that lead to problems with feeding??

Is it easy (cheap) to have the bolt handle changed on a M700?? If yes, are there better ways of attaching an aftermarket handle (compared to the factory handle)??

Anybody care to suggest a M700 clone (the better mouse trap) action, that would do the trick?? I'd prefer CM steel. Are Ed Brown actions for sale, and what do they cost?? Anybody else build long M700 clones at present??

- mike

Mike,

Who is telling you that these “better mousetrap 700 clones†are in fact any better than a regular 700...and what are they claiming makes them so much better? Comments from the manufacturers should, of course, be taken with a grain of salt. You just might be placing far more value on these “clones†than they deserve...just my opinion.

Anyone who builds a “new†action for sale to the public has to do something different in the design unless they want to run into patent infringement problems with the actions they are copying. Many times the only differences are those needed to avoid that problem and have very little to do with anything being any “better.â€

If you are worried about the old Urban Legend of 700 bolt handles falling off then have the bolt handle screwed to the bolt body. There are several smiths out there doing this for guys that feel they need it. I’ve spoken to one of the guys doing this and he kind of chuckles when you ask him about it and says: “Hey, if guys think they need it, and are willing to pay me to do it, I ain’t about to talk them out of it.â€

Like several others have already said...there are lots of actions in addition to 700’s that will handle this cartridge just fine, so your choices are not as limited as you are making them out to be.

I almost hate to throw my dog into this cat fight. Emotions run so strong regards each person's favorite action, that a contrary view doesn't always have a chance.

Anyway, for the umpteenth time, Camp Perry IS NOT a test of rifle accuracy. It is primarily a test of the shooter's ability to cope with whatever variables he encounters on the line. However, even at Camp Perry, a Remington HAS won the national championship, in the hands of Mitch Maxberry. I personally think the model 70 is a much better action for Perry, especially as an across-the-course gun...but that is because it is a lot easier to work smoothly and quickly in rapid fire, not because it is inherently more accurate. It IS, of course, plenty accurate enough, when properly set-up & maintained.

Properly set-up Remingtons, on the other hand HAVE won a pretty fair number of registered benchrest matches. I have never heard or read of a Model 70-actioned rifle having won an official registered benchrest 100 or 200 yard group match aggregate in the last 35 years since groups really began to shrink.

So the high-power shooters rightfully prefer the Model 70 because over-all it is better suited to that type of match. Benchrest shooters when forced to choose between the two opt for the Remington 700, because they are easier to get consistent, fully competitive extreme accuracy from.

Both are good actions. Pick your own poison, just don't think that because you (the generic you) prefer it, it is the right dosage for everyone.

quote:

Originally posted by Alberta Canuck:
I almost hate to throw my dog into this cat fight. Emotions run so strong regards each person's favorite action, that a contrary view doesn't always have a chance.

Anyway, for the umpteenth time, Camp Perry IS NOT a test of rifle accuracy. It is primarily a test of the shooter's ability to cope with whatever variables he encounters on the line. However, even at Camp Perry, a Remington HAS won the national championship, in the hands of Mitch Maxberry. I personally think the model 70 is a much better action for Perry, especially as an across-the-course gun...but that is because it is a lot easier to work smoothly and quickly in rapid fire, not because it is inherently more accurate. It IS, of course, plenty accurate enough, when properly set-up & maintained.

Properly set-up Remingtons, on the other hand HAVE won a pretty fair number of registered benchrest matches. I have never heard or read of a Model 70-actioned rifle having won an official registered benchrest 100 or 200 yard group match in the last 35 years since groups really began to shrink.

So the high-power shooters rightfully prefer the Model 70 because over-all it is better suited to that type of match. Benchrest shooters when forced to choose between the two opt for the Remington 700, because they are easier to get consistent, fully competitive extreme accuracy from.

Both are good actions. Pick your own poison, just don't think that because you (the generic you) prefer it, it is the right dosage for everyone.

