Training rifle USA ww2

I collect training rifles.
also from the USA
The question doesn't really belong here because it's about german weapons here but since I read here on an american forum I thought I could also ask here, hoping that some of you american guys could help me out...
So I'd love to have some information about the following weapons, if they were used to train in the american military. Anything would help me, websites, pictures maybe even some newspaper article, just anything that gives me a kind of proof that they were really used in the american military.
A mossberg 42 is already part of my collection.

USN Model 1889 Rolling Block
M1922M1 springfield Armory
M1922M2 Springfield Armory
Harrington & Richardson Model M12
H&R M65 slb
H&R M58 slb
Winchester Model 52C
Winchester Model 52D
Winchester 74S (SLB)
Winchester 77 (SLB)
Winchester 22lr 1903(Air Service 1918) (SLB)
Winchester Third Model Low Wall Winder Musket
Remington 341
Remington 40X
Remington 511P
Remington 513T
Remington 521-T
Remington 550 (SLB)
Remington 241 Trainer US Navy (SLB)
Remington Model 541X
Stevens Model 416-2
Stevens M87 (SLB)
Mossberg Model 42-MB
Mossberg Model 44-US
Mossberg Model 144-US
US Marked Kimber 82 Government


So as a little thank you, here's a picture
View attachment 162277
Trainer 22 lr

my Karabiner 98 A Erfurt 1917
View attachment 162278

Welcome

To some extent or the other, all of these were used, but many post war.

The degree to which they were employed depended on the time period or service branch.

The Civilian Marksmanship program, and Reserve Officer's training programs at Colleges and Universities, the Junior Marksmanship programs sponsored by the National Rifle Association Clubs were the heaviest users.

There are a couple pretty good general references available and I will try to post a link where you can obtain them later today or tomorrow.

I am sure others will add to that. Aeisir has quite the collection of these, is very knowledgeable, and am sure he can be of help when he sees this post.

Here is a link to the current Civilian Marksmansip Program and you will find much here. You may have to register to be able to search.

http://forums.thecmp.org/forumdisplay.php?f=70

Let's not forget the Remington Model 11 variant that was used to train bomber crews.

I have never heard of the following to have been used: Win. 74, 77. Moss 42MB were British lend lease, never used by the US (tho some never were shipped). Moss 44us only if serialed and US Property marked, US Navy. Never heard of a Air Service rifle in .22. H&R, 65 & 58 were civilian models. Doubtful REM,341, 511p,521 T, 241. were used. Some others are suspect. I also do not know what SLB means!
You must remember the US did not use 22 rifles as training for regular troops.(Navy an exception, but they were short of rifles at wars start). What we had were "Gallery Practice rifles". Manly used for rile teams and recreation. Also many US bases had 'sport and recreation' buildings were equipment could be checked out, rifles included. Any thing may be found there! These so called training rifles were never purchased in in enough numbers to train an army of millions of men!
This will probably start a big discussion here, but the same can be said of the German Army of WW11. There is a book written in the US on US Training Rifles, would probably answer any questions you have.

Good Clarification

dave said:

I have never heard of the following to have been used: Win. 74, 77. Moss 42MB were British lend lease, never used by the US (tho some never were shipped). Moss 44us only if serialed and US Property marked, US Navy. Never heard of a Air Service rifle in .22. H&R, 65 & 58 were civilian models. Doubtful REM,341, 511p,521 T, 241. were used. Some others are suspect. I also do not know what SLB means!
You must remember the US did not use 22 rifles as training for regular troops.(Navy an exception, but they were short of rifles at wars start). What we had were "Gallery Practice rifles". Manly used for rile teams and recreation. Also many US bases had 'sport and recreation' buildings were equipment could be checked out, rifles included. Any thing may be found there! These so called training rifles were never purchased in in enough numbers to train an army of millions of men!
This will probably start a big discussion here, but the same can be said of the German Army of WW11. There is a book written in the US on US Training Rifles, would probably answer any questions you have.

Click to expand...

And as you indicate relative to "qualification" or training for combat; - not so much.

