Thoughts on my sporterized Springfield M1903?

M

MountainMan83

New member
Hey everyone, I bought a sporterized Springfield 1903 awhile back. I was just looking for what people thought of it, because it surely is a beaut to me! I’ve only had it 6 months and it’s gotta be my favorite rifle I ever owned! I can shoot rounds through the same hole at 100 yards with factory 150gr 30-06 with this beast. It is in the sub-800,000 serial number range, but I’m not to worried about it. Do any of you have an idea of when it was sporterized? I was thinking somewhere in the range of the 60’s. It has a late 70’s Bushnell Banner 4-12X40 on it that I love, and looks better than a lot of scopes I use today! I attached some photos for you to feast your eyes upon...
 

Attachments

  • 23_B8_ECA0-7_B96-430_F-841_F-_CC7_D1_A459410.jpg
    23_B8_ECA0-7_B96-430_F-841_F-_CC7_D1_A459410.jpg
    235.6 KB · Views: 455
  • 9_AE67_F7_C-3_D87-4_CF9-_BD7_B-_C927_B7_F1_EDEF.jpg
    9_AE67_F7_C-3_D87-4_CF9-_BD7_B-_C927_B7_F1_EDEF.jpg
    180.4 KB · Views: 409
  • 837_FFDF4-1_FE0-4_D9_E-_A0_D5-4_CFE99_A60_CC0.jpg
    837_FFDF4-1_FE0-4_D9_E-_A0_D5-4_CFE99_A60_CC0.jpg
    179.4 KB · Views: 339
Last edited:
I really like Springfields,both military and sporter. These days,Iwould not alter a military,but from back in the day,the the rifles built on Springfields can be very well done.
It looks like you have a real nice one.

Now,I'm not trying to rain on your parade..but the low number thing...

I don't have the serial numbers commited to memory,and the arsenal matters,too. I can't give you an off the top of my head answer about the safety of your rifle. And,FWIW,I don't recite reloading data from memory,either.
I look it up.
I suggest posting the S/N (as close as you feel comfortable,you can XXX the last digits)and the arsenal.
There are folks here that can tell you darn near how many slices of bologna were in the heat treater's lunch when he made your rifle.

For the sake of my face and fingers,or the sake of a friend or relative that may shoot the rifle...heartburn or not,I WOULD pay attention if the rifle is built on a receiver that is of sub standard heat treat. They can't be trusted.

Aside from the loss of vision or hand injury ,or worse,the price of an emergency room visit will buy a REALLY nice rifle.
 
I like it. I have a sporterized Smith Corona that will shoot like that with my handloads. I've never fired a factory round out of it.
 
I've experienced a catastrophic receiver failure. I will tell you flat out it's NOT something you EVER want to happen.
Over 100 stitches in my face/neck, shattered jaw that was wired shut for 12 weeks, a hole in my neck to breath through, weeks of missed work, weeks of being fed through a straw, lost 20-25% of my body weight, permanent nerve and tissue damage resembling the effects of a light stroke.
Hop right on that train Dude cause my seat is empty.
 
Also have a Smith Corona action built to a nice 7x57 with Douglas Bbl. Shoots very well with Handloads. Not a lot of factory ammo out there but handles that as well.
 
Changeover is at 800k for a Springfield, 285,507 for a Rock Island.

With what?
Click to expand...

Does not matter, its the consequence that counts.

While I did not suffer it I was at the range when it happened to a guy shooting in a clients gun (Winchester Model 70, newer gun)

So much for gas released in a controlled manner.

The scope came back and hit the guy in the mouth, took out a bunchy of teeth.

A piece hit a bystander and fortunately it was a flat hit, he got a bloody cheek but no penetration

We found a piece of the receiver embedded in the back wall, if that his someone it would have done damage.

I am not afraid (nor were the Marines - Rock Island iuse) of the 1903 LSN, but the OP has a right to know.

Also that the unsupported head is worse than a controlled round feed that has a supported head.
 
Beautiful rifle! I have one myself. Done in 1945, great shooting rifle!

uvx6yAL.jpg
 
The receiver was made at Springfield Armory in 1915. The rifle, when it was customized, was built one piece at a time I assume. It has an RA 2-44 03a3 bbl on it and an 03a3 floorplate with a Remington bolt shroud and an unidentifiable bolt body and cocking piece. The bolt body seemed to be hardness tested, there are two pin point marks in the bottom of the one locking lug. The old timer that built this seemed to know what he was doing and I’m pretty sure he would have tested the receiver but I’m not certain.
 
Saw the shortened title on the front page and opened it thinking "please not another 1903, please not a 1903".... :mad:

Cause I've been looking forever for a decent one in original stock and there just aren't any in my area.:(

Sporterize a Hi-Point everyone, not a Springfield!:eek:
 
"...when it was sporterised..." There's no way to tell. The only part of that rifle that's an '03 is the receiver. I believe that's an aftermarket barrel that, along with the backwards stock, could have been put on any time in the last 100 years.
Kind of suspect that despite the heat treat issue, if it was going to blow it would have already. The ammo makes no difference either. However, it's a maybe 'when' thing not an 'if'.
 
T. O'Heir said:
"...when it was sporterised..." There's no way to tell. The only part of that rifle that's an '03 is the receiver. I believe that's an aftermarket barrel that, along with the backwards stock, could have been put on any time in the last 100 years.
Kind of suspect that despite the heat treat issue, if it was going to blow it would have already. The ammo makes no difference either. However, it's a maybe 'when' thing not an 'if'.
Click to expand...
Backwards stock?
 
BerretaProf....Long ago it was an NRA perk to be able to buy a 1903 or 1903A3 for a token price.

The NRA itself had its name on an arsenal converted Springfield.A lot of nice custom rifles have been built on the Springfield.
The OP's rifle was done during that era.

No one is suggesting altering a 1903 or 1903A3 today.What is bottom price on a military 1903 or A3 today? More than the price of many brand new sporting rifles. Maybe $1200? I don't think many folks would start there and then spend the money to sporterize it.I think the Mil trim rifles are pretty safe.

Good luck on your search.
 
"With what?"

One of the "glass hard" P17 actions re-barreled to a belted magnum. Those actions are some of the strongest known(sarcasm). Some of the "over treated" ones are really strong right up to the point when they grenade.
 
They were also made out of nickle steel, much more flexible than the previous 1903 steels (and what they went to at some point)
 
My understanding-based on my reading of Hatcher-is that there were a few bad production runs long before WWI. Changing the steel and using pyrometers solved that problem. We are of course going to debate this until the Crack of Doom.
 
SIGSHR said:
My understanding-based on my reading of Hatcher-is that there were a few bad production runs long before WWI. Changing the steel and using pyrometers solved that problem. We are of course going to debate this until the Crack of Doom.
Click to expand...
Exactly! That wasn’t my intention with creating this thread...I’m sure it’s safe as I’m near positive the old timer that built it had run a hardness test on it.
 
Its been decades since I read the stories about these rifles.
There certainly were some brittle 1917's.I'm thinking they may have been Eddystones,but I'm not sure. In those days,a lot of heat treat was by "Master eyeball"
The legend I recall,the arsenal came under new management.The new boss decided the windows were dingy,and ordered them cleaned.
The increase in ambient light "decalibrated" the master eyeballs. Getting the same color overheated the steel.
Different times,different tech.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top