Perfectly put...and very good advice!

quote:

Originally posted by Rick 0311:
Mike,

Who is telling you that these “better mousetrap 700 clones†are in fact any better than a regular 700...and what are they claiming makes them so much better? Comments from the manufacturers should, of course, be taken with a grain of salt. You just might be placing far more value on these “clones†than they deserve...just my opinion.

Anyone who builds a “new†action for sale to the public has to do something different in the design unless they want to run into patent infringement problems with the actions they are copying. Many times the only differences are those needed to avoid that problem and have very little to do with anything being any “better.â€

If you are worried about the old Urban Legend of 700 bolt handles falling off then have the bolt handle screwed to the bolt body. There are several smiths out there doing this for guys that feel they need it. I’ve spoken to one of the guys doing this and he kind of chuckles when you ask him about it and says: “Hey, if guys think they need it, and are willing to pay me to do it, I ain’t about to talk them out of it.â€

Like several others have already said...there are lots of actions in addition to 700’s that will handle this cartridge just fine, so your choices are not as limited as you are making them out to be.

Yo Rick, when you get into the accuracy game, M700s become a bit like military Mausers for the hunting action market. They can be customized almost no end: new trigger, new recoil lug, new firing pin assembly, action and boltface squared, lugs lapped, bolt sleeved, action sleeved - you name it. There seems to be no end to the fun things you can do to make a M700 approach one of the custom (BR type) actions. Just for fun, I have just gone down this road with a M700 of mine, mostly to see what was possible, and what would make sense.

When you start playing games like this, you very soon come to the point, where the amount of money you put into the M700 not only makes the end product about as expensive as if you had started out with a custom action. What is more, the resale value of all the customizations is pretty doubtful. I don't build guns to sell them again, but it is a fact that a customized M700 won't fetch anywhere close to the prices of a rifle built on a full-blown custom action. So if you want to build on a M700, it probably makes sense to try to keep yourself under control, and not try every trick in the book to make your M700 shoot with the best.

Jerry Stiller (of BR action fame) has announced he will introduce a M700 clone - working name: Predator. This would be intended for people who wanted a M700, but would like to have something sqaure and dimensionally sound from the beginning (i.e. no need to square, lap and sleeve...), but without the high cost and multitude of options found in true BR actions. However, as new action projects often go, there are delays, and it is unknown whether the action will ever become a reality. I really hope he manages to bring this action to market. IMHO it would be perfect for the guy who wants to build a really accurate rifle, without going to the cost of a full-blown custom action. The Predator has been estimated to cost $500-600, other custom actions run between $900 - $1500...

All in all, I really like the M700 for accuracy projects. But if you start customizing the action, you have to stay alert to the cash invested, and compare to the price of a custom action.

- mike

Mike,

I work on 700’s allot and I don’t necessarily disagree with your comments...but I just have never considered Ed Brown’s products as custom bench rest actions. Just my opinion.

quote:

Originally posted by Rick 0311:
Mike,

I work on 700’s allot and I don’t necessarily disagree with your comments...but I just have never considered Ed Brown’s products as custom bench rest actions. Just my opinion.

I agree, I was thinking of the Ed Browns because I needed a repeater, and because they come in CM - which most the BR actions don't. Sadly, those actions were not available for sale to the public.

When I spoke of BR actions, I was thinking Hall, BAT, Stiller, Nesika etc. Both Nesika and Borden make repeaters, but I think all their actions are SS.
- mike

You came off trying awful hard the be beleivable, but then admit later to simply just passing the gunny. Hell, I passed 2 of the last 3 presidents and even shook hands and talked breifly,..so I must be an expert in foreign affairs. I made no attempt at discrediting your assertion once you stated you had been there,..as I certainly was not.

also, my comment as to your position was typed in a mature and non-insulting fashion, just matter of factly. And as you obvioulsy felt threatened by words on a computer monitor, you respond with a question as to my manhood. That is the mark of testosterone overtaking rational and mature thought processes (a trait exibited by the majority of federal inmates). I made no insults, you however could not proceed without doing so.

