1903 USMC Service Rifle under the radar.... Picture heavy

[Smokeeaterpilot]

Hey guys, I was doing my usual strolling for 1903s (yes I have a 1903 addiction). I came by an Armslist Ad for a 1903 Rock Island rebuild.

Now first I'd like to throw out I normally avoid Armslist Ads like the plague because so much fraud takes place there. However, this one was through a dealer and vendor. So I looked up the name and found the website to a brick and mortar gun shop so completely different to a private listing. So in my mind a little safer.

The pictures were horrible. But it listed it as. "good shape with a few dings, pre-war and rebarreled." It was priced high for a mix-master but low for a USMC rifle.

I saved the seller's pictures. Just so you can see what I first saw.

http://i1266.photobucket.com/albums/jj530/Smokeeaterpilot/1903%20RIA%20USMC/1_zpsxw0zse6e.jpg (http://s1266.photobucket.com/user/Smokeeaterpilot/media/1903%20RIA%20USMC/1_zpsxw0zse6e.jpg.html)

http://i1266.photobucket.com/albums/jj530/Smokeeaterpilot/1903%20RIA%20USMC/2_zpss8yw8qyd.jpg (http://s1266.photobucket.com/user/Smokeeaterpilot/media/1903%20RIA%20USMC/2_zpss8yw8qyd.jpg.html)

I'll admit I got a little excited right off the bat. So I called the shop the next morning and spoke with the seller and started asking some questions. He openly admitted that military surplus rifles seldom show up in his shop and he doesn't know much about them. But I asked was the stock sanded, no cartouches, serialized bolt and greenish coloring. He answered yes to everything and I requested some more pictures which he quickly e-mailed me.

I asked if he would be willing to accept a lower off to see if I could get a better deal, he said it's a consignment but been sitting there for 4 years so he's sure the seller is gonna take my offer, he called back a couple hours later and said he accepted and shipped priority.

When it arrived I got even more excited. It's nicer than I expected and it's a true USMC rebuild. Has several characteristics.

Serial number on SRS falls in a high number of documented USMC rifles.
High Number RIA action.
Greenish parkerizing.
Blackish blued (serialized bolt) and blackish rear ladder sight
heavily sanded stock with no cartouches
It came with a fine checkered butt plate but I had a spare stippled buttplate so I threw it on there.
hatcher hole
No vice marks but because of the barrel date I'm told that's not the kiss of death.

I really like the grease and wood fibers in the stock I'm assuming were for long term storage.

Your thoughts?

http://i1266.photobucket.com/albums/jj530/Smokeeaterpilot/1903%20RIA%20USMC/8_zpsfungefw1.jpg (http://s1266.photobucket.com/user/Smokeeaterpilot/media/1903%20RIA%20USMC/8_zpsfungefw1.jpg.html)

http://i1266.photobucket.com/albums/jj530/Smokeeaterpilot/1903%20RIA%20USMC/15_zpsg4tolv48.jpg (http://s1266.photobucket.com/user/Smokeeaterpilot/media/1903%20RIA%20USMC/15_zpsg4tolv48.jpg.html)

http://i1266.photobucket.com/albums/jj530/Smokeeaterpilot/1903%20RIA%20USMC/10_zps79a2mhnz.jpg (http://s1266.photobucket.com/user/Smokeeaterpilot/media/1903%20RIA%20USMC/10_zps79a2mhnz.jpg.html)

http://i1266.photobucket.com/albums/jj530/Smokeeaterpilot/1903%20RIA%20USMC/1_zpsntqdaxhb.jpg (http://s1266.photobucket.com/user/Smokeeaterpilot/media/1903%20RIA%20USMC/1_zpsntqdaxhb.jpg.html)

http://i1266.photobucket.com/albums/jj530/Smokeeaterpilot/1903%20RIA%20USMC/14_zps8fkr971p.jpg (http://s1266.photobucket.com/user/Smokeeaterpilot/media/1903%20RIA%20USMC/14_zps8fkr971p.jpg.html)

