'03 Springfield. What do I have here?

[Wyatt Burp]

Here's my Springfield Armory 1903, serial # 1866. I always assumed this was in the "better not shoot" potential brittle receiver range yet I shot it a lot in years past with surplus military ammo. The barrel is marked "S A" over a bomb stamp which is over a "1 42". Was it arsenal redone in Jan. 1942? I was told once the bolt is wrong. And stock is kind of shiny hinting of a refinish.
Asking prices on '03s are all over the place but pretty high on line. I know nothing about them. What do you think of this one value wise or any other info you could shed on it?

 

[bmcgilvray]

Don't have the rifle in hand for a detailed look/see but am guessing that it is a mixmaster, made up from a very early receiver with a mishmash of '03 and '03A3 parts and likely put together after the original receiver was "mustered out" of service. It could be an arsenal rework or it could be a "garage rework."

The original receiver would have originally been a very early rod-bayonet Model 1903 and chambered for the predecessor of the .30-06, the .30-03. https://www.google.com/search?q=190...3JLZAhVL1WMKHbmHBa0Q_AUICygC&biw=1268&bih=845

The bolt in your rilfe is a World War II '03A3 bolt. The two bolt stock with finger grooves came along on the eve of World War I and was until into World War II.

Realistically, your rifle is worth the sum of its component parts. The receiver is interesting because it is early, however not enough to warrant a premium price.

The best Model 1903 I have on hand is this 1913 Rock Island Arsenal rifle, having the characteristics of the common '03 rifles of the pre-World War I era.



I've always shot low-number Springfields that came my way even though in this internet age the low-number's reputation has become so overblown and I am roundly scolded in online forums for doing so. I just don't shoot 'em with nuclear-powered handloads.

The ones I've shot included rifles made in 1905, 1913, 1915, and 1917. All had barrel dates and markings which indicated that they were likely original to the receivers. I would be less interested in shooting obviously rebarreled low-number '03s and would certainly avoid shooting any sporterized rifle or cartridge conversion done on a low-number '03 action.

The Brophy book on the subject is your friend.
[ame="https://www.amazon.com/Springfield-Illustrated-Documented-Development-Accessories/dp/0811708721"]Amazon.com: The Springfield 1903 Rifles (The Illustrated, Documented Story of the Design, Development, and Production of all the Models of Appendages, and Accessories) (9780811708722): William S. Brophy USAR: Books[/ame]

 

[Wyatt Burp]

Thanks, Gary. That’s a ton of help. My dad owned this gun since the late 50s or early 60s when he and his friends would buy guns mail order right to the house. Like “Ye Old Hunter”. Since it’s been in this configuration that long when surplus guns were widely available would that make it more likely to be arsenal redo and not a civilian parts gun?
BTW, what year do you think “1866” was? I have no clue how many made per year at the start.

 

[jimmyj]

The issue with the"Low Numbered" Model 1903 Springfield was defective ammo and/or wrong caliber ammo used and not defective Model 1903 single heat treatment receivers

 

[DWalt]

There has been a lot of misinformation written about the low-number Springfields. The full story is given in Hatcher's Notebook for those who have access to a copy. To make a long story short, the Army concluded that they presented no safety hazard, and they were not withdrawn from active service. But most bolts were later replaced with stronger ones. I have one (early 1917), with two bolts - the original and a later one. When I shoot it I use the later one.

 

[Targets Guy]

My Rock Island is a 1923 production. I have a hard time with the sights but still have fun at the range.

 

[bmcgilvray]

"Thanks, Gary. That’s a ton of help. My dad owned this gun since the late 50s or early 60s when he and his friends would buy guns mail order right to the house. Like “Ye Old Hunter”. Since it’s been in this configuration that long when surplus guns were widely available would that make it more likely to be arsenal redo and not a civilian parts gun?
BTW, what year do you think “1866” was? I have no clue how many made per year at the start."

_________________________________________________________________

Sorry, my "quoter" won't allow me to use the "Quote" feature any more.

The 1950s mail order history could possibly help it. At least we know it wasn't cobbled together within the last 30 years or so, after the ol' '03 began to garner a bit of collectors respect and the "Franken" examples began showing up in shops and on gun show exhibitors' tables.

