Contemplating Building a 7.62 NATO M1903

[Southron]

Are there any gunsmiths out there that would build a "shooter" M 1903 in 7.62 NATO?

Does anyone know of any 7.62 NATO conversions that have been done?

It would be an a "fun" project because I understand that the 7.62 NATO cartridge is inherently more accurate than the .30-06. Of course, surplus 7.62 NATO is much more available and cheaper than .30-06 .

[StockDoc]

Criterion will make the barrel, and I believe Krieger will as well, give them a call. I hear they are fun to shoot.

[pickax]

Would be a interesting project, but I disagree on both statements about accuracy and less expensive 7.62.
It might be cheaper in years to come, but not now. CMP greek ball '06 is the best deal going.

[Southron]

My understanding is that after the M-14 started being used in the Military Matches, the size of the bullseye in the targets had to be reduced, supposedly because the 7.62 NATO cartridge is more accurate.

I had forgot about Greek 30-06 but like everything else that the CMP sells, they will be running out of it sooner or later. Surplus 7.62 NATO is going to be around for a lot longer.

[Southron]

Has anyone else built an '03 in 7.62 NATO?

My understanding is that after the M-14 started being used in the Military Matches, the size of the bullseye in the targets had to be reduced, supposedly because the 7.62 NATO cartridge is more accurate.

I had forgot about Greek 30-06 but like everything else that the CMP sells, they will be running out of it sooner or later. Surplus 7.62 NATO is going to be around for a lot longer.

[Griff Murphey]

Probably the thing that brought in the decimal target (the aiming black was not significantly increased until the 7 ring on the SR was blacked-in in the 90's for the 300 yard rapid stage - this was widely acknowledged to be a concession to the increasing age of the hi power competitors) more than anything else was the hardback leather coat. That raised scores significantly. Once the military started issuing them to teams, everyone had to have them.

An accurized M-14 is no more accurate than an accurized M-1, although it is to my way of thinking more ergonomic, especially in offhand. An M-1 with a 7.62 NATO barrel will use the same exact elevation dope all the way to 1,000 yards.

[Darreld Walton]

To answer the OP's original question, yes, I've had this conversion done a couple or three times on 03's and an A3. None of them were as satisfying as I hoped they would be.
At least with the rifles I have experience with, bedding, trigger, load development, and the shooter have a far bigger 'impact' than does cartridge selection.

[Cosine26]

7.62/308 M1903
It is entirely possible to build a 7.62/308W on a M1903 action. There are a couple of things that you might want to consider:
1. The full bolt throw must be maintained at full length to get the ejector to work and to make the clip slots usable for rapid fire.
2. The receiver rails MAY have to be reshaped to get the cartridge to feed reliably . The 7.62/308 case is fatter at the shoulder than the 30-06 at the same point .
3. In using the full length magazine box, the ammo in the magazine under recoil might shift forward and fail to feed in rapid fire.
*I say "MAY" in item two, for I built a 7.62 on a Gew 98 action and have never had any problem. The receiver rails did not require reshaping. With regard to item 3, I never had a problem with the feeding for the 7.62 is fairly close to the 7.9 Mauser cartridge in length.
*When Remington was building the 40X Center Fire single shot in several center fire cartridges (222 Rem,222 Rem Mag, 7.62, 30-06,etc.), they kept a record of group sizes as the rifles were always tested for accuracy prior to shipment. The smallest caliber gave the smallest group and group size gradually increased with caliber up to the 7.62 caliber which was significantly smaller than the 30-06 and larger calibers. This is documented in a GUN DIGEST for 1968 in which Warren Page ( a noted bench rest shooter of the era) cites the Remington data in an article entitled "The Bigger The Cartridge". This data was compiled while testing several hundred rifles in the Remington custom shop.
*I believe that the NRA and army reduced the target size for the rifles and ammunition were becoming so much better that too many high scores were being shot. The first move was to decrease the size of the "V" ring on the "A" target from 6 inches to 4 inches. There were so many "possibles" being shot on the "A", "B", and "C" targets that determining a match winner was difficult. This was probably due more to better barrels, better bullets, better shooting equipment than to any particular cartridge. The 1000 yard record for the Wimbledon match stood at 100-27V's for a number of years. Then a navy shooter by the name of Trenin (SP?) shot something like 100-75V's ( I do not remember the exact count now). The SR/MR series for the short ranges (up to 600 yards) were modified first. The 1000 yard :"C" target was superseded later-probably because there were only a limited number of 1000 yard ranges.
*Remington solved the magazine problem when it built the Model of 1934 in 7x57 on a Remington 30 S action (a modified M1917 action) for Honduras. They put a 1/2 inch spacer in the back of the magazine that reduced the length of the magazine to 7x57 length. The top of the spacer was beveled from the top toward the front end at about a 45 degree angle, so that as the cartridges, when clip loaded, slid forward toward the front of the shortened magazine box. They also had to shorten the follower to accommodate the shortened magazine box. Today one may be able to use a follower from either a short action Remington 700 series rifle or a short action Model 70 action. The Remington 30 action apparently did not require that the receiver rails be modified, for I converted one back to 30-06 and had no problem with feeding.
*Another solution is to have the action shortened by 1/2 inch- a project for a very skilled craftsman. Sedgley did it with the M1903 action , McFarland did it with the M1917 action, and Dunlap did it with the pre-64 Model 70 action. A very complicated process requiring the highest skill and the manufacture of special stocks.