http://i1266.photobucket.com/albums/jj530/Smokeeaterpilot/1903%20RIA%20USMC/11_zpsgmcfquiy.jpg (http://s1266.photobucket.com/user/Smokeeaterpilot/media/1903%20RIA%20USMC/11_zpsgmcfquiy.jpg.html)

http://i1266.photobucket.com/albums/jj530/Smokeeaterpilot/1903%20RIA%20USMC/15_zps0u0zwkyb.jpg (http://s1266.photobucket.com/user/Smokeeaterpilot/media/1903%20RIA%20USMC/15_zps0u0zwkyb.jpg.html)

http://i1266.photobucket.com/albums/jj530/Smokeeaterpilot/1903%20RIA%20USMC/26_zpsuazewkhz.jpg (http://s1266.photobucket.com/user/Smokeeaterpilot/media/1903%20RIA%20USMC/26_zpsuazewkhz.jpg.html)

[Smokeeaterpilot]

More pictures...


http://i1266.photobucket.com/albums/jj530/Smokeeaterpilot/1903%20RIA%20USMC/4_zpsbdfsuikr.jpg (http://s1266.photobucket.com/user/Smokeeaterpilot/media/1903%20RIA%20USMC/4_zpsbdfsuikr.jpg.html)

http://i1266.photobucket.com/albums/jj530/Smokeeaterpilot/1903%20RIA%20USMC/24_zpswb9txdas.jpg (http://s1266.photobucket.com/user/Smokeeaterpilot/media/1903%20RIA%20USMC/24_zpswb9txdas.jpg.html)

http://i1266.photobucket.com/albums/jj530/Smokeeaterpilot/1903%20RIA%20USMC/21_zpsdxy08uai.jpg (http://s1266.photobucket.com/user/Smokeeaterpilot/media/1903%20RIA%20USMC/21_zpsdxy08uai.jpg.html)

http://i1266.photobucket.com/albums/jj530/Smokeeaterpilot/1903%20RIA%20USMC/6_zpsyxdmabu0.jpg (http://s1266.photobucket.com/user/Smokeeaterpilot/media/1903%20RIA%20USMC/6_zpsyxdmabu0.jpg.html)

http://i1266.photobucket.com/albums/jj530/Smokeeaterpilot/1903%20RIA%20USMC/7_zpsfiipmzmz.jpg (http://s1266.photobucket.com/user/Smokeeaterpilot/media/1903%20RIA%20USMC/7_zpsfiipmzmz.jpg.html)

http://i1266.photobucket.com/albums/jj530/Smokeeaterpilot/1903%20RIA%20USMC/25_zpsnnvr4udx.jpg (http://s1266.photobucket.com/user/Smokeeaterpilot/media/1903%20RIA%20USMC/25_zpsnnvr4udx.jpg.html)

[Parashooter]

Why on earth would anyone remove a nice checkered buttplate and replace with a crudely-punched/chiseled specimen? Certainly Marine armorers wouldn't (since the purpose of the "stippling" is to emulate the added friction produced by checkering).

[louis]

Nice rifle very nice find!! I like the stippled butt plate I think cplnorton or someone has one similar not certain maybe that was you lol. I've got a couple of usmc 03's with stippled butt plates gives it a different look. Good find again!!

[Smokeeaterpilot]

Parashooter, I agree with you but the Stippled buttplate is so iconic of a Marine rifle it wouldn't really fit on anything else correctly, since I had a spare I'd thought I'd use it.

I definitely will want another one. But I'll definitely say 4-5 years ago I would have bypassed this thing entirely thinking it was a mixmaster garbage. Sites like this and members sharing their wealth of knowledge made it possible to pick gems like this out from the masses. And I'm grateful for it!

[Smokeeaterpilot]

I'm still not sure of the wood fibers in the stock. I'm assuming for storage but its almost if the stock was stored separately from the stock. But I'm not sure...

[Fred]

Parashooter, I agree with you but the Stippled buttplate is so iconic of a Marine rifle it wouldn't really fit on anything else correctly, since I had a spare I'd thought I'd use it.

