Tweet
firstflabn- the reason I mentioned this is there is a significant amount of army M1903s that were overhauled late war/post war out there for sale. They are easy to spot, as they have barrels made after the M1903 had been replaced by the M1 Garand as the primary US infantry weapon for both the Corps and the army, as well as other indicators of their time of overhaul. With the amount of rifle out there that fit this bill, these overhauls appeared to have been of decent proportions.
-
-
I have a Rock Island 03 that appears to be part of the 1945 Remington Overhaul group, although I am not 100% sure.
It is an original, worn finish action and floorplate/triggerguard, new Commercial Controls bolt combined with a new SA 1942 barrel in a Scant Stock with the small "P" in circle (.400 or so diameter) and a "45" with a "7" directly above and in the middle of the "45"(July of 1945?). It appears like the weapon was rebarrelled and then reassembled, without refinishing the entire gun, although the front band and rear sight is refininshed. Is that likely - or even possible? I originally thought it was just put together from parts, and it of course it could be. I remember reading that Remington was paid a fixed flat rate of $10.45 to refurbish each 1903, with the US Government supplying the parts needed, so perhaps a full refinish was not part of the deal, only as needed? CCLast edited by Col. Colt; 12-31-2013, 09:20.Colt, Glock and Remington factory trained LE Armorer
LE Trained Firearms InstructorComment
-
Good points by all. We're all seeking the same info - how many '03s were refurbed?; when and where was the work done? In the absence of stumbling into a report that neatly answers the question, we're left to indirect methods. I questioned the applicability of anecdotes from current experience to circumstances unique in US history; others questioned the relevance of broad context from overall Army Service Forces procurement activities. So, it becomes a bit of a philosophical question. Kinda like feeling for the light switch in the dark. You think you're getting close when you feel the door jamb; I think I'm getting close when I stub my toe on the table on the other side. Until the light comes on, we won't know, but when it does, we'll all celebrate.
A lot of unanswered questions remain (including, especially, the primary 'how many/when/where' one), but perhaps some big picture ideas about the late war/early postwar procurement process can be reconsidered.
The position that no "gentle wind down" existed has not been proven.
Had all the workers been sent home to stand in bread lines? Hardly. Contract termination is a negotiated matter and usually includes a wind-down and build-out period. So, while the contracts may have been negotiated and settled, one should not assume that all work had stopped. I work for a defense contractor. And some of our contracts have been cancelled. But in every case, new work orders were opened immediately to collect reimbursable costs associated with winding down.
I like to call this 'My Gentle Wind-down Table'
one should not assume that all work had stopped is a bit of a strawman, a 90% reduction in a short period comes close enough to make the point.
The reconversion process was every bit as amazing as the conversion process had been four years earlier and deserves attention beyond its use in this discussion. Looks likely it was the same folks on both ends. Somewhere in his very long book (even longer than my replies!), Smith writes that the War Department plan called for using 30,000 employees to terminate and settle procurement contracts.
What happened to all the ordnance civilian workers? Engaging in my own unsupported speculation - the women went home to make babies; the men changed employers and made cars and refrigerators. And, very unlike today, the political pressure was to slash government's influence in the economy to make room for private enterprise. No bread lines resulted, so it must have worked.Comment
-
There was a short downturn and lots of strikes and shortages (people had lots of money and suddenly there was a lot of pent-up demand), but the economy soon righted itself."We make men without chests and expect from them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst."
--C.S. LewisComment
-
Seasons' Greetings!
Again, firstflabn's data are grossly misleading and terribly one-sided. Here's the real picture:
1945 United States Federal Budget - Total Outlays - $92,712,000,000
1946 United States Federal Budget - Total Outlays - $55,232,000,000
1947 United States Federal Budget - Total Outlays - $34,496,000,000
I fail to see a 90% reduction over a 6-month period, or anything even remotely close to it.
Happy New Year!
J.B.Comment
-
The "45" is directly in front of the front guard screw with the "7" above the 45. Read with the rifle muzzle up. CCColt, Glock and Remington factory trained LE Armorer
LE Trained Firearms InstructorComment
-
John, I will try to get some pictures sometime this weekend. They are in the same place as the regular Remington stamps from 03A3 production, but they are at least twice as big, and not enclosed in any geometric shape. It looks like below (except the leg of the seven is between the 4 and the 5 and centered), and would logically seem to mean July of 1945. This combined with the small (.398) circled P proof may mean that at least the Scant Stock and matching WWII handguard was in the rebuild program. Otherwise, I am at a loss to explain the use of the numbers. The barrel still has cosmoline in the date initials, although the rifle had been fired by the time I got it.
7
45
I love a mystery - especially after it is solved! CCLast edited by Col. Colt; 01-03-2014, 08:38.Colt, Glock and Remington factory trained LE Armorer
LE Trained Firearms InstructorComment
Comment