View Full Version : Remmington 03a3 sniper
My father gave me a Remington 03A3 a few years ago and I recently started researching it as he has passed and is no longer around to fill in some blanks. It has a scope mounted on it and missing the front sight. It is all green parkerized except for the scope rings and scope. The stock has been cut and it I guess is what is called sporterized. He was in the USMC and was issued this gun while he was in at the end of the Korean war and he was an officer. He told me when h e got out he was given his gun and made it sound as if he probably shouldn't have been allowed to have it. He got out in late 50's i believe and never really used the gun it sat in the gun case for years. I did see him shoot it a couple of times and those were rare as it was while hunting something he rarely did and did it to take me as i wanted to go. I received the gun from him about 20 years ago and it sat in my gun cases or safe for almost the whole time, i took it hunting a couple of times and only shot it while i was sighting it in those few times, maybe 20 rounds through it and that was due to it being to accurate it only took a few shots to realize it didn't need it. This gun is extremely accurate and my father cherished the gun for that fact and he was right at 100 yds my shots were almost always toughing each other everytime I sighted it. So since he is gone I started to wonder why he cherished it. From research I have done it appears the serial number falls within the limited production in 1943 by Remington as the model number is 3415588 and barrel stamped 8 43. I have posted pictures. There is nothing wrong with rifle besides the stock and scope from what i can tell. What is it worth now? Is it worth restoring? Anyone know where I can get the original stock and scope?
It maybe better to sell to someone whom has the parts I need due to the fact the stock and scope appear to be very rare that have the right markings. Appreciate any thoughts or insight even to the rifle itself.3167131672316733167431675
3167631677316783167931680
Johnny P
07-21-2015, 04:51
The rifle was actually an 03-A4, but the receivers were marked 03-A3 in case they were ever used for a standard rifle. The rifle has been through rebuild, and as you noted the stock has been heavily modified. It would be expensive to restore it to it's original configuration, but considering that it was your father's rifle it would certainly be worth expense.
The rifle was actually an 03-A4, but the receivers were marked 03-A3 in case they were ever used for a standard rifle. The rifle has been through rebuild, and as you noted the stock has been heavily modified. It would be expensive to restore it to it's original configuration, but considering that it was your father's rifle it would certainly be worth expense.
thanks for the response and I am starting to wonder do I want to get it back to original, as my father didn't want it that way and is why it looks like it does today. The other thing is which I never considered would putting the gun in a different stock somehow affect its accuracy, it is extremely accurate?
PhillipM
07-21-2015, 11:37
You should really search through his things to see if the original scope is stashed away somewhere.
Very nice find, thank you for sharing.
Johnny P
07-22-2015, 04:27
thanks for the response and I am starting to wonder do I want to get it back to original, as my father didn't want it that way and is why it looks like it does today. The other thing is which I never considered would putting the gun in a different stock somehow affect its accuracy, it is extremely accurate?
At the time it was sold it was just another old military rifle, and little interest in preserving it's history. All that has changed today, and considering your request for information in restoring the rifle your view on the rifle has changed also.
You should really search through his things to see if the original scope is stashed away somewhere.
Very nice find, thank you for sharing.
Well my father got remarried about 40 years ago and if it wasn't for him giving the gun to me a number of years ago, I never would have gotten it. When he died nothing was given to us, it was all given the kids he had with his new wife, I mean I got nothing, not even a medal of his. So I don't think he had anything else anyway as I said before he wasn't collector and he would have thrown out the scope. I am sure he got an ear full back then giving the gun to me, he had one other gun and gave that to my step brother, that was a side by side.
cplnorton
07-22-2015, 07:48
Zadmat, I sent you a PM. If should show up in the notifications link at the top of the page.
"...made it sound as if he probably shouldn't have been allowed to have it..." Pretty much. If the story is true. The troopies were not allowed to keep any issued kit. Marine officers did not snipe and certainly would not have been issued a 1903A4 at the end of the Korean War. Mind you, it's entirely possible a surplused rifle was given to your da by somebody. Maybe his troopies. Who knows?
