Now, I know that theres a difference between personal favorites (my personal favorite is the Mosin-Ngant) and the true effective ones of the war.
So really, I am looking for; what was the most effective sniper rifle of ww2? – and maybe if you’d like, your personal favorite 
probably the gewehr 43 because it was semi-auto
Oh great, another one of these trite threads…
Which is exactly the reason why it does not make a good sniper rifle: it is less accurate than the equivalent bolt actions, and the ejected case gives the position of the firer away.
The sniper rifles have been discussed at length in threads [i]passim[i], I suggest you use the search function, but the general (informed, as in people with hands-on experience) opinion came down on the side of the British No.4 Mk.1(T).
but with a bolt action wouldn’t you have to move your eye away from the scope to work the bolt? also with the gewehr you could fire 3 or 4 shots continuously so maybe you could get 2 kills rather than one, since the first thing people do when they hear a sniper is take cover
I was reading an article the other day about lee enfields, having shot a no.1 mk3 i know there a beatiful gun. However the Canadian made No4T equipped with a British No32 Mk1 scope can do 20-30 aimed shot’s a minute and accurate as all hell i’d put my money on this great gun as being the best sniper rifle to see action in world war two.
No. Some very proficient troops were able to manipulate the bolt without otherwise disturbing the weapon much more than an automatic would be disturbed, and could re-acquire a sight picture just as quickly.
You are also assuming that all snipers in WWII had scopes. Many didn’t.
also with the gewehr you could fire 3 or 4 shots continuously so maybe you could get 2 kills rather than one, since the first thing people do when they hear a sniper is take cover
A semi-automatic does not fire continuously. It fires every time the trigger is pulled. Every time the trigger is pulled the recoil will upset the sight picture, which has to be re-acquired before the next shot.
Snipers shoot aimed single shots, not bursts.
Experienced troops may take cover when a sniper fires, but they also look around to find his position. Three or four shots each time significantly increases the probability of the sniper’s position being located because of time involved, smoke and muzzle flash.
The sniper’s purpose usually is not to get kills per se but to disrupt and suppress the enemy. Half a dozen shots, with maybe only one non-fatal casualty, in a couple of hours can suppress the activity in an opposing unit just about as effectively as a kill with each of twenty shots over the same period.
The main job of a sniper is in fact gathering intelligence and observing. Shooting comes second.
Jan
Which is the most effective sniper rifle?
The one with the guy that killed the most enemies!
The British L42 sniper rifle did not require the shooter to move anything but his wrist, and he could do this fairly rapidly - it’s really the positioning of the elbows that counts, they create a stable platform for the weapon.
However, the ethos behind sniping is ‘one shot equals one kill’ therefore, if he had to move he ought to have already dropped his target with his first shot, thus having to shift his aim in order to acquire another target and so the question of working the bolt-action on a less, ergonomically-friendly weapon is somewhat academic.
At extreme ranges, a sniper might shoot less accurately, but the shots will continue to have a demoralizing affect on the enemy.
The philosophy behind semi-auto sniper rifles like the Soviet Dragunov is that, should the sniper find himself in a situation were he finds himself attacked and outnumbered, he would have at least some firepower to get himself out of the mess, though the drawback is that there is a sacrifice in accuracy. In WW2 (and today) most snipers operated as teams, with one being armed with a scoped sniper rifle, while his observer would carry e.g. a submachine gun to cover his back.
Jan
I think the Mauser Kar 98k sniper rifle with Zf4 scope was one of the best sniper rifle.
Jan
well i know what semi-auto means, I’m not that dumb, but you’re also talking about the most experienced troops, the best sniper would be easy to use wouldn’t it?
Im a beginner at a rifle range, and even with the limited experience ive had with scopes the way to acquire the best accuracy is to never take your eye away from the scope, although i struggle with this sometimes, some of the more advanced members are quite proficient never taking there eye of the target untill their magazine of 5-10 rounds is emptied. however i must make it clear the firearms we use are of a slightly lower calibre to those used in world war two, however i disbelieve it would make any difference.
i’m not saying that when people take their eye off the scope its because they want to, i though that on most rifles there was not enough room between the bolt and the scope
Sorry. I wasn’t sure that you understood the distinction as you referred to 3 or 4 shots continuously, which I took to mean a burst of automatic fire.