Collectible firearms' availability has taken a beating within the past quarter of a century or so. The number of nice, or even just decent original examples of Winchesters, Colts, Smith & Wesssons, U. S. and foreign miilitary arms etc. that aren't dogged out or else "put-together" by "Bubba" has really declined. One just doesn't see quantities of good examples of collectible arms at even the large gun shows any more.

Of all the guns I enjoy watching and collecting, the 1903 Springfield has suffered worst. The commonly found examples of 1903 Springfields I've been seeing for the past 10-15 years are hideous to behold, yet the exhibitors and dealers aren't ashamed at all of the exorbitant price tags dangling from the rifles' trigger guards. The rifles are sometimes passed off as "all-original" even when it's a pre-World War I gun with a number of World War II '03A3 parts, perhaps reparkerized to all match. If they are called on it then they revert to saying it's out of an arsenal rebuild program.

Huge numbers of rifles were rebuilt. Huge numbers of rifles were sold off through DCM or provided as "foreign aid." Huge quantities of replacement component parts were produced during World War II.

Over the years the whole mess has trickled back into the country and with parts surplussed out of government storage over the years all entered the market, giving rise to a lot of franken-guns.

Of course it must be realized that Bannerman's was putting 1903 rifles together out of condemned parts and selling them even before World War I and the mail order concerns of the 1950s weren't above doing the same.

It's a hard thing to determine what one has when he's looking at a 1903 Springfield that is obviously rebuilt for the poor ol' rifles don't talk.

I can't recall any of the production figures I've read of. Both Hatcher and Brophy make mention of production figures from various times during the 1903's career. Just found this article online that could narrow down when such an early serial numbered receiver was produced.Model 1903, Springfield Rifle, Serial Number 1 | Center of Military History Be careful. The article may be referring to Rock Island manufactured guns only. I never read of this figure of 1600 rifles being produced before halting for modifications.

I once had a low-ish 4-digit numbered Springfield (seems like it was in the 40,000 range) with a 1905 barrel date and that "CN 1905" stock cartouch that exhibited all the characteristics of a rod bayonet rifle converted to .30-06 and conventional bayonet.

More data
Springfield Armory Museum - Collection Record,

Says initial production was 225 rifles per day for the Springfield Armory, 125 rifles per day for Rock Island Arsenal.
Warfare History Network >> An American Legend: The 1903 Springfield Rifle
The above link also claims the 1903-A3 was used in the early fighting in the South Pacific. It would have been the older 1903 actually as the 1903-A3 wouldn't have been available in quantity during the early stages of Pacific fighting. Any photos I've ever seen of early fighting in the Pacific show the 1903 rather than the 1903-A3. I like the '03A3 and have searched for a front line photo of it in action for years but only ever see it in the hands of support troops, '03A4 sniper rifle not included.

More on the low-number actions and their failures.
Information On M1903 Receiver Failures

Years ago I undertook to collect '03s and '03A3s. Got a bit over-enthused and had as many as 17 around here, including some decent and uncommonly seen variants. Only four remain.

 

[jimmyj]

**** Springfield Model 1903 Springfield .30
the battle sights (open sights) are set for POI at 525 yards
At 100 yards ail approx 24 inches low to score in the black bullseye.
OR
replace the front sight blade with one 1/8 to 1/4 inch higher.

 

[2152hq]

#1866 is a first year of production,,1903,,,@ Springfield Arsenal
They made about 16,000 that first year according to the chart I have.

First few weeks of production?

 

[Wyatt Burp]

I have this question posted at another forum and someone mentioned something about a "Hatcher Hole" in the reciever saying my gun has one. Can anyone shed light on this? here's the statement:
"This rifle appears to have a "Hatcher Hole" drilled into it on the left side of the receiver. This was done to reduce pressure and is quite safe to shoot."

My gun has a hole on both sides of the receiver at the rear of the chamber, the one on the left referred to slightly bigger. Is that common, normal, or unsafe in any way?
Edit: In pictures I see that same hole on other guns I'm looking at. Here's Sgt. York, I mean Gary Cooper shooting one. I think the real York carried a 1917.