I definitely will want another one. But I'll definitely say 4-5 years ago I would have bypassed this thing entirely thinking it was a mixmaster garbage. Sites like this and members sharing their wealth of knowledge made it possible to pick gems like this out from the masses. And I'm grateful for it!

The rifle was 100% authentic in its form and you chose to replace an original component of that rifle with a part that you feel should be on it so that it better fits someones idea of what all such rifles should look like. We're you trying to improve its authenticity? What you've actually done is devalued it as a collectors piece. Any rifles original make up and character is changed when an owner starts switching parts on it. Sorry if it upsets you because that's not my intent. But I strongly feel that to take what appears to be an untouched and completely un fooled with USMC 1903 Sprinfield and start switching out parts on it is counter productive for several reasons.
I think you ought to switch those buttplates back.

[Smokeeaterpilot]

The rifle was 100% authentic in its form and you chose to replace an original component of that rifle with a part that you feel should be on it so that it better fits someones idea of what all such rifles should look like. We're you trying to improve its authenticity? What you've actually done is devalued it as a collectors piece. Any rifles original make up and character is changed when an owner starts switching parts on it. Sorry if it upsets you because that's not my intent. But I strongly feel that to take what appears to be an untouched and completely un fooled with USMC 1903 Sprinfield and start switching out parts on it is counter productive for several reasons.
I think you ought to switch those buttplates back.

I appreciate your opinion and you have by no means upset me. I definitely understand the purist approach to collecting. I welcome differing opinions. I hope you don't mind if i explain my point of view.

Since the rifle is beyond a doubt a USMC rifle I did not consider it unethical to swap out a part another USMC part. The reason being is I can't prove this rifle is untouched as it left the arsenal in its present state. Without proper documentation it could have had several small parts replaced along the way from prior owners. A lot of time has passed since it left its service life and I can't prove it being untouched. All I can go by is what I see. I saw a part that could be replaced with a more correct part and choose to replace it. I could have simply not mentioned about replacing the part and no one would have ever noticed. So the same occurrence could have happened between the end of its service lift when it reached my hands. Lots of opportunities for prior owners to do the same.

Now if I personally got it from an auction where it was documented to found is some forgotten cache of Marine rifles then yeah it's without a doubt "untouched" as it left service. And I would not have touched one thing.

I guess the long drawn out explanation is maybe the rifle came with a stippled buttplate and an owner along the way didn't like it, so wanted to throw on a fine checkered buttplate because he thought it was done by Bubba not knowing what it was. That is my interpretation of this. Now I could be wrong but I look at it there's no way to tell how it left service and in what configuration. That's why I didn't consider it devaluing the rifle.

I'm probably not going to fire the rifle, probably because I love the grease and wood fibers in the stock and I don't want to lose those. Now if I find out those are out of place then I'll clean it. But for now I'm not touching anything else.

[JohnMOhio]

I agree with you Fred. Keep them as your find them. However, the previous owner(s) may have had a stippled butt plate on it and thought it crude and changed it out. It is difficult to tell what has transpired with a particular firearm over the years unless you purchased it new and kept it that way. After it passes on to another owner, all bets are off I suppose.

John

[Promo]

Two of my USMC snipers have the finely checkered buttplate on them. And there are plenty of USMC rifles with these buttplates around. Since it's anway visible to anyone knowledgeable that this is an USMC rifle, why try to "restore" something to what it never was and had?

[Col. Colt]

I have to agree that it should be left "as found" barring actual signs the part was changed. The rifle is a historical atrifact, and you are guessing, and trying to "increase it's Marineness", it appears to me.