I find it amusing that a discussion on rifles can be made into a pissing match,..but then there are those on every forum I frequent.

JustC,

You know son, you’ve got some problems that aren’t going to be solved with your childish (and very unsucessful) attempts to insult me.

I’ll leave it to others to read our posts to decide which one of us was “name dropping†and attempting to “come off†as something they weren’t. “Carlosâ€...and the “Gunnyâ€?????

Please inform me, oh wise one, exactly how intimate a relationship does one need with another person in order to identify the firearm they are carrying?

here is one for you, follow the link. I guess you just weren't there when he carried the rem700. Now who was it that said that happened?



<A HREF="http://www.northfork.net/vietnam/wwwboard/messages/186.html" TARGET=_blank>http://www.northfork.net/vietnam/wwwboard/messages/186.html[/URL]</A>

Here is your link to the data that in the early 70's, and BECAUSE of vietnam the mcmillan stocks were used. Am I incorrect in my thinking that the Vietnam war was still under way in the early 70's? if so, then I admit that info is false.



http://www.snipercentral.com/m40a1.htm

and once again that was not an insult in the previous post, simply an observation. An insult would come in the form of multiple colorful euphamisms and aludings of deviant sexual behavior or the like. However, I did not and will not reduce myself to that demeanor. Any thoughts of insults thus far are simply mis-interpretations and I can be big enough to even aplogize for typing them in such a way as to mislead you if that is in fact the case.

JustC,

Pardner,

If you will take the time to go back and read my posts you will clearly see that all I ever said was that Carlos Hathcock used a model 70 to win the 1965 Wimbeldon Cup match, and that I personally saw Carlos Hathcock carrying a Winchester model 70 rifle in Vietnam in 1969 on a few occasions when our paths happened to cross. NEVER did I say that this was the only rifle he ever used or carried, because I have no personal knowledge to make that statement. Unlike you...I don’t base my statements on what someone told me...or if I do, I make that clear from the beginning, which you didn’t.

I NEVER once claimed, or even implied, that Hathcock and I were friends, close or otherwise...in fact I clearly stated that we were NOT friends and had only exchanged small talk on a few occasions in passing, just like every other grunt in the 7th Marines did.

Carlos Hathcock WAS NOT in Vietnam in the 1970’s, nor was I. We were both wounded and left the country in 1969.

The model M40A1 (McMillan stocked) was not in service in the early 1970’s in Vietnam. There may have been early prototypes at Quantico then, but they weren’t in Vietnam, and Carlos Hathcock certainly never had access to one in 1969 that I am aware of.

What do you call this if not an attempt at an insult?

Your quote:

“ You may wish to build your reputation as someone who has been immersed in the company of an icon,..but that and 37 cents gets you a stampâ€

Again, Show me where anything I have posted could even remotely approach an attempt on my part to build a reputation as someone who was “immersed in the company of an icon.â€

Now go back and read your own posts:

“My daddy’s hunting friendâ€...â€pictures of my friend arm and arm with Carlos, all over his living room wallsâ€...â€Carlos did such and suchâ€...â€The Gunny†(I loved that one!)...etc, etc, etc.

Who is trying to build a reputation here??????

JustC,

Decided to visit your little links you posted!


Are you really and truly that naive and impressionable?

Some guy (who the hell knows who he is) on some web site says that Carlos Hathcock switched over to 700’s “somewhere in 1965 or 1966.“

Number one...Carlos Hathcock didn’t serve in Vietnam in 1965...and didn’t become a sniper until very late in 1966. Number two...M700’s (all with wood stocks) didn’t get fully into the supply system in Vietnam until Hathcock‘s first tour was almost over in late 1967.