Anyway, as it sits, it's worth whatever any sporterised 1903A4 is worth. The scope is commercial. Even though it's got an '03A4 barrel and receiver. It will cost a bundle to restore. Gunparts wants $190.95 for one type of a drop-in reproduction "Type 'C' walnut stock alone. An unissued 'Scant'(different grip shape) runs $237.35. There'd be the hand guards and all the metal bits too.
Johnny P
07-22-2015, 02:16
While it will cost to restore it, so far he is $0 into it.
During that time period Marine officers where allowed to purchase these rifles that where no longer in marine inventory. So it's possible that this is one of them. After all the Marine Corps did have A4's in their inventory.
Motorcop
07-22-2015, 03:55
I could be going against the grain here, but "I" would leave the rifle as it is for the rest of the time I had control of it. Perhaps later on someone not connected to the father and son may acquire the rifle and that person can then do with it what he will. The OP's father wanted it setup in this configuration and if I was his son I would leave it as it is in remembrance of my Dad. Another non-original "original" A4 isn't needed out there.
Rick H.
One more item the USMC preferred the scant stock on these weapons
PhillipM
07-22-2015, 10:41
One more item the USMC preferred the scant stock on these weapons
Scant vs straight grip or vs full pistol grip? Source?
I'm referring to the Usmc version of the 1903a4 the Usmc preferred the scant stock on these for some reason. I've seen a few photos of marines using them in both training and in combat and they were with the scant stock. I've read a number of books that all suggested the same. If I still had theses books I would pass it on to you but I don't have them any longer.
chuckindenver
07-23-2015, 07:25
were did you get that info from?
While it will cost to restore it, so far he is $0 into it.
You are right and finding quality parts is difficult, wished I considered it 20 years ago!
I could be going against the grain here, but "I" would leave the rifle as it is for the rest of the time I had control of it. Perhaps later on someone not connected to the father and son may acquire the rifle and that person can then do with it what he will. The OP's father wanted it setup in this configuration and if I was his son I would leave it as it is in remembrance of my Dad. Another non-original "original" A4 isn't needed out there.
Rick H.
Well said and that is also why I didn't do anything with it, it flat out shoots accurately the way it sits and I guess you could say a chip off the old block, I haven't done anything with it either and to be honest not sure I will, he said the old scope was awful and why he upgraded, the scope I have on it is probably worth something too, it's a redfield, I actually like the scope. At least the way it is now I can hunt with it and if I put it back to original not sure I would.
OP: IMHO it was your fathers and it was they way he wanted it, so I would leave it as is and remember him and his gift to you.
cplnorton
07-23-2015, 08:55
Yeah I've seen several pics of the Marines with scant stocks on the A4 as well. But I don't think it was so much they liked them more than the C, I just sort of imagine since the scant was manufactured as a replacement, that is how they probably ended up on there.
I have a lot of documents on the A4 from the Marines, and they were not that found of them. But they did have them. The mostly complained about the beddng and trigger pull. And during the Korean war timeframe they said the 2.5 scope wasn't adequate fore the terrain of korea.
As Louis said it was pretty common for officers to be able to purchase these weapons after about the 1954 timeframe.
cplnorton
07-23-2015, 09:10
On a interesting side note, I have seen one A4 that I think was a Marine A4. It was in a block of Marine A4 serials in the SRS. The trigger had been modified to about a 3lb pull and the stock had the same style 6 o'clock bed done to it just like the Unertl sniper/team stocks. I just found it interesting about the trigger pull and bedding, as that was the main two things in the Marine documents that they said was wrong with the rifle.
Yes cplnorton the Usmc was not fond of them at all. But they did have them. Like you I'm always looking for info on marine equipment and info. I too have run across an A4 that looked like it may have had Usmc ties. They are very rare.
