E.C. Crossman

[Phil McGrath]

Is his "Book of the Springfield" worth the $10.00 I paid from the gun show?

[clintonhater]

In ANY edition, absolutely! Most common ed. is probably the one with Roy Dunlap's additions.

[Phil McGrath]

In ANY edition, absolutely! Most common ed. is probably the one with Roy Dunlap's additions.

Yes, that's the one.

[John Beard]

Absolutely.

J.B.

[Phil McGrath]

Thanks' guys!

[Fred]

Phil, Only you can determine if the book has value to you. Read it and find out.

[clintonhater]

Phil, Only you can determine if the book has value to you. Read it and find out.

The person to whom it would have no value has no serious interest in '03s. (Not a crime--I have no serious interest, for ex., in Garands.) Crossman actually submitted the manuscript for this book and what became Military & Sporting Rifle Shooting to his publisher, Tom Samworth, as a single work, but Mr. Sam wisely decided there was too much material for a single volume.

Closest thing, by the way, to a biography of Crossman is an article that appeared in the 2010 Gun Digest.

[Rick the Librarian]

Crossman's book is not for the beginner. It was written in 1931 and then, Roy Dunlap updated it in 1951. It was written back in the day when the Springfield was as much (if not more) seen as a "vehicle" for a sporter, rather than as a collectible military rifle. One of the classics but not particularly easy to get through, if you're new to the '03.

[clintonhater]

Crossman's book is not for the beginner. It was written in 1931 and then, Roy Dunlap updated it in 1951. It was written back in the day when the Springfield was as much (if not more) seen as a "vehicle" for a sporter, rather than as a collectible military rifle.

Not when brand new '03s, along with NRA Sporters, etc., could be ordered by the gross through DCM! Not when dozens of articles were being written in the Rifleman and other gun mags even into the '60s on how to butcher (i.e., "sporterize") your Springfield, Mauser, etc.

[Rick the Librarian]

While obviously I deplore the practice of "butchering" the M1903, I do keep in mind the times, when M1903s and other military surplus rifles were extremely common and relatively cheap.

I do remember seeing a magazine about 10 years back that discussed "sporterizing" military surplus rifles, including the M1903, M1917 and SMLE. I've always wondered how many readers followed that "advice" and found out later what they had done to the value and collectability of their rifle!!