View Full Version : Buying a M1903
I'm considering buying a shootable M1903. I never buy a rifle sight unseen so it will be coming from a gun show or, more likely a local gun dealer. I will be prepared to look at bore, throat erosion, muzzle condition and head space. What are some of the pros, cons and peculiarities that I should be aware of with this particular model?
Merc
IditarodJoe
04-02-2016, 02:35
Merc,
In my limited experience, 1903s are fairly straightforward rifles. At the risk of stating the obvious, make sure everything works. Check the operation of the bolt, the safety, the magazine cutoff, and the rear sight (the sight ladder should snap smartly into place; the windage adjustment should be smooth but not loose). If possible, take along a snap cap and dry fire it a few times to feel the trigger pull. Also take along five dummy rounds to make sure it cycles properly through the entire magazine. (I've seen feeding problems with these in the past that were the result of improper receiver geometry.) Look for stock cracks and stock fit - does the trigger guard fit snugly against the stock? Look for any signs of cracking behind the receiver tang. Also, carefully check the bolt lugs. These are pretty much the same things I'd look at on any older bolt action rifle.
Keep in mind that, if the barrel and receiver are good and headspace checks out, just about any other problem can be fixed - sometimes cheaply (weak magazine spring), sometimes more costly (cracked stock). Small problems can sometimes provide you with considerable bargaining leverage. HTH. Good luck!
Joe,
What's an average price to pay for a better than average '03?
Merc
IditarodJoe
04-02-2016, 03:13
Whew, that's tough. So many big variables . . . your local market, the rifle itself, your bargaining skills, old fashion luck ... Others here are far more qualified than I am to answer your question, but to give you a straight SWAG answer, say somewhere in the $600-$800 range.
IditarodJoe
04-02-2016, 03:28
Merc,
I was thinking, you mentioned above that you're looking for a "shootable M1903". If by "above average" you just mean "full military configuration, everything works as it should, and the rifle shoots well" and you're willing to accept the mix of replacement parts as well as the dings, dents, and finish wear that comes with being a nearly 100 year old battle rifle, then with luck you might find a good shooter for a couple hundred less. Just a thought, and still a SWAG ("Scientific Wild-A$$ Guess").
I kinda figured M'03s would be similar to M'17s in value since they were fairly similar rifles.
I kinda figured M'03s would be similar to M'17s in value since they were fairly similar rifles.
Similar === Thy are military, bolt action, and 30-06 cal...... other than that fact, its a Caddilac to a Chevie.
Since the CMP sold '03's, prices have went way up. 1917 have also gone up (like most guns) the last few years but they have not reached '03 prices, which are very popular since CMP sold out. Saw a nice Rem. to day for 500 and change, blued or that black park they used. '03's around here run upwards of 700 bucks.
Rebound,
This is what I want to hear. Caddy vs. Chevy! I have had no experience with M'03s other than what I read. I obviously admire the rifle since it was chosen as the regulation US Army rifle until replaced by the M1 Garand. Give me the reasons for your high opinion of the M'03 and your low opinion of the M'17.
Dave,
WW1's 100th anniversary is probably going to make '03s and '17s even more expensive.
Merc
IditarodJoe
04-02-2016, 08:13
Merc,
It's more a case of sleek sports car vs. rugged 4WD truck. The 1903 is lighter in weight and more nimble to handle than the 1917, and it has finer rear sight adjustment capability. The 1917 has a stronger receiver, more rugged and better protected front and rear sights, a longer sight radius, and it holds six rounds instead of five. The 1903 was a great target rifle. The 1917 was a great battle rifle. By the end of WW1, three of every four rifles in the hands of American soldiers in Europe were Model of 1917s. The 1917 won WW1 for the US. The Garand won WW2. The 1903 won ... well, er, nothing actually, other than the hearts of American collectors. Although its significance in the military history of the US is rather limited, the 1903 is a beautiful rifle and a joy to shoot. You REALLY need to own one of each! :icon_lol:
Joe,
That's a great comparison and a statement that critizes neither. They both have their advantages although I admit that I'm in awe of the size and strength of the '17. What a rifle!
Is there a book on the '03 similar to the book by Ferris on the '17s?
Merc
Some observations that seem obvious to me:
I think the engineers who designed the P-14 that eventually became the M1917 probably learned a lot from the M1903. The '17s more robust receiver and the size and strength of everything else that was built around it to prevent rupturing seems to be one of the more obvious lessons learned. Yet, wasn't the same added strength in the '17's design that added size and weight held against it later by the Ordinance Dept. that resulted in the '03 being chosen as the standard Army rifle over the '17 until the M1 Garand was developed?
The '17's rear sight was criticized because didn't include a windage adjustment. Why didn't they just incorporate or retrofit the '03's sight in the P-14 and '17's design since it was still available if they considered the original sight inferior?
Last, but not least, was there a degree of prejudice towards the Brits since the '17 was based on their original design? Both designs could have been rightly and accurately called a Mauser.
Merc
IditarodJoe
04-03-2016, 05:05
Is there a book on the '03 similar to the book by Ferris on the '17s?
No. While the Model of 1917 began as a relatively mature design and saw few changes during its short two years of production, the history of the development and production of the Model 1903 spans five decades and includes numerous design modifications. Taken together, the major works by Brophy, Campbell, and Canfield encompass much of what is known about the 1903, but there are a number of other good sources as well including an excellent book published by Nick Ferris and John Beard that focuses specifically on the early (1905-1910) 1903s and a book by Ferris dedicated solely to the 1903s made at the Rock Island Arsenal. Additional information on these rifles remains unpublished.
OK, so here's what I think I know about the M1903:
Avoid Springfields under Ser. No. 805000 and Rock Islands under Ser. No. 285507 due to bad receivers.
1941 and 1942 Remington's offer classic 1903 look at lower prices but sacrifice the WW1 connection.
1903A3 from Remington or Smith Corona are strong but saw little use and have different sights. Stamped parts make them less desireable if you want the classic look.
Things I still don't know:
The meaning of a "SRS Check."
Prices:
(Nice shooters will have good rifling, minimal TE and MW and will pass HS field gauge test.)
Nice shooter in average or less condition - $500
Nice shooter in good shape - $600 to $900
Nice shooter in minty condition - $1200 to $1500
Totally correct, never arsenal overhauled, late WW1 or 1920s - $ ???
Feel free to add to, or correct any of the above information.
Merc
Griff Murphey
04-03-2016, 07:00
Another factor you might look at particularly if you want to shoot CMP matches is how hard is the bolt lift. There are some 03s that have truly magic light bolt lifts that are a real blessing in rapid fire and then there are others not so butter smooth. I have seen bolts passed around at matches without checking headspace which is probably not a great idea but people do it.
I think as a rule 03's are better about this than A3s unless they are just worn in better.
Then there's your cock on closing 17 enfield - you better be a hard mo fo to slam that sucker in rapid fire.
Griff,
The three rifles I shoot most frequently are all cock on close so that's what I'm most familiar with. They include an early Winchester M1917, a 1944 Lee-Enfield No. 4 Mk 1* and a 1931 M1916 Spanish Mauser. I've had the No. 4 and the Mauser for a few years. The No. 4 is amazingly accurate firing flat based bullets. I'm still figuring out what ammo the Mauser likes.
The M1917 was acquired in January and has only been to the range once. It shoots a nice group through the original iron ladder sight in its lowest possible setting. It has a near minty Eddystone bolt that operates smoothly with medium main spring resistance on closing. I'd like to find a Winchester bolt to replace it but I doubt if I'll ever find one in the same condition. It never saw service in WW1 so the barrel and receiver are near minty.
Merc
Dave,
WW1's 100th anniversary is probably going to make '03s and '17s even more expensive.
Merc
I would guess but I have 3 ea. and that's all I need! Not to mention three classic sporters and a put together target rifle in a .22 M2 stock.
After WW1 US Ordnance was focused on the development of a semiautomatic infantry rifle. Many inventions were considered and various prototypes developed. Ultimately the M1 rifle designed by Springfield arsenals John Garand would take the honors. The "03" was considered a "dead duck" by many Ordnance personnel (see Sharpe, The Rifle in America). The introduction of the 03-A3 and 03-A4 sniper's rifles were simply wartime expedients.
The British P14 (later designated Rifle No.3 Mk1) and the US Rifle M1917 had the benefit of another decade's development over the Mauser 98 platform which would have been its principal opponent. But most important had it not been for the so-called "American Enfield" US forces in WW! probably would have been armed with pointy sticks or maybe just stayed home. 03's could not be turned out quickly enough and in sufficient quantity to arm our infantry.
J,
Knowing the history behind our old guns makes owning them a lot more interesting.
What's really interesting to me was how the US entered WW1 in April, 1917 but the Ordinance Dept. withheld all of the M1917 production in 1917 from the war. This meant more than 400,000 M1917s stayed home because of parts interchangeability issues. They finally allowed M1917s to be sent to war in March, 1918 and only allowed those made after January, 1918 to go. The M1903 and was their only choice to arm the doughboys for the first 11 months of the war.
Merc
firstflabn
04-03-2016, 04:41
This meant more than 400,000 M1917s stayed home because of parts interchangeability issues...The M1903 and was their only choice to arm the doughboys for the first 11 months of the war.
Merc
It didn't matter. Shipping space, not rifles, was the primary constraint in the first year. The AEF reported that by 31 Dec 17, 183,896 men had arrived in Europe. The rule of thumb in WWI was that a balanced force required one rifle for every two men for initial issuance. Thus, the available trained force (using that term loosely) in Europe on New Years Day in 1918 could have gotten by on 100k rifles. You might recall that the Army had about 600k M1903s at the declaration of war in Apr.
On 31 Mar 18, the AEF reported 329,005 men had arrived. Of these, an estimated 107,000 were noncombatants. The buildup didn't gather speed until May. By then, the interchangeability issue had been resolved (and you overstated the scope of the problem).
Best I can tell, the 82nd Division was the second National Army division to arrive in Europe (the 77th got there in mid-Apr). The 82nd Division reached full strength on 30 Nov 17. They received their M1917s at the beginning of Feb - that's two whole months. Considering most were raw recruits, two months was barely enough time to begin making soldiers of them. Wooden rifles upset the press, but had no effect on the entry of US troops into combat.
It was six weeks after the arrival of the lead elements of the 82nd before the division was complete on the ground in Britain - shipping priorities. Then another two months of field training with experienced British and French troops. Not until 25 Jun did elements of the 82nd enter the line. There's your 11 months - the division had been organized on 5 Aug 17.
Rebound,
This is what I want to hear. Caddy vs. Chevy! I have had no experience with M'03s other than what I read. I obviously admire the rifle since it was chosen as the regulation US Army rifle until replaced by the M1 Garand. Give me the reasons for your high opinion of the M'03 and your low opinion of the M'17.
Merc, sorry I'm so late in getting back to answering you.. But it happens... I think all the answers to your question have been answered by others.. And I don't so much dislike 1917s, I'll drive a Chevie too. A good car also.. But not the same as a Caddilac... Buytheway I own a Buick..
REBOUND
blackhawknj
04-03-2016, 08:30
1. The serial number. Low Number=basically collectible/wall hanger, High Number=shooter.
2. Factory correct vs. period correct. Since the M1903 was in service for close to fifty years many were subject to Uncle Sam's Clean and Repair programs. M1903 No. 1 was actually rebuilt from Rod Bayonet-30/03 configuration to 1906 specifications and issued to a Doughboy in France. My 1918 High Number is factory correct but in the WWII scant grip stock.
3. Manufacturer-Springfield ? Rock Island ? Remington? Which model-M1903, M1903 Mark I, M1903A1, M1903A3-?
It didn't matter. Shipping space, not rifles, was the primary constraint in the first year. The AEF reported that by 31 Dec 17, 183,896 men had arrived in Europe. The rule of thumb in WWI was that a balanced force required one rifle for every two men for initial issuance. Thus, the available trained force (using that term loosely) in Europe on New Years Day in 1918 could have gotten by on 100k rifles. You might recall that the Army had about 600k M1903s at the declaration of war in Apr.
On 31 Mar 18, the AEF reported 329,005 men had arrived. Of these, an estimated 107,000 were noncombatants. The buildup didn't gather speed until May. By then, the interchangeability issue had been resolved (and you overstated the scope of the problem).
