Just comparing the two 03's in photo's

[Fred]

Here are photos of my two 1903's together for some interesting comparison's with each other. Just for the heck of it.

http://www.jouster.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=36480&stc=1

[Fred]

http://www.jouster.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=36481&stc=1

[Fred]

http://www.jouster.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=36482&stc=1

[Fred]

http://www.jouster.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=36483&stc=1

[WHG]

Is one of the rear sights installed backwards? Both of my 1903 rifles (one made in 1918, the other 1935) have the adjusting knob at the front of the sight.

[1mark]

Nope both sights are install properly. Just different designs.

[Fred]

http://www.jouster.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=36484&stc=1

[Fred]

http://www.jouster.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=36485&stc=1

[clintonhater]

Nope both sights are install properly. Just different designs.

In one of his many magazine articles, Whelen said he thought the M1901 sight was the superior battle sight, but that the "target shooters" in Ordnance insisted on a peep--and then placed it too far forward to be effective!

In the film "Sergeant York" (I think it was that one), there's a close-up of a detachment of marching Doughboys, and the M1901 sights on their Springfields are very obvious. Makes me wonder if the War Dept. (which at the time cooperated very closely with Hollywood) gave them to the studio to avoid the cost of converting them to the M1905.

[RCK]

Fred, thanks for showing those great rifles.

[Fred]

It's my pleasure!

[Rick the Librarian]

In the film "Sergeant York" (I think it was that one), there's a close-up of a detachment of marching Doughboys, and the M1901 sights on their Springfields are very obvious. Makes me wonder if the War Dept. (which at the time cooperated very closely with Hollywood) gave them to the studio to avoid the cost of converting them to the M1905.

The rifles in the film were Bannerman 1903s made of 1903, M1917 and Krag parts. The sights were probably M1902 Krag sights.

[Allen Humphrey]

Thanks for showing those Fred. If you ever get the opportunity to accurately weigh the rod bayonet rifle, I'd love to hear the result. The earliest versions of the model incorporated so many weight reducing features that we subsequently deleted by the time Remington finished wit the 1903. It seems like there would be a substantial weight difference between a Rod Bayonet rifle compared to a late Rem 1903 and its long bayonet and scabbard.

[Fred]

OK, I'll go weigh it now on the digital bathroom scales...


Model 1903 made in 1918...9.7 (with oiler and 1907 sling)

Model 1903 Rod Bayonet made in 1903...9.5 (with oiler full of oil and 1903 sling)

Model 1896 Krag made in 1896...9.5 (with oiler and three rods and 1903 sling)

Model 1868 Springfield made in 1868...9.8 (with 1887 sling)

[Richard H Brown Jr]

The one in the front looks like a really low SN. Pre-War original to 1903-1908 or so. Any exact date range avail. from you experts?


RHB

[Richard H Brown Jr]

Dang: Just read all the comments after I posted, and looked closer at the photo's boy is that an early one or what? Guess Teddy didn't get Army Ordnance to get rid of all the rod 1903's, after all.

RHB

[Fred]

The one in the front looks like a really low SN. Pre-War original to 1903-1908 or so. Any exact date range avail. from you experts?


RHB

That receiver was made in 1903. The rifle has the 1904 updates to the follower and the safety.

http://www.jouster.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=36497&stc=1

[Fred]

http://www.jouster.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=36498&stc=1

http://www.jouster.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=36500&stc=1

[Fred]

Here's something that's unique and interesting. The photo below is of uniform insignia that show two crossed Rod Bayonet 1903 Springfields. The items are on ebay and the seller is calling them Krag Carbines. The link to the site where they are for sale is below.
So, we know that Company G of the 10th and the 3rd N.Y. Infantry were issued the then new 1903 Springfield rifle.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/SPANISH-AMERICAN-WAR-N-Y-10th-INF-VOL-M1896-30-CALIBER-CARBINE-ENLISTED-COLLAR-/291812273632?hash=item43f15dede0:g:LJYAAOSwQupXWyt S

http://www.jouster.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=36501&stc=1

http://www.jouster.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=36506&stc=1

[Fred]

Have you ever wondered where the initial design for the tip of the 1903 Rod Bayonet came from? Take a look at this old time Singer sewing machine part...
It seems to me that this little device certainly could've been an inspiration that someone got from their wife's sewing machine. Who knows?

http://www.jouster.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=36502&stc=1

[Fred]

http://www.jouster.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=36504&stc=1

[Fred]

http://www.jouster.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=36505&stc=1

[Allen Humphrey]

OK, I'll go weigh it now on the digital bathroom scales...


Model 1903 made in 1918...9.7 (with oiler and 1907 sling)

Model 1903 Rod Bayonet made in 1903...9.5 (with oiler full of oil and 1903 sling)

Model 1896 Krag made in 1896...9.5 (with oiler and three rods and 1903 sling)

Model 1868 Springfield made in 1868...9.8 (with 1887 sling)

Thanks! So by the time you add the weight of the M1905 bayonet and scabbard, you would be knocking on 12 pounds for an apples to apples comparison.

[Fred]

My rod bayonet rifle feels lighter at the muzzle than the 1918 rifle, which is noticeably more muzzle heavy in comparison.

[Fred]

Thanks! So by the time you add the weight of the M1905 bayonet and scabbard, you would be knocking on 12 pounds for an apples to apples comparison.

The 1918 made 03, which is in virtually uncirculated condition, is 11.7 pounds with the bayonet and canvas scabbard. I'll weigh it again to make sure.