Interesting stamping on an 03 on Gunboards and opinion

[rayg]

What would that "3" added to the receiver represent/be for? Also is that stock a repro or a original pristine one? And does that crisp cartouche look ok? No arsenal rebuild stamps but metal carries a minty looking Parkerizing. Civilian redone maybe or all correct?

"Rock Island Arsenal M1903 1903 '03 Very Early" http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/Vie...Item=461688358

[IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]

[Plain Old Dave]

WW1 guns shouldn't be parked, AFAIK. IMO this is a barreled receiver somebody found "date correct" parts for. I wouldn't give more than maybe 500 for it.

[cplnorton]

Sure looks like the Marine Corps light colored finish. Also the closest hit in the SRS is for a Marine rifle.

14404 032437USMC - PHILIPPINES

[Rick the Librarian]

The RIA-marked stock alone is worth several hundred dollars. If I could find that rifle for $500, I'd catch my pants on fire in the haste of getting my wallet out!!

[chuckindenver]

Rick did you notice that big ol S on the nose??
something is fishy with the over all finish of this rifle, looks like a repark. and the stock is too nice for the other parts.. id like to know more about the serial number and the 3 stamped as well

[Rick the Librarian]

The rifle, considering it has a 1918 barrel and the 1913 stock, is almost certainly a mixmaster and, even with the nice 1913 stock, is grossly overpriced. I did notice the S, although not a clear picture. That is correct for a 1913 RIA stock. The stock is not correct for the rifle, considering the barrel.

[rayg]

Didn't see the "S" first time looking at the auction but see it now on photo #17. Well it's a real mix master, 1905 receiver, 1913 cartouche and 11-18 barrel. The description states all RI parts. Quite a coincidence that every part is RI even though it's all mixed dated parts and the metal has gone through a barrel change and re-park. Can't believe that an arsenal when they took it apart to re-park it, put all RI parts back on it. I can't get the feeling out of my mind that the rifle is a professional civilian re-park put together with misc. matching RI parts. Probably isn't the case but just a thought, Ray

[Rick the Librarian]

I'm not sure that I don't agree with you, Ray. I doubt an arsenal rebuild would include that nice of "older" stock.

[Emri]

I doubt an arsenal rebuild would include that nice of "older" stock.

No they wouldn't. A re-build done after parkerizing was standardized would certainly include a second stock bolt and a re-build marking to the stock. The rifle is a put together. Someones idea of a "restoration" is my thinking.

[Rick the Librarian]

Mine, as well, Emri. Certainly at least double the worth (which is mainly for the parts).

[PhillipM]

So what about the 3?

[rayg]

Yes, what about it, anybody know or have an opinion? It's a different font also but an older style, Ray

[the_1st_sgt]

While I was reading this thread my son was looking over my shoulder. He speculated that maybe it indicates the "third" modification ie. rod bayo to 05 to 06 configuration. We will probably never know what it is as the guys who built those rifles are long passed on. I seem to recall seeing markings like that on a few rifles over the years but can't remember if they were only the number 3 or other numbers.

[jonnyo55]

I agree that this rifle is in no way original, though I'd sure like to have the wood off of it! If it was a USMC rifle that was refinished by them (the color IS right for that), would it not have had the Hatcher hole added? It would be interesting to see if there are any vise marks on the barrel...

Here's my hypothesis on the "3" marking, and it's only that...not based on any known facts. This rifle (the receiver, anyway) is early enough to support this.

I'm thinking that perhaps this receiver was one that was originally a test "mule" of sorts for the engineering department, used to check the spec of production receivers, gauges, and fit of other parts. This particular one would have been the third in an unknown number that were used for various purposes, and likely would not have been hardened. At some point, these gauging receivers were found to be no longer needed, and rather that discard them RIA stamped them in the normal fashion, hardened them and made rifles out of them. The "3" remained as an artifact of its previous use. There would be no good reason to grind it off, and to do so would risk putting the receiver out of spec.

Here's the rub: the (government) serial number that would have been thus stamped would have been consistent with current production at that time, so both the 1918 barrel AND the 1913 stock are incorrect.

A lovely humper, but a humper nonetheless...