Questions about a new 03

[ncblksmth1]

Just picked up a new to me 03.
I have some questions about what I percieve to be inconsistencies.
Serial number 1241xxx with no hole in the left side of the reciever. Also no pedersen cut. The serial number is not centered on the reciver and the 1 seems to be a heavier strike and not quite on line with the others. The gun has a SA 3-42 Barrel on it. The Stock seems to have been boned and no cartouches or proof marks are on it.

Anybody got any opinions?

Bob

[Rick the Librarian]

I've seen a number of M1903s with the "1" (especially the first one) struck deeper. When you say "no "hole", do you mean, no Hatcher Hole? Again, not unusual; And not surprising to be without the ejection port of a Pedersen Device - the receiver was made a year or two after the last Mark Is were manufactured.

[Jeff L]

Sounds like a WW2 rebuild. What does the but plate look like?

[mhb]

low-numbered 1903 receivers with a '1' added to the serial number in an attempt to make them appear to be a high-numbered ones. The giveaway is that the serial number is then not centered on the receiver ring, and that appears to be the case with your rifle.

mhb - Mike


Just picked up a new to me 03.
I have some questions about what I percieve to be inconsistencies.
Serial number 1241xxx with no hole in the left side of the reciever. Also no pedersen cut. The serial number is not centered on the reciver and the 1 seems to be a heavier strike and not quite on line with the others. The gun has a SA 3-42 Barrel on it. The Stock seems to have been boned and no cartouches or proof marks are on it.

Anybody got any opinions?

Bob

[John Beard]

Just picked up a new to me 03.
I have some questions about what I percieve to be inconsistencies.
Serial number 1241xxx with no hole in the left side of the reciever. Also no pedersen cut. The serial number is not centered on the reciver and the 1 seems to be a heavier strike and not quite on line with the others. The gun has a SA 3-42 Barrel on it. The Stock seems to have been boned and no cartouches or proof marks are on it.

Anybody got any opinions?

Bob

(1) Your receiver should have no hole on the left side of the receiver ring.
(2) Your receiver should have no Pedersen Cut.
(3) A heavier strike on the leading "1" in the serial number is very common, indeed normal.

No opinion. Dem's the facts!

J.B.

[mhb]

is NOT normal... and that's a fact.
A photo would help a great deal in evaluating your rifle, but your description is pretty definitive.

mhb - Mike

[Devil Dog]

I like Mike's answer. I would continue investigating to be sure it is not a LN receiver. A pic of the serial number would help.

[John Beard]

Just picked up a new to me 03.
I have some questions about what I percieve to be inconsistencies.
Serial number 1241xxx with no hole in the left side of the reciever. Also no pedersen cut. The serial number is not centered on the reciver and the 1 seems to be a heavier strike and not quite on line with the others. The gun has a SA 3-42 Barrel on it. The Stock seems to have been boned and no cartouches or proof marks are on it.

Anybody got any opinions?

Bob

Is your rifle's receiver ring marked with serifed letters and the serial number marked with fancy script numerals? Or is it marked with block (sans serif) letters and a plain block serial number? Please advise.

Thanks!

J.B.

[chuckindenver]

i have seen many with the 1 off set...or deaper.. 241123 would be serif type numbers or script , 1241123 would be sans serif, or block type numbers.

[Rick the Librarian]

I agree with Chuck - I've also seen serial numbers slightly "uneven".

[Mike D]

You have to visualize each number being centered within a block or rectangle, being the dye or stamp. This can make the spacing appear "off" with block numbering. Not the case with serrifed numbers.

This visual is also evident with the "FJA" inspection stamp. Many have questioned the spacing between the "F" and "J".

Mike