SRS Request for two M1903s and a M2 .22LR Springfield

[fjruple]

Hi Folks--

Yesterday I picked up two M1903 .30-06 rifles and a M2 .22LR Springfield trainer. Brief description below:

a) M1903 Mark I Springfield .30 caliber SN: 1124249 bbl dated SA 5-19. Many parts appear to be early M1903 Remington parts. Only original Mark I parts appears to be the barrel and trigger.

b) M1903 Springfield .30 caliber SN: 1499989 bbl dated SA 12-36, the rifle has a "C" type stock. The bolt on this rifle is electro-engraved with the SN 1027845

c) M2 Springfield .22LR SN: 9859 bbl dated 1-42. This rifle appears to be all original.

any information would be deeply appreciated

Thanks

[JimF]

I tend to doubt the M2 is “original” with a 1942 barrel.

Herschel Garner may weigh in on this, if he sees your post.

[CPC]

I concur with Jim, no expert at all but if I recall I believe a encountered an original in the 10K range and it had a barrel date of 1937.. Hopefully, Herschel will see the post.

[J.J.]

According to Lt. Commander Fred Ewalt, who was quite an authority on the 1922 series of rifles, quite a few lower numbered receivers were held in stores and assembled into rifles later on in production. I have seen serial # 1718, that had a 3-37 barrel and appeared to be 100% original with all of the later parts with drawing numbers present and correctly marked M2 stock. The bolt well was bright and showed no evidence of being refinished. Lt. Commander Ewalt has since passed and is sorely missed by collectors of the 1922 series of rifles.
J.J.

[fjruple]

Thanks for the information, guys. The M2 is my third M1922 series rifle. I have two Model 1922 M1s that were upgraded to M2 specs. I am not so much a collector, more of a shooter and I love rifles that shoot true and straight. Looking at the M2, the barrel does appear to be lighter shade of grey parkerizing then the receiver which is more a blacker tone.

Any SRS information on the serial numbers?

[Kragrifle]

Best information has it that M2 with SN over 7800 or so we?re WW2 production. As long as rifle has original finish, no inspector cartouche and matching rear sight numbers rifle may be original. However, it is tough to find any 22 cal Springfield that has not been altered in some way.

[fjruple]

Best information has it that M2 with SN over 7800 or so we?re WW2 production. As long as rifle has original finish, no inspector cartouche and matching rear sight numbers rifle may be original. However, it is tough to find any 22 cal Springfield that has not been altered in some way.

The stock does have a Circle P and SA over a D on the left side of the stock.

[artd]

Hi Folks--

Yesterday I picked up two M1903 .30-06 rifles and a M2 .22LR Springfield trainer. Brief description below:

a) M1903 Mark I Springfield .30 caliber SN: 1124249 bbl dated SA 5-19. Many parts appear to be early M1903 Remington parts. Only original Mark I parts appears to be the barrel and trigger.

b) M1903 Springfield .30 caliber SN: 1499989 bbl dated SA 12-36, the rifle has a "C" type stock. The bolt on this rifle is electro-engraved with the SN 1027845

c) M2 Springfield .22LR SN: 9859 bbl dated 1-42. This rifle appears to be all original.

any information would be deeply appreciated

Thanks

To your first question, there are no SRS listings on your three rifles.

a) M1903 Mark I Springfield .30 caliber SN: 1124249

1121715 04/09/35 LITTLE ROCK AIR DEPOT
1127202 12/01/25 LITTLE ROCK AIR INT DEP TO RIA

b) M1903 Springfield .30 caliber SN: 1499989

1499840 RCVR 05/17/38 DCM RIFLE SALES 1922-42
1500026 RCVR 11/15/38 DCM RIFLE SALES 1922-42

c) M2 Springfield .22LR SN: 9859

9695 M2 11/10/34 8TH CORPS AREA
9770 M2 11/10/34 8TH CORPS AREA
10209 M2 110846 SA ACCURACY TEST

The 1-42 barrel date is likely original to the rifle, however, the circle-P and SA D cartouche indicate the rifle was returned for refurbishment. It is also possible that your rifle may have been used as a M2A1 sub-caliber training device. Springfield produced approximately 6888 of the sub-caliber training devices. After WW2 these devices were obsoleted, returned to Springfield, and assembled into rifles to eventually be sold.

Is the bottom of the bolt etched with the rifle's serial number?

Art

[fjruple]

To your first question, there are no SRS listings on your three rifles.

a) M1903 Mark I Springfield .30 caliber SN: 1124249

1121715 04/09/35 LITTLE ROCK AIR DEPOT
1127202 12/01/25 LITTLE ROCK AIR INT DEP TO RIA

b) M1903 Springfield .30 caliber SN: 1499989

1499840 RCVR 05/17/38 DCM RIFLE SALES 1922-42
1500026 RCVR 11/15/38 DCM RIFLE SALES 1922-42

c) M2 Springfield .22LR SN: 9859

9695 M2 11/10/34 8TH CORPS AREA
9770 M2 11/10/34 8TH CORPS AREA
10209 M2 110846 SA ACCURACY TEST

The 1-42 barrel date is likely original to the rifle, however, the circle-P and SA D cartouche indicate the rifle was returned for refurbishment. It is also possible that your rifle may have been used as a M2A1 sub-caliber training device. Springfield produced approximately 6888 of the sub-caliber training devices. After WW2 these devices were obsoleted, returned to Springfield, and assembled into rifles to eventually be sold.

Is the bottom of the bolt etched with the rifle's serial number?

Art

Art-- The bottom of the bolt is electro-penciled with the serial number of the rifle. Is there any way to tell if the rifle is a conversion from a sub-caliber training device?

[artd]

fjruple,

Unfortunately no. Unlike 1903's that were marked "A2", M2's received no additional identifying marks.

Would you mind posting a picture of the bolt's etched serial number. I am cataloging etched serial numbers and do not have one in this time frame.

Art

[fjruple]

M2 Pics

Art-- Please give me a few days to post pictures. Thanks for your help.

Art-- as promised several pics of my M2. Just one observation, the M2 does not appear to be as well finished and fitted as my upgraded Model of 1922, MII. Enjoy.

M2 barrel markings.jpg M2 Bolt markings.jpg M2 receiver markings.jpg M2 stock markings.jpg

[artd]

Art-- Please give me a few days to post pictures. Thanks for your help.

Art-- as promised several pics of my M2. Just one observation, the M2 does not appear to be as well finished and fitted as my upgraded Model of 1922, MII. Enjoy.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]49398[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]49399[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]49400[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]49401[/ATTACH]

Thanks for posting the photos. You have a nice M2.

Art