Best I can tell, the 82nd Division was the second National Army division to arrive in Europe (the 77th got there in mid-Apr). The 82nd Division reached full strength on 30 Nov 17. They received their M1917s at the beginning of Feb - that's two whole months. Considering most were raw recruits, two months was barely enough time to begin making soldiers of them. Wooden rifles upset the press, but had no effect on the entry of US troops into combat.
It was six weeks after the arrival of the lead elements of the 82nd before the division was complete on the ground in Britain - shipping priorities. Then another two months of field training with experienced British and French troops. Not until 25 Jun did elements of the 82nd enter the line. There's your 11 months - the division had been organized on 5 Aug 17.
That's an excellent description of the early US troop deployment in WW1. Thanks for sharing your knowledge.
Merc
Merc, sorry I'm so late in getting back to answering you.. But it happens... I think all the answers to your question have been answered by others.. And I don't so much dislike 1917s, I'll drive a Chevie too. A good car also.. But not the same as a Caddilac... Buytheway I own a Buick..
REBOUND
Actually, your analogy was pretty good. I've heard and read a lot about both rifles but no one has offered a side by side comparison. Yours was appreciated and reinforced my hunt for a 1903.
Merc
1. The serial number. Low Number=basically collectible/wall hanger, High Number=shooter.
2. Factory correct vs. period correct. Since the M1903 was in service for close to fifty years many were subject to Uncle Sam's Clean and Repair programs. M1903 No. 1 was actually rebuilt from Rod Bayonet-30/03 configuration to 1906 specifications and issued to a Doughboy in France. My 1918 High Number is factory correct but in the WWII scant grip stock.
3. Manufacturer-Springfield ? Rock Island ? Remington? Which model-M1903, M1903 Mark I, M1903A1, M1903A3-?
Thanks for the info. Which variants are the most common, scarce, interesting, desireable, etc?
The scarce 1903's of Any type are generally the ones that have remained in unmolested and original condition. The better condition they are, the more scarce they become.
A not very common Rod Bayonet 1903 Springfield...
Not very common in any condition. I've read that about half of the (about 100) rifles known are put together (sometimes many decades ago) from original parts that used to be available in the days of Francis Bannerman, but that are today nearly impossible to find. In the case of a Rod Bayonet 1903, even a rifle that is correctly assembled from original parts is uncommon to come across today. Original Rod Bayonet rifles in Unaltered condition are obviously even more rare and will bring prices around $50,000, give or take several thousand. Too steep for me. My Rod Bayonet 1903 Springfield is one of the re assembled ones but is still in its original 30-03 caliber. I think That's pretty neat. One of these such rifles is pretty darned difficult to obtain today unless a guy stumbles across one like I did or is willing to pay anywhere from the mid to high Four figures for one.
After wanting one for over 40 years, I one day Forest Gump'd my way across one and obtained it for what an Excellent conditioned M1 Garand would go for. That'll never happen again. Anyway, I've got mine and so will now be allowed into the Halls of Valhalla where St. Brophy is feasting and drinking with all 1903 Springfield lovers who've passed unto the next world.
http://www.jouster.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=35048&stc=1
http://www.jouster.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=35051&stc=1
A scarce 1917 assembled 1903 in unaltered, unmolested condition. The seller didn't know about the type or significance of this rifle, so I got it for under what it was worth.
http://www.jouster.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=35049&stc=1
A virtually unused 1920 National Match 1903 in Minty condition. Again, I just Forest Gump'd my way across this one... The seller didn't know what it was.
http://www.jouster.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=35050&stc=1
A very large part of obtaining any Collectable 1903 Springfield is being able to recognize one. Most sellers will go into a sales pitch about the rarity of such and such a rifle without knowing what they are talking about. Most of the rifles for sale aren't worth anywhere near what the seller is asking. However there are still a lot of very collectable rifles for sale that go under the radar and so are not recognized for their rarity. I look for and find those. Otherwise, I wouldn't be able to obtain any of them. I'm not even a collector. I just have a handful of collectable 1903's. One less now since I've sold my 1920 National Match rifle. The real collectors have a lot more Really nice rifles. A Lot more.
http://www.jouster.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=35052&stc=1
I've seen many military rifles but there are only a few that could be called handsome. The 1903 and 1917 are two that qualify.
Merc
Rick the Librarian
04-04-2016, 09:41
"Knowledge is power"!! :)
The pre-WWI M1903 in original condition is about the closest thing to "art" I have seen in military firearms.
35058
"Knowledge is power"!! :)
The pre-WWI M1903 in original condition is about the closest thing to "art" I have seen in military firearms.
http://www.jouster.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=35058&stc=1
Yep! They were often assembled by the same workers who assembled the Trapdoor Springfields and the Krag Jorgenson Springfields. Both of which have superior fitting of parts. Old World Craftmanship! I've yet to obtain one of Those!
However my mid 1917 assembled S.A. rifle seems to be of a much tighter and better fit everywhere than my two other (Springfield & Rock Island Arsenal) mid 1918 assembled 03's, so I think that it just might actually fit in with the Pre WWI craftsmanship 1903's.
Inexpensive original 1903's that've been Arsenal Refinished or Updated or Repaired are also out there. They get tossed in with the rifles that have been assembled from Surplus parts by shooters and so are often unrecognized. Any 1903 that is still in its military configuration as last used within the military, whatever that happens to be, is desirable. They too can be considered correct because that was their configuration while last used in the service.
I'm not an expert on the subject by any measure, but there are a lot of guys here on this CSP Forum who certainly are and they can detect original features from those that aren't. I frequently seek their assistance and recommendations.
Fred is absolutely correct. If you don't know what you want or what to look for in a 1903 I might make a suggestion that you can do right at home. Go to the gunbroker web site and check out all the 1903's for sale. You'll pick up on it quickly by comparing what each rifle has. Serial numbers,barrels, sights, stocks, condition etc. then if you have any questions come back here and ask. There are plenty of expert folks here willing to help you. You will see the difference in the lower end mid range and high end priced rifles.
blackhawknj
04-04-2016, 05:53
Investing is good books is a wise move before buying. I recommend Brophy's The M1903 Springfield.
firstflabn
04-04-2016, 07:08
That's an excellent description of the early US troop deployment in WW1. Thanks for sharing your knowledge.
Merc
I'm trying to get this WWI stuff figured out. The twists and turns that occurred after the totally unprepared US came up with a pretty logical plan to build an army for the European war fascinate me. Resisting Brit and French political pressure to send replacements for their forces instead of organizing an independent American army; losing the potential to produce 100k '03s during the receiver problem; the early phases of the Spanish Flu; the German 1918 spring offensive facilitated by the collapse of Russia late in 1917. That's plenty to upset the soundest plan. If are willing to endure it, here's one more thought on the beancount front:
I have no objection to the one third '03s, two thirds '17s broad estimate on quantities in Europe. It's misleading though. First try a hypothetical: say the entire US effort had consisted of 10 '03s carried to the war in June 1917 and 20 '17s carried over in June 1918. Further assume this hypothetical war also ended in Nov 18. If you said that 90% of the rifles used in the war were '17s, you would be mathematically correct - but would it tell an accurate story of the relative contributions of the two types? In this example, the '03s had 170 rifle-months service while the '17s had only 100 rifle-months. Length of service is at least as important as gross numbers.
While I would love to tell you I had detailed ammo expenditure data by divisions, I don't. So, let's look for another proxy for combat use.
About 42 divisions went to France. I have an army report that shows "Days spent by each division in quiet and active sectors." Only 29 divisions went "into the line." Some others were broken up for reinforcements and some just got there in the waning days of the war and never made it to the front. Anyway, of these 29 divisions, only 10 are National Army - this one third are the units with '17s (there are some exceptions, but this is a very broad gauge, so humor me).
I can't locate the accompanying notes to this chart, but the quiet and active day counts appear to exclude training with the Brits and French. (I never said it was a perfect proxy). So, of the 1,329 quiet days at the front, NA divisions had only 330 (about 25%). Of 905 active days at the front, NA divisions only had 187 (about 20%). That's a good bit short of the two thirds indicated by quantities alone.
Let's look at one other proxy - casualties. Regular Army and National Guard divisions - the ones with '03s (again with some exceptions) suffered two thirds of the casualties among divisions, while the NA divisions only had one third.
So, by these two imperfect proxies - days at the front and casualties - '03s saw from 66-80% of the action in Europe. M1917s would have played a major role had the war continued into the spring of 1919 and the amazing quantities produced made planning for the 1919 spring offensive possible, but in light of their very late appearance in France, it's hard to see how most of the '17s did much more than take two boat rides.
Very interesting information! Thanks!
Very thought provoking. Thanks again.
Merc
Investing is good books is a wise move before buying. I recommend Brophy's The M1903 Springfield.
Thanks for the suggestion. I agree. I'll look on Amazon to see if it's still available.
I came equipped with only a bore light when I bought my M1917. I learned about everything AFTER I bought it and was very lucky to get a shooter that's in pretty nice shape but just as easily could have wound up with junk. I swore I'd never buy a M1903 or any other old rifle without finding everything there is to know about them in advance.
Merc
I went to two large gun shows yesterday to check out the available M1903s and saw several at each show. Average asking price was in the $700 - $800 range. I didn't see anything that really caught my eye except one exceptionally dirty '03 for an asking price of $850 that looked OK in spite of all the dirt but the bore was so dirty that there was no way to check for corrosion or pitting. Can't imagine asking that much money for a rifle without taking the time to make it presentable.
The A3s looked strange with their stamped swivels - think I'll hold out for an '03. Were any A3s made with unstamped parts?
Saw very few M1917s but lots of M1s in the $900 - $1200 range. One seller had 8 for sale. All were exceptionally clean, looked decent and were tagged with barrel dates and measured TE/MW numbers. This seller obviously knew what he was doing. M1s might also be on my wish list but the mechanics are a lot more complicated than a bolt action rifle.
Merc
Merc down here in south FL there are no 03's A3's or Garands at the gun shows or the gun shops and not even the pawn shops. Wish I lived near an area where they are out there. Keep hunting you'll find a good one
PhillipM
04-10-2016, 06:55
Once accustomed to cock on opening, shooting an M1917 is weird in a match because when you slap the bolt down it will spring back up if not done correctly.
There are ZERO commercial rifles produced today that cock on closing, much to the chagrin of the Enfield lovers.
Merc down here in south FL there are no 03's A3's or Garands at the gun shows or the gun shops and not even the pawn shops. Wish I lived near an area where they are out there. Keep hunting you'll find a good one
I went to a February gun show a few years in a row in Ft. Myers while visiting relatives and can't remember seeing very many old military anything. Lots of modern pistols, rifles, knives and zappers though. There is a Wednesday only flea market at a drive-in movie in Ft. Myers that always had a few guys selling old military rifles. I don't remember the name of the drive-in but I know it's on Rt. 41. The vendor activity peaks during the winter months.
The shows in Western PA are always big and well attended because we're such a heavily deer hunted state. On a few occasions, especially when (you-know-who) would start to talk about gun control, there were shows where the exhibit hall the size of a large super market was filled to capacity and a line of guys circled the parking lot waiting to get in.
Merc
Once accustomed to cock on opening, shooting an M1917 is weird in a match because when you slap the bolt down it will spring back up if not done correctly.
There are ZERO commercial rifles produced today that cock on closing, much to the chagrin of the Enfield lovers.
The next cock on opening rifle I shoot will be the first since everything I currently shoot is cock on closing.
Merc
I went to a February gun show a few years in a row in Ft. Myers while visiting relatives and can't remember seeing very many old military anything. Lots of modern pistols, rifles, knives and zappers though. There is a Wednesday only flea market at a drive-in movie in Ft. Myers that always had a few guys selling old military rifles. I don't remember the name of the drive-in but I know it's on Rt. 41. The vendor activity peaks during the winter months.
The shows in Western PA are always big and well attended because we're such a heavily deer hunted state. On a few occasions, especially when (you-know-who) would start to talk about gun control, there were shows where the exhibit hall the size of a large super market was filled to capacity and a line of guys circled the parking lot waiting to get in.
Merc
Too bad you didn't go to the small antique gun show in Ft Myers held at the same time as the big one you went to there. I go to it every year but it was a lot smaller this year because of the conflict of two show at the same time. But there was an excl condt 1911 dated 03 that looked to be still in all original condt for only $850. The only thing wrong with it was the cartouche was too light to make out. A nice one and I would have picked it up if I didn't have three early 03's already but as I'm writing this, I'm now sorry I didn't get it as that was a good price with money to be made for resale. Ray
I'll have to put Ft Meyers on my watch list but it's a trek of more than a 2 hour drive for me.