I disagree.
According to W02 Steve King, an instructor at the School of Infantry Sniper Cell, today’s sniper teams (pair) carry out the same role.
"A sniper’s primary role is to kill selected targets on the battlefield. That is his one and only role! Officers, commanders at any level, signallers … you always want to take these fellows out. "Snipers have a limited capability to engage crew-served weapons, to put a round into a mortar sight or a machine-gun receiver.
“There are a number of general tasks a sniper team can fill … to harass the enemy or reconnaissance but if it is doing that it is not being employed properly,”
My bold. http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-asstd/sniper.htm
Bearing in mind that we’re talking about WWII, it certainly wasn’t the case in the IJA that snipers had a primary function of reconnaissance and observation. There’s a useful discussion here, although unfortunately not a forum as easy to read as WWII in Color.
http://www.f16.parsimony.net/forum27947/messages/5916.htm
In WWII the Australian army ran sniper teams in pairs, the shooter and the spotter. The latter’s job was to identify targets not seen by the shooter and also to look out for threats to the team while the shooter was occupied.
The Japanese often operated alone, notably in tree tops where they commonly stayed until discovered and killed.
Japanese snipers didn’t necessarily achieve one shot - one kill.
If shooting is secondary, there’d be no need for special sniper weapons as the basic bolt action infantry weapons in good condition in WWII were generally sufficiently accurate to be used as sniper weapons by proficient marksmen at the distance snipers were likely to operate at. And indeed were usually the weapons used by ‘snipers’ (see next paragraph). Special sniper weapons with better sights just gave that extra bit of accuracy which will improve the results of good marksmen but won’t make much difference for a lot of average shooters.
Which leads me to the point that references to ‘sniper’ are usually wrong. Usually it referred to an unseen rifleman firing at the group calling him a sniper. A true sniper is a specifically trained and very proficient marksman adept at high level field craft. Most so-called snipers in WWII, in the Pacific anyway, were simply riflemen detailed to undertake aimed fire with standard infantry weapons to disrupt and demoralise the enemy.
Original post deleted and reposted in this form due to problems with original links.
I disagree.
According to W02 Steve King, an instructor at the School of Infantry Sniper Cell, today’s sniper teams (pair) carry out the same role.
"A sniper’s primary role is to kill selected targets on the battlefield. That is his one and only role! Officers, commanders at any level, signallers … you always want to take these fellows out. "Snipers have a limited capability to engage crew-served weapons, to put a round into a mortar sight or a machine-gun receiver. “There are a number of general tasks a sniper team can fill … to harass the enemy or reconnaissance but if it is doing that it is not being employed properly,”
My bold. Sniper
Bearing in mind that we’re talking about WWII, it certainly wasn’t the case in the IJA that snipers had a primary function of reconnaissance and observation. There’s a useful discussion here, although unfortunately not a forum as easy to read as WWII in Color.
http://www.f16.parsimony.net/forum27947/messages/5916.htm
In WWII the Australian army, ideally, ran true snipers in teams of two, the shooter and the spotter. The latter’s job was to identify targets not seen by the shooter and also to look out for threats to the team while the shooter was occupied. Photo 1 below. (Caption from Australian War Memorial http://www.awm.gov.au/ 1942-01, MALAYA. PRIVATE J. R. MADDEN, AN AIF SNIPER, AND LANCE CORPORAL BLOMFIELD WITH A THOMPSON SUBMACHINE GUN ON THE LOOK OUT FOR ENEMY TROOPS IN A RUBBER PLANTATION.) The blanket or groundsheet hung on a tree in the background hardly suggests that this was a picture taken in true action postions, unless the sniper team wanted to draw attention to their presence.
The Japanese often operated alone, notably in tree tops where they commonly stayed until discovered and killed.