[Fred]

Long ago., I installed a 7.62 NATO steel insert into my 1903A1. It worked fine and only cost $35.00
I could remove it with a headless case extractor.
Feeding and extraction was never a problem either. I guess I was lucky.

[Griff Murphey]

I had Elmer Ballance set back the barrel on an 03A3 when I was in college in the late 60's. .308 was easy to obtain but not '06. I thought it might mke a good match rifle in the rain or for practice. Accuracy was ok but never as good as my M-1s. Plus, the rifle never fed properly. I could get it to feed a few rounds if I set the cartridges in the center of the follower which as a previous poster pointed out negates the use of the stripper clip guides. I know there are people who will tell you this conversion works fine but it sure did NOT in my rifle. And yes I played with different trigger guards including stamped and milled. Thankfully I did not play with the rails and was able to convert it back with a new barrel. No you can't just ream it back out to '06 because you have a ring where the fatter .308 shoulder was.

All you are doing is lowering the value of your 03.

[Kurt]

Are there any gunsmiths out there that would build a "shooter" M 1903 in 7.62 NATO?

Does anyone know of any 7.62 NATO conversions that have been done?

It would be an a "fun" project because I understand that the 7.62 NATO cartridge is inherently more accurate than the .30-06. Of course, surplus 7.62 NATO is much more available and cheaper than .30-06 .

A timely question as I'm working on a "fun" project and have wondered the same thing but in .308. Similar yet different. As far as the feeding issue, I tried some empty .308 brass with bullets in a couple 03's and they fed fine in mine so I don't think I would have a problem there. I picked up a McGowan Precision heavy target barrel on an auction that is chambered for 30-06 but isn't threaded. I could if I choose, have it re-chambered for .308 as it's a blank and unthreaded. I have read a fair amount on this and for the most part, no real up or downside either way. I'll probably stick with the .06 chamber. A bigger problem is finding a receiver...sigh.

Kurt

[wolley]

I have a MANN accuracy device in 308 on a Smith Corona action. Even though a feed cone was cut on the barrel feeding with more than 3 rounds in the magazine is problematic.

[Darreld Walton]

The 03 was designed, if I understand correctly, to be a single shot rifle with a magazine for 'emergencies'. The Mauser won't easily accept rounds presented in the same fashion as the 03.
I've had better success making .308's and similar rounds on M98's, probably because the original 8x57mm cartridge's external dimensions more closely approximate the .308 than does the 30-06-7.62 NATO comparison, and have yet to have a 'problem' with a 308/7.62 Mauser.
Awhile back, when NIW 03 and A3 barrels and M98's could be had for a 'song', I had quite a few of 'em made up as .308's and .300 Savage by cutting the threads off and rethreading to fit the M98. It's also a heckuva lot less expensive to purchase any 'accessory' for an M98. It's like comparing cars.

[StockDoc]

Dean's Gun Room done the barrel install, but cannot do the rear sight sleeve on the 03.