Springfield M1-C Sniper Rifle

[ltcboy]

I am still a novice collector but I a happy with my prize ornament. Here is my M1C.

http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/0603/ ... =slideshow

Here is my M1D

http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/0603/ ... =slideshow

Have to show this off, my consecutive serial numbered Berettas.

http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/0603/ ... =slideshow

Hope you enjoy.

Mike

[Junk Yard Dog]

Nice ones Mike, you getting there

[desdem12]

[bunkysdad]

Hi Mike, boy would I ever enjoy running into you at the range some time8-)

[MN Fan]

Nice collection Mike! Those matched Barettas are amazing

Well, I couldn't rest unless I ran back over and looked at it one more time. I still doubt I would have brought it home, but I am pretty sure it has been put together outside the arsenal. Possibly, the original scope mount could have gotten damaged and replaced, but either way, its not 100% original. The lace up cheek pad is authentic, as is the scope and flash suppressor. The rifle numbers matched, the scope was correct for the year. But, the scope mount is not original. It isn't serialized to the scope. In fact, it has no markings at all. Its a damn nice rifle and it felt good to hold it again, but I left it behind for someone else to fret over. I can get back to the one's I can afford now

[ltcboy]

Hi Mike, boy would I ever enjoy running into you at the range some time8-)

Actually, i am coming down to Texas, by San Antonio, to kill feral hogs in Sept. I am driving down and i can bring some of my toys if youcan provide the range to go to.


Mike

[Junk Yard Dog]

Better start scrounging up some M2 ball Russell

[harleydrider82]

Hi,

This may be my only post here, but I am hoping to save your wallet. I know this was a few months ago, but here goes.
The rifle you posted pics of is NOT an M1C rifle. The SA-52 mark on the receiver is a legit marking, applied by Springfield Armory to about 400+ M1Cs that were converted to regular M1 configuration by removing the scope base, and "plugging" the holes in the receiver. The rifle then likely had a new barrel mounted if the old one was out of specs, other unserviceable parts replaced, then was re-issued. Why did they do this? The Army and USMC asked for more regular M1s, and this was a quick fix. If you recall, H&R and IH received contractsto build even more M1s during the Korean War.
Several of these SA-52 rebuilds, a legitimate collectible variant, have been "restored" by "unplugging" the receiver, mounting a base,(most of these bases are fake), and returning the rifle to it's original M1C configuration. However, the military never did this to ANY SA-52 rebuilt rifle, and doing so makes it a sort of "fake". NONE of the M1Cs released to the DCM/CMP by the Army had a SA-52 rebuild marking. Not one.
Additionally, the scope base in these pictures looks fake, reproduction, as does the mount.
FWIW, the USMC NEVER used a sniper rifle called the "SA-52". Instead, they later modified the mount system, installed a better scope and called it the MC-1. If you encounter a MC-1, it is likely fake.
I once saw a "original" M1903 Springfield at Gander Mountain, purchased by one of their buyers. The price was $2500.00. A shame, as someone likely bought it, trusting that a company like Gander, or Cabela's, or whomever, would be knowledgeable in purchasing. Wrong. This rifle had a 1942 replacement barrel, and other replacement parts, making it something other than "original".
My guess is that someone "restored" this SA-52 rebuilt rifle, formerly a real M1C, before real M1Cs were available in any quantity here in the US. There are SEVERAL rifles that have been "restored" similarly. The intent of the "restorer" cannot be known, but I can tell you with 100% certainty that the rifle pictured is neither a real M1C, nor a USMC MC-1.
The same holds true for most of the military flintlock rifles one encounters today. Most of these "original" flintlocks were converted prior or during the Civil War to a Percussion priming system. Years later, collectors "restored" them back to flintlock.
So what is this rifle worth? If the scope is legit, the price of the scope, and the price of a regular M1.
HTH,
George

[harleydrider82]

One additional point: The lack of matching numbers between the mount and base, mount and scope, base and rifle, etc, is not a disqualifier. If you find one that does match, it is likely a fake done by an overzealous "restorer". NONE of the legit M1Cs I have seen or read of have matching base and mount numbers. SEVERAL of the scope bases have no number at all and they are legit. A legit M1C can have numbers on the scope mount that do not match the rifle, or the scope, but still be legit, while the base itself may have been left blank.
HTH

[Junk Yard Dog]

Welcome to the forum harleydrider82, Cliff ( MNfan) is currently on sabbatical dealing with family matters, thank you for the information, and I hope we will see more of you around on the forum. We have several US military surplus collectors here, our focus is not entirely on the Mosin rifle.

[desdem12]

Very good info

[izhevsk]

If you are here to shoot it, I would suggest taking the "muzzle flash" off as it decreases the accuracy a lot, reason why they switched to a 3 pronged flash hider/

[izhevsk]

Repo or not, that is amazing looking and a great shooter.

[Junk Yard Dog]

How can it be known as a great shooter if you don't have it and haven't shot it ? In this case it will never be known, Cliff didn't buy it, fortunately as it turns out . This is a good example of why I will not recommend that people spend large amounts of money to buy exotic rifles I am not an expert on in a deal that's not face to face. If I had said " that's a cool rifle Cliff, grab it:) " and he did then he would have gotten stuck with a fake worth considerably less than half what he paid, and I would be living under an assumed name in some small Mexican town.

[izhevsk]

Hahah I can say the same, well get a good garand and it will shoot little over MOA. How is that not? Where not taking .5 or .25 MOA were talking about even to do the job done, look at mosins there good shooters. Maybe not sub half MOA just enough to do the job done properly.

[izhevsk]

And 1k for hahah a lower quality m1 will go around that, if that was real the condition and everything else it would be around 3-5k. All I see at gun shows and other websites are m1903 Springfield and snipers for that much

[Junk Yard Dog]

Real ones are a lot of money, fakes are just Bubba rifles and worth less than an ordinary non sniper.

[izhevsk]

I'm talking in a form if it's real. Again either way it's a nice rifle, just like buying an m1a are you not going to by one because its a "repo" and it's not original meaning it's a terrible rifle and should be bought for it's performance and looks?

[Junk Yard Dog]

If I want to buy a rifle for performance and I have several grand to spend it's not going to be a repo M1 or any other milsurp sniper repo, it will be one of the very well made commercial sporters with every bell and whistle, as well as a high quality modern scope.

http://www.sako.fi/sako90auction.php

[desdem12]

I don't think i have bought one rifle yet for the purpose of it being or supposed to be a great shooter. I buy it cause the history and the gun itself is cool. I have not really tried to hit a piece of paper with most of them. I have found severeal to be great shooters but not why i bought them at all.