But to a large degree in various areas to enhance marksmanship skills of the populace as a war contingency and preparedness. Originally the Director of Civilian Marksmanship Program which evolved into the Civlian Marksmanship Program founded for that very purpose.

Particularly on Colleges and Universities ROTC programs and in Reserve and National Guard Units many or most of these were employed. And as you point out the Navy in at least some cases qualified with weapons only using the .22's. Known to be the case at Great Lakes Training Center in WW2 and from one Vietnam era vet who only ever shot a .22 until he saw a Garand aboard ship after boot camp.

Nearly all installations and units had marksmanship teams which competed and trained with the .22's - again the main purpose to enhance marksmanship.

Into the 80's and 90's my National Guard unit was using Remington 513T and Winchester 52's as well as High Standard Pistols for such purposes.

And yes same can be applied to WW2 Germany. In his testimony at Nuremberg Shirach rightfully stated in his defense that the whole concept of a "National Marksmanship Program" with a standardized trainer was borrowed or copied from the Americans.

And yes as is true of WW2 Germany many of these models can be debated as to whether or not they qualify as "trainers". Within the U.S. there was "service standard" (such as the Springfield 1922, m1 and M2) and "service substitute" (such as the Mossberg 44). The grey area comes in those guns never adopted as either yet purchased and utilized independently by individual services, units, or for special circumstances. The national armories could not dedicate production capacity to .22 trainer production when there were insufficient combat arms. The firearms industry rapidly became involved via contracts for weapons. Hence available or "off the shelf" .22 were acquired for training purposes but never sanctioned in some case by the Chief of Ordinance.

In Germany only the KKW and the DSM were approved by the SA as "standard" yet virtually all .22 rifles available were used for training purposes, and as true here that included various organizations outside the military.

Fact is, in both places, due to urgency and expediency and the limited availability of rifles and pistols many sporting models were placed into service to train soldiers, sailors, airman, and Marines.

We were using broomsticks for rifle training while production was spooling up as war raged in Europe.

A pretty good reference

https://www.amazon.com/Martial-22RF...sr=8-1-fkmr0&keywords=u.s.+martial+.22+rifles

Covers the "sanctioned" or "service standard" and some "service substitute" models, but not all of the "grey area" guns and omits much of the politics involved with efforts by the various services going back to 19th Century to develop or find "small bore" rifles for economy and training in built up areas.

Somebody needs to do another book on this topic.

There is more information out there. But as was the case on German Trainers when I started my research some 40 years ago, it is fragmented, much of that which is out there is not correct. Government documents, period photographs substantiate that the surface has only been scratched by previous publications.

With the internet, enough conflicting information can be found to support many debates and much confusion.

PERIOD DOCUMENTS and PHOTOGRAPHS are the best evidence.

Relevancy

iF the other Mods see this as wandering off topic and you wish to move the thread that is up to you.

Beyond extending a courtesy to a German interested in U.S. trainers seeking help, I have long seen it as relevant to our main topic.

In fact I had in the works for some years notes and research to include the development of the .22 rimfire and document it's first use in a training rifle.

It soon became apparent that to include that in the German Trainer book would have taken too much space not to mention much more research and likely ended with open ends and few conclusions.

The point of that having been to show that the Germans did not invent the concept, nor were they the first to develop a Standardized .22 training rifle which emulated the standard service rifle.

The first and really only successful attempt to do that in the United States was the Springfield 1922 accomplished in that year. Those were the guns the Germans saw in International Small Bore competitions and that Shirach saw at Camp Perry on a visit to the United States with civlians and boy scouts utilizing them. 12 years later Germany's first "national Standard" .22 training rifle the DSM34 was introduced.

From what I could determine in my efforts; that began first with the British followed closely by the various attempts to convert the U.S. Krag to use .22 ammunition.

And also hard to determine precisely when Stevens, Pope or others came to the dimensions that evolved into what is now the the .22 long rifle. (if you were to limit the discussion to small bore rifles firing that cartridge) and there were many other cartridges in development around and before 1900 that were experimented with for such purposes.

Yes our Springfield 1922 and it's employment, gave birth to the development and use of a .22 training rifle emulating the standard service rifle of a nation in Third Reich Germany.


Anyway...

