Springfield 1903

1903/1903a3

every one has an opinion on old springfields.no broken 03 after 1929,and most were destroyed because of 8 mm ammo,and a few did get broken.
the Navy never turned theirs in and the marines on guadalcanal carried the old 03s.I have one 1914 barrel and serial under 500,000,I shoot it but because the barrel is perfect I use lead bullets and a target load.not all guns had a problem it depended on the day and person heat treating the receiver.
:rolleyes::eek::D
 
I'm confused about that...what do you mean "no broken 03 after 1929"? I don't understand what you're saying

I know that it is something of a rule of thumb to not shoot 03s that have an s/n under 1,000,000 but I do not understand this "8mm ammo" reference you have made. The 1903 is chambered for M2 ball, .30-06

I am not an 03 expert by any means but I have a long history with them for a 37 year old...the 03A3 in the photo above (taken summer '08) is the first firearm I ever fired. I was 9 :) That thing is slick as snot and accurate as all git-out...but I've never seen an 03 chambered for 8mm




Nice Eddystone by the way, M4Sherman
 
I've always heard that 03's above serial number 800,000 (Springfield) and 286,506 (Rock Island) were double heat treated and hence considered "safe".
I put safe in quotes, as even late Springfield receivers have failed, as have Mauser, Arisaka, Enfield, Carcano, and Mosin Nagant receivers.
 
[I'm confused about that...what do you mean "no broken 03 after 1929"? I don't understand what you're saying]

Most likely a reference to the US Ordinance Dept recall of all low-numbered 1903's in service for re-heatreating. The recall, however, doesn;t guarantee that ALL were done - as (for instance) the USMC didn't return theirs.


[I know that it is something of a rule of thumb to not shoot 03s that have an s/n under 1,000,000 but I do not understand this "8mm ammo" reference you have made.]

Some folks have forced German Mauser 8x57 ammo into the .30-06 chamber, and fired it, figuring "military ammo - it must be OK".
8mm-.323"vs .30" bore.

.
 
Hello,

New here, this thread caught my eye, am trying to value a Rock Inland 1903, barrel is stamped RIA , the flaming bomb and 8-18, SN# is 317XXX, according to the SN# search I did the rifle was produced in 1918, rifle has not been sanded, has a p in circle stamp and a triangle with a 1 on the stock and has a great bore. Is about a 80% or better condition rifle.

My questions is about its stamps

The bolt is stamped R and has only one number on it a 14. Do not see any other numbers on it, is this correct for a early 03?, safety and sights are stamped R, front barrel band is stamped U. See no stamps on the bottom metal, Is this correct for a early 03?

It's bayonet is marked SA, the flaming bomb , 1918

Does the rifle sound original?. Thanks for any help.

remi
 
Last edited:
RIA

The study of 1903/03a3 rifles is a consuming hobby. There are certainly more knowledgeable folk than I who may chime in.
That unsanded stock makes me wonder. There should be a stamp on the stock indicating final inspection. The stamp is "usually found on the left side of the stock, just to the rear of the cut-off recess." (Brophy). It may take any of a number of forms but usually involves the initials of the inspector.
The bayonet, marked SA, is from Springfield Armory. The other stamps are normal inspection stamps.
Pete
 
Last edited:
The reference to "8mm" is to the fact that at least one single heat treated M1903 blew up when an 8mm Mauser round was fired in it. At least that is what the investigation reported. It is not possible to chamber 8mm in most .30-'06 chambers but I suppose an oversize chamber, combined with an undersize round might allow it. Pressure would, of course be fairly high, and I assume the case let go, wrecking the rifle.

But most of the blown '03's failed while firing .30 ammunition, though some of that also was defective. There have been two post-WWII reports of SHT rifles blowing with target loads of a lead bullet and 9-10 grains of Bullseye. The rapid burn rate of the Bullseye created a sharp shock that was too much for the brittle steel of the receiver.

Jim
 
Paid $35 for my old 1903 back in the early 80's.

Springfield Armory,made in 1919. Had the correct leather sling, 4 groove barrel and the original cleaning kit. Loved it, shot it, ( a lot ). Barrel wasn't the prettiest I've ever seen but the old gun didn't care.

Got to where I could bust a rock the size of a refrigerator at 1,000 yards with it 3 out 5 shots, depending on how many beers I'd had before I torched off. Save the lectures please. I was the only thing alive for several miles in any direction back then.

Some old boy popped off one day a few years back and said he'd give me 500 bucks for that rifle. I told him 550 and it was his. He owns it now.

Wish I still had it.

I've still got my Garand though.
Happyface.jpg
 
late post

the 1929 date was suposed to be the last date an 03 burst.I would suspect that some one might drive an 8 mm in if forced hard enuf.the case is not the problem the bullet was.
I belive 1,000,000+ 1903 were made and some what 3,500,000 1917s JIM may correct me as I am a little older and may forget.so most troops used 1917 not 1903.
 
I don't know (nor does anyone else) the last date a SHT '03 let go; it might not be here yet. 1929 was probably the last incident written up, but I doubt anyone cared much during WWII and of course no one kept track after the rifle was no longer in service. I have seen two reports of blow ups in the American Rifleman since about 1950 (when I joined the NRA) but no one is actually keeping track so there may have been more. FWIW, both of those involved target loads with pistol powder and cast lead bullets.

Jim
 
A caveat

800,000 is an arbitrary number selected as the cut off for double heat reated receivers; The exact serial number is actually unkown other than it was "around 800,000."

There was a very good article written a number of years back and published in one of the more obscure collector's periodicals about a Springfield receiver that DID let go and was in the s/n range of 813,000. It was subjected to advanced tests and found to be "improperly" heat treated and very brittle. Recovered fractured pieces were found to exhibit the same crystallization typical of other low number receivers that had failed.

The point being: 800,000 was an arbitrary number that was picked as no accurate records were kept. The account of the 813,000 range gun strongly indicates that improperly heat treated receivers actually surpassed the 800,000 number.
 
Last edited:
1929

IIRC, 1929 is the year that the ordinance report that recommended not firing the SHT receivers was released. Hatcher's Notebook (1946), which I do not have near me at the moment, details all the reports (67, I believe) of failure up to the date of the book.
I am ready to be corrected about the date of the Ordinance report but I believe it is correct.
Pete
 
Thanks for the feedback, had two collectors look at the rifle last weekend, both confirmed rifle is a all original, all matching 1918 Rock Island in 80% condition, my bluebook puts a 80% pre 1930 at $3000., but looks like $1,200-2,000 is the gunbroker price range. Any thoughts as to value?

Thanks again, remi
 
Value

You are right to look at the "gunbroker" value as opposed to the Blue Book.
About value - do you really want to sell it?
Pete
 
The friend who own's this rifle wants to sale off his collection at this time so his family does not have to deal with it later. He is a 91 year old WWII vet and has a large collection of military rifles and WWII items. I am trying to survey his items and get him fair market value. He has some amazing stuff.

Thanks, remi
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top