Part of collecting is helping improve the accuracy of the known data base, by direct observation of unmolested rare variations as they really are. Speculating that someone MIGHT have changed a given part on an otherwise normal for type rifle is dangerous, and, after you pass the rifle along, through death or sale, it will now completely MISLEAD the next group of collectors about how normal a fine checkered buttplate can be on a USMC rifle. This has happened often in M1 rifles, where the new owner "corrected" his rifle, and sold or disposed of the original parts - only to find out later his rifle WAS correct - and he has now UNCORRECTED it, based on an incomplete or faulty understanding, or when new information surfaced. I have a pre-WWII Garand, and it had a funny, mottled parkerizing on the bolt. I had another matching bolt with a smooth finish, and was about to change it when I mentioned this to an old, experienced collector. He immediately stopped me and told me that the earlier 1941 guns exhibited this finish "defect" from stacking the bolts loose in a wire basket on top of each other at Springfield Armory - and was a "tell" that the gun was original and unmolested - to ADVANCED collectors - this is NOT in any book I have ever seen. Glad I was stopped from vandalizing a difficult to find variation, and chunking the original bolt "because it is ugly".

History is what is, not what we want it to be. Respectfully, CC

[Smokeeaterpilot]

First I enjoy the spirited discussion. I love exchanging ideas, interpretations and theories. This appears to be just as hot button a topic as anything political or religion based. But I hope you don't mind if I interject my take on this.

I understand the purist mentality of "leave it as you found it" and don't try to "roll back the clock" or change the rifle's history. But I'd like to point out to me there is a vast difference between a "correct" rifle, a "humped" one and a "untouched."

When you first acquire a firearm you can only go on two things, what's presented in front of you and what is documented. Since this rifle has absolutely no documentation of it being in the condition when it left service some 60-70 years prior I can only go on what I see and what is the evidence in front of me. If I were to trade or sell this rifle later (without changing the buttplate) I would not only consider it unethical but misleading trying to pass it off as "untouched" because it can't be documented as such. The condition would lead one to believe that is untouched, but to say it remained in the same condition as when it left service without any validation through proper documentation would be nothing short of misleading in my eyes.

What I can do is present what I have. I have the SRS serial numbers of USMC rifles surrounding my serial number (thanks to some of our members), the condition and characteristics of the stock, the electro penciled bolt, the blackened rear sight, greenish parkerizing and the hatcher hole as well as the wood fibers and grease in the stock. Then let a potential buyer reach his own conclusion to establish a price. But trying to pass this off as a "untouched" example without anything backing that up (which such a statement would influence price significantly) would be to me unethical because it can't be proven.

I can say this is rifle is a USMC rifle with several Marine characteristics and has several correct parts but that's about it.

I am NOT advocating "humping" this rifle. As I mentioned it does not have vice marks, so I am not advocating taking a pipe wrench to the barrel to give it another trait. That is not even in the discussion I just want to make that clear. If it came without an electro-penciled bolt I would not try and do that myself (but faking that can be pointed out by some of the more experienced collectors, I'm not one of them I couldn't tell the difference)

If anything I'm creating a "paper" trail of how this rifle was found at this point in time, where it came from as well as any changes that were made (in my eyes which weren't really that much)

So that is my take on this. I understand it is one of the less conservative approaches and I appeared to have walked into the Lion's Den. But I just can't declare this an "untouched" example if I go to sell it (which I wont, it will either go to my kids but if they have no interest it'll probably get donated to the USMC or NRA museum if they want it). I can say I believe that's how it left service, but I can't make a declaration on that it is one.

In the end it's just varying opinions but I appreciate everyone contributing. I love these discussions, I hope I have not offended anyone.

I'd like to share a story of a friend of mine who went to the CMP Alabama location a few years back. (Since most of these M1 Garands came from US Army stores among other locations we can assume the truly nice examples are how they left service. If someone has worked at the CMP recently please tell me if this story is true or false.)

A friend of mine was in Alabama for either a shooting competition and near the store. He went over there and spoke with an Armorer that he knows personally. The armorer told him that they had sold out of Service Grade rifles and only had Correct Grade and Collector Grade rifles (I believe it was of HRA manufacturer rifles) but to keep sales going they would swap out correct grade rifles to make service grade rifles to keep sales moving. So he bought as many Service grades as he could afford at the time and swapped out parts in his hotel room to try and get correct grades. I have never tried to validate this story but it's always interested me.