I ramble.

And again perhaps this post should move. I vote it stays and I hope some other students of the topic will add what they have learned but not merely speculation or assumptions.

You forgot on the M1903 Hoffer Thompson rifles. They were very interesting, I have three of them.

Hoffer Thompson

Absolut said:

You forgot on the M1903 Hoffer Thompson rifles. They were very interesting, I have three of them.

Click to expand...

I did not forget them or other conversions used prior.

Yes before the 1922 but never in wide use and was a conversion vs. a purpose built .22 trainer.

Prior to the that there various conversions of the krag.

While the Winder musket was purpose built it was never a standard trainer.

I stand by my remark that the Springfield 1922 was the first purpose built (not a conversion) .22 training rifle in the U.S. accepted by the Chief of Ordinance and placed in service in good numbers.

Hello,
I'm already very thankful for all the information I`ve got!
I translate all the texts with the help of google translator, and the only time I'm able to answer is when my daughter's got some time to help me out (hey, i am very amused...).
My question is not only about weapons used directly in the military

quote:
Particularly on Colleges and Universities ROTC programs and in Reserve and National Guard Units many or most of these were employed. And as you point out the Navy in at least some cases qualified with weapons only using the .22's. Known to be the case at Great Lakes Training Center in WW2 and from one Vietnam era vet who only ever shot a .22 until he saw a Garand aboard ship after boot camp.

Nearly all installations and units had marksmanship teams which competed and trained with the .22's - again the main purpose to enhance marksmanship.

Into the 80's and 90's my National Guard unit was using Remington 513T and Winchester 52's as well as High Standard Pistols for such purposes.

And yes same can be applied to WW2 Germany. In his testimony at Nuremberg Shirach rightfully stated in his defense that the whole concept of a "National Marksmanship Program" with a standardized trainer was borrowed or copied from the Americans.

Information just like that are very important for that matter!
Is there a possibility to give me an easy summary of which weapons (from my list) were used and where? Maybe in like a little table or something.
As an example:
80's and 90's my National Guard Remington 513T , Winchester 52's ,High Standard Pistols
This is a perfect information!
If it's uncomfortable for you to write in this forum, I'd also be very happy to write over personal e-mail.

I am very surprised and happy about all the feedback and all of you nice people, thanks a lot for helping me out! It's very rough to get information about such stuff here in Germany...
On the other side I'm very well known about the DSM34 coming to the USA because I have a good old friend, who personally ,as a member of the HJ ,gave one to an american soldier after they've marched into our little village.

Best wishes from the good old Westerwald,

Michael

Users

Sorry it would result in speculation in many cases to attempt to list who used what when relative to the services.

I also appreciate the language difficulties you face having been on the opposite end of that with German documents and publications.

However:

The links above on the one book (easily obtainable on-line), and the Link to the CMP small bore forum would be a good starting point.

I doubt that a comprehensive list could be accomplished without much research. Many of those early models (pre-WW2) were very small quantities and expediencies. Exception being the Springfield 1922 1922M1 and first version Winchester 52's which were used on into the WW2 era and augmented by the Remington 513T, Mossberg 44US, Stevens 416, Winchester 52b and the upgraded 1922M2 during the War. The Marine Corps attempts to find an autoloader that emulated the M1 Garand, and which guns were purchased by them in small quantity is well covered in that reference. And I probably missed one or two here as well.

A whole field of study and research wide open to explore if so interested.

Just take what you find on the internet and in some publications for what it is worth and seek out the ones that quote National Archives or show illustrations (period photos) that support the text.

Many of the later production guns (post WW2) were used in small quantities only by service marksmanship teams, NRA marksmanship programs under the purview of the DCM and CMP. Many of those (not all) remained in Government storage with no use until released for sales in the past decades in virtually new condition (such as the Kimber 82)

I wish it were as simple as you wish. But that is what makes collecting and studying any firearm interesting.

I admire and appreciate your desire to delve into the history associated with the guns actual use.

You probably would be surprised to find out the US Government gave quite some Springfield M1922M2, M1922MI1, M2 and Remington 513-T to the Austrian Army post WWII as an aid.

