springfield 1903 serial 539,000 range

But you CAN tell which ones are faulty and got a poor or incorrect heat treatment by doing hardness checks. Faulty heat treating can be caught. If the hardness is low the tensile strength is low. It is not a problem with brittleness, it is a problem with "softness" from all that has been documented. In either case a low reading (HRC <30) or high reading (HRC 40>) will indicate a problem.
 
Between 1917 and 1929, according to Ord Dept records there were 33 reported burst receivers from Springfield's, and 24 from rock Island.

Only one of the Springfield's that burst during this time period was a Post 800,000 rifle, it burst because a 7.9 mm German cartridge was used.

There were 11 other burst receivers but the serial number could not be unidentified.

There a millions of rifles out there, why take the chance. If you are on the range shooting a early Springfield, and it does burst, and some one in injured, you will be liable. If some one is killed, there is a good chance we are talking about Negligent Homicide because of all the warnings out there which you ingnored.

It simply isn't worth it.
 
Don't waste your time

Don't bother taking it to a gunsmith to get it approved for use ! It ain't gonna happen ! These old 03s only value is as collectors , wallhangers or parts guns .
 
Even if you had a gunsmith inspect it, I don't know any self-respecting gunsmiths who would in good conscious tell you it was safe to fire a low serial 1903. No one is willing to take that risk, especially in this day and age of lawsuits.
 
I have a friend who has a mint "sniper" version and I've seen him drop a running deer at over 500 yards with the iron sights using handloads I developed for him. They are tackhammers if you get a good one.

This was NOT a low number Springfield however.
 
Last edited:
Tell us more about a low number "sniper" version.
We all know about WW II 1903A4s and even 1942 USMC but a low number 1903 sniper is a rarity.


One poster on THR points out that they quit keeping records of action failures when the 1903 was phased out in favor of the M1 in spite of the fact that some were still deployed and others in use by target shooters and hunters.
There are also reports of low number actions breaking when dropped.
Dave LeGate at Rifle Magazine donated some number of low number actions to be tested to destruction. Some of those broke when rapped or dropped.

A friend has one that is really a great shooter until the rather rough barrel fouls. He shot it enough to see that it was not going to blow up and then hung it on the wall.

Y'all be careful, now, you hear.
 
You know what bothers me ?
It bothers me that so many of the good 1903 A3 Remingons were made into drill rifles. I wish our Military had seen fit to turn the early serial numbered 1903s into the drill rifles.
But then again if it makes sense our government will do its best to avoid it.:)
 
In a way I admire those bold eneough to throw caution to the wind in persuit of happiness, In another way I pitty them.
 
The single heat treat recevers were made from WD1325. So were the double heat treat. This is a low grade material with inferior properties to alloy steels.

Looking at data on Matweb, the low carbon steel used in these early receivers is not used for complicated parts, unheated it is used for rebar, if heat treated for medium duty shafts, studs, bolts and nuts. I did a composition search and found AISI 1117-1118 steel, which is similar in composition to Springfield Armory Class C steel. I could not find something that was just carburized and quenched , I found data for 1 inch round AISI 1118 mock carburized, reheated to 1450 F, quenched, tempered. This is similar to the double heat treatment. The Ultimate strength is 103,000 psi, yield 59,300 psi, elongation at break 19%. For something similar to WD2340 Nickel steel, I found one inch round AISI 4820. For that material, mock carburized, 1450 F reheat, water quench, the ultimate strength was 163,000 psi and the yield strength was 120,000 psi, elongation at break 15%. Many modern receivers are made from 4140. For a 1 in round AISI 4140 Steel, normalized at 870°C (1600°F), reheated to 845°C (1550°F), oil quenched, 260°C (500°F) temper, ultimate strength 270,000 psi, yield 240,000 psi, elongation at break 11%.

The margin of strength in modern firearms is just so much better than what you will find in these early plain carbon steel receivers.

Not only do the plain carbon steel M1903’s have low margin of strength, the action has virtually no shooter protection features. Gas goes everywhere, the stock gets blown, hot gas goes straight down the firing pin shaft into the shooter’s eyes, it can be very bad.

