“Low number” Springfield 1903

[sigp220.45]

I only had a minute to check this one out. 1903 Springfield from Springfield Army, stock cut but metal is unmolested, 1942 barrel, 1914 manufacture.

It is under the magic number for “low number” Springfields, some of which had suspect heat-treating. Out of about a million, 90 or so cracked the receiver during firing.

I figure if this thing was gonna crack, it would have done so by now, and if Uncle Sugar was that worried about it he wouldn’t have rebarreled it for the 1941-1945 festivities.

I actually kind of like the stock the way it is, but I’ll probably look around for a correct one, so the cool kids will talk to me.

I haven’t bought it, but I’m considering it. I have a 1924 1903 already, but I could always use another.

Thoughts?

 

[pmanton]

If I had spotted it at that price, I would have grabbed it.

 

[NYlakesider]

If it feels good do it!

 

[Onomea]

Well, heck ya!

 

[rockquarry]

I haven't read either of these sources recently, "Hatcher's Notebook" and "The Springfield 1903 Rifles" by Brophy. There were some very tragic accidents with the low number Springfield receivers coming apart.

They would likely be safe for low pressure cast bullet loads, but I'd use only a Springfield with a receiver number above 800,000 even for mild loads.

 

[GypsmJim]

I won't own one if I can't shoot it. With THAT SN I wouldn't shoot it. IMHO the price is too high for a wallhanger.

 

[minconrevo]

A number of the blown up low number 1903's were grenaded by defective over pressure GI ammo produced by Winchester for WWI. While the risks of metal failure isn't a given in low number SC and Springfields, there still are high number guns of both readily available.

Uncle Sam kept a fair stock of low numbered rifles put back for emergency wartime use. I would imagine the theory was a gun that might be unsafe was better than no gun at all in an emergency.

If I were to buy the mentioned rifle, I would only shoot low pressure handloads through it.

 

[sigp220.45]

I don’t handload, and I don’t buy guns I can’t shoot. If I get it, I’ll be banging away with Wal Mart .30/06 ammo.

I’ll give it a good lookover tomorrow. My inclination now is that 90 guns out of a million is pretty good odds.

 

[ladder13]

I’d buy it and shoot it. Exc price.


Smith-Corona and Remington made 03A3’s, RIA and REM made the other 03’s.

 

[GypsmJim]

I don’t handload, and I don’t buy guns I can’t shoot. If I get it, I’ll be banging away with Wal Mart .30/06 ammo.

I’ll give it a good lookover tomorrow. My inclination now is that 90 guns out of a million is pretty good odds.

Yes and no. The price is too high.

 

[cololab]

No doubt there were a fair number of low number rifles that served well in military units with no failures and continued their lives in civilian hands. I think I've read somewhere (can't cite a verified source) that the Marines did not turn in their low number rifles.

Who knows if this rifle was rebarreled by the military or by someone else.
So, you might be perfectly OK to shoot the one you are considering.

I wouldn't be inclined to pursue this one, but go for it if it appeals to you.

 

[Greyman50]

Based on the 14 mfg date the correct barrel and stock will cost you as much and most likely more than their asking price. But , hey its your $$$ so go for it if you want it.

 

[StrawHat]

I would be very tempted to buy it and convert it to 22 LR or 22 Hornet.

Kevin

 

[kennethg]

I have a low #03 that was also made in 1914 and rebarrelled with a later dated (I think 1924) SPG barrel. I figured that if it was fired enough to require a new barrel, it must have been shot a lot. 1914 dated SPG's are in a group of years where the failure rate is very low or non existent. Also, some of the failures were attributed to gi's putting 8mm mauser ammo in them and pulling the trigger. that would be catastrophic.

 

[BLACKHAWKNJ]