Too bad you didn't go to the small antique gun show in Ft Myers held at the same time as the big one you went to there. I go to it every year but it was a lot smaller this year because of the conflict of two show at the same time. But there was an excl condt 1911 dated 03 that looked to be still in all original condt for only $850. The only thing wrong with it was the cartouche was too light to make out. A nice one and I would have picked it up if I didn't have three early 03's already but as I'm writing this, I'm now sorry I didn't get it as that was a good price with money to be made for resale. Ray
I'll have to google that one to see if they advertise it on the Internet for time and place since we'll be back next year. No-one's really interested in or appreciates the old stuff but me. My "youngest" is the 1944 Lee-Enfield No. 4 Mk 1*.
Thanks for the tip.
Merc
I'll have to put Ft Meyers on my watch list but it's a trek of more than a 2 hour drive for me.
Louis,
Some gun shows are worth traveling long distances. A bunch of us go every year the first weekend in May to the Civil War show in Mansfield, Ohio that's over 2.5 hours driving from Pittsburgh. Google "Ohio Civil War Show" and you'll get an idea of the show's size and scope. It encompasses the Civil War, WW1 and WW2 and nothing else. We make a day of it and either go there with an idea of what we want to buy or just to look around to see what catches our attention. I'll be looking at M1903s this year. I regularly see people there that I know from Florida and Georgia who make the trip. We see some big-time dealers. Rapheal Elledge from Antiques Roadshow on PBS is usually there. It's one of those shows that's highly anticipated and attracts a large crowd every year.
I hear there's another big show in Baltimore. I'll look around on the Internet for similar shows in Florida that might be worth seeing even if it's a few hours drive.
Merc
Thanks Merc. When I go visit a couple of my buds in central Virginia we go to the gun shows up there and they are well worth going to. Down here it's all ar ak and pistols. Seems the better shows are up in that area.
Louis,
Some gun shows are worth traveling long distances. A bunch of us go every year the first weekend in May to the Civil War show in Mansfield, Ohio that's over 2.5 hours driving from Pittsburgh. Google "Ohio Civil War Show" and you'll get an idea of the show's size and scope. It encompasses the Civil War, WW1 and WW2 and nothing else. We make a day of it and either go there with an idea of what we want to buy or just to look around to see what catches our attention. I'll be looking at M1903s this year. I regularly see people there that I know from Florida and Georgia who make the trip. We see some big-time dealers. Rapheal Elledge from Antiques Roadshow on PBS is usually there. It's one of those shows that's highly anticipated and attracts a large crowd every year.
Merc
I'll be at the Mansfield show selling off my Civil War stuff/collection. Started collecting that first, so is the first to go. Moving so won't have room for it all. Ray
http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/index.php?/topic/2364-my-mannequin-displays/
I'll be at the Mansfield show selling off my Civil War stuff/collection. Started collecting that first, so is the first to go. Moving so won't have room for it all. Ray
http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/index.php?/topic/2364-my-mannequin-displays/
That's not A collection. That's THE collection. Amazing. I'll be watching for you.
Merc
Holy Smokes that's a museum collection!!!
Thanks Merc. When I go visit a couple of my buds in central Virginia we go to the gun shows up there and they are well worth going to. Down here it's all ar ak and pistols. Seems the better shows are up in that area.
Looks like there is a gun show in Ft. Myers on November that might be interesting.
https://gunshowtrader.com/gun-shows/fort-myers-gun-knife-show/
Too bad you didn't go to the small antique gun show in Ft Myers held at the same time as the big one you went to there. I go to it every year but it was a lot smaller this year because of the conflict of two show at the same time. But there was an excl condt 1911 dated 03 that looked to be still in all original condt for only $850. The only thing wrong with it was the cartouche was too light to make out. A nice one and I would have picked it up if I didn't have three early 03's already but as I'm writing this, I'm now sorry I didn't get it as that was a good price with money to be made for resale. Ray
$850 is on the upper end of the average price range I've been seeing in W PA for average condition 03s but it's low if the rifle was in really nice shape. How were the mechanics (bore, bolt, etc.) or didn't you get that far?
Merc
Thanks Merc I saved the info I'll be taking a ride there and check it out.
Just a quick look but from what I remember it looked like it had all correct period parts, straight bolt handle, correct rear sight, high hump handguard, bbl date matched the serial number. Again just a quick pick up look but believe it was all as it should be and was in about 95% condt. If it had a better cartouche, (the stock was probably boned which smoothed over the cartouche), it would be about a $1500 rifle as it was, it was worth more then the $850 asking price. As mentioned, I have three low number 03's and am pretty much up on their prices.
Check them out on the site I show my collection on, Ray
http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/index.php?/topic/2364-my-mannequin-displays/
Just went through it myself and and to save folks time in looking here are the pags showing my early 03's.
pg 2
pg 5
pg 18 sold that one for I believe $1500 two-3 yrs ago
pg 23
pg 24 very early 03 sling
I got some great advice on checking throat erosion while discussing my inaccurate Spanish Mauser. Check it out on this forum under Mauser Rifles - Spanish Mauser 7X57 Reloads.
Merc
I showed my wife your photos to let her see that my four remaining 1903's and maybe four WWI and one Rod Bayonet cartridge belts and two 1905 bayonets isn't such a big deal as compared to what a Real collector has accumulated. Now she doesn't think that I'm out of control after all.
However, I DID just purchase last week an excellent condition Model 1868 Springfield trapdoor with an 1868 dated breech block whose serial number is 127 with some of the money that I received from the amount that I got for my 1920 National Match 1903 Springfield.
My wife doesn't mind as long as I keep the quantity of stuff down to what she considers to be a manageable size. After all, I have no Gun Room, so I keep my stuff on a chair in a corner of one of the spare bedrooms.
I like your collection of neat stuff Ray! Thanks for the link to the photos!!
I also have a space issue and my stuff currently occupies about half of the family room which the wife approves of. Rarely do I buy something without first considering where I'll display it. Maybe it's best to do what the major museums do and rotate our exhibits.
Merc
I bought a really nice 1943 Remington 03-A3 on Wednesday that seemed to have escaped the rebuilding process. It has all the usual stamps and cartouches but no arsenal stamp and only one circle P proof mark. The chief inspector's stamp is FJA for COL. Frank J. Atwood. The barrel is dated 4-43 and the serial number indicates it was assembled in 6-43. The Parked finish is 95% or more on the barrel, bands, butt plate, etc. but there are a few shiney spots on the bolt where it makes contact with the receiver. It passes headspace and throat erosion is nearly unmeasurable. The only thing negative about the rifle was the gunky finish on the wood components. They were covered with a black sticky oily substance that may have been some sort of preservative or just a totally oxidized linseed oil finish. It was easily removed and a georgeous walnut stock revealed itself. I took it to the range yesterday and put all 6 rounds within a 6 inch target, 3 at 50 yards and 3 at 100 yards. A battle rifle to be proud of.
Merc
'03A3s are the easiest to shoot because of their superior sights, especially if your eyesight is less than perfect. They can also be had for a bit less money and have the best metallurgy of any '03s. Prices to vary with location but they have gone up everywhere. Around here good mixmaster shooter '03s run $700.00 to as much as $900.00 depending on a lot of factors. Every now and again you do hit a bargain though. I'd set $700.00 as my baseline if I was in the market for another one, hope for a better deal and be willing to go up $25.00 - $75.00 for an especially nice example.
Art,
You would have liked this one. How many all-Remington non-rebuilds are out there? Their asking price was $900. We settled at $775.
I think it's probably the nicest example of a 03-A3 I've seen and I'm very happy with it. The price included a repro Nobuckle sling and an oiler/cleaning kit which together would have cost me $50 or more if I'd purchased them separately.
Merc
8/18 update (a few items added):
I stand corrected.
My recently purchased Remington 03-A3 made in June, 1943 is a rebuild, a really well-done rebuild with several new parts, but still a rebuild. The absence of an arsenal rebuild cartouche (that I'm used to seeing on older rebuilt rifles) was apparently common on 03-A3s. The RA (Remington Arms) cartouche (that's missing on mine) is usually stamped on the stock near the Ordnance and Atwood's inspection cartouches. It's a manufacturer's mark, not an arsenal rebuild cartouche. Raritan Arsenal's rebuild cartouche is also "RA" witch adds to the confusion (see m1903.com).
Just as in the arsenal rebuilding of the M1917s, apparently no attention was ever paid to keeping Smith-Corona and Remington parts separated. Remington stamped "R" on their parts and Smith-Corona left everything blank.
My 03-A3 does have a very uniform and incredibally well preserved gray Parkerized finish that suggests the rifle went directly into storage at the arsenal after rebuilding. Original factory finished components were usually a variety of different colors and finish types according to Rick the Librarian.
Looking a little deeper:
The stock has recoil screws instead of recoil pins that should have been on an original mid-1943 rifle stock, so it's a replacement stock that was made later, possibly a new one at the time of rebuilding (shortly after the war?) since there's so few blemishes or wear marks. There's no "RA" (Remington Arms) cartouche that suggests it's a Smith-Corona stock.
The butt plate has some minor dings and is not new. It has a coarse cross-hatch pattern that indicates it was made by Smith-Corona. Remington butt plates have a finer cross-hatch pattern. You can see a side-by-side comparison on M1903.com. There is no manufacturer's mark.
Instead of an "R", the bolt is stamped "BF 19" at the base of the handle. The bolt body appears new. BFs are described on other forums as a "war time replacement" bolts although given the excellent, almost unused overall condition of the barrel/receiver, you'd wonder why they found it necessary to replace the bolt - which leads to the question: did Remington ever use BF bolts during the original assembly? (The answer is NO!). The "BF" stands for Bonney Forge and, according to m1903.com, the "19" is one of a series of numbers described as "steel lot codes" and may be a way to trace heat treatment and alloy formula data. According to available info, Bonney Forge supplied the forgings to Springfield who machined the bolts. (You have to wonder why the bolts weren't stamped BF-SA, SA or just S. Did Remington make both the forging and the finished bolt?) I disassembled the bolt in order to inspect the firing mechanism. It looked new and without visible wear or corrosion but showed no evidence of any lubrication.
The stacking swivel and the lower sling swivel base are both stamped with an "R" but the upper sling swivel is blank and is Smith Corona mfd.
I won't disassemble the rifle (as I did with my M1917 Winchester) to look for and evaluate the condition of original and non-Remington parts. It's fine the way it is and it's doubtful that I could ever find individual Remington parts out there with the exact same Parkerized finish. I replaced many of the non-Winchester M1917 parts with originals that were mostly inexpensive NOS, for a better fit, finish and function which doesn't appear necessary on the 03-A3. Parts compatibility issues that haunted the M1917 don't seem to be a problem with the 03-A3.
The mechanics are excellent. It head spaces very well on a .30-06 field gauge, a ME gauge shows zero muzzle wear and throat erosion is minimal. It's no surprise that the rifle is a very accurate shooter at 100 yards.
Factory originals are rare and sell for $1500 or more - see the "Pristine 03-A3" that's currently on the WTS thread.
It's still a fantastic looking relic rifle and I feel fortunate to have found one in this condition. See the pics below.
There you have it - a list of things to look for when examining a 03-A3 that you're considering.
Merc
A few photos of the 03-A3.
3696236963369643696536966
A few more.
36968369693697036971
A few more.
36972369733697436975
3698136982369833698436985
And, finally a few more.
PeteDavis
08-19-2016, 05:43
Nice piece.
PD
Thanks Pete. It's a nice rifle.
Merc
Richard H Brown Jr
08-21-2016, 04:29
Comments to all of the above.
"There are few 1903's in Fla" Well, with 2 miles of me is an excellent condition low sn 1903, that I looked at, but didn't want to pay the asking price for a 'wall hanger'.
Within a coupla months of seeing that 1903, I walked into a pawn shop to pick up some .308 and maybe some 9mm, and just happened to ask if they had an '03. *RELATIVELY* cheaply, I got a mixmaster 1903 with a Springfield Nov 1918 receiver, and an RIA 1918 (Nov) barrel. With a replacement scant stock and some suspicious pipe wrench style gouges on the barrel up near the receiver.
Now the 1903a3 that I got a coupla years back, I picked that up thru oldguns.net. Probably paid more than it was worth, but between buying it, and shipping cross country to my FFL, it was aroun low $900's.