I'm not sure where I read it but the scant stock a4 came directly from Remington when they went to the marines. The marine corps didn't have a many of them. Love to find one
cplnorton
07-23-2015, 01:33
Louis we will have to talk offline. I love to do any research with anyone interested in anything Marine. :)
In the Marine documents from the sniper program in WWII, they talk about switching to the A4 from the 03 Unertl. In those they comment that they will get them from "Army channels." So I suspect the ones they did get, were probably acquired from the Army. Which sort of makes sense as you look at the Marine serialed A4's in the SRS. Many are intertwined with 6th Army serial numbers as well. Which the 6th Army was in the South Pacific during the War. So it sort of fits with the Army Channel's description.
Initially the Marines wanted 1000 of them when they ran out of Unertl scopes, to build the Unertl snipers. But I sort of doubt they received very many before the war was over. It's hard saying as I've never found any documents that gives a detailed number.
Post WWII, is anyone's guess, as there is several mentions of them in the sniper documents from Korea.
cplnorton
07-23-2015, 02:00
My gut instinct is that the A4's were used mostly for training post WWII. According to the documents, Marines had a shortage of Unertl and M1C's leading into Korea. And I sort of guess the A4 was used in some sort of a supplemental training role during the Korean War timeframe. But that is just speculation on my part.
Punch the Clown
07-23-2015, 02:23
Patience and it can be restored. I was at the Allentown show a few months ago and someone beat me to a nice 1903 stocked in an original 03A4 stock. It sold for around $700, which sort of made the stock free in my eyes. I'm sure a scope can be stolen in a similar way. All you need is patience.
Patience and it can be restored. I was at the Allentown show a few months ago and someone beat me to a nice 1903 stocked in an original 03A4 stock. It sold for around $700, which sort of made the stock free in my eyes. I'm sure a scope can be stolen in a similar way. All you need is patience.
Thanks and I will start looking more for one. Isn't it real important to get the right stamps or markings? Also I was told that the original bolt was not parkerized and was blued or black, so what I struggle with is why on earth would someone parkerize a bolt that never was and to me would have been easier to keep natural as blued, why try to match the gun when it never did? Can someone make sense of this, it would have made more sense to keep it blued.
My gut instinct is that the A4's were used mostly for training post WWII. According to the documents, Marines had a shortage of Unertl and M1C's leading into Korea. And I sort of guess the A4 was used in some sort of a supplemental training role during the Korean War timeframe. But that is just speculation on my part.
The M1903A1 w/ 8x Unertl was basically a flop as a combat sniper rifle. The scope was too long and unwieldly, it was not sufficiently moisture proof, the magnification was too high leading to dim images around dusk and dawn and finally the adjustments were too delicate and finicky.
By Feb 1944, barely 6 months after its introduction, the Commandant issued orders to his QM to obtain the M1903A4 w/Weaver 330C since the M1903A1 w/8x Unertl "had not proven effective in combat".
On the other hand the USMC reportedly never throws any serviceable equipment away so the M1903A1 Snipers continued to be issued. One hundred of them (about a tenth of the total production) were given to the US Navy for mine sweeping duty.
The use of the Unertl scope had been the brainchild of USMC Captain George Van Orden and Master Gunner Calvin Lloyd who were tasked with evaluating potential sniper's equipment in 1940. Their initial recommendation was to mount the Unertl's on Winchester Model 70 sporting rifles. USMC brass balked at introducing a new rifle so the sniper rifles were ultimately built from M1903 or M1903A1 match rifles the Corps had in inventory.
In one of Peter Senichs books he interviewed a former USMC sniper and inquired as to the average range that Japanese targets were engaged. The answer supplied was about 400 yards. Probably well with in the capability of the Weaver 330C or Lyman Alaskan.
Regards,
Jim
Johnny P
07-24-2015, 12:47
Thanks and I will start looking more for one. Isn't it real important to get the right stamps or markings? Also I was told that the original bolt was not parkerized and was blued or black, so what I struggle with is why on earth would someone parkerize a bolt that never was and to me would have been easier to keep natural as blued, why try to match the gun when it never did? Can someone make sense of this, it would have made more sense to keep it blued.
