What a shame..............a "sporterized" sporter

[m1903rifle]

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/Vie...Item=335907866

[Bill D]

He says he will ship to a C&R holder. If he does, he would be breaking the law. Hope someone points that out to him.

[Doug Douglass]

All orgional factory parts, reciever, barrel, bolt, stock, this is a complete C&R rifle. The ATF does not spend any time chasing sporterized old military style rifles.

[Emri]

Yes, it is too bad it is no longer a collectable. However, for the current bid, it isn't a bad looking sporterized job. Whoever did it spent time and effort to do a higher level of craftsmanship than the average hack job you see. Too bad they used a scarce rifle as the base though.

[dave]

This rifle was made as a sporter and he seems to have proof of this (and they were sold to the public). Therefore it would not come under the 'sportered military rifle' rule. Nothing in the law says anything about an altered sporter rifle, it would come under the 50 year rule.

[Jeff L]

Probably the only thing worse is a sporterized 03A4. Sigh.

[The Wolf]

I agree it's a shame a rare rifle was used to make the various enhancements on it, and the value of it has certainly been seriously downgraded as a result of these modifications. With that said, I believe the Springfield 1903 provides an excellent baseline from which master craftsmen/gunsmiths/engravers/wood workers in the 1920's an onwards could apply their highly-refined skillset to create some of the most superb sporter rifles ever seen. Look at some of the fine examples of 1903 high craftsmanship Mr. Petrov has shared with us over the years. JMHO, gents... nothing more.

Best Regards from Virginia,

Chris

[Dick Hosmer]

Something "fishy" there - real NRA Sporters do not have grasping grooves, therefore, no need for the fillers behind the checkering. Even if the number is on the DCM/SRS list, I think the stock came from somewhere else.

[Dan in NY]

Another headscratcher is what's keeping the from sling swivel on? Hope the swivel's just in the wood like a Rem. 700.....and the barrel hasnt been dovetailed or anything else to add to the Bubba-ization... All in all, $550 isnt terrible...

[gnoahhh]

We mustn't look upon altered rifles done in the dim dark past, out of what we view today as 'collectibles', with modern eyes. Rather, through the eyes of someone a generation ago who grabbed one off the junk rack when they were a dime a dozen. Heck, I'm only 60 and I can remember an NRA Sporter going begging for a hundred bucks and change, and when guys shooting bog-stock 03's were pitied because they couldn't afford the cost of a conversion. I gleefully helped my father sporterize an 03A4 that he got through the DCM/NRA 50 years ago for around $20. He was happy as a lark to have been sent an 03A4 because some of the sporterizing work was already done for him- d/t'ing, bolt handle, etc. Be happy that enough survived to assuage our current viewpoint.

[raymeketa]

I'm with gnoahh on this one. Using words like "a shame' and "too bad" to describe sporterized surplus rifles from the 40s, and 50s is to forget history. Rifles that we would consider as collectable today were what shooters turned to for making into a sporter. The Mauser and Springfield were the two that were the most favored. Others, such as the Japs and Mosins were not much better than junk. Those in between, such as the Krags, Trapdoors, and SMLEs were OK to shoot but not good enough for a conversion, except maybe to cut off the barrel and stock.

I'm 77 and got my start in shooting and hunting with "sporterized" rifles. Sure, it would be great if I could have the old originals just the way I bought them for a few bucks, but that will never be. I'd also like to have my '49 Ford and '55 Chevy too.

Ray

[Herschel]

I agree with gnoahhh and Ray. I bought a DCM 03A4 in 1970 or 1971 with the intention of "sporterizing" it. I am happy now that I never got around to doing it. The NRA Sporters were built from new parts by Springfield Armory. They were designed for target shooting and hunting. The square cut butt was designed to simplify shortening the stock or changing the angle of the buttplate. The fore end without grasping grooves was designed to make it possible to checker the stock without inserting panels to give a suitable working surface as was done on the subject rifle. I have NRA Sporters with side mounted scopes, with checkered stocks and with slimmed down stocks. The only modification the I wish had not been done to one of them was that it was glass bedded. At the time it was done I am sure the shooter was expecting the glass bedding to improve accuracy. Pictures of rifle matches from the 1930's show many NRA Sporters on the firing line. I don't know where to draw the line between sporterizing and customizing. I would hardly call the 1903's modified by Griffin and Howe "sporterized" even though many of them started out as issue type 1903's.

[m1903rifle]

I'm sorry, but the M1903 NRA Sporter was not a "surplus" rifle. It was a product built to sell to the civilian market ( specifically members of the NRA ). My original post should have said "customized" NRA Sporter since it was issued in the "sporter" configuration originally.