Referenced to arsenal/contractor rebuilds after WW2. Everything I've read, points to the rebuild facility, getting in crates of various rifles, and running 1 or more lines for each type. Total strip down to basic component parts, and they were then tossed into bins, and then inspected and/or gauged to meet rebuild specifications, if they didn't, into the scrap bin. Once the got a stockpile of parts enough to justify a assembly line, the parts were pulled and the basic sub assemblies were assembled and probably Q&A'd and stored. Then the mating of barrel to action, and final chamber reaming, and assembly to a full rifle, and test fired, and accepted or rejected. Accepted rifles, were cleaned, then packages with appropriate accessories and manuals into long term storage crates/containers, and shipped out to storage arsenals.
M-2
As an aside, in Hater's book of the Garand, he talks about post war rebuild programs, and there are some nice pic of the 'canned' M-1 Garands.
The Springfield Armory Museum up in Springfield,Mass *used* to have a sliced open can and a still sealed one on display, iirc. mmmm imagine what a still sealed 'spam can' of Garands would go for at auction.
Just my $0.50 worth of comments (inflation), I may be wrong about the rebuild program flow, but the basic idea is. If the part meant rebuild specifications, it was put into a bin, on rebuild line, the first part grabbed, was used.
RHB
Looking at an example of the final product, and adding the Parkerizing process, I would say that's probably how it went. They did things in the most expedient manner possible with the resources they had. It's unfortunate that there were two OEMs that made 03-A3s resulting in a fine rifle with mixed parts. They probably didn't think there would be any interest in the old rifles 70 years later.
Merc
The butt plate is a Smith Corona but the stock appears to be an earlier Remington 03a3 stock. Nice example of a rebuilt rifle.
I've been reverse-engineering the logic behind the origin of the stock. Some of the things it has, and doesn't have has me assuming that its a later Smith-Corona:
The rifle was made in June, 1943 according to the serial number. The stock has recoil screws instead of recoil pins and, according to a knowledgable collector's information, mid 1943 Remington stocks still had recoil pins. I've been unable to find anything elsewhere that would confirm this information.
The stock has Frank J. Atwood's inspection cartouche and the Ordnance Dept. cartouche along with the usual proof marks, but it doesn't have a maker's mark nor a rebuilder's mark.
There's an original 03-A3 on the WTB/WTS Thread that has an original Remington stock that's stamped with "RA" near the Ordnance Dept. cartouche. Since mine was rebuilt and doesn't have any marks that indicate the OEM or rebuilder, should we assume that the Arsenals stopped stamping their initials on the 03-A3 stocks after rebuilding and that the RA stands for Remington Arms instead of Raritan Arsenal? Should I assume that Smith-Corona made the stock because there's no maker's mark? I read that S-C didn't mark any parts.
Taking all of that into consideration makes a good case that it's a later Smith-Corona stock that was probably installed on the rifle when it was rebuilt. BUT, I would like to be proven wrong and will be more than willing to accept the knowledge that it's a Remington made stock. If anyone has a source of good info that indicates it's a Remington, I'd like to see it.
Merc
Looking at an example of the final product, and adding the Parkerizing process, I would say that's probably how it went. They did things in the most expedient manner possible with the resources they had. It's unfortunate that there were two OEMs that made 03-A3s resulting in a fine rifle with mixed parts. They probably didn't think there would be any interest in the old rifles 70 years later.
Merc
Merc, they could give a rats rear less about keeping the rifles "correct." They care about the most expedient way of putting rifles in the field. The don't care about collectors or enthusiasts a bit. Whether the rifle eventually wound up with a collector or as bumpers and razor blades was irrelevant. The didn't care then then and still don't.
You'll read often about "bubba" rifles. Heck most "Bubba" specials were made by WWII and Korean War vets who didn't want anything like a military rifle. They had had their fill of rifles in military garb. They wanted a hunting rifle and they didn't want it to look military which resulted in the boom in "sporterized" military rifles back then. I don't think that's "evil." If I was a serious collector of '03s I'd have a couple of pretty '03 sporters from that period to go with the others.
Look at the band spring cut out. In the pictures it looks square. If it is it's a Remington Stock. Early Remington cross bolt stocks were only marked with the FJA and ordinance mark as there was no SC production so no need to mark them with RA.
Art,
I agree, the army had a war to fight.
After WW2 ended, the vets were busy firing up the post war economy and the rifles they knew how to disassemble and reassemble blindfolded were available and cheap. I agree that most collectors look down at sporterized rifles without considering who did the work and when. The fact that they're worth a fraction of what an original sells for shows you where the interest is. I've been going to gun shows for years and have seen a few military sporters here and there, but the one military rifle that I've yet to see sporterized is the M1 Garand.
Merc
Look at the band spring cut out. In the pictures it looks square. If it is it's a Remington Stock. Early Remington cross bolt stocks were only marked with the FJA and ordinance mark as there was no SC production so no need to mark them with RA.
TWH,
I looked and it is square. Thanks for the sharp eye and the knowledge.
Merc
Here's a sight that identifies M1903 and 03-A3 stocks:
www.trfindley.com/pgm1903stkid.html
Check out the links at the bottom of this guys page. Looks like his speciality is refinishing stocks and can re-stamp cartouches.
Merc
PhillipM
08-22-2016, 04:52
Merc, they could give a rats rear less about keeping the rifles "correct." They care about the most expedient way of putting rifles in the field. The don't care about collectors or enthusiasts a bit. Whether the rifle eventually wound up with a collector or as bumpers and razor blades was irrelevant. The didn't care then then and still don't.
You'll read often about "bubba" rifles. Heck most "Bubba" specials were made by WWII and Korean War vets who didn't want anything like a military rifle. They had had their fill of rifles in military garb. They wanted a hunting rifle and they didn't want it to look military which resulted in the boom in "sporterized" military rifles back then. I don't think that's "evil." If I was a serious collector of '03s I'd have a couple of pretty '03 sporters from that period to go with the others.
As a teen, I begged my Korean War vet father for an M1. We simply had no knowledge of the DCM, so he spent a lot of 1983 dollars to get me an SA Inc. Garand for Christmas. After I unbound it and shot it in the back yard etc., He picked it up and looked it over and said, "I never thought I'd touch another one again." This was not a jubilant remark, but a lamentation. What was going on in his mind, I'll never know. He was a life member of the NSSA, loved his 1148 in 28 gauge, but the M1 drug up memories he never conveyed to me.37138
Phillip,
Do you have a photo of your father in his uniform?
Merc
PhillipM
08-22-2016, 07:09
Phillip,
Do you have a photo of your father in his uniform?
Merc
Unfortunately not a good one. I have his company graduation somewhere but I don't know if I could pick him out
37165
Finally got around to buying a muzzle gauge.
Merc
Here's a good article on the history of the Smith Corona 03-A3:
https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2010/3/12/the-smith-corona-03a3s/
Merc
psteinmayer
08-23-2016, 09:19
That is some Great reading! Thanks for sharing Merc...
That is some Great reading! Thanks for sharing Merc...
Your welcome. Just trying to contribute. My problem is that I often don't know what I don't know, but I'm learning. Everything's out there if one takes the time to look and the forum knowledge here is helpful. Great bunch of guys.
Merc
Looks like you got a nice one. I like the tiger stripes on the butt stock.
Looks like you got a nice one. I like the tiger stripes on the butt stock.
Jeff,
The stock does have an interesting grain that reflects light differently as the viewing angle changes. Almost like a 3-D effect. All this was hidden under af dark thick sticky coating. Was it Linseed oil breaking down after 73 years?
Merc
Did you clean up the stock?
Jeff,
The dark sticky coating on the stock was starting to come off on my hands just from handling it and came off completely with spirits. Possibly a moisture repellant that was applied to protect the wood while in storage?
Merc
Great thread Merc, and all you contributors... i read all of it and peaked my interest into my search for a proper stock for my 1930SA 03... She's now wearing a newly fitted and refinished boyds C-stock cause the one that bubba used 50 grit sandpaper on was gruesome... i'll try and get a picture... She looks like an 03A1 anyway...
bombdog, out...
Great thread Merc, and all you contributors... i read all of it and peaked my interest into my search for a proper stock for my 1930SA 03... She's now wearing a newly fitted and refinished boyds C-stock cause the one that bubba used 50 grit sandpaper on was gruesome... i'll try and get a picture... She looks like an 03A1 anyway...
bombdog, out...
I'm glad you found this thread. I think it's one of the more interesting topics on the forum and where else would you find this many forum members willing to help.
Sounds like your rifle is now a "looker" with the refinished stock and would like to see it. Is it a shooter as well?
Merc
Have to wait for the shoulder surgery to heal before i bust off any 30/06 rounds... Been just 2 weeks, just got the stitches out today... But i did go to another site i used to frequent, can't recall the name, but according to all the info between this one and that one, i may have taken too much wood from the tang area as the bolt, guard, and bushing have contact with each other... It was a freebe but i hope i didn't ruin it...
But she's a beaut... Going to a gun show tomorrow to see if i can score another strait stock with finger grooves...
i'll keep ya'll informed...
bombdog, out here...
Bombdog,
I hear you on your shoulder. My left was replaced in 09 and the right is probably not far behind. I baby it by shooting from a Caldwell rack to lessen the recoil and reduce aiming errors.
Merc
Roger that Merc...
Went to the gunshow and i have a new addition to my girls, Winchester #108624 of the M1917 variety... Guess now i need to lern a thing er two bout her... Know the guy who had her, says she's a shooter... We'll see... Has a 11/18 Remington barrel though... i'll keep ya'll informed...
bombdog, gone diggin...
BD,
I also have a M1917 Winchester. See me on the M1917 page on this forum.
Merc
OK guys, since there's lots of foot traffic on this thread, I think it would be a great place to post some photos of your M1903s and 03-A3s, especially if they are recent acquisitions or really nice specimens. You saw my 03-A3. Let's see what you got.
Also, since so many forum members contributed their knowledge and experience to this thread, let them know if you were able to use any of the information that they so graciously offered to look for or buy your M1903 or 03-A3. Photos are always welcomed.
There are two variants that apply to the Smith-Corona 03-A3 that anyone who is looking to purchase one should be aware of. A 03-A3 with either of these variants would probably be considered uncommon.
Remington and Smith-Corona accidentally used the same serial numbers on approx. 3,600 03-A3s. S-C added a "C" prefix to their serial numbers for identification and inventory purposes.
High Standard Co. was the barrel supplier for S-C 03-A3s and acquired approx. 5,000 6 groove Savage barrels and got govt. approval to furnish them for S-C 03-A3s.
Note: Both quantities mention above are from an American Rifleman article published in 2010 and are approximate. The actual quantities produced may be different.
So, the next time you're looking at a S-C 03-A3, check to see if its serial number has a C prefix or a 6 groove barrel. With all the parts swapping going on at the armories when they were being rebuilt after WW2, what are the chances of finding a S-C 03-A3 with a C prefix and a 6 groove barrel? Now that would be rare.
Here are two 4.81M SC rifles that are only about 3600 serial numbers apart. The bottom rifle appears to only have been proof fired and is OG stamped. The top rifle is a 6 groove.
Here are two 4.81M SC rifles that are only about 3600 serial numbers apart. The bottom rifle appears to only have been proof fired and is OG stamped. The top rifle is a 6 groove.
Wow! Nice going.
As I indicated on previous posts on this thread, I purchased a minty 1943 Model 03-A3 in July, 2016 at Cabelas in Wheeling, WV. I live in Pittsburgh, PA. Is it legal to purchase a rifle in West Virginia and immediately transport it to Pennsylvania?
I'm considering taking an unloaded rifle plus several boxes of ammo with me on vacation to Florida to do some range shooting with relatives and I'm wondering about the 6 state lines (WV, VA, NC, SC, GA, FL) that I'll cross (twice) and whether or not I'll be violating any state laws by merely having the rifle and ammo in the car with me.
It would be nice if Trump standardizes the federal gun laws to include transporting firearms across state lines.
I just got myself a 1903 with a set of Mr Bill Bentz's thicker front sight and rear sight peep. these old eyes have never been happier! :eusa_dance:
ElWoodman
11-20-2016, 05:43
The 1903 Rifle won the first offensive engagement in the Pacific Theater of WWII: Guadalcanal. It was the ONLY time in WWII that US forces went up against an enemy on equal terms (5 shot turnbolt-vs- 5 shot turnbolt). We all know that firepower advantage enjoyed by our people toting the M1 Garand....And yes, "Tell it to the Marines"....
