1 mile shot with M1903A4 Springfield sniper variant with M84 scope - .30-06

[crash277]

I'm just starting into Long Range shooting with a .308. Really enjoying this thread. I love snipers tales from all eras, fluke or skill!
Please keep this going. 30-06, .308, .338...heck! What's the longest kill with a .22LR? That should be interesting. I know I can look it up but want to bump this!

I just started ong range as well, I like this thread. I may have to get into hand loading eventually.

 

[Melnibonean]

I just started ong range as well, I like this thread. I may have to get into hand loading eventually.

There's no "might" about it. You will need to.

....just wait until you start obsessing about primer pocket cleaning. Fun times.

 

[Still alive]

There's no "might" about it. You will need to.

....just wait until you start obsessing about primer pocket cleaning. Fun times.

HAHAHAHA! I'm there already! I'm currently experimenting with 155, 168 and 178 gr bullets with Varget powder. I enjoy scraping out the primer pockets! It's the measuring of the powder that is slow as heck!!

 

[caramel]

The furthest i shot my 1903A4 was 200 yards and it was a solid MOA to that distance using Corelockts 220 gr with the 73A 2.5 X Letterman scope... JP;

Little video of the 1903A4 in action at the range... Press on picture to activate...

[/URL][/IMG]

 

[RobertMcC]

Billy Dixon June 1874 1,406 m (1,538 yd) Sharps .50-90 .50-90 Sharps United States Civilian Buffalo Hunter American Indian Wars

Anything in the 1 mile is 338 or 50BMG from what I can find.

7.62x51 one I found was shy under 1400Y. Who know if this is true.

 

[J996]

AFAIK this is still the current record kill for .308 There are mentions of the Brits hitting a bit further with the L96A1 (it was in a sas sniper book) but I can't find anything concrete about it.

 

[RobertMcC]

AFAIK this is still the current record kill for .308 There are mentions of the Brits hitting a bit further with the L96A1 (it was in a sas sniper book) but I can't find anything concrete about it.

Staff Sergeant Jim Gilliland apperently now has the longest 308 kill at 1367 Yards. 1250 M

 

[purple]

Let's assume that the SPR "sniper guy" was shooting 168gr AP ammo from his M1903A4 with a nominal MV of 2700 fps. Let's also assume that the 168gr Sierra match bullet is roughly equivalent in ballistics performance, then look at Sierra's ballistics tables for this bullet. Assuming a 300yd zero and a MV of 2700 fps the bullet would drop 369 inches @ 1000 yds or 5 times the height of a 6ft man. And we still have 760 yds to go beyond the 1000 yd bullet drop calculation, so we are definitely talking about a huge amount of holdover with a resulting plunging bullet trajectory. Now throw in the effects of a modest 10mph wind at 1000 yds (again 760 yds shy of the mile long shot) and we are looking at 109 inches of lateral wind drift.

In addition to trying to estimate the range and dope the wind for a 1 mile shot (no hip pocket rangefinders or wind flags out there), you need to consider the inadequacies of the Weaver 2.5x sniper scope to make this shot. With that scope it would be all holdover for elevation and hold off for wind as it simply did not have enough internal adjustments or precise settings for this. Then there is the poor optical quality, parallax distortions, small field of view and huge post reticle to obscure the target. Target resolution with that scope at that range would have been next to impossible.

Identifying and engaging a man sized target at a mile in another issue. Is the target stationary or moving? Is there any way to ID the bullet impact at that range so as to make holdover/hold off corrections for subsequent shots? Is the target fully or partially exposed? What about the effects of intervening terrain, trees, vegetation and buildings to mask the target? What about mirage effects? While it might be interesting to chip away with this rifle @ 1 mile, I'd vote for an 81mm mortar instead.

 

[sunray]

No different ammo in WW2 for the 1903A4. Not likely to be left handed snipers either(although there might have been since there were no rules then. Current prerequisites, U.S.M.C. at least, allow right handers only.)
Anyway, at a mile the bullet drop is far too much. A 165 grain hunting bullet drops about 375.6".
Nor can you just change scopes like in that MOVIE. The base has windage adjustments built into it(the rear screws in the picture) and you have to get the scope rings on just right or the scope will be way off.
What load are you using for 1.5 MOA groups @ 100 yds.? Mine will go under that with IMR4064 and Hornady 168 HPBT's. Tell an American you're shooting it and he'll have a stroke. Four figure values, Stateside. snicker.