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbpojm3iWUg[/ame]

 

[DWalt]

"#1866 is a first year of production,,1903,,,@ Springfield Arsenal
They made about 16,000 that first year according to the chart I have."

Interesting story about the early '03s. They had a built-in spike bayonet. When Teddy Roosevelt found out about them, he ordered the Army to return to using the blade type, and converting those made with the spike back to using knife bayonets. To find an original '03 with the original spike bayonet is essentially impossible, but I think there are some museum specimens. The British used some spike bayonets on the .303 Enfield during WWII.

Regarding the Hatcher Hole, it was a hole in the left side of the receiver ring with a matching hole in the bolt lug as a vent for gas pressure relief in the event of a case rupture. It was supposed to have been added in the 1930s for new production, but those earlier '03s which were rebuilt later had the hole added. I have no idea whether it accomplished its intended purpose.

 

[HARDWARE]

the hatcher vents gas in the event of a ruptured case .. rather than blowin the receiver

 

[HARDWARE]

heres a pair of 03a3's. the remington is all original and the smith-corona is re-arsed

 

[Stevie]

Most any USGI issue rifle of the WWI/WWII era has been re-arsenaled at least once and often many many times.

I own a Rock Island 03 with the 'Hatcher hole' and a 12-41 Remington barrel...also has a A3 bolt. I think the serial number dates it to 1918 in the double heat-treat range.

My old US1917 Eddystone is also a real-deal mix of Winchester Remington and Eddystone pieces. The Eddystone probably ties with my Inland M1 carbine for mix of bits and pieces built into a gun!

 

[LoboGunLeather]

My reading on the "low serial number" 1903's indicates that the earlier rifles used a heat treatment process that could, in some cases, produce brittleness, and some of those rifles were known to fail when fired with service ammo (including several serious injuries).

Later rifles were produced with an improved heat treatment process to overcome this problem. While the earlier rifles were kept in regular use for several decades, by the time WW2 came around those rifles were mostly relegated to "war reserve" status (for emergency issue rather than regular issue).

These issues have been talked about, written about, and researched for nearly a century. There are a number of known catastrophic failures occurring during the early 20th Century, but I have learned of none having happened with original (unaltered) rifles firing correct ammunition since those earlier times.

That said, the two low-numbered 03's in my collection are kept as military relics; I regularly shoot high-numbered 03's and 03-A3's without any hesitation.

 

[DWalt]

"My old US1917 Eddystone is also a real-deal mix of Winchester Remington and Eddystone pieces. The Eddystone probably ties with my Inland M1 carbine for mix of bits and pieces built into a gun!"

Military arsenals had absolutely no concerns about gun collectors of the distant future when they rebuilt guns.

 

[Stevie]

I've read that the Marines kept the older M1903 rifles in service regardless of the hi-lo serial number debate. Drilled the Hatcher Hole and rebuilt them.

I've also read that quite a few M1903 rifles were provided to Free French forces during WWII...mostly earlier versions.

The Marine Corp M1903 rifles in particular seem to enjoy a popularity for collectors....most have the Hatcher hole...stippled butt-plates and pipe-wrench marks on the barrels! I think the Marines modded the sights to a more realistic battle-sight range too.

I've never seen a Greek return M1903...but I guess these normally have the floor-plates pinned and electro-pencil serial numbered bolts. Some of the Greek issue rifles hit the market not too long back.

The low serial M1903 issue has been kicked around for 100 years or better now! Reports of brittle receivers and bad bolts date back to the Krag rifle days. I'm on the fence regarding the issue aas I don't own a single heat treat receivered M1903 rifle.

I do recall reading an article in a 1964 or 65 'Shooter's Bible' regarding rifles suitable for re-building into custom sporters(Mannlichers, Mausers, Springfields and the like. It stated that the later 03 rifles were preferred...but that the lower serialed ones were all right with 'sensible loads'....That's not an endorsement from me!...Just what I read in an ancient Shooters Bible...