ElWoodman
11-20-2016, 05:50
Another possible factor is if it is a Marine Rifle. Our (Marine Corps) rifles are high and holy things to us, on occasion causing us to pay more than we'd rather admit.......but we do...It's a Marine thang.
clintonhater
11-21-2016, 11:12
The 1903 Rifle won the first offensive engagement in the Pacific Theater of WWII: Guadalcanal. It was the ONLY time in WWII that US forces went up against an enemy on equal terms (5 shot turnbolt-vs- 5 shot turnbolt)...
Don't forget the "Alamo of the Pacific," as the History Channel foolishly calls Wake Island. (The difference: the defenders of the Alamo, did NOT surrender.)
The 1903 Rifle won the first offensive engagement in the Pacific Theater of WWII: Guadalcanal. It was the ONLY time in WWII that US forces went up against an enemy on equal terms (5 shot turnbolt-vs- 5 shot turnbolt). We all know that firepower advantage enjoyed by our people toting the M1 Garand....And yes, "Tell it to the Marines"....
Just curious. Since the M1 Garand entered service in the mid-1930s, why were the Marines still using the M1903 at Guadalcanal?
clintonhater
12-03-2016, 04:12
Just curious. Since the M1 Garand entered service in the mid-1930s, why were the Marines still using the M1903 at Guadalcanal?
Army had top priority for M1s; Marines were supplied on the "trickle-down" principle.
cplnorton
12-03-2016, 04:17
Just curious. Since the M1 Garand entered service in the mid-1930s, why were the Marines still using the M1903 at Guadalcanal?
There is a really good article on this in the latest Garand Collector's Journal if you get that.
But the Marines actually had a lot of Garands even before Pearl Harbor, and even adopted the M1 as the main battle rifle before the Canal. But they just didn't have the faith that it would be reliable in combat until all the revisions on it were done. The Marines had a lot of problems with the Gas Traps they had tested, so they were waiting for all the revisions on them before they were issued widespread to the infantry. But Marines were issued Garands for the Canal. It was mostly just to Marines who were in Support roles, and some of the replacments were issued some as well.
firstflabn
12-04-2016, 08:48
The 1903 Rifle won the first offensive engagement in the Pacific Theater of WWII: Guadalcanal.
A pretty bold assertion. Can you tell us a bit about how you arrived at that?
blackhawknj
12-04-2016, 04:53
I read an account of the Ardennes, told the story of a cook in an artillery battalion, when he was handed an M-1 he said he' d never seen one, he joined the Army in 1941, qualified on the M1903-and probably hadn't fired since.
PhillipM
12-04-2016, 08:04
Army had top priority for M1s; Marines were supplied on the "trickle-down" principle.
In 1940 the USMC turned down the M1. Your story is a myth. In fact, had the USMC got on board with the M1 in 1940 and shared the tooling up costs, the USMC would have had M1's out the ears.
Don't forget the "Alamo of the Pacific," as the History Channel foolishly calls Wake Island. (The difference: the defenders of the Alamo, did NOT surrender.)
"Alamo of the Pacific" was a term coined by the press at the time, in fact while the fighting was still going on. Word of that got to the defenders and it was emphatically not good for morale.
The Alamo almost surely did have six to 10 men surrender to Gen. Manuel Castrillon who offered them, in good faith, safe conduct and who were subsequently executed on orders of Santa Ana. Another group made a run for it when the situation was untenable and were cut down by Mexican cavalry stationed outside the walls for just that purpose. Interestingly there is a record of one fellow who received a Republic of Texas land bounty warrant as a veteran of the Alamo. In addition several people including Bowie and Travis' slaves who apparently actually did fight and later surrendered were let go as did a Mexican army deserter Brigido Guerrero who had joined the Texans and then convinced the Mexican authorities that he was in fact a P.O.W. so it wasn't just women and children who were released. Juan Seguin was sent out of the Alamo shortly before it fell to seek help, got to Houston who forbade him to return. None of this in any way diminishes the courage of the men there but there are a lot of myths and fables that grew up around the battle, one was that "Thermopylae had its messenger of defeat and the Alamo had none."
clintonhater
12-05-2016, 09:39
The Alamo almost surely did have six to 10 men surrender to Gen. Manuel Castrillon who offered them, in good faith, safe conduct and who were subsequently executed on orders of Santa Ana. Another group made a run for it when the situation was untenable and were cut down by Mexican cavalry stationed outside the walls for just that purpose...
Oh, no--John Wayne got it wrong! Gee, who can you trust?
Thought this was the greatest picture I'd ever seen when it was first released, and saw it twice, maybe three times, at my town's only theater. But when I tried to watch it again not long ago on TCM, I couldn't get much beyond the first half-hour without succumbing to boredom, which is pretty much my same reaction to all the pictures I loved as a kid or young adult.
cplnorton
12-05-2016, 01:13
You guys might like this, and we already put this in the Garand Journal. So it's not a huge secret if people read that article. But Tim Plowman found these at the Archives.
But in Feb 1941, the Marines decided that the M1 was pretty comparable to the 1903, as long as it wasn't exposed to extreme conditions. And they state that they believe there will be revisions to the rifle, that will make it just as reliable. So what they decide to do was purchase 3,000 Garands a month starting in April 1941, and distribute them out to everyone that wouldn't expose the rifles to the extreme conditions. Then wait till the revisions were in effect that would make it reliable even under extreme conditions, and then arm for example the Infantry.
On Dec 10th, 1941, the day after Pearl Harbor, the Marines did a count and had 24,000 M1 Garands. They then immediately put in a request to Army Ordnance to get the shipments increased.
But yeah it's interesting to know, that on the day the Marines were attacked at Pearl Harbor, the Marines already had 24,000 M1 Garands. Which I think there was only about 60,000 Marines at this time. So they almost had one for every two men before the war even started. Which this contradicts I think most of the books out there.
But the Marines officially adopted the M1 in July 1942. But 1942 was also a very tough year for the Marines, as the size of the Marines was exploding at a level that they just coudln't keep up with supply. So that led to shortages of rifles for Marines going through boot camp. So the Marines desperate for rifles, and couldn't get enough Garands from the Army, turned to the Navy, and got a lot of really JUNK Navy 1903's. lol
But by about Jan 1943, the Garands supply lines caught back up and well the rest is history. :)
http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/m1%20dec%201941%201_zpsmjs23ajj.jpg
Steve. I was under the assumption that the early M1 Garands delivered were the early gas trap models that were sent back to Springfield for upgrading. I don't have written proof but I've read it from original papers from headquarters USMC and through another reliable source we both know. So yes the Marines did have M1's but not enough to cart off to war at that early time of Guadalcanal as they were being rebuilt and slowly shipped back in small lots at a time.
By the way by the end of March 1943 the USMC had 342,905 Garands in possesion and were slated to receive another 75,000 over the next 3 months by late June 1943
cplnorton
12-05-2016, 04:21
Steve. I was under the assumption that the early M1 Garands delivered were the early gas trap models that were sent back to Springfield for upgrading. I don't have written proof but I've read it from original papers from headquarters USMC and through another reliable source we both know. So yes the Marines did have M1's but not enough to cart off to war at that early time of Guadalcanal as they were being rebuilt and slowly shipped back in small lots at a time.
If you get the Garand Journal there a really good article that details the rollout of the Garands. Its' in the Fall 2016 issue starting on page 25. But yeah the first 400 they tested were Gas Trap and from reading the Marine Docs, they were going to send those back. Those did leave a bad taste in the Marines mouths. But the Marines actually tested a second lot at the end of 1940, which they detail as being of the latest style. Which those would have been post Gas trap. I have a lot of documents on this, but this one sums it up pretty good.
http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/feb%201941_zps8p6zzwac.jpg
Then the Marines decide these new style Garands are good enough to give it a go, but they are still cautious of issuing them to Infantry. Just because of the bad taste in their mouth from the Gas Traps. But they order 27,600 of the new style M1's with a delivery date of 3,000 per month starting in April 1941. By Dec 10, 1941 they had received 24,000 of the new Garands. Which is detailed in that count in that document in previous post. But it's listed multiple times on several documents.
http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/Fullscreen%20capture%201252016%2063642%20PM.bmp_zp spdilusb8.jpg
But after Pearl Harbor is bombed, the Marines request they start to receive shipments of 5,000 a month, then I see a note requesting the shipments be increased to 8,000 per month. And I think I remember a request being increased to 22,000 a month by late 1942. But don't quote me. There are a ton of documents in this, and it's been probably a year since I read them. I'm just pulling out a few to show here that I had set aside from this box.
But I do know for a fact they did get the 24,000 before Pearl Harbor, because it details where every one of them went. So I have the detailed counts of where every Marine Garand went in 1941.
They are broke up in different timeframes, and multiple pages, but they detail where everyone went. But here is just the beginning of the counts for each group. Some of this might end up in the Garand Journal, so I would rather not show some of it. But some of the ones above have already been in the magazine so I don't care about showing them.
http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/Fullscreen%20capture%201252016%2063220%20PM.bmp_zp sqj3g1byt.jpg
http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a535/cplnorton11/Fullscreen%20capture%201252016%2063428%20PM.bmp_zp sna3lhvn5.jpg
firstflabn
12-05-2016, 04:37
So yes the Marines did have M1's but not enough to cart off to war at that early time of Guadalcanal as they were being rebuilt and slowly shipped back in small lots at a time.
You might want to look into what rifles the 3rd Defense Battalion landed with on Aug 7.
I'm not a Garand guy, so I can't say when SA completely switched over to the new front end, but the SA Annual Report for FY40 says, "Delivery of the redesigned front end for the M1 Rifle started in June 1940." How many Garands did the USMC have at this point - 900 or so?
USMC's Garand shortage was at least partially of their own making. While the Army was sharing rifles in training, the Marines (as I understand it - Help! Steve) issued rifles to individuals soon after induction. That can eat up quite a quantity pretty quick. If it turns out that was done in disregard of a unit's planned deployment date, then it seems even more ill advised under the existing desperate circumstances.
Here's a quote from the CG of the 94th Infantry Division during the scarcity period. "The 94th was activated on 15 Sep 42: Our rifles and carbines (approximately 11,367) were issued initially on a 25% and 20% basis. Of necessity they were rotated between and among units." Based on carbine monthly production, my guess is this remark described a period no earlier than Spring, 1943.
Logistics can be a pretty complex subject - especially during this period with so many plans being changed to adjust to changing conditions (plus they had no idea what they were doing at this stage). Thanks to the research and level headed analysis of Steve and Tim, at least we no longer have to rely on the uninformed complaints of grunts to assess who got what. Shouldn't take the Internet Rangers more than 10-15 years to catch on (not talking about you, louis - keep up the good work).
Thanks for the correction Steve. Hopefully you'll write a book on the hard work you're doing and share with us Marine collectors. Great stuff. A year or so ago there was one of these early Garands with the papers sold on GunBroker. It came with a few hundred pages of research. What a find that was.
Too bad we don't have serial numbers on all those rifles. I suppose one day hopefully not too far in the distant future.
cplnorton
12-06-2016, 04:23
Thanks for the correction Steve. Hopefully you'll write a book on the hard work you're doing and share with us Marine collectors. Great stuff. A year or so ago there was one of these early Garands with the papers sold on GunBroker. It came with a few hundred pages of research. What a find that was.
Someday I would love to share everything. But I can't take all the credit, I have to thank my friends, Tim Plowman and Andrew Stolinksi. They have really worked hard pulling stuff from the Archive locations, and I wouldn't have near as much without their hard work.
I really love to read, and reading this stuff from back then is just very interesting. So much is different than what the books say, and in some ways, I almost enjoy hunting for the documents more than the actual rifles and pistols anymore.
By the way, that early Marine Garand on Gunbroker with all those documents. I bought it. lol The guy who original owned it, wrote a article on the first 400 Marine Garands for the Garand Journal back in like 2006. It was all his research he did to write the article.
cplnorton
12-06-2016, 04:31
Too bad we don't have serial numbers on all those rifles. I suppose one day hopefully not too far in the distant future.
Man I can only hope, but the Marines issued a order not to track serials during the war, only quantity. So the serials would have only been recorded at say the unit level. Which those documents usually weren't archived. Which stinks. lol.
But you never know, there are more documents released all the time and a lot of archive locations haven't been hit at all. So I can only hope. lol
Steve you bought that rifle!! I should have known!! That was some find! Yes I tried finding unit records but that was awhile back. Seems like they were either destroyed or hopefully hidden somewhere in some warehouse lol. Good luck in your research I know it's a royal pain but rewarding.