 

[GunGuy34]

SPR is a good flick, but a lot of it is pure Hollywood. The keen eye will recall that the "sniper" character was using 2 different scopes on his rifle at different times in the movie. One of them is a Lyman Alaskan which appears in the photo in post #1. The other is unknown.

I own and shoot a real M1903A4 which I've had for some years. The bore is very lightly used and remains in excellent condition. Remington built them with both 2 and 4 groove barrels which were air gauged for tolerances. Mine is a 2 groove. The rifle will shoot consistent 1.5 MOA groups @ 100 yds using quality handloads with 155 or 168gr match bullets.

The standard scope for the M1903A4 was a standard Weaver 330 sporting scope of 2.5x and with a .75 inch diameter tube. The M84 scope was used on some rifles which remained in service into the 1950s. The Weaver 330 is a very flimsy scope and is highly subject to parallax. It would have been great on a rabbit gun, but really wasn't robust enough for a fighting rifle, even a carefully babied sniper rifle. I have a Weaver M73B1, which is a militarized Weaver 330, but use a Lyman Alaskan on my rifle. The Alaskan is a much better scope and was originally specified for the M1903A4, but Lyman was unable to supply them in the quantities required, so the Weaver became the second best choice. The Alaskan has a 7/8 inch tube and is far superior to the Weaver, but it is still only 2.5x. The post and crosshair reticle subtends approx. 4 inches @ 100 yds, so you can imagine how much real estate it would obscure @ 1 mile.

Most military .30-06 ammo in WW2 was the M2 ball round with a 150-152gr flat base bullet which does not hold up well over a long distance. The 168gr AP bullet was ballistically superior and a lot of this ammo was also used. Long range target shooters know that a 168gr bullet pretty much runs out of gas before 1000 yds. Add this to a very poor sighting system shooting over an unknown distance and it boils down to a lot of Kentucky windage and elevation estimation and a lot of Hail Marys. Is a .30-06 still lethal at a mile;could be, but first you need to hit the target.

Short answer. Yes, it is Hollywood BS.

ya he changed out the scope when he shot that german sniper threw his own scope. a homage to carlos for sure.

 

[Sharps '63]

HAHAHAHA! I enjoy scraping out the primer pockets! It's the measuring of the powder that is slow as heck!!

Buy an electronic powder measure. While it's spitting out the next charge, you are seating the bullet over the last.

 

[Suputin]

A 1760 yd shot with WWII 30-06 would not be possible. The 152gr bullet has a long nose and a short bearing surface with a flat base. There is no way that thing is going to remain stable while crossing the sonic barrier. Once a bullet tumbles it will be hopelessly inaccurate within a fairly short distance.

I'm just starting into Long Range shooting with a .308. Really enjoying this thread. I love snipers tales from all eras, fluke or skill!
Please keep this going. 30-06, .308, .338...heck! What's the longest kill with a .22LR? That should be interesting. I know I can look it up but want to bump this!

I have killed gophers at 200 yds with a .22rf.

 

[Still alive]

Buy an electronic powder measure. While it's spitting out the next charge, you are seating the bullet over the last.

What brand do you recommend? I was told by an old time reloader that they were inaccurate for precision shooting.

 

[purple]

What brand do you recommend? I was told by an old time reloader that they were inaccurate for precision shooting.

Ah, to weigh or throw charges. People develop their own preferences over time. When using an easy metering ball powder for high volume reloading I like to throw charges and weigh every 10th charge just to make sure that things are ticketty-boo. For extruded powders like IMR4064 or IMR4895, which tend to be accuracy champs in the .30-06, I set the measure to throw a charge a bit below the required weight into the scale pan and then trickle up to the precise weight before filling each case. IMR 4064 is pretty "loggy" and tends to hang up or bridge in the powder measure which can result in over and under charges if you rely on the measure alone to deliver the correct charge.

A bit of electric power works good for reloading tasks like case trimming and cleaning primer pockets (chuck up your primer pocket brush in the drill press to do this). The RCBS 3 way case trimmer attachment (trims,chamfers and deburrs in one operation) is a good way to go for folks who shoot a lot of .223, .308 or .30-06.

 

[Ganderite]

A 1760 yd shot with WWII 30-06 would not be possible. The 152gr bullet has a long nose and a short bearing surface with a flat base. There is no way that thing is going to remain stable while crossing the sonic barrier. Once a bullet tumbles it will be hopelessly inaccurate within a fairly short distance.

