Not a chance. Ever tried it? I have. An average Garand will out shoot an average K98, and a good Garand will out shoot a good K98.
i have i own both and and tryed them and the 1903
The m-1 Garand. No doubt about it. Quick loading, high rate of fire, reliable, and good stopping power.
M1, an easy choice to make.
Semi Auto wins as a combat rifle imho.
mine is the bar
Man of Stoat says:
Not a chance. Ever tried it? I have. An average Garand will out shoot an average K98, and a good Garand will out shoot a good K98.
I say:
If you think that a Garand is more accurate than a bolt action rifle (Especially the Kar 98)
then I think that you have been watching too many war films.
If the Garand was that accurate, how come the US forces used the PO3 Bolt-action rifle for sniper work up to the Vietnam War?
Even to this day the bolt-action rifle is preferred over a semi-automatic weapon when it comes to sniper work. And, oh yes! Look at the pedigree of the P03 and you will see that it is strongly influenced by the Mauser design.
Paul
As a skirmish (assault) weapon, the Garand far outclasses the Mauser98. The difference in rates of accurate fire prove the point. Hitlers main mistake in WW2 was starting a war with a bolt action infantry rifle. Having to go off sight picture to chamber each round takes too much time, and delays engagement of succeeding targets. in a fight, thats a good way to loose. As for sniper rifles, there may have been more bolt rifles than semi-autos used, but that is changing. The bolt action lends itself to the task of sniping as there is no need for any volume of fire. just one, or two shots. But I think that the Garand would fare as well as a sniping weapon in most battle conditions, as ranges would generally be less than 600 meters, and most engagements taking place at 300-400 m. (far less in Urban operations. ) The reason most sniping rifles were bolt action was due more to the need to have the semi autos in the roll of infantry weapon where they would do the most good. (You have all day to play as a sniper,so the high rate of fire was not needed. )
The 98 could not hope to match the performance of the Garand, or any other rifle caliber semi auto rifle fielded in WW2. Apples, and oranges. Sorry “B”, but Stoat has you on this one.
Man of stoat said that the Garand is more accurate. Accuracy is what he meant as accuracy is what I meant.
The bolt action concept is the best ‘ask any competition shooter’ system for target & sniper shooting and has been for over 100 years. Show me a World Champion shooter who used a semi-automatic to win the title, and ill show you a pile of rocking horse shit.
Most engagement ranges for infantry weapons are 'though not exclusively, 100-300 yards. Out to 600 yard + range are more for the support LMG/GPMG.
And to cheer you up a bit, I voted for the Garand, as a semi-automatic rifle is better for the main reason of putting more rounds down and winning the firefight and the concept was another step towards ‘though not a huge one’ the assault rifle
Paul
I’ll let MOS speak for himself. But I think what he is referring too is that the quality of the K98s slipped quite a bit later in the War as they were being churned out, and the Garand was manufactured to a high degree of relative precision because of America’s much larger industrial base…
I’ve heard this more than once…
Obviously, an accurized K98 was one of the best sniper arms of WWII, and the Garand sniper version was for more intermediate ranges…
Nickdfresh
If you read Man of Stoat’s post again, you will see that he was matching quality as well as accuracy
Paul
This is an English language forum. Very few members can read German, so posting in German does not encourage the discussions which are the purpose of the forum.
It is clear from your post at #186 that your English is more than adequate to post in English, although most of your posts so far have been in German.
Please post in English in future.
He’s posting from Vancouver, Canada --I would hope so! 
Actually, his post was a anecdotal personal experience. Experience I’ve heard echoed other places…
Quite…
To answer all of these in one go:
Of course an accurised 1903 will outshoot an accurised Garand. No contest. but, I have never seen a military kar98k that actually shot very well, and I have seen rather a lot. Even the sniper versions were not as accurate as for instance the 1903A4,No4Mk1(T), and even the nagant sniper.
As for the military versions, even forgetting issues of bedding, the sights on the Garand are light-years ahead of those on the Mauser.
Personal experience: a bog standard Garand will outshoot a bog standard Mauser, end of story.