That other link you posted shows and gives the specs for a model M40A1 that wasn’t in service until 1979. What’s that got to do with Vietnam era sniper rifles? Carlos Hathcock hadn’t been in Vietnam for ten years at that point in time, and the last Marine ground forces had left Vietnam in 1973.

Since you seem to have such a hard time in believing what I say, why not have your dad ask Jim Land about this stuff. If anyone alive would know it would be him.

My daddy doesn't shoot,..I said a pard of mine. That is the first failed reading lesson for today.

Next, the building a reputation comment stems from your projection of being correct about the fact that the adoption of the M40A1 being wayyyy after vietnam and that it was NOT the transitional period,..which was totaly incorrect.

Check the svc date here:
http://www.militaryfactory.com/smallarms/detail.asp?smallarms_id=15 Yeah,..that's 1972. You are wrong about the transitional period statement I made. Nuff said.

The Gunny and Carlos are affectionate terms I give to someone whom I feel was one of the most influential shooters of the last century. I am not in the service,..so I am under no obligation to address them in any way that I don't wish to. The Gunny is my way of refering to Carlos. If he was my C.O. then it would most certainly be "SGT Hathcock". But fortunately, I sign all the paychecks here,..so I am the only one whom commands he be addressed in a certain manner in the civilian world, and can only demand that of my employees while they are at work (or in svc so to speak).

I don't need a reputation from the gunny,..as it is clearly stated that I never met him,..so how could one attempt to build a reputation from that? What gain if at all would there be? I simply relayed 3rd hand info from a pard whom I know for a fact has spent quite a bit of time in the company of the man.

quote:

I got that info 3rd hand from a pard of mine who was a good friend of Carlos. That is what you get with not being there yourself,..but I can tell you that all the pictues on the wall in his house of the two of them arm-in-arm is enough to substantiate what he says. I wasn't there so I can't say for sure. I only know what I was told by his friend. [QUOTE]

BTW,..isn't this entire post a disclaimer? or did you miss that one while patting yourself on the back for being totaly incorrect about the transition period being years after the war? 1972 was during the war or very close to it's end at least. I made my disclaimer,..you didn't make yours until far later in the conversation,..should I say WAYYYY [!!!!] after the initial post which is steeped in the fact that you served with him. It wasn't until later you come clean with the fact that you rode around with him once or twice and layed eyes on his stick. I have no reason to doubt your info there, however it is far from all encompassing of his career in-country.

[QUOTE] I don’t know where your info on Hathcock comes from, but I served with him in the 7th Marines in 1969 in Vietnam and personally saw him carrying his model 70 with the 8x Unertl long after the original M700’s had been brought into use.

tell me that doesn't sound like you were along side him in 1969. But now later it turns into:

quote:

I was with A/1/7 and there were more than a few times that Hathcock rode in the same chopper, rode on the same AMTRAK, and participated in the same ops as I did. We were not friends or buddies and I doubt we ever exchanged more than a casual word or two in passing, we just happened to be in the same war at the same time, and at many of the same places...along with thousands of other guys.

The first post is misleading and not expounded on until later. Your comments about the transition period are simply wrong,..and I defended my position by presenting info stating it's SVC date was in 1972. That is not wayyyy after, As the difference between 1969 and 1972 makes for a picture perfect definition of "transitional period". And the link confirms he took a rem700,..whether the time line is off is of little concern to me. He did take a rem700 and therefore he DID use both rifles. before the rem700, the standard issue sniper rifle was the model 70win (hence no choices) but then the rem700 emerges, and low and behold he took one of them, albeit not right away from what you say. I seem to recall a reference to the rem700 in the "marine sniper" book,..but as stated some treasure hunter stole my copy which was signed before it could be given back to me, so I have no way of checking on that as I refuse to buy another copy since I'm still pissed about the first one.

so all in all, he was issued the mod70, he then took a rem700, and it was during the transition period. So all you have is your allegations of name dropping,..which by your own logic, we are both guilty of.