2016 was an interesting year. I was looking for a M1903 but opted for a really nice 1943 Remington 03-A3 in July when an opportunity presented itself. I also bought a Winchester M1917 in January that I greatly admire for its size, strength and appearance. Both are in great shape and shoot accurately. I'm still looking for a M1903 and will not rest until I find one in 2017. Lastly, we elected a president who will defend the 2nd amendment. All things considered, it wasn't a bad year.
I bought a front sight hood for the 1943 Remington 03-A3 I bought in July 2016 thinking it would help to aim the rifle by framing the thin sight blade which would allow me to see the target a little more easily. The hood was still covered in cosmoline and there are no marks on it so I figured it was new. I tried to install the hood but found that it was impossible to do without scratching the near perfect Parkerized finish on the front end of the barrel. I know the hoods must fit tightly on the barrel in order to stay put. Has anyone found a way to install a tight fitting hood without scratching a perfect Parkerized finish?
Johnny P
01-08-2017, 06:02
I bought a front sight hood for the 1943 Remington 03-A3 I bought in July 2016 thinking it would help to aim the rifle by framing the thin sight blade which would allow me to see the target a little more easily. The hood was still covered in cosmoline and there are no marks on it so I figured it was new. I tried to install the hood but found that it was impossible to do without scratching the near perfect Parkerized finish on the front end of the barrel. I know the hoods must fit tightly on the barrel in order to stay put. Has anyone found a way to install a tight fitting hood without scratching a perfect Parkerized finish?
The sight protector doesn't make sighting easier on the 03-A3, and actually makes it more difficult. The round aperture of the receiver sight is a wonderful sighting device given the ability of the eye with no input from you to acquire the center of the aperture and position the front sight blade at the center. Especially so with the taller front sight blade of the 03-A3, with the sight protector on you have added another aperture for the eye to center, and it does. Only problem is that the front sight blade is not centered in the front aperture, and is very close to the top of the sight protector. You have to consciously disregard the front aperture, which is now in the way, and concentrate on the sight blade to keep it centered in the rear aperture.
If you want to try it for yourself, stick two round bit screwdrivers in the upper part of the sight protector and pry it apart as best you can to help get it over the sight, and have your best buddy there to help get it on. Coming off it removes some more finish. I have seen them with the folded over piece on the rear cut off to allow the protector to slide on instead of over the sight.
The sight protector doesn't make sighting easier on the 03-A3, and actually makes it more difficult. The round aperture of the receiver sight is a wonderful sighting device given the ability of the eye with no input from you to acquire the center of the aperture and position the front sight blade at the center. Especially so with the taller front sight blade of the 03-A3, with the sight protector on you have added another aperture for the eye to center, and it does. Only problem is that the front sight blade is not centered in the front aperture, and is very close to the top of the sight protector. You have to consciously disregard the front aperture, which is now in the way, and concentrate on the sight blade to keep it centered in the rear aperture.
If you want to try it for yourself, stick two round bit screwdrivers in the upper part of the sight protector and pry it apart as best you can to help get it over the sight, and have your best buddy there to help get it on. Coming off it removes some more finish. I have seen them with the folded over piece on the rear cut off to allow the protector to slide on instead of over the sight.
Thanks for the informative reply.
I've been watching a fairly minty looking 1918 RIA M1903 s/n 304xxx at my favorite gun store for a while. They've had it for several months and might be ready to make a deal.
ElWoodman
05-24-2017, 03:46
Joe.....The M1903 carried the day for the 1st Marine Division at Guadalcanal August '42- January '43. They were relieved by US Army forces toting M1s, but by that time most of the fighting was done. Marines, with the '03, shattered the myth of Japanese invincibility. Then they were issued M1s and the rest is history.....
I think I've finally zeroed the windage adjustment on my 03A3. I hit the bulls eye at 100 yards several times after many experiment shots. I may actually begin to enjoy shooting this rifle now I can finally hit where I'm aiming instead of constantly tinkering with the windage knob.
It's sad to see so little traffic on this forum these days.
It's sad to see so little traffic on this forum these days.
yes it is,, but it is a far cry from what it was back in the early 2000's when I first started posting,,
Richard H Brown Jr
08-21-2017, 01:01
Louis:
In North Central Fla, and happened on a Nov 1918 mix master in a pawn shop, about 3 yrs back. There's also a low sn wallhanger in a gun store within 5 mi of my house. 8*). And the one I got, seems to have the earmarks of being a Marine '03. Rebuilt after the war, but the bolt handle is electro penciled with a sn, that's withing a couple o' hundred of the one used by a Marine WW1 MOH awardee. And the sn of the rifle, is close to ones that were in the Banana Repulbic wars, or at a USMC air field in St Thomas, VI, or Mare Island, or a Naval Ammo dump close the the NY Federal school for idiots on the Hudson river. Unless you find a Marine's service record, it's hard to establish where a Marine '03 was, dur to the fact that until the middle or end of WW2, Marines at boot camp were issued a weapon and carried it were ever they were sent, until it was *lost*, turned in for repair, turned in when the Marine left service. Corpral Norton on the forum, goes thru NARA looking for info on Marine '03's.
RHB
I had some fun with my Remington 03-A3. Took it with me this year on vacation to FL. The range had several non-shooting spectators who were just looking at the weaponry. A minty M1 Garand was there and attracted much attention. Rangemaster only one to notice my 03-A3. Kinda bland looking. My M1917 Winchester always drew a crowd at this range.
Still looking for a M1903. Saw several that were sold before I had time to act. Started carrying my gauges in the glove compartment. Collectors are driving up the price.
Jon Field
02-27-2019, 04:59
Rub grease inside the edges of sight hood before installing it, makes it go on easier with no scratches. To pull off run a round shanked screwdriver through upper ring and pull straight off! Helps to never install one though!!!
A friend has offered to sell me his blued 1925 Springfield M1903. I got an email from him yesterday and I’ll be seeing him on Wednesday. I saw the ‘03 a few months ago and told him to let me know if he ever wanted to sell it.
The rifle has been extensively rebuilt just in time for the final year of WW2 by the Rock Island Arsenal. The stock is stamped RIA over EB in a rectangle. I’m not finding anything on EB. He was apparently an inspector at the arsenal during the 1940s. The rifle currently wears a High Standard barrel that’s dated 9/44. I checked for muzzle wear and headspace when I first saw it and both were OK. I didn’t check it for throat erosion but will before any money changes hands.
The stock is a Remington 03A3 and has a very dark mostly undisturbed patina with the usual marks and dings. The rebuild cartouche is bold but the FJA cartouche is barely legible. The only disturbed area on the stock is a small repair on the left side near the forward edge of the receiver. I’ve seen this type of repair previously in about the same spot. Not sure what caused it, but obviously, it was bad enough to fix. It appears a small section of wood was removed and a new piece was inserted, pegged (3) and glued. Whoever did the work was a pro. Unfortunately, he used a hardwood like maple which is a lighter color.
He also has three M1903 stocks that he described as “beat up.” They’re probably too far gone to be useful, but no harm looking.
I bought the 1925 Springfield ‘03. The rifle’s mechanics were clean and appear to be in minty condition. Headspace and muzzle/throat erosion measurements are as new. The HS 9/44 barrel looks as new. The dull black finish on the metal parts is undisturbed. That’s the good news. The rest of the rifle is a mixture of ‘03 and 03A3 parts. The stock has a lightly stamped FJA cartouche and has a squared spring groove so it’s a Remington 03A3 type 11. It was oil soaked. Looking a bit closer at the spring groove, the squared end was cut on a slight angle, so it could be a Keystone stock.
Springfield ‘03 parts required to replace the 03A3 parts are available on the Internet and are inexpensive. I’ll keep the Remington 03A3 stock on the rifle for now while keeping a watchful eye on eBay.
I baked out some of the oil in the stock by placing it in the hot afternoon sun for several hours over several days and wiping the oil away every hour or so after spraying with alcohol. There were literally streams of oil dripping from the stock. I might try it again tomorrow while wrapping it in a black garbage bag and see if the additional heat will expel more oil.
Oil continues to ooze from the surface of the stock in surprising quantities when exposed to sunlight. Has anyone been successful in expelling the oil from your stock? Is there a better way? What purpose did all this oil serve?
Edit: acetone seems to have dissolved the oil.
Was it a common practice to stamp a 2nd proof stamp (circle P) next to, or nearly on top of, the original proof stamp located behind the trigger guard to indicate that the original barrel had been replaced and the new barrel has been proof fired?
Hey Merc - the method I employ works, although sounds a little silly. After my first milsurp purchase (Persian Mauser) arrived I learned about cosmoline. Great stuff, did its job protecting weapon while in storage. I went to Home Depot, bought a section of round metal duct. Capped one end, placed wooden hardware into tube, added no-scent cat litter and capped the other end. I placed it in the back of my SUV where it rolled around randomly. When not moving the sun did a great job of turning up the heat. When the cosmo is expelled it is absorbed by the litter. The random movement ensures new litter contact. This won't work in Winter, I don't think, but works like a charm in hot weather. I have moved twice since that first milsurp purchase and the tube of cat litter has moved with me each time. Hope to help.
Hey Merc - the method I employ works, although sounds a little silly. After my first milsurp purchase (Persian Mauser) arrived I learned about cosmoline. Great stuff, did its job protecting weapon while in storage. I went to Home Depot, bought a section of round metal duct. Capped one end, placed wooden hardware into tube, added no-scent cat litter and capped the other end. I placed it in the back of my SUV where it rolled around randomly. When not moving the sun did a great job of turning up the heat. When the cosmo is expelled it is absorbed by the litter. The random movement ensures new litter contact. This won't work in Winter, I don't think, but works like a charm in hot weather. I have moved twice since that first milsurp purchase and the tube of cat litter has moved with me each time. Hope to help.
That’s a good idea Liam. What color is the tube? Black absorbs heat. I think the acetone that I used dissolved a lot of the oil that was near the surface but probably a lot still remains.
Edit: So, where did the oil that’s in the stock come from? The cosmoline. According to Wiki: Cosmoline is a wax-like petroleum based rust inhibitor that dries over time. The oil must have been absorbed by the stock as part of the drying process while the thickening agent (wax??) remains on the surface and is easily removed with acetone.
From what I’ve read on other gun forums, mineral oil saturation can cause wood fibers to swell or become soft. My stock actually looks ok now but I would like to remove as much of the oil as possible.
4637246373463744637546376
Some ‘03 photos.
4637746378463794638046381
A few more. Notice the repaired stock area. The patch is definitely a hardwood, possibly maple or oak. It’s nearly the same color as the oak table.
The spring slot end is cut on a slight diagonal. Possibly a Keystone stock?
Barrel stamped HS 9/44.
463844638246383
Three more. Rock Island rebuild stamp with the unknown EB initials and last 4 digits of the serial number plus another 4 unknown digits.
Notice the double “P” proof stamp. Does this indicate that the new HS barrel was proof fired?
Now that I have removed most of the oil from the stock and found a way to remove most of the remaining oil, I’ve decided to keep the stock. It’s in good condition and isn’t showing any deterioration from the oil saturation. Plus, it’s been on the rifle since the WW2 rebuild.
Nice rifle. I like rifles with a history, even if I don't know it.
JOHN COOK
08-05-2019, 02:51
Just a thought. Since this post started back in April 2016 I don't know if it was mentioned or not, but isn't the 4 digit nbr on the stock indicative of the stock being a Greek return ??? I have an 03A3 with several repairs on the stock and the last 4 digits of the serial nbr is stamped on same and was told it was a Greek return. One of the repairs was similar to the one in your photo. FWIW.
john in SC
Just a thought. Since this post started back in April 2016 I don't know if it was mentioned or not, but isn't the 4 digit nbr on the stock indicative of the stock being a Greek return ??? I have an 03A3 with several repairs on the stock and the last 4 digits of the serial nbr is stamped on same and was told it was a Greek return. One of the repairs was similar to the one in your photo. FWIW.
john in SC
Thanks John, interesting theory.
There are several things that I wonder about. Just trying to interpret what I see:
There’s another 4 digit number (9782) stamped under the S/N on the stock. Their meaning is unknown.
The last 4 digits of the S/N are also etched on the top of the bolt handle. This indicates that an effort was made to keep the rifle’s components together. This wasn’t something that the US armorers were usually concerned about.