Photo 2 below. (Caption from Australian War Memorial 1942-12-28. PAPUA. BY EXPERIENCE ALLIED TROOPS HAVE LEARNED TO TAKE NO CHANCES WITH ENEMY TREE TOP SNIPERS. EVERY TREE TOP THAT COULD HOUSE SNIPERS WAS SPRAYED WITH HUNDREDS OF ROUNDS FROM AUTOMATIC WEAPONS. ONE BREN GUNNER VARIED THE TREATMENT WHEN HE SIGHTED A SNIPER. USING THIS EXTREMELY ACCURATE AUSTRALIAN-MADE WEAPON HE FIRED SEVERAL BURSTS AT THE TOP OF A COCANUT TREE CONCENTRATING HIS FIRE AT A SPOT SIX FETT FROM THE TOP. THE WEIGHT OF THE SNIPER CAUSED THE TREE TOP TO BREAK AND HE WAS KILLED WHEN HE HIT THE GROUND 60 FEET BELOW. THIS PHOTO SHOWS SNIPER AND THE TOP PORTION OF THE TREE LYING ON THE GROUND. AT THE TOP OF THE SNIPER’S OUTSTRETCHED RIGHT HAND IS HIS BROKEN RIFLE. ) A nice piece of positive war propaganda is the reference to the Australian-made Bren, which implies that not only was it made in Australia but that it was also an Australian design, which we all know it wasn’t.
Photo 3 below. (Caption from Australian War Memorial 1942-12-28. PAPUA. ONE OF THE MOST EFFECTIVE MEANS OF FREEING THE COCOANUT GROVES OF JAPANESE SNIPERS WAS TO SPRAY TOPS OF COCOANUT TREES WITH INTENSE GUN FIRE. THE PHOTO SHOWS THE EFFECT OF THIS INTENSE GUN FIRE DURING THE AUSTRALIAN ADVANCE ON BUNA. )
Snipers don’t necessarily achieve or try for one shot - one kill, nor even shoot aimed shots at people to disrupt the enemy. Photo 4 below. (Caption from Australian War Memorial 1943-08-11. NEW GUINEA. MOUNT TAMBU FIGHTING. A HOSPITAL IN THE JUNGLE AT THE FOOT OF MOUNT TAMBU. JAPANESE SNIPERS PUT 23 BULLETS THROUGH THE TARPAULIN COVERING WITHOUT HITTING ANY OF THE WOUNDED.)
If shooting is secondary, there’d be no need for special sniper weapons as the basic bolt action infantry weapons in good condition in WWII were generally sufficiently accurate to be used as sniper weapons by proficient marksmen at the distance snipers were likely to operate at. And indeed were usually the weapons used by ‘snipers’ (see next paragraph). Special sniper weapons with better sights just gave that extra bit of accuracy which will improve the results of good marksmen but won’t make much difference for a lot of average shooters.
Which leads me to the point that references to ‘sniper’ are usually wrong. Usually it referred to an unseen rifleman firing at the group calling him a sniper. A true sniper is a specifically trained and very proficient marksman adept at high level field craft. Most so-called snipers in WWII, in the Pacific anyway, were simply riflemen detailed to undertake aimed fire at selective targets with standard infantry weapons to disrupt and demoralise the enemy.
This should have been in my last post. Got a bit lost with fixing up the links and fitting in text to separate photos.
Another WWII Autralian sniper pair, this one showing a left handed sniper.
TARAKAN, BORNEO, 1945-05-05. CORPORAL C.C. DONNELLEY, (1), AND SERGEANT G.W. BURLEY, (2), MEMBERS OF 2/4 COMMANDO REGIMENT, SIGHTING A SNIPER TIED TO A TREE ABOUT 100 YARDS TO THE WEST OF THE RIDGE.
Another Australian sniper pair.
Australian War Memorial caption: BOUGAINVILLE ISLAND. 1944-12-30. NX193912 PRIVATE T. HALL, 25TH INFANTRY BATTALION PICKING OFF A JAPANESE SNIPER IN A TALL TREE DURING THE AUSTRALIAN ADVANCE ON THE ENEMY POSITIONS IN THE PIATERAPAIA SECTOR.
Another form of counter-sniper fire to that in my last post, on the same date in the same sector as the last post.
AWM caption: BOUGAINVILLE ISLAND. 1944-12-30. MACHINE GUNNERS OF THE 25TH INFANTRY BATTALION USING THEIR VICKERS GUN ON A JAPANESE SNIPER WHO WAS HOLDING UP THE AUSTRALIAN ADVANCE ON JAPANESE POSITIONS IN THE PIATERAPAIA SECTOR.