JustC,

Look, lets put an end to this ridiculous debate, which has absolutely nothing to do with the inherent accuracy of a particular rifle in question, which is what prompted my first post that drew your comments about Hathcock and his rifles.

Remington 700 sniper rifles came into the supply system in late 1967 in Vietnam. They had WOODEN stocks...NOT fiberglass stocks...and the “transition†period to fiberglass stocks, that you are so hung up on, happened in the late 1970’s with the adoption of the M40A1, NOT in the early 1970’s with the M40 (or what most Marines at the time called an M700). Since you weren’t in the service I can understand that you might not be aware that whenever any major change is made to a weapon system the Model designation is automatically updated to “A†and a number to designate the new model. A change from a wooden stock to a fiberglass stock would constitute such a “major†change.

Taking that into consideration what would the model number of the replacement to an M40 be? If you answered M40A1 you can go to the head of the class! The M40 A1 came into service in 1979...or six years after the last Marine Ground Forces had departed beautiful Vietnam, Republic of, and ten years after Hathcock had left Vietnam.

I don’t care what books and web sites you have found that say otherwise, those statements are fact. If you cannot accept my word for it have your dad ask Jim Land since I believe he was on the M40A1 design team.

Again, for the umpteenth time...I NEVER said that Hathcock didn’t also use Remington 700’s on occasion. I have no personal knowledge that would confirm or deny that statement.

ALL I HAVE SAID IN EVERY ONE OF MY POSTS IS THAT I PERSONALLY SAW THE MAN CARRYING A WINCHESTER MODEL 70 ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS IN 1969... PERIOD...END OF STORY! No wild war stories, no claims of heroics, I just happened to see the guy and the rifle.

Is that so hard for you to understand and comprehend????????????

Where you are coming up with all these “hidden meanings†or “hidden agenda’s†of mine is beyond my comprehension...but it‘s wearing a little thin.

Go back to your books, web sites, and pictures and have a happy and wonderful life, and don’t try to argue things having to do with the Marine Corps with old grunts who know better.

Sure thing Rick,...it can be over.

Now with all due respect, until I find documentation otherwise, the M40A1 is listed as a svc date of 1972. That stands up to criticism as I find no other documentation to contradict that,..in fact there is an extreme absence of the actual svc date in just about anywhere I have looked. So for now,..I have only one peice of data to draw a conclusion from. And that is not to detract from your presentation either,..just my preference in data accumulation. Something I must have picked up in school.

have a nice day.

notice the lack of incendiary remarks.

the hidden agenda thing still escapes me though,..I hadn't sensed any of those. Should I go back and re-read? I must have missed them,..and that is not like me when it comes to reading comprehension

JustC,

When you get to be an old fart like me you might learn to rely on 1st hand personal accounts far more than all the crap available on the internet written by arm-chair warriors, and self-proclaimed experts on subjects they know nothing about.

Call this company and ask for Eric. He is an ex USMC armorer who rebuilt almost all of the M40A1 sniper rifles when he served at Quantico.
http://www.gaprecision.net/content/products.php

Ask him what year the M40A1’s came into service. You might also want to contact Unertl (702) 369-4092, and ask Ted what year John Unertl invented the 10x sniper scope for the M40A1 rifles. He applied for the patent in 1978 and received it on January 27, 1981. You can go to the US Patent office web site for that info. Patent # 4,247,161.

Remember now...any major modification (new scope, new stock, etc) requires a change in Model number. There were no USMC sniper rifle models between the M40 and the M40A1. The M40A2, used a newer McMillan stock, new scope rings and bases and new bottom metal...and the M40A3’s have a newer still McMillan stock pattern...and from what I have heard the M40A4’s will go with a different scope.

Let's just disagree instead

have a nice day Rick.

quote:

Originally posted by JustC:
Let's just disagree instead

have a nice day Rick.