The bolt and its components are stamped with the R that indicates that it was made by Remington who began making M1903 Modified and 03A3 rifles in 1943. It must have replaced the Springfield bolt during the final RIA rebuild some time after 9/44.
The stock looks like it could be a Keystone stock because the end of the spring groove is cut on a slight angle. Keystone stocks were made for Remington starting in 1943. Grooves ends on Smith Corona stocks were round and groove ends on Remington stocks were square. It has the RIA cartouche so it was on the rifle before the rebuild. The Ordnance and Atwood stamps are barely visible and several handling chips and dents are present.
There isn’t an import mark, unless it’s the number stamped on the stock.
It still had the remnants of the cosmoline on the stock so it went into arsenal storage after the war.
The US Govt. put a lot of effort and money into this obsolete rifle towards the end of WW2. The M1 Garand should have been plentiful by then. It would make sense that it was loaned to the Greeks after the rebuild.
Edit: The repair that was performed to the stock was nicely done. The wood patch appears to be a hardwood that looks like oak or maple. It’s pegged in two places and there’s an external support near the recoil bolt. I can see a lot of time and effort in this repair. Is this something that the US armorers would have taken the time to do, or would they have simply replaced the stock?
Yeah, this thread is old. I just wanted to close the loop on my search for a nice shootable Springfield M1903. I didn’t think it would take more than three years to find one. It’s been an interesting thread to follow because so many have been willing to share their knowledge and give me the advice I needed. Thank you.
RIA/EB is Robert Bjerke (spelling) an inspector at Rock Island. The numbers stamped on the stock and bolt are indicative of a Greek return which is why the rifle has no import marks. The fact that there are two sets, assuming they don’t both match the rifles serial number, just means that the stock was reused on more than one rifle. Keystone made replacement stocks, Remington made there own stocks. As to why the stock was grease soaked the Greeks used different things as a preservative for storage that ranged from something that was almost like soft wax to something that was like axle grease and not at all like cosmolene. This is why your stock appears oil soaked.
RIA/EB is Robert Bjerke (spelling) an inspector at Rock Island. The numbers stamped on the stock and bolt are indicative of a Greek return which is why the rifle has no import marks. The fact that there are two sets, assuming they don’t both match the rifles serial number, just means that the stock was reused on more than one rifle. Keystone made replacement stocks, Remington made there own stocks. As to why the stock was grease soaked the Greeks used different things as a preservative for storage that ranged from something that was almost like soft wax to something that was like axle grease and not at all like cosmolene. This is why your stock appears oil soaked.
Thank you for the information. All of it makes sense.
I think the Greeks were given the rifle after the RIA rebuilt it in 1944 since they sent it back to the US covered in that grease they used as a preservative. I also think the acetone removed most of the excess oil. It was the first time I’d ever seen oil drip from a stock that was sitting in the sun. After 75 years, I’m surprised it didn’t cause swelling or softening.
I think the stock repair was done by the Greeks. I can’t see the US armorers taking the time to repair a stock. I’ve seen damage in the same general area on at least one other ‘03 stock. It was probably caused by the ejecting cases.
JOHN COOK
08-05-2019, 02:11
The last 4 digits of the S/N are also etched on the top of the bolt handle
Merc, my rifle also had the last four nbrs. on top of bolt handle and was soaked with something. I finally got it all out of the wood after about two months. Cleaned up pretty good. I then found three 1/4 " dowels imbedded in the stock near the butt plate. It was sanded down and the contour was correct.
john in SC
Merc, my rifle also had the last four nbrs. on top of bolt handle and was soaked with something. I finally got it all out of the wood after about two months. Cleaned up pretty good. I then found three 1/4 " dowels imbedded in the stock near the butt plate. It was sanded down and the contour was correct.
john in SC
They probably fixed a small crack. The Greeks were obviously good wood workers.
When did the Greeks return the M1903s to the US?
RIA/EB is Robert Bjerke (spelling) an inspector at Rock Island. The numbers stamped on the stock and bolt are indicative of a Greek return which is why the rifle has no import marks. The fact that there are two sets, assuming they don’t both match the rifles serial number, just means that the stock was reused on more than one rifle. Keystone made replacement stocks, Remington made there own stocks. As to why the stock was grease soaked the Greeks used different things as a preservative for storage that ranged from something that was almost like soft wax to something that was like axle grease and not at all like cosmolene. This is why your stock appears oil soaked.
http://myplace.frontier.com/~aleccorapinski/id9.html
Not Robert. Elmer was his first name.
Your correct and that’s what I get for typing faster than thinking.
That’s OK. You’re not alone.
I didn’t find Elmer’s initials identified on any of the usual ‘03 information sights that I frequent. So, I googled “RIA inspector” and there he was.
I took the ‘03 to the range today to try to figure out the open sight at 100 yards. I used the battle sight and 6 of the 10 bullets that I fired stayed within a six inch group. Unfortunately, I had variable 8-10 mph crosswinds from the left the pushed everything mostly right. I adjusted the windage but only succeeded in making things worse. I decided to bag it for now and try again under better wind conditions.
el Woodman
08-10-2019, 04:44
Most of the First Marine Division carried M1903s to that battle. Also BARs and M1917 water cooled MGs. The Japanese were similarly armed, if you consider a BAR a LMG. From many personal interviews with Marine veterans of Guadalcanal (First Mar Div Assn. reunion,1997) is where I came by this info. Yes, the 1st Raider Bn. had numerous M1s, and there were the assorted Thompson and Reising SMGs (the Japanese were lacking in SMGs) but the average rifleman had an '03. Yes, there was also considerable contributions by the Cactus Air Force.
Richard H Brown Jr
08-10-2019, 11:35
Merc:
This will explain all of the sight selections on the M1903 ladder sight: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B3vgQuY3vA0FMlVOcmE3NS1Lbkk/edit?pli=1 Note: some don't have the Volley sight notch on the top cross member, after WW1 the powers that be decided it wasn't necessary, and deleted to save money in manufacturing.
RHB
Richard,
Thanks for the sight information. I used the notch at the slide’s lowest setting and that position yielded a good elevation placement. I’ll experiment with the windage the next time out.
I had an issue with the cartridges that I used. It was my first time shooting both the ‘03 and M2 bullets that I substituted for .308 boat tail bullets that I have been shooting without issues in my other 30-06 rifles (M1917 and 03A3).
I shot 10 uncrimped rounds and all 10 case necks were covered with soot. I found a variety of opinions on other forums as to the possible cause. Some said crimping will help while others say crimping is not necessary. I don’t crimp the boat tails and don’t have soot on the case necks.
I’ll shoot a few boat tails through the ‘03 and a few M2s through the ‘17 to see if the problem follows the bullet.
The case neck sooting problem followed the bullet. I shot 5 uncrimped BTs and M2s last evening with the ‘03 and the BT case necks had minimal sooting while the M2 case necks had considerable sooting. So, should the next step be to try crimping the M2 bullets?
I bought a crimping die a few weeks ago and crimped twenty 30-06 rounds loaded with M2 bullets. I went to the range after dinner with about 2 hours of daylight remaining and shot 10 M2 bullets in the ‘03 and noticed some improvement in neck sooting and accuracy.
Will try a magnum rifle primer and IMR 4064 powder instead of a standard rifle primer and BL-C (2) powder and see what happens.
I had both the ‘03 and ‘17 at the range this evening and they both drew a lot of attention from my fellow shooters.
are you getting much flash with the BL-C(2)??
I tried some loads years ago with 748, and thought I would get flash burns after 10 rounds,
accuracy was so so, but man what a fireball (and not the max load)
I went back to 4064 and 4895
I didn’t notice any muzzle flash, but there was a slight puff of white smoke when the un-crimped rounds were fired that was probably related to the sooting.
Since my M1903 has all the characteristics of a Greek return, I researched when and why the US sent M1903s and other small arms to Greece. They were sent to the Greek gov. to fight the communists in 1948 by congress and were returned to the CMP in 2001.
The ‘03s were most likely subjected to a US arsenal rebuild prior to being shipped to Greece which would account for the great looking 1944 HS barrel that’s on my 1925 Springfield ‘03. Several owners of Greek returned ‘03s on other forums have mentioned the 1944 HS barrels that are installed on their rifles.
https://i1180.photobucket.com/albums/x413/nf1e/HS%205-44%20barrel_zpsyc80i4cb.jpg (https://s1180.photobucket.com/user/nf1e/media/HS%205-44%20barrel_zpsyc80i4cb.jpg.html)
I have a Rem. 03 w/ a HS - 44 barrel. The stock ... well, it's a stock! But the barrel is virtually new in every respect. Exceptionally good shooting rifle with any load, jacketed or cast bullets. Have used this rifle to win number of local vintage military rifle matches. Sincerely. bruce.
[QUOTE=nf1e;566284]https://i1180.photobucket.com/albums/x413/nf1e/HS%205-44%20barrel_zpsyc80i4cb.jpg (https://s1180.photobucket.com/user/nf1e/media/HS%205-44%20barrel_zpsyc80i4cb.jpg.html)[/QUOTE
Is this a Greek returned ‘03? Nice barrel.
does it have a B on the magazine floor plate?
pic of the receiver?
serial number etched on the bolt?
does it have a B on the magazine floor plate?
pic of the receiver?
serial number etched on the bolt?
Yes.
Yes. last 4 digits of serial number.
Yes.
Yes. last 4 digits of serial number.
then it is a Greek Return, but guessing you already knew that
https://i1180.photobucket.com/albums/x413/nf1e/1903%203_zpsynzou5x1.jpg (https://s1180.photobucket.com/user/nf1e/media/1903%203_zpsynzou5x1.jpg.html)
https://i1180.photobucket.com/albums/x413/nf1e/IMG_2822_zpsinajpjh3.jpg (http://s1180.photobucket.com/user/nf1e/media/IMG_2822_zpsinajpjh3.jpg.html)
https://i1180.photobucket.com/albums/x413/nf1e/1903%203_zpsynzou5x1.jpg (https://s1180.photobucket.com/user/nf1e/media/1903%203_zpsynzou5x1.jpg.html)
https://i1180.photobucket.com/albums/x413/nf1e/IMG_2822_zpsinajpjh3.jpg (http://s1180.photobucket.com/user/nf1e/media/IMG_2822_zpsinajpjh3.jpg.html)
Does your rifle have an “X” stamped on the stock near the floor plate? Some Greek rifles have them but mine doesn’t.
It would be nice to know what the “B” on the floor plate stands for.
XXX stamped in the stock just forward of the floorplate.
XXX stamped in the stock just forward of the floorplate.
The stock on my rifle is from an 03A3 and the only stamps it has forward of the floorplate that I see are the four inspector marks that are on all 03A3 stocks. It has the last 4 digits of the serial number stamped on the shoulder stock so the Greeks used it.
the B means the floorplate is pinned,
the B means the floorplate is pinned,
I guess the Greeks didn’t worry much about cleaning the mag box.
Lingering questions:
Any idea what the XXX means?
How many ‘03s were involved in the Greek aid package?
no idea on the XXX, none of the one's I bought have that on them,
somewhere , I recall seeing the numbers on lend lease, may have been on Gunboards in the American arms section,
but not sure
I read a SWAG of between 14,000 and 44,000 M1903s were sent to Greece in 1947. No figures yet on how many the CMP sold. One accounting says prices for shooters in 2001 were about $300 to $575 (+/-), depending on condition and type of stock.
I’d like to hear opinions. Is my 1925 M1903 with a 1944 HS barrel that was a US service rifle leading up to WW2 and possibly fought in WW2 and then went on to fight the Greek Civil War in the late 1940s more or less valuable than your standard everyday ‘03? Would you go out of your way to look for a Greek returned ‘03? Would you convert a Greek returned ‘03 with it’s special markings to a standard ‘03 by replacing the stock, floorplate and bolt and unpinning the floorplate or not?
As someone who is about to sell a HN parts gun that shoots decent but has no collectible value, my view is that once you get away from original or early modified guns, Greek history doesn't matter. It's how they look and perform that sets the price. A3s are a little different because they are a WW2 era gun often only minimally used.
As someone who is about to sell a HN parts gun that shoots decent but has no collectible value, my view is that once you get away from original or early modified guns, Greek history doesn't matter. It's how they look and perform that sets the price. A3s are a little different because they are a WW2 era gun often only minimally used.
I would agree that any rifle’s looks and performance should determine it’s value if there’s no provenance. But, as a long time Civil War antique collector, I know if there’s a good story that goes along with the antique, then that will always add value.
