Clarification of a point in Brophy.

[clintonhater]

Page 64, lower left corner, where are shown close-ups of the windage knob clearance cuts in pre-war and WWII handguards. By WWII, I presume he means those used on Remingtons.

Can anyone explain this anomaly: a 1922 service rifle, originally inspected by Daniel Leary, re-inspected by Stanly Gibbs, whose tenure lasted into 1938. Of course there's no way to determine what, if anything, was done when it was recalled to the armory, but it now wears the handguard identified by Brophy as the wartime variant. Condition of the gun is 98%, if not better, and color & patina of stock & handguard match PERFECTLY--they are indistinguishable.

Because it would be extremely difficult, I think, to make a replacement handguard match the original stock so perfectly, I'm wondering if there's any research newer than Brophy's which might establish SA's use of this handguard before WWII, & before Gibbs retired.

For what it's worth, my old, much-missed, friend Butch Eyeberg (if any of you remember him) looked the gun over at the same show in Texas at which I bought it in the '70s, and said it looked correct to him; not that he or anyone else (including Brophy) is beyond error. (I have a letter from Clark Campbell enumerating Brophy's errors, in Campbell's opinion of course, but this matter of the handguard isn't mentioned.)

[Rick the Librarian]

It depends what you define as "Remington". Remington did make replacement handguards like those shown on the upper handguard in the picture. The handguards they made for "production" Remington M1903s, had the circular windage knob relief cut.

When using or commenting on Brophy, I keep in mind his writing is over a generation old and many new things have been discovered about M1903s.

[clintonhater]

When using or commenting on Brophy, I keep in mind his writing is over a generation old and many new things have been discovered about M1903s.

Exactly what I was thinking; the work he did was monumental, BUT there are bound to be areas of his research for which the data available to him at the time was insufficient or incorrect.

If Remington produced BOTH handguard variations, is it possible SA did also?

[Parashooter]

. . .it would be extremely difficult, I think, to make a replacement handguard match the original stock so perfectly . . .

Actually, it's often pretty easy to make a replacement handguard match an original stock. This is because the two major obstacles to matching grafted patches, grain and refraction, aren't a problem with handguards, which were seldom made from the same log (or even tree) as the stock. Color and patina (handling sheen) are easily adjusted with a small collection of aniline dyes and a touch of French polish. Here's an example of a US Krag handguard I made from walnut scrap a couple years back, matched to an original 1901-dated stock using these materials and techniques.



I would show the same kind of result on some '03 handguard/stock combinations, but the sun has set here and one really needs natural light for such photos.

[clintonhater]

Actually, it's often pretty easy to make a replacement handguard match an original stock.

Well, easy when one knows what he's doing, as you obviously did to produce such an excellent result. But I can see my assumption about the difficulty of matching color & finish was mistaken.

[John Beard]

Brophy is correct. The last M1903 rifles assembled at Springfield Armory prior to WWII were the 1940 NM rifles. And those rifles had the handguard style identified by Brophy as pre-WWII and had the D28179 drawing number stamped on top. The WWII style identified by Brophy was actually made by three different suppliers, one of which was Remington. But Rick the Librarian is correct. The Remington handguards were made during late WWII as spare replacements for use in overhaul and are original to no rifle except a late WWII overhaul.

Hope this helps.

J.B.

p.s.,

M1903 handguards are notorious for longitudinally cracking (harmlessly). Well-meaning owners then rush out and buy a WWII-vintage replacement handguard to do away with the ugly crack. Unfortunately, a collector-grade rifle is more valuable with a cracked original handguard than a cheap mismatched WWII replacement.

[clintonhater]

Brophy is correct. The last M1903 rifles assembled at Springfield Armory prior to WWII were the 1940 NM rifles. And those rifles had the handguard style identified by Brophy as pre-WWII and had the D28179 drawing number stamped on top. The WWII style identified by Brophy was actually made by three different suppliers, one of which was Remington. But Rick the Librarian is correct. The Remington handguards were made during late WWII as spare replacements for use in overhaul and are original to no rifle except a late WWII overhaul.

Hope this helps.

J.B.

p.s.,

M1903 handguards are notorious for longitudinally cracking (harmlessly). Well-meaning owners then rush out and buy a WWII-vintage replacement handguard to do away with the ugly crack. Unfortunately, a collector-grade rifle is more valuable with a cracked original handguard than a cheap mismatched WWII replacement.

Thanks, though this info destroys my last hope that the present handguard somehow got there "legitimately" during this rifle's last return to SA, when it acquired the SPG stamp. I'm still surprised that someone went to this much trouble to fake it (by matching the finish so well) as long ago as the mid to late '70s, when I acquired it. Now I can't help but wonder what else has been faked!

[Parashooter]

It's probably not really faked. Most replacement '03 handguards were made of the same kind of straight-grain black walnut heartwood as most original stocks. Finish with heated raw linseed oil, same as the original stock treatment, and they usually match very well - especially after they've been in service a few years.