JustC,

My error...a change in a scope would not require a new model number...but that doesn’t change my other points about when the fiberglass stocks came into service.

You can also go to McMillan’s web site and read the history of his making fiberglass stocks for the Corps‘ M40A1 sniper rifles. The process “started†in 1975 with the Corps contacting him and him starting the design phase.

I believe (could be wrong, but don’t think so) that the first “combat†use of the fiberglass stocked M40A1 was in 1982 in Beirut.

I think you are misinterpreting some of the things you are reading when they refer to a “process starting†at a certain time. The difference in time between a plan “starting†and a weapon actually getting into the hands of a Marine in the field can take many years to complete.

At the risk of starting another go around with you over my “I was there†attitude...the 7th Marine Sniper platoon in 1969 (two years or so after the M40 Remington‘s started hitting Vietnam) had M1D’s, M14’s, Wichester 70’s, M700’s (M40’s) and even a Remington 40X in their weapons room on Hill 55.

The only point in that is to show that just because a new weapon is introduced into the system doesn’t mean all the others get thrown away and never used again. The Corps got the M16’s issued in 1967, but it took quite awhile for all the units to make the switch...and even then some guys stayed with the M14’s and there were always several M14’s in each platoon clear up till the time the Marines pulled out in 1973.

Your mistakes are honest ones...but nonetheless, still mistakes.

Trust me, you should have no trouble at all finding any number of topics where your expertise and knowledge far surpasses mine...but I’m afraid the Marine Corps ain’t going to be one of them.

Rick,..can you send me somewhere that has that info about the whole start-to-finish process on the M40A1? as I stated, the information I can find on the net is scattered and contradictory at best. I was only ever able to find the one sight, (and I have been a rem700 afficianado or at least huge fan of, for many years) I have gone into everything I can find to answer these questions and get nothing but a span of time. I have yet to see more than 1 or 2 sites which agree, and they only ever agree on maybe 1 point out of how many? This has become frustrating. I was sure that the huge amount of research I had done in the past few years had netted me, FINALY a date. I have no knowledge of the site or it's admin etc, but it sure looked like it was not one of those "fly by night on the wings of opinion" places. However, I guess digital cameras and graphics programs make anything look credible these days.

JustC,

You have access to probably the most knowledgable person still alive on the topic of Sniper Rifles in general, and the development of the M40 series of Marine Corps rifles in particular...Major Jim Land.

Eric, at GA Precision would be another person to speak with, as he was a Marine Corps armorer at Quantico who has probably personally handled and worked on more M40’s than you could shake a stick at.

Looking for “accurate†information in books and/or the internet will usually result in exactly what you are experiencing...frustration. You will find the majority of the stuff on the internet is just information that people have swiped from some book that was wrong, and the bad info just keeps getting spread under a different title and “author.â€

In direct answer to your question though, I don’t know of any web sites that provide 100% accurate info on the M40’s.

I'll have to ask if Land is still a member of the grand national waterfowl association. That would no doubt be how he ended up hunting on the Father-in-law's farm. If he is,..all his contact info should be in the members directory. Maybe I can get him another hunt and he can spend a few hours with me and my "so called files full of research". I bet my rem700 sniper rifle file has more contradictions then our conversation here has in it. I still have only ever recovered one site that the writer even TRIED to give a date of svc for the rifle. EVERYTHING else says blah blah blah from the late 60's to the late 70's. Now, I may not be the smartest guy around,..but when I see that type of info dispersion, I am uncomfortable with any of it, as it is so damn different from source to source. When I dug up that addy a while back with a 1972 date,..I figured I had finally found a diamond in the coal mine,...finally someone had a clue. But, it appears that your source will be able to refute that,..and now here I am,..back at the beginning again.

JustC,

PM’s sent to you a few minutes ago.

Pardner, if I worried about all the bum info I have received, and even passed on, over the years I would have had a heart attack along time ago!

I believe you should be able to contact Jim Land through the NRA...he’s a board member.