Lesson learned...

[TDP0311]

About a month ago I bought a 12-43 Sedgley USMC barrel off a seller from the CMP forum, and today found out that under the closest of inspections the barrel was bent and re-straightened. I did some digging, and found out this is a problem with the late war Sedgley USMC barrels- I'm fairly new to the 1903 world, and hadn't heard of this before.

Lesson learned... Shame that there are those out there that do this type of thing or pass them off to another after finding out they were had by some fraudulent purchase down the line. For the record, I'm not stating the seller I bought my barrel from is this type, he just as likely could have thought this was a typical spare barrel, as it looked absolutely perfect, a tribute to the original fraud.

Good news is I won't pass the buck, and will eat the loss so another newbie Marine or collector like myself isn't fooled. A word of advice to those who see one for sale- don't pull the trigger on the sale unless you can examine it in person or know the seller personally- these barrels look perfect, but are nothing but aiming stakes!

[Dave in NGA]

Some people really like the Sedgley barrels. The one and only one I purchased was not a "restraightened" barrel. It was oversized with a .310-.311 barrel diameter. Unless you use 180 grain .308 bullets or heavier it positively won't group worth a hoot. That being the case, I'm not impressed with Sedgley's QC efforts back in the day.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

I was lucky. I bought one that proved to be as accurate as I can shoot. I am very happy with it to say the least.

jt

[Tom Trevor]

Did you contact the seller and request a full refund plus postage? An honest person would take it back at once the other type well______ them.

[TDP0311]

I sent an email to the seller today, will see if I get a response.

[cfn1803]

I would be careful of any USMC Sedgley barrels dated 43 and 44 many of these were suppose to have been de-milled by the govt, by bending and sold off as scrap. Many were straightened and sold to the public as surplus spare barrels.......

Clay

[purple]

I have a rifle with a 1-45 dated Sedgley (not USMC marked) which gauges .301 at the muzzle and .303 in the throat and shoots on par with my other 03 and 03A3 barrels.

[Randy A]

I have a rifle with a 1-45 dated Sedgley (not USMC marked) which gauges .301 at the muzzle and .303 in the throat and shoots on par with my other 03 and 03A3 barrels.

It's probably less than .303 TE, starting in 42 or 43 they made some modifications to the chamber / rifling on all barrels due to reports from the field that some extracted (unfired cartrigdes) were leaving the bullets in the bore. So up until a certain wear point, the TE gauges will give a false reading on GI barrels. Here is the paragraph from the TM:

The Breech Bore Gags for the M1903 rifle--Nos. C64343 and C3940 –will not give an accurate reading when used in new barrels (starting in 1942) until the barrel has been worn to point of .306” in diameter at the breech. This is because new barrels have a deeper bullet seat which allows the gages to enter the barrels .135” deeper than in the old type, giving a false reading which is not indicative of the actual bore diameter. There has not been designed, nor is it intended that there will be designed, a new breech bore gage, because these gages are designed to indicate when a barrel has become excessively burned out at the bullet seat, and the present gages will accurately indicate when barrel wear has reached the rejection point of .308”.

Anyhow, I got a NOS 10-43 USMC barrel a couple years ago (straight one, still in wrap) and it gauges tight, except of course the T/E as explained above.