Accuracy Help Needed for 1903 NM Rifle

[1903nm]

I purchased an old 1903 NM for my son to shoot in a local Springfield Match. It is a 1930 rifle that was re-barreled with a '39 barrel. I was expecting this rifle to group in the x-ring, as the MW is 0 and a bore was scoped revealing little throat erosion. However it is lucky to group ten shots within the eight ring at 100 yards. I took it apart and noticed two things. The right top corner of the magazine box has visibly rubbed against the bottom of the receiver. I also see hints that the top of the rear screw bushing may also be touching the receiver as it is definitely not flush with the wood. I don't know if I can have anything done to give upward pressure on the barrel that follows the CMP rules or not.

I don't think we have problems from the rounds we tried. One was Greek and the other was ones that put two shots in the same hole with a 1903 NM that has Lyman sights. I plan to see my gunsmith next week, so any thoughts would be much appreciated.

Thank you for reading my lengthy post.

[Darreld Walton]

Your rifle is most likely suffering from compressed wood fiber. At 70+ years, under load, the wood has most likely also dried out, causing shrinkage.
You can get some of the upward pressure on the barrel back by 'lowering' the area immediately behind the recoil lug, and then adjusting the inletting to allow the receiver to settle lower into the stock. You'll likely also need to remove quite a bit of metal from the top of the magazine box, and also the buttress where the forward action screw meets the bottom of the recoil lug, AND, shorten that front action screw. I don't believe that I'd touch that rear bushing, you need something solid back there for the receiver to sit on.
It's a lot of work to do it that way, and the simpler, easier way to deal with it is to just order up a new replacement C type stock and install it.

[Cosine26]

Is the NM M1903 permitted in the Springfield Match? I believe that the NM M1 is not permitted in the Garand Match .
Just wondering?

[Jim in Salt Lake]

Rule 4.2.3 says they can be used in Springfield matches, "National Match M1903 or M1903A3 rifles with star-xgauged barrels are legal for use in as-xissued rifle matches, providing that the sights are as-issued sights and the rifle has standard bedding in wood (no inserts or synthetic bedding)." That bit about standard bedding would be the issue for the OP and a new or different stock may be needed to solve his problem if he intends that rifle for CMP Springfield matches.

[Roadkingtrax]

Is the NM M1903 permitted in the Springfield Match? I believe that the NM M1 is not permitted in the Garand Match .
Just wondering?

Yes it is allowed, however a properly shooting 1903a3 can shoot inside of a NM 1903 and it's poor sight radius any day of the week.

[Darreld Walton]

Yes it is allowed, however a properly shooting 1903a3 can shoot inside of a NM 1903 and it's poor sight radius any day of the week.

Proved THAT little tidbit out several times, using two like condition rifles, a 1936 NM rifle, and a four groove Smith Corona, both rifles in "as new" condition, and both using proven ammunition, off the bags, from a solid bench.

[cplnorton]

1903NM we all love pictures. We would love to see pics of your rifle. It sounds like a nice one. :)

[Roadkingtrax]

Proved THAT little tid bit out several times, using two like condition rifles, a 1936 NM rifle, and a four groove Smith Corona, both rifles in "as new" condition, and both using proven ammunition, off the bags, from a solid bench.

Certainly no contest for aesthetics! Was your A3 in its straight stock?

[Darreld Walton]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/RocketDr/SC1903A3/14110462.jpg This was the 1903A1 NM that I once owned. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/RocketDr/SC1903A3/36232031.jpg This, the SC 03A3 mentioned.
Still trying to find the rest of the albums detailing these two rifles. The SC still had the original assembly crayon marks on top of the recoil lug in the stock, and some of that had transferred onto the bottom of the receiver.
After a family emergency, both rifles were sold to cover hospital and funerary expenses for a grandchild. The NM is being coddled somewhere in Georgia, IIRC, and the SC is owned, along with another VERY early SC, by a collector in Maryland.

[Darreld Walton]

Rule 4.2.3 says they can be used in Springfield matches, "National Match M1903 or M1903A3 rifles with star-xgauged barrels are legal for use in as-xissued rifle matches, providing that the sights are as-issued sights and the rifle has standard bedding in wood (no inserts or synthetic bedding)." That bit about standard bedding would be the issue for the OP and a new or different stock may be needed to solve his problem if he intends that rifle for CMP Springfield matches.

Did the rules change about the bedding? In past years, "careful bedding", without shims, "glass bedding", or removable pieces, was allowed. Meaning that removing wood to adjust the fit was legal, you just couldn't add anything. I'd heard of some of the teams going as far as trimming the tops of their magazine boxes, and the pads for the forward receiver screws, because the rules didn't say anything about modifying the metal for a better fit, and those "old school" military rifle team armorers got quite good at "gaming" their rifles to enhance performance within the rules.

[Fred]

Yes it is allowed, however a properly shooting 1903a3 can shoot inside of a NM 1903 and it's poor sight radius any day of the week.

Well, it means that some people can get more use out of the 1903A3 sights than they can out of the 1903 sights. It really depends on the shooter.

[Roadkingtrax]

Well, it means that some people can get more use out of the 1903A3 sights than they can out of the 1903 sights. It really depends on the shooter.

How'd I know you would comment on that. The 1903a3 is the easier rifle to shoot, and shoot well.

[Bob S]

Yes it is allowed, however a properly shooting 1903a3 can shoot inside of a NM 1903 and it's poor sight radius any day of the week.