Gunner-B – I give you David Tubb who has owned NRA high-power with a tricked up SR-25 for many many years. I give you John Feamster who took a heavy barrelled AR 15 bench resting and shot a sub-quarter inch group at 200 yards at his first competition, without any special preparation, and finished respectably. I give you myself, who is currently averaging 5-7 points per card ahead of the nearest competition at my club’s 100 m target rifle competition using a 20 inch hbar AR 15 with match sights. What you mean by a “world champion” shooter anyway? Many target disciplines shot at “world” level are restricted to manual actions anyway… as for sniping, the main issue is that a semiautomatic shoot a shiny, spinning empty case out of the side with every shot – not very good if you want to stay hidden.
There is an enormous prejudice against the accuracy potential of semiautomatic rifles in general. For the most part, these prejudices are entirely correct. However, a properly set up AR 15/AR 10/ SR 25/equivalent can and will perform just as well as a properly set up modern bolt action.
I give you 100 years of Historical fact, not anecdotal prejudice.
When someone like Accuracy International supersede their current bolt action system with a semi-automatic system, then I will cede to that system. But it will not change the fact that the Mauser was, ‘all being equal, more accurate than the Garand.
Paul
What “historical fact”? Can you cite me a comparative test? Otherwise you are just repeating the anecdotal prejudice of others.
I, on the other hand, in addition to my own PERSONAL experience with several Garands and several Kar98k’s, have just discovered, thanks to the miracle of Google, such a comparative range test: http://www.cruffler.com/match1.html
If we ignore the National match and sniper models, there is one M98, of 1908 vintage (therefore the long rifle) running at 2.25 MOA. The two standard specification Garand rifles are running at 2.46 and 2.48 MOA. The only 98k-type rifle in the test is an M48 (which would be the post-war Yugoslav version of the Kar98k, but otherwise identical to wartime production), running at 4.5 MOA.
As for accuracy International, you are ignoring the tactical consideration of a flying empty case giving away the position of the sniper, which I already mentioned above. This is NOT an issue of accuracy: it is a question of the sniper’s craft. Anyway, AI produce two fifty-calibre sniper rifles,1 a bolt action, and one a semiauto. They claim that their semiauto matches the accuracy of their bolt. Interestingly, their semiauto looks like a super sized SLR action, complete with dust grooves.
There are many reasons for the choice of weapons used in the sniping rôle, accuracy being only one of them. Not being pinged after the shot is even more important !
Also, I was unaware that 7.65 Luger pistols were of that much use in sniping. 
You’re not Henry Allingham are you ?
If not I would suggest that your historical fact is anecdotal and obviously prejudicial.
And therein lies the rub.
The inverted V sights on the K98 are not easy to pick up and do not engender themselves to an accurate and consistent sight picture.
The bedding of K98s is absolutely appalling. The stepped barrel, bedded along it’s entire length causes no end of problems for grouping.
The trigger on the Garand is far smoother and with a crisper release than the heavy, gritty and clunky item dangling beneath the Mauser.
For the record I have two Garands, (one a Model D,) three K98s, (all bog standard,) and a G33/40.
Time and time again the Garands have shot better side by side against the 98’s, both using wartime and modern ammunition.
It should also be noted that both the US Army and Marine Corp have now returned to using semi-automatic sniping weapons with a modernized, rebuilt versions of both the M-14 and AR-10. Of course, the M-14 was basically a modernized M-1 Garand recalibrated and using a 20-round box magazine…
They of course still retain the bolt-action M24/40 as well…
You can harp on about the supposed better accuracy of the Garand over the Mauser all you like. Sniper work up to today is almost exclusively a Bolt action club. Of course a different system may supersede the bolt action system, as will a system supersede semi & auto systems. Until then, it is bolt action.
Cuts
How refreshing it is to use a fine old warrior to make a sarcastic remark, I bet you had to dig deep to use that one…
Man of Stoat
You know as well as I that the .50cal system was designed for different tactical reasons.
Lee Harvey Oswald should have used a Garand, ‘with which he gained his marksman grade whilst in the Marines’ instead of a crappy Mannlicher Carcarno and an accomplice on the grassy knoll.
Paul
Wrong. The US Army is phasing out its M-24 (Remington 700) rifles in favor of the M-110 (an accurized, highly refined AR-10). I initially thought these weapons were a supplement to counter the Russian designed Dragunov…