This is a myth. Just because a bullet goes through the target almost sideways does not mean it is tumbling. I have watched thousands of bullets go through targets at 1000 to 1200 yards and seen the egg shaped holes they leave. Some think this is because the bullets are tumbling. No so. You don't hit the bull regularly at 1200 yards with a tumbling bullet.

Consider this set of facts:

At long range the rifle has to be aimed quite high to be able to reach the target.
The bullet will arc over and then drop down towards the target.
The slower the bullet or the poorer the shape, the higher the rifle is aimed and the greater the arc of the trajectory.
The bullet is spinning at 150,000 RPM (or more) and is stable, like a gyroscope.
Depending on the RPM (barely enough or excessive) the bullet will either (1) follow the trajectory with the bullet always aimed up in the same way it left the barrel or (2) the bullet will arc over and try to point in the direction is going (down).

This is where it gets interesting. Either scenario puts a sideways bullet through the target. If the bullet is over stable, it stays pointed up, so that as it comes down into the target, it has a sideways slashing effect on the target. The bullet-shaped hole makes people think it is tumbling.

If the bullet is not over stable, it will tip over and point down as the bullet comes down into the target. This means the bullet has changed the direction it is pointing. (Pointing down instead of up.) Anyone who has played with a gyro knows that it changes attitude, it precesses 90 degrees to the change. So the bullet pointed down will yaw sideways and also leave a sideways hole in the target. Also misdiagnosed as a tumbling bullet.

If transonic passage makes a bullet tumble, no 22 Long Rifle or black powder round would be accurate.

 

[Phat Eagle]

What brand do you recommend? I was told by an old time reloader that they were inaccurate for precision shooting.

IMHO I'd only trust 'em with ball powder, not bar...

You want to know everything about reloading? Take a coffee over to Mr. B's and he'll set you right... NOT MY FAULT that you'll now spend countless hours in search of the perfect load...

 

[BadAsMo]

All the Chargemasters and the like are good for is to get the load close. I sold mine and bought a set of scoops.
If you want to shoot long range you need a scale that can measure better than 1 kernel of powder accuracy.
Mine will weight to less than 1/5 of a kernel of Varget. If you write your name on a piece of paper I can tell you how much the ink weighs.

If you convert the actual load variation you'll get from a 1 decimal place scale to variation in FPS you'll not consistently hold 1 MOA of vertical just on shot charge variation with a 308. In addition to the 1 moa vertical is the atmospheric factors and the accuracy of the rifle.

When I run my loads over a chronogragh I don't determine the SD of my load. I determine the SD of the chronogragh. I wonder if I shoot through 2 or 3 chronographs and average the results if the answer would be more accurate.

 

[purple]

The furthest i shot my 1903A4 was 200 yards and it was a solid MOA to that distance using Corelockts 220 gr with the 73A 2.5 X Letterman scope... JP;

Little video of the 1903A4 in action at the range... Press on picture to activate...

[/URL][/IMG]

This looks like an 04A4 clone built up on an 03A3 action. It has a repro Chinese scope and mount, a different bolt handle and a Smith-Corona made bolt shroud. We see it go bang, but nothing else.

 

[gunlaker]

You probably couldn't even see someone with those old scopes at a half a mile.

That is not at all correct . A half mile is not that far. I can see a person standing at that distance without a scope. I shoot that distance with black powder and front and rear appertures, or sometimes with a 6x scope with a 3/4 tube.

Old rifles work better than many of today's shooters think. You don't need modern technology to shoot or see that far. You only need a stable bullet and wind doping ability. Accuracy has significantly improved in the last 50 years, but the old stuff isn't quite as bad as you think.

However that would likely be a very low probability shot . But hey, it's Hollywood.

Chris.

 

[Dad003]

A 1760 yd shot with WWII 30-06 would not be possible. The 152gr bullet has a long nose and a short bearing surface with a flat base. There is no way that thing is going to remain stable while crossing the sonic barrier. Once a bullet tumbles it will be hopelessly inaccurate within a fairly short distance.

i had some bullet that were not stabilized by my twist in my .243win and they were more accurate than the federal fusion that were grouping over 3inch in my rifle at 100yard when my bets grouping with reload was under .5 inch at 100 too bad i dotn have my binder here with my target otherwise i would put the pic