There is a long thread with pictures of a blown single heat treat at this URL.

http://www.jouster.com/forums/showthread.php?14045-Blown-03-Receiver-From-GB&p=136820#post136820

These pictures came from Springfield Armory. Just see how these plain carbon steel receivers frag’d.

In my opinion, single heat treat receivers are just not worth the risk. The Army eventually pulled them, because there is no non destructive way to determine good from bad. If it was as simple as a hardness test, they would have done it.

LowNumberRIA73153blowup.jpg


M1903LN323816blownreceiver.jpg


M1903LN570095rupturedcaseblowsrecei.jpg


M1903LN7182338mmcaseblowsreceiver.jpg


M1903LN764040shatteredreceiver.jpg
 
Most of the ones you find now wore out one or two barrels in their life time. Reduced loads I do not see why they can not be shot. Army may have pulled them out of service but the marines and navy used them all tru WW-2. As for pictures of blown up 1903s with split barrels it sure was not the action that was why it blew up.
Exact same steel and treatment as a Krag and people shoot them all the time.
 
Also, the rimmed cartridge and its chamber are superior to most rimless in terms of case support. Which at least partly makes up for the single lug Krag action.

We paid Mauser royalties on gun, ammunition, and even stripper clip design until WW I. While I used to think the 1903 a great rifle, I now wonder if we might not have come out better just to have bought the whole package and issued 7.62x57 Mauser '98s.
 
AISI 1117-1118 steel
Click to expand...

AISI 1117-1118 steel is plain carbon steel that has been "resulphurized" for machineability. It is NOT steel that you would heat treat as the sulfide "stringers" are stress risers for failures to occur and the low amount of carbon in the steel (.017-.018%) will not harden hardly at all. It is the junkiest of all steels. And as I've said before you probably couldn't get a Rockwell HRC reading much over zero. And this is the government. They probably didn't think to check with a hardness test. And 4140 at the normal 30-40 HRC hardness in a rifle is 145,000 Psi tensile strength. The figures previously listed are for carburized steel.
 
Last edited:
What would be a modern equivalent of Springfield Class C steel? ( which by 1928 was being called WD1325.)

And given the heat treatment below, what would be the yeild, ultimate, %elongation?

Would like to get this steel comparison correct.

Sorry for the formatting loss, but the system won't keep the table values aligned.


Code: 
From July-Aug 1928 issue Army Ordnance, “Heat Treatment and Finish of Small Arms at Springfield Armory”




		                           Carbon  Manganese Max Phos  Max Sulpher	Nickel	Component
Use
Manganese Steel	WD1325	               .20-.30    1.0-1.30	    .05    .050	Receivers
And Bolts
Nickel Steel	W.D. 2340	.35-.45	.50-.80	.04	.050	3.25-3.75	Receivers
And Bolts
Manganese Steel	W.D. 1350	.45-.55	1.00-1.30	.050	.050		Barrels



From Book “Manufacture of the Model 1903 Springfield Service Rifle, Wolfe Publishing Co. Inc, 1984


Receivers and bolts of SA, serial number 1 to 800,000*
Material, Class C Steel
Treatment: Carburize in bone at 1500 F for 4 hours, then quench in oil


I examined an American Rifleman article from the 60's. The author was discussing issues with the 30-40 Krags, which were also made from Class C steel.

He said the case was about .004" and under that the steel underneath was 23 C Rockwell.

So did they put a case for surface hardness and leave the substructure soft?
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't shoot it either. 800,000 and up for Springfield Armory and pretty sure 286,000 and up for Rock Island Armory are the magic numbers.
 
May I suggest cast loads for these low # springers? there are lots bullets around and info on this, it's cheap shooting, low noise and recoil. Could be a lot of fun and challenging to hit tin cans at a 100 yards.
 
got out to shoot it again. this time put 60 rounds through. only trouble is a couple of time the bullet didnt line up to go in the barrel. jams i guess you could say if that makes sence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top