I should have pointed out I am keeping the buttplate, I placed it in a marked ziplock bag so I can find it later should I decide to switch it back or sell it with the original buttplate.

But once this rifle leaves my hands through death or a sale, I have absolutely no control over what future owners choose to do with it. Whether they keep it as is or change it further. So I've tried not to worry about it, just how it is as I am fortunate enough to own it.

Thanks everyone, if anyone has more to add please do!

[swampyankee]

Nice rifle, but next time don't tell anyone about changing anything. That way everyone will sleep well tonight and not worry about something so trivial.

[ismith]

I think it's important to remember that not all Marine 1903s have all of the Marine characteristics. That said, that is a pretty neat buttplate. I strongly recommend shooting it. Mine is my favorite 1903, a real shooter.

[Promo]

If you change your buttplate, that aswell doesn't allow you to call it more an USMC rifle, than it previously was. And someone knowledgeable will anyway know that USMC rifles had checkered buttplates. Those guys who don't know this, will also not know about an individually stipped buttplate.

You probably will not be able to tell someone it is untouched. However, you will be able to tell that you are selling it in exactly the same condition as you bought it. And that is an unbeatable argument, especially after 10 or more years. That has helped me a lot when selling my items.

It is of course your thing what you do with your rifle, however from my point of view you didn't raise the value compared to what it originally have been worth. Probably you would in fact have lost money, since when you'd sell the USMC buttplate seperately, you would have got more money than for the finely checkered one. And the rifle anyway brings the same money, with or without an USMC stippled buttplate. So in fact for you it would have been a bad deal.

[Mike D]

Your rifle, do what you want.

The buttplate does not affect me, but what appears to be varnish on the stock, sure does. I don't believe the USMC did that. A previous owner did not bother to remove the hardware before applying this, it seems.

I'm wondering about the stock. It is a Rem M1903 stock, correct? No relief for an A3 handguard ring, right? Looking at the cut-off relief and stock bolts, it does not appear to be sanded at all. Could it be NOS??

More questions after answers. Thanks!

Mike

[Normanclature]

If Mike D is correct and it is a Remington stock, then the "correct" buttplate for the stock would be a milled or stamped Remington. So the stock on this rifle is a replacement and any 03 buttplate could have been added by the Marines from spares.
It seems to me that under these circumstances it is merely a matter of personal preference for the present owner to put a stippled buttplate on his rifle. I cannot see how this is destroying the rifles history or misleading future buyers.
We know stippled buttplates were used by the USMC. Checkered ones were probably used also.

[John Beard]

Your rifle, do what you want.

The buttplate does not affect me, but what appears to be varnish on the stock, sure does. I don't believe the USMC did that. A previous owner did not bother to remove the hardware before applying this, it seems.

I'm wondering about the stock. It is a Rem M1903 stock, correct? No relief for an A3 handguard ring, right? Looking at the cut-off relief and stock bolts, it does not appear to be sanded at all. Could it be NOS??

More questions after answers. Thanks!

Mike

(1) Incorrect.

(2) Right.

(3) No.

J.B.

[Mike D]

(1) Incorrect.

(2) Right.

(3) No.

J.B.

John - Thanks for the answers. If you could, please provide a little more info.

If the stock has no finger-grooves and no A3 ring relief, what else could it be besides made for a Rem '03?

Do you know of any sub-contractors that made this type of stock?

Why not NOS? Would that not explain the wood fibers?

Mike

[Punch the Clown]

(1) Incorrect.

(2) Right.

(3) No.

J.B.

OK, I'll play. The stock is a Springfield scant stock that someone re-shaped to a straight grip? That's my guess and I'm sticking to it.

[Roadkingtrax]

Punch its not a scant stock. I had a similar Marine rifle, and it was in the style of a Remington straight stock, albeit...a little rougher cut.

http://i223.photobucket.com/albums/dd281/ttraxler/USMC%20BLOCK/USMC80010.jpg (http://s223.photobucket.com/user/ttraxler/media/USMC%20BLOCK/USMC80010.jpg.html)