Harrison's 03 book?

[GregU]

Was looking at J.C. Harrison's "The Collectable 03" today at a gunshow. Is this a good reference book? I've got Brophy's "The Springfield 03 Rifles" and thought it was short on specifics sometimes. Thanks. Greg

[Mike D]

I don't own it, and have heard not to bother. Is it another book with "types" for the different styles of each part?

Mike

[John Beard]

Harrison's book has value if you have a caged bird and don't mind taping the pages together.

J.B.

[GregU]

Damn! Now I have to buy a bird!! Off to the classifieds.

[Rick the Librarian]

My pet peeve, besides the "Types", which have no basis in fact, are the numerous "models" (Model 1921, Model 1942, etc.) that Harrison devised to describe various M1903s, which also have no basis in fact.

While no M1903 book is free of several erroes, Harrison's and Poyer's books have many more than the average.

[Col. Colt]

What Harrison brings to the table that makes his books well worth the cost is the wonderful line drawings of every individual detail. Photos aren't as good as his line drawings. Harrison was trained as a biologist/botanist I was told, which explains the excellent drawings.

I have heard all the complaints about his refusals to change things when shown a error, etc, and I'm sure that is valid. What I don't mind is that both Harrison and Poyer came up with their own classification "Type" system for the multitude of unmarked parts - somebody has to come up with a way to discuss the parts variations verbally - in English - what's wrong with that?

But ALL 1903 sources seem to be flawed, and all of them seem to have some strengths. I think you need as many sources as you can find, until someone writes the definitive book on the subject - which apparently has not happened yet..... Perhaps our experts here could volunteer to be impromptu editors and make a list of corrections, at least for the worst errors for these existing works, or create something entirely new and better themselves. My fear is that with only a couple of authorities available, their knowledge will eventually be lost to the community. CC

[ClaudeH]

My fear is that with only a couple of authorities available, their knowledge will eventually be lost to the community. CC

Between what Herschel knows about M1922s and what John Beard knows about M1903s, there is vast knowledge whihc one day will be lost ot us.

We hear stories of vast libraries of research and correspondence being discarded by disinterested widows such as Hervey Donaldson's files, Dr. Mann's manuscript for his second volume, etc. It would be wonderful if we could set up a foundation to preserve such materials and encourage noted authorities to direct their executors to transmit their archives to the foundation.

In Herschel's case, the foundation should send one or more interviewers to discuss M1922s at length and record the conversations. I believe Herschel's mind contains the definitive work on M1922s which we will never see.

[Rick the Librarian]

What Harrison brings to the table that makes his books well worth the cost is the wonderful line drawings of every individual detail. Photos aren't as good as his line drawings. Harrison was trained as a biologist/botanist I was told, which explains the excellent drawings.

I have heard all the complaints about his refusals to change things when shown a error, etc, and I'm sure that is valid. What I don't mind is that both Harrison and Poyer came up with their own classification "Type" system for the multitude of unmarked parts - somebody has to come up with a way to discuss the parts variations verbally - in English - what's wrong with that?

But ALL 1903 sources seem to be flawed, and all of them seem to have some strengths. I think you need as many sources as you can find, until someone writes the definitive book on the subject - which apparently has not happened yet..... Perhaps our experts here could volunteer to be impromptu editors and make a list of corrections, at least for the worst errors for these existing works, or create something entirely new and better themselves. My fear is that with only a couple of authorities available, their knowledge will eventually be lost to the community. CC

You make some valid points - the completely 100% error-free M1903 book has yet to be written - nor will it likely ever be done. There are a number of points about the M1903 that are opinions or interpretations.

I think in the case of Poyer, and, to a certain extent Harrison, the number of errors goes over the line. To show you the depth and breadth of these "opinions", I posted a review of Poyer's book on Amazon a while back. Needless to say, I got a blistering reply from Mr. Poyer. What did surprise me was the equally blistering reply I got from a high official of the Remington Society, opining that Poyer was the knight on a white horse and I was the anti-Christ. How anyone with a minimal knowledge of the Remington can defend Poyer's book, totally escapes me!

[rebound]

You make some valid points - the completely 100% error-free M1903 book has yet to be written - nor will it likely ever be done. There are a number of points about the M1903 that are opinions or interpretations.

I think in the case of Poyer, and, to a certain extent Harrison, the number of errors goes over the line. To show you the depth and breadth of these "opinions", I posted a review of Poyer's book on Amazon a while back. Needless to say, I got a blistering reply from Mr. Poyer. What did surprise me was the equally blistering reply I got from a high official of the Remington Society, opining that Poyer was the knight on a white horse and I was the anti-Christ. How anyone with a minimal knowledge of the Remington can defend Poyer's book, totally escapes me!

Rick, you forgot about Thumper rabbit (from Bambi) ..
If you can't say something nice than don't say nothing at all. LOL

[Herschel]

ClaudeH, Thanks for the kind remarks. I am fortunate to have been acquainted with the late Fred Ewalt who taught me a lot. I also have learned a lot from Lynn Meredith. Some of my most useful research material is copies of articles in magazines from the 1920's and 1930's that have been given me by Springfield enthusiasts. I try to respond to requests for help by people who want to know something about a Springfield .22 they own or consider buying. Writing a book or even magazine article is not in my plans.

[Darreld Walton]

I finally DID find a use for Harrison's book, and those wonderful line drawings.....
I've a Grandson who, since two years old or so, has been fascinated by firearms. Even before he could put sentences together. So much so, in fact, that I witnessed my Daughter reading his "bedtime story" to him from a Smith & Wesson catalog one evening!
Anyhow, those line drawings made a pretty decent coloring book for that young man........

[Rick the Librarian]

I have never written a book (and have no plans to) but I know that even a magazine article (I have written several of those) is extremely time-consuming. It can eat of YEARS of your life. A lot of people just don't have the time and dedication needed to do so.

[ClaudeH]

Writing a book or even magazine article is not in my plans.

Yes, I know. We've exchanged a few lines about this before.

I hope you've at least made arrangements so your notes, files, etc. get preserved. I know a lot of the material you posess is already published and seems mundane to you, but there is not much of the older stuff left about to be collected in one spot anymore.

I wonder if there's a firearm's-centric library somewhere that would have the space and inclination to preserve some of the materials you and others have accumulated.

I wish I had systematically collected a compendium of what you've published here!