Only at short range and on really big targets. Trying to get centered up at 600 yards with an issue (unmodifed) 03A3 rear sight is an exercise in futility. Put a Lyman 48 on the back, and it will shoot Master-class scores if the shooter is capable.
With the one 03' that I used to shoot regularly across the course (NOT a NM) I never had a problem getting centered up (with an original O'Hare mike) and I could usually shoot ~185 with a few X's. The only difficulty with the '03 sight was making precise windage changes of less than 1 MOA. That rifle has a No. 8 aperture and a hand-made front sight to match (.080" wide). The sight radius of the '03 is not significantly different from the 20" barrel AR's that are regularly shooting cleans at 600, but the AR sights are more precise and the aperture is closer to the eye. Sometimes TOO close if you are a stock-crawler like me.

Just some thoughts and observations. YMMV ....

Respectfully,
Bob S.

[Roadkingtrax]

Impressive shooting for 600, but you're right...I'm looking at in terms of how they are used today, @ 200 on an SR. I shoot a south facing range from time to time and with a straight stock 03. My 03a3 has a c-stock, reduced aperture and wide front sight. Modifications change the discussion considerably.

How long ago was the 1903 dropped from the service rifle rules? Were you shooting in different class?

[Cosine26]

I believe that the M1903 became obsolete as the service rifle when the Distinguished Matches were opened at Ft. Benning in 1946. Harlon Carter did a write up of this in an early American Rifleman. The M1903 was the service rifle in the 1940 Nationals and there were no Nationals after 1940 for a number of years. The Leg matches in 1946 were the first fired after WWII that was opened to civilians , I believe. The USMC was conducting it various intra service matches in 1945 or 1946 and the M1 was the service rifle.
As I understand it, the M1903 was declared surplus and all remaining stocks were sold off through the DCM in the 1945/1946 time frame. I believe that the 03A3 was retained as a substitute standard until sometime in the 1960's at which time the remaining stock was sold off as "unclassified" for $14.50" through the DCM with NRA assistance
FWIW

[Bob S]

How long ago was the 1903 dropped from the service rifle rules? Were you shooting in different class?

I think the last published rule book to carry the '03 as a Service Rifle was 1940. I don't think the NRA published a rule book again until 1953 or 54, and it was just the M1. I have the 1935 rule book and two 1954 books ... big gap in there. For the Board matches, I don't know.

In my lifetime, I had to shoot the '03 or 03A3 in the Match Rifle category, and still do when my doctors will let me shoot. My first match was 1965 with an unmodified 03A3 and cast bullets, all at 200 yards on the Able target. Even then I was frustrated because the groups were like half the V ring, but because of the crude "adjustments" I couldn't get the groups centered. That convinced me that I needed a Lyman 48 and a C stock. I later made Master with that rifle on the "new" (decimal) targets. I still have that rifle, although it has been much-modified again.

I checked the books on the '03 that I mentioned; the last time I fired it at 600 yards was at Reading Mass in 1984, and the score was 180-5X; not a good day. I still have that one, too, but it's not CMP-compliant because it is bedded ... there were no "vintage" rules in those days.

All other things being equal, an aperture close to the eye is preferable to an aperture in front of the receiver. But the '03 "wins" in the ability to center groups easily.


I have an 03A3 with a rear sight modified for continuous elevation adjustments and 1/2 minute windage. I designed a little gizmo that clips onto the back that gives the ability to make precise and repeatable elevation adjustments. It requires the shooter to loosen and then tighten a set screw, so it's not really "convenient", but it works. None of this is CMP-compliant; it's just fun to go to the 600 yard line with an apparently as-issued 03A3 and shoot a decent score :)

As always .... YMMV.

Respectfully,
Bob S.

[Jim in Salt Lake]

Good question, Darreld! Made me go out to the garage and scrounge up a 2012 CMP rule book. Page 31, 6.3.3, has the same rule, same wording. I also saw under 6.3.1 As Issued Military Rifle Requirements, "Rifles may be accurized only by the careful assembly of standard parts." I bet there were some arguments by those gunsmiths that their metal mods were "careful assembly." That one is in the current rules, as well. On the removing wood to adjust fit, I agree. I have a Boyds stock on one of my rifles and I had to remove a lot of wood, mostly to match the outside contour. The bedding was too tight at the lug, so that got modified to my benefit. I looked at some used stocks but they had the OP's issue. I had the Boyds in a corner and some sharp chisels and stopped looking. I get new books every year and my biggest fear is that a rule will change and one of my rifles won't be legal. That happened early on in Vintage Sniper. I just want to shoot and not worry that I could fail an inspection.

[1903nm]

I have an update and another question for you guys. I printed off what Darreld suggested and carried this rifle to my gunsmith and asked him to trim the top of the magazine box a little to prevent rubbing the bottom of the action. This was phase one and was tested Saturday from 100 yards prone. After one cold barrel shot the next four could be covered by a quarter, just barely. My gunsmith suggested a second step of working on or replacing the top wood hand-guard as it is loose fitting. Does anyone know or have experience that this little piece of wood has an effect on accuracy? Again ,any ideas or suggestions are welcome and appreciated!

[Merc]

I shimmed my hand guards with a layer or two of file folder paper to keep them from moving which you could try if you find the looseness is annoying. It sounds like that is one sweet shooter.