 

[bmcgilvray]

Hah! It appears that Gary Cooper used two different prop rifles during that scene. The second rifle appears to have some sort of Krag sight, either a Model 1898 or a Model 1902 sight. http://www.kragcollectorsassociation.org/kca/Photos/riflesights.JPG

Look at the rear sight first chance to see it in the clip and then look at it at the point where York says: " I cain't see how I missed that whole great big target ...," and again at 2:23. A different rear sight configuration will be seen from the sight seen at the beginning, one that is wholly incorrect for a Model 1903.

 

[Culina]

Didn't most arsenal rebuilds put a stamp on the left side of the stock? I have seen a lot of rifles with the AA, BA, SA and other two letter arsenal stamps. For Garands they did the same thing or elector penciled the something like LEAD 67 on the right rear receiver leg.

 

[bmcgilvray]

Caution: Memory Lane Pontification Below

The '03A3 at the top of this World War II grouping of typewriter company-manufactured U.S. military arms is the first center fire gun I ever acquired. Bought it from a pawn shop in 1975 when I was 18. The clerk made me a deal to purchase this '03A3 and a M1894 Krag Jorgensen for $200 out-the-door. This wasn't such a hot deal at the time. I recall that the Krag was tagged $115 but can't recall the tagged price on the '03A3. I still have the Krag too. This is complete conjecture but I'm guessing that this '03A3 was an unissued barreled action taken out of stores, placed in a Remington scant grip stock, and sold through the DCM program in the 1950s-1960s and ending up in that pawn shop.

The Krag


Took my first two deer with the rifle and began a budding high-power career, shooting the rifle in local competition for several years. Endless plinking fun, both at the range or in the field has been enjoyed with this rifle right down to the present. Any wear seen on the rifle has been accomplished by me.

Long range "rock crushing" across a canyon from 100 yards to ?.




The rifle is a quite early Smith Corona made not long after the company began producing the 1903-A3 on contract. If I remember the Brophy book correctly, Smith Corona began production in October of 1942 and the assigned serial number block began at 3608000. This rifle is one of the Smith Corona's with a six-groove barrel. The six-groove barrels were provided to Smith Corona by High Standard which got some unfinished barrel blanks from Savage, originally produced to be utilized in commercial rifles. Supposedly 5000 or so six-groove Smith Corona's were made.





Don't know that the uncommonly seen six-groove barrels are all that special for accuracy, but this one really will shoot a gnat's eye in a mud hole from off the bench rest.

Silly story telling on me. A few years back I decided to take the '03A3 on a nostalgic afternoon deer hunt on our old family place. I have a deer stand nailed together in the top of a live oak tree and can see in several directions about 125 yards at most.

The rifle was then wearing a simple vintage M1 web sling and with the rifle slung across my back I began climbing the live oak. Just as I got to the very top of the tree and was about to swing onto my seat, the lower band let go, the front swivel screw stripping out of the threaded portion of the rather flimsy stamped lower band. I was in an awkward spot that required clinging to limbs with both hands. The rifle pitched off of my back into space as I could only watch helplessly.

I was heartsick as the rifle fell down through the oak, clattering against limbs as it fell. Being excessively sentimental I had actual tears welling in my eyes as I began the descent out of the tree, chagrined at what I was to find when I got to the rifle.

The lower band and front swivel screw were the ones used for those years of high-power competition and were strained and worn and I should have considered that before climbing the tree with the rifle. These '03A3 stamped parts weren't as sturdy or of as good quality steel as the older forged 1903 parts are and the 1903 has an additional front swivel nut to better secure the swivel to the lower band.

Despite the blows the rifle suffered against the oak limbs as it fell it came through amazingly unscathed. The stock had a bit of surface scuffing where it slid against the tree trunk as it fell and this proved to be bark or lichen residue which merely wiped away with a thumb. A front sight hood was the only thing lost; the offending lower band with its wretched screw was still clinging to the rifle with swivel still dangling from the front end of the web sling.

Grateful not to find ruination, I gathered up and returned to the old lake cabin on the place, reluctant to use the rifle until function and accuracy could be verified.

Shooting verification took place the next week from off the bench rest at the range. The rifle shot precisely where it was sighted at 100 yards with no muss and no fuss. No sight adjustment required. While I was very fortunate that the rifle was uninjured, the rifle did take some hits during the fall and proved that '03A3s are tough.