The friend who sold me the rifle bought from the CMP in 2001. He had no idea of its history and therefore sold to me as a strangely marked M1903, wearing an 03A3 stock, a new barrel, covered with a hardened preservative that he never tried to clean, never checked things like ME, TE and headspace and never had it to the range. I also had no idea of its history when I bought the rifle but cleaned off all the gunk, checked it out, shot it and then started doing research. I think he would have probably asked more money for it had he known the provenance and I probably would have thought it was cool and paid it. I’m impressed by the rifle’s history and I think it’s one of the more interesting guns that I own.
I’d like to hear opinions. Is my 1925 M1903 with a 1944 HS barrel that was a US service rifle leading up to WW2 and possibly fought in WW2 and then went on to fight the Greek Civil War in the late 1940s more or less valuable than your standard everyday ‘03? Would you go out of your way to look for a Greek returned ‘03? Would you convert a Greek returned ‘03 with it’s special markings to a standard ‘03 by replacing the stock, floorplate and bolt and unpinning the floorplate or not?
Q #1,,no, unless you have some way to know it was USMC used, then it would likely bring a bit of a premium,
Q #2, personally, no, but some collector looking to fill a gap, maybe
Q #3, no, you have altered the rifle, that has been altered, some may say restored, even if it was some rare piece, or tied to some famous unit, ship etc thru CplNorton's or SRS research, it would still be restored, and not as valuable as an original, (but maybe more than a standard rifle,, this part gets murky)
I have a few Greek rifles, from the CMP (and kept the certificate), as well as a few non CMP 03's, and a handful of non CMP A3's, the Greeks may bring the same as a similar non greek in similar condition, even with the certificates, because sometimes folks will pay more for a CMP gun, (this is true with Garands as well)
other markings may or may not increase value, case in point, I sold a nice greasy greek return 03 a few years ago that was NZ marked, or at least the stock was, no idea if it was the original or had been changed at some time in it's life,
I would agree that any rifle’s looks and performance should determine it’s value if there’s no provenance. But, as a long time Civil War antique collector, I know if there’s a good story that goes along with the antique, then that will always add value.
The friend who sold me the rifle bought from the CMP in 2001. He had no idea of its history and therefore sold to me as a strangely marked M1903, wearing an 03A3 stock, a new barrel, covered with a hardened preservative that he never tried to clean, never checked things like ME, TE and headspace and never had it to the range. I also had no idea of its history when I bought the rifle but cleaned off all the gunk, checked it out, shot it and then started doing research. I think he would have probably asked more money for it had he known the provenance and I probably would have thought it was cool and paid it. I’m impressed by the rifle’s history and I think it’s one of the more interesting guns that I own.
A couple of comments. First, "Buy the gun not the story" still seems like good advice. Second, I honestly don't think the Greek Civil war is going to become a touchstone for enough US-based collectors to create much of a market. The M1903 rifles that came back from Greece were by-and-large mixmasters that had been through multiple rebuild cycles. Sure there are niches, but the reality, and this is also true with M1 Garands, is that so damn many of them were produced that only a small percentage of them will be of true collector interest in the long run. That SA Garand with an August '43 barrel and correct stock might have been a lot of fun for someone to correct, but chances are that he will not be able to sell it for the money that went into buying and correcting it, but that's OK because hobbies are a way of exchanging money for fun and keeping husbands home at night.
A couple of comments. First, "Buy the gun not the story" still seems like good advice. Second, I honestly don't think the Greek Civil war is going to become a touchstone for enough US-based collectors to create much of a market. The M1903 rifles that came back from Greece were by-and-large mixmasters that had been through multiple rebuild cycles. Sure there are niches, but the reality, and this is also true with M1 Garands, is that so damn many of them were produced that only a small percentage of them will be of true collector interest in the long run. That SA Garand with an August '43 barrel and correct stock might have been a lot of fun for someone to correct, but chances are that he will not be able to sell it for the money that went into buying and correcting it, but that's OK because hobbies are a way of exchanging money for fun and keeping husbands home at night.
My collecting hobby went in many directions - Civil War, WW1, WW2, old watches, old electrical, old photography. I particularly like a good story, always have, so that’s what interests me. The Greek Civil War was an unexpected story and another direction. It’s kept me busy and off the streets. It’s definitely a mixmaster but it’s a great shooter. Practically all rifles that went to war are mixmasters. I’ll keep it that way.
"Old electrical" as in what? Tube radios?
"Old electrical" as in what? Tube radios?
I wish I’d kept my parent’s old Zenith floor model radio from the 1930s and their old Crosley 10” TV from the 1940s with a continuous tuner.
I like old industrial electric meters since I used to repair them in the 60s and 70s. I have some that date back into the late 1800s that are really interesting. I had to make parts to keep the really old stuff working since replacement parts were no longer available.
46592
Here’s a GE DC KWH meter from the early 1900s that’s interesting. It once belonged to the streetcar company in Pittsburgh. It was rated 3000 amps right through the meter. I’ll send more pics when the light is better.
46593
Here’s a Weston DC Voltmeter from the late 1800s.
P51MUSTANG
10-10-2019, 01:00
I agree with Togor 100 percent.... You will see many sellers trying to sell you the story instead of the rifle. Let us know what you wind up getting.....
I agree with Togor 100 percent.... You will see many sellers trying to sell you the story instead of the rifle. Let us know what you wind up getting.....
I bought the rifle and only discovered that it was a Greek return when I investigated the unusual markings. The seller is a friend and he bought it from the CMP in 2002. He had no idea that it was a Greek return. He never cleaned off the preservative, never looked into it’s past and never shot it. It sat in his safe for 17 years.
It’s a mixmaster for sure. The finish on the 1944 HS barrel, 03A3 Remington bolt and Springfield receiver is largely undisturbed. The 03A3 stock is in good condition with the usual handling marks and one small dowel pinned repair near the receiver. The outer hardware is all Springfield including the butt plate which I originally thought was an 03A3 Remington but turned out to be a 1925 Springfield. It went through multiple arsenal rebuilds. All the measurements are good and it shoots decent groups at 100 yards.
I could replace the odd parts, except the barrel, to make it more original but then it would be just another parts gun. The existing work was done by an arsenal and the mechanical parts are like new. Changing anything would destroy the history of the rifle which makes it interesting (at least to me). The rifle tells its own story but you have to dig. It was made too late (1925) for WW1 but needed a new barrel before being shipped to the Greeks so it probably saw extensive service during WW2, and the marks on the stock, bolt and floor plate are consistent with Greek Civil War service.
I might be open to buying another ‘03 if a more correct example is found.
P51MUSTANG
10-10-2019, 02:12
Still a nice rifle.... I have a RIA I got back in 2002 as well. Does the floorplate have a B stamped on it?
Still a nice rifle.... I have a RIA I got back in 2002 as well. Does the floorplate have a B stamped on it?
Yes, mine does have a B stamped on the floorplate. I understand that the B means that floorplate is pinned and can’t be opened. The stock has the last 4 digits of my rifle’s S/N plus the last 4 digits of a different S/N right below indicating that Greeks had the stock on a different rifle at some point in time.
It doesn’t surprise me to find so many 03A3 parts on a M1903. They fit, work and were probably easier to obtain in the late 40s than the original ‘03 parts.
I assumed that the '03 was rebuilt by a US arsenal before being sent to Greece in 47 or 48. But after seeing the new HS barrel, the dark undisturbed bluing, the pinned floor plate, the 03A3 bolt and stock, I suspect that the Greeks did all this work themselves.
They had the rifle in their possession for more than 50 years. Why did they suddenly decide to return thousands of old rifles to the US? Did the CMP request that they be returned?
I assumed that the '03 was rebuilt by a US arsenal before being sent to Greece in 47 or 48. But after seeing the new HS barrel, the dark undisturbed bluing, the pinned floor plate, the 03A3 bolt and stock, I suspect that the Greeks did all this work themselves.
They had the rifle in their possession for more than 50 years. Why did they suddenly decide to return thousands of old rifles to the US? Did the CMP request that they be returned?
they were lend lease, (IIRC) and obsolete, I would guess they could only return them (vs sell them to other importers like the mausers and enfields )
and I bet CMP waived some cash in front of them for the ammo purchased as well
they were lend lease, (IIRC) and obsolete, I would guess they could only return them (vs sell them to other importers like the mausers and enfields )
and I bet CMP waived some cash in front of them for the ammo purchased as well
The '03s were obsolete when we sent them to Greece but I'm glad to see that they took the time and effort to maintain and preserve them. I wonder how many M1s are sitting in warehouses around the world.
John Beard
11-05-2019, 03:57
I assumed that the '03 was rebuilt by a US arsenal before being sent to Greece in 47 or 48. But after seeing the new HS barrel, the dark undisturbed bluing, the pinned floor plate, the 03A3 bolt and stock, I suspect that the Greeks did all this work themselves.
They had the rifle in their possession for more than 50 years. Why did they suddenly decide to return thousands of old rifles to the US? Did the CMP request that they be returned?
As noted by lyman, the rifles were loaned to the Greeks. When the Greeks no longer had need for the rifles, they properly notified the U.S. Army and requested disposition instructions. As required by law, the Army notified the CMP that the rifles were available and the CMP paid to have the rifles shipped back to the U.S.
J.B.
Thanks to John and Lyman, I now have a better understanding of how the process of purchasing rifles from the CMP works. Do you know when they were returned?
A friend bought the ‘03 from the CMP in July, 2002 and promptly put it in his gun safe for 17 years. He has a keen interest in milsurp rifle’s but simply put it away without removing the original Greek partially solidified axel-grease preservative, checking out the critical measurements and shooting it. He also had no idea that it was a Greek return. I kinda feel bad for my friend. He never got to know the old war horse.
I appreciate the effort the Greeks put into preserving the rifle. The preservative may have been difficult to remove, but it did a great job of preventing rust. The measurements are fine and it’s an accurate shooter.
Thanks to John and Lyman, I now have a better understanding of how the process of purchasing rifles from the CMP works. Do you know when they were returned?
A friend bought the ‘03 from the CMP in July, 2002 and promptly put it in his gun safe for 17 years. He has a keen interest in milsurp rifle’s but simply put it away without removing the original Greek partially solidified axel-grease preservative, checking out the critical measurements and shooting it. He also had no idea that it was a Greek return. I kinda feel bad for my friend. He never got to know the old war horse.
I appreciate the effort the Greeks put into preserving the rifle. The preservative may have been difficult to remove, but it did a great job of preventing rust. The measurements are fine and it’s an accurate shooter.
that time frame is right, early 2000's, and they sold out in a year or so (some varieties quicker)
1917's,
RIA low number
RIA high number
Rem 1903
rem 1903 C stock,
SA low number
SA high number
and a few other options I am forgetting,
there was a lot of stuff returned, I bought a few myself,
about the same time the 22's were pulled from the units (and a lot of schools) and sold off as well,
John Beard
11-06-2019, 06:23
Thanks to John and Lyman, I now have a better understanding of how the process of purchasing rifles from the CMP works. Do you know when they were returned?
Late 2001.
J.B.
I visited Cabelas in Wheeling, WV a few weeks ago just to look around. A few boxes of odd ammo on the shelves, still no bare bullets, cases or gun powder for reloading. The salesman says they’ve been getting stuff in but word must get around and the hoarders show up.
I checked out their “Gun Library” as I always do for milsurp rifles when I’m there. Milsurps haven’t been very common in this Gun Library for the past year or two. So, to my surprise, there was a group of rifles sitting together in a rack like they could have been someone’s collection. There was one Springfield M1903 from the 1920s, three 03A3s from the 1940s (don’t remember if they were all Remingtons) and one Eddystone M1917. All appeared to be in good condition with original barrels and looked like they had been cleaned and the actions were well oiled. The 03’s stock might have been sanded and refinished because the cartouches were faint.
The price tags were surprising. $1500 each. I haven’t been back but would be willing to bet they’ve all been sold. Cabelas has always listened to offers so they might have knocked off some money, but the days of buying these rifles for around $700 each might be gone.
True gun values. Interesting sight.
https://truegunvalue.com/rifle/Springfield-MODEL-1903/price-historical-value
https://truegunvalue.com/rifle/Remington-MODEL-03-A3/price-historical-value
Click your mouse on the paper clip on the front page of this thread to view some outstanding photos of a Remington Model 03-A3 and several Springfield Model 1903s.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.