My first M1903 Springfield rifle.

[Hal O'Peridol]

Picked up at a gun shop outside Seattle yesterday. Don't know a lot about Springfields, just general knowledge adsorbed over the years, but never any details.

Not worried about "Did I over pay" or "Did I pay too much". I was happy with the price and I paid it, and 03 Springfields have been scarce on the ground her lately.

I know it is a low number and understand the whole safety thing around such receivers.

Rifle sits in a fingergroove stock, with 2 reinforcements with escutcheons. Many bangs and dents, plus dirty.

So, any info regarding this rifle is appreciated, and can take more pictures when I return home on Monday night. Also, if either Rick or Duane would like to inspect in person, that could easily be arrainged.

So, here are the photos:

[Hal O'Peridol]

[John Beard]

You have nothing to express regrets for. You have a fine old rifle that would be an asset to many collections.

The barrel and receiver appear to be an original combination. The rifle was originally manufactured in 1904 as a rod bayonet rifle. The rifle was issued for service in 1906, then recalled for alteration in 1908 or 1909. The barrel was inspected, found to be in serviceable condition, and stamped with an "A" beneath date. The barrel was also roll-stamped with "S.A./Shell and Flame/05" at the time of alteration.

The stock is not likely original to your rifle. The stock exhibits post-WWI overhaul inspection stamps from both Raritan Arsenal and Springfield Armory. But your rifle's action does not exhibit overhaul characteristics from either location. So your rifle's stock was likely swapped from another rifle somewhere along the line.

And, finally, your rifle's bolt body is marked with an "R", indicating manufacture by Remington during WWII. That's the only part I see which is not consistent with the rest of your rifle. I believe the Remington bolt was a recent Bubba-installed replacement. I recommend that you keep your eye open for a more correct bolt and replace the Remington bolt body at your earliest opportunity. Of course, if you plan to shoot your rifle, then the Remington bolt would be a safer alternative.

Hope this helps.

J.B.

[Hal O'Peridol]

Thanks John! What would be the best current book to get to study up on the 03?

Couple more questions for everybody:

When did Springfield actually start production of the 03?

A type 1 or 2 stock would be correct for this rifle?

I assume(!) a "high hump" handguard would also be correct? Also, did the early handguards have the reinforcements in them?

Thanks!

[Rick the Librarian]

1. Very late 1903.

2. I would say that any "generic" stock would be all right - I don't think I'd waste time and money trying to find a very early one.

Could you post a couple of "overall" pictures of your rifle? Maybe from cocking piece to rear sight both left and right side?

Opinions on "the" right M1903 book are varied. Many suggest Brophy others suggest Canfield's 2003 book. Both have shortcomings.