The original blued parts were phosphated (Parkerized) during rebuild as the facilities did no rebluing. Even the magazine and barrels of the Model 1911/1911A1 were given a phosphate finish during rebuild if in condition to be reissued.
Johnny P
07-24-2015, 12:50
I'm not sure where I read it but the scant stock a4 came directly from Remington when they went to the marines. The marine corps didn't have a many of them. Love to find one
The scant stock came about as a shortage of stock blanks large enough have a pistol grip. Straight stock blanks were run on a C stock duplicating machine, and the tiny grip was the result. All other dimensions are the same as the C Type stock.
Doug Douglass
07-26-2015, 07:55
It is a diamond in the rough....the vast majority of the $$$ expensive parts are there. Stocks are not expensive, put a Lyman Alaskan on it or an M84 with the correct rings and bands and bingo, a rebuilt A4 worth a ton more than what it is now. My lightly used A4 is 4212 away from this one. Good hunting parts.
The scant stock came about as a shortage of stock blanks large enough have a pistol grip. Straight stock blanks were run on a C stock duplicating machine, and the tiny grip was the result. All other dimensions are the same as the C Type stock.
+1 Also to the stock used on the M1903A4 rifle was actually designated "STOCK, M1903A1" The drawing for the "Stock, M1903A1" illustrates that two profiles were furnished , the full pistol grip ("C"style) and the scant pistol grip. As Johnny points out whether a stock came out with the full grip or the scant grip depended on the amount of wood in the blank. (See Clark Campbell 2003)
The USMC made their request for M1903A4's in early 1944 at about the same time when most A4 production was being equipped with 2 groove barrels and contractor supplied scant stocks. I suspect any tinkering with bedding and trigger pull was done in post war years.
so I did some more research and my Dad left the Marines in 63-64 and the gun has been in our family since then. I can't verify that the gun was issued to him, but he did use it while in the Marines, as he told me the gun was extremely accurate.
cplnorton
07-28-2015, 06:14
Zadmat, out of morbid curiosity. Does your's have a punch mark in the flat part of the rail like this?
http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/1903A4%20Original/P1250875_zpscytf918r.jpg
chuckindenver
07-28-2015, 07:51
punch mark is a targeted mark..
punch mark on the bottom of the barrel, under were the front sight is , air gauge marking
cplnorton
07-28-2015, 08:59
I have a open box SA rebuild A4 that doesn't have the punch mark on the rail, that is why I'm sort of curious what is on Zadmat's rifle.
chuckindenver
07-28-2015, 10:14
have a few match rifles and USMC rifles {not A4} ... with the punch mark
cplnorton
07-28-2015, 10:39
I'll tell you why I'm curious if Zadmat's is the same. My A4 that I posted here a couple weeks back, that never saw a rebuild and has like a 4ME barrel, has that punch mark on the rail. In fact that is the pic above I just posted of it. The stock also has the 6 oclock bed done like the Unertl/team rifles. And the handguard is even milled out on the inside. Then the trigger is about 3lbs and very crisp.
Serial is wedged into a nice USMC block too. And there are a couple more traits that make me think it's USMC as well that I have only seen on other USMC rifles, but i'm still doing research on those and I don't want to say them in public forum.
But here is the SRS
3418258A4 020390USMC FIELD MUSEUM QUANTICO
***3419099*** My serial of my rifle.
3419379 0129476TH ARMY
3419658A4 020390USMC FIELD MUSEUM QUANTICO
3419836A4 020390USMC FIELD MUSEUM QUANTICO[/QUOTE]
http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/1903A4%20Original/P1240833_zpsfmb9nbvh.jpg
Any SRS info on 3419477? I'll post pictures of the rifle later. I bought it from the son of a man who bought it from the DCM in the 1960's. I have the original sales receipt. It was sold without the scope. What is the proper scope for this serial number?
My SRS information is about 7 or 8 years old perhaps a current subscriber can help. Nothing in my data.
The original scope would most likely have been an M73B1 - the second model with stamped nomenclature and Weaver name and address on the data plate.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.