PS: among this aid were also 480 Remington M1903A4 sniper rifles, just to have it mentioned.

TM 9-1285 Ordnance, Maintenance SHOTGUNS, ALL TYPES 25 November 1942 lists the following in service at that time:

Winchester M97, M12
Stevens M620, M620A and M520
Ithaca M37
Remington M31, M11, and Sportsman
Savage M720

All of the above are in 12 Ga.

The DSM and KKW were never made exclusively for the German military or adopted by them. They were what we would call 'commercial' rifles, I believe. Never general issue. Must were purchased by SA and other organizations. So I would not think they could be directly compared with the Springfield made .22's. Comments?

A Very Good Point

dave said:

The DSM and KKW were never made exclusively for the German military or adopted by them. They were what we would call 'commercial' rifles, I believe. Never general issue. Must were purchased by SA and other organizations. So I would not think they could be directly compared with the Springfield made .22's. Comments?

Click to expand...

What you state is absolutely true regarding the manner in which the 2 guns were produced and distributed.

The comparison is that all three of these rifles design (to emulate the standard service rifle) and intended purpose (quasi military marksmanship training) to better prepare a nation for war was the same concept.

Although not produced or procurred by the Government (directly as in a Government Arsenal such as Springfield) the DSM and KKW were designed and purpose made for just that reason on the request of the SA. The Standard Service Rifle 98K was not produced in a Government owned or operated arsenal as was the 1903 Springfield.

"Kleinkaliberschiessen der Moderne Volksport" published in 1931 mentions the 1922 in a review of small bore shooting in the USA, as well as the Savage NRA 1919 (arguably a "trainer") and the Winchester 52.

As for the Springfield 1922 being made expressly for the Services, here is what MG Julian Hatcher had to say about that:

"At Springfield Armory, work was begun in 1919 under the direction of MG Julian Hatcher in cooperation with the National Rifle Association to develop a .22 caliber rifle to provide an accurate smallbore rifle for Civilian rifle clubs, and for competition in schools and colleges, and for Sales to NRA members."

No mention as being an “issue” item for the Services.

"Mr. Fred Coon of Springfield Armory was the chief designer and Mr. A.L. Woodworth developed the chamber bore and other details. Colonel Studler the Director of Civlian Marksmanship adopted the the 1922 for those purposes."

It was not adopted by the Chief of Ordinance for the Services.

The SA's role as responsible for National Marksmanship training was relatively the same as the Director of Civilian Marksmanship.

As was true of the KKW and the DSM, ultimately the Services did indeed use them (to some extent or the other but not widely) for training.

As has been pointed out, various German government and political organizations ordered DSM's and KKW's. I've had both Reichsbahn and SA DSM's. The military made extensive use of the EL24 .22 conversion kit for 98K's and these are frequently in unit marked cases, so for any branch of the military to purchase .22 rifles for training was unnecessary.

But they did use them

oldcorps said:

As has been pointed out, various German government and political organizations ordered DSM's and KKW's. I've had both Reichsbahn and SA DSM's. The military made extensive use of the EL24 .22 conversion kit for 98K's and these are frequently in unit marked cases, so for any branch of the military to purchase .22 rifles for training was unnecessary.

Click to expand...

Regardless of how they were procured or obtained, we have significant photographic evidence that to some degree the German Services did indeed use the DSM and KKW for training purposes. Some of these period photographs are included in "Training Rifles of Third Reich Germany"

At what point in the war and who were they training? HJ, Volkssturm, et al ? Those I've known who were called up to the army or volunteered even toward the end trained with 98K's.

Hard to say exactly

when some of those pictures taken.

The pictures of the SS with DSM's (in other publications) appear to be pre-war.

Other pictures of Wehrmacht appear to be well into the war.

And of course the Volksturm training with them is late in the war.

And certainly at the Sniper Schools where the KKW was used and is well documented. Again well into the war.

Folks who can look at uniforms and date various features might have the ability to narrow down the period those pictures were taken.

But photographs don't lie.

They were popularly used in inter and intra-unit marksmanship competitions both before and during the war. I guess that was a form of training. Now, how common are Waffen Amts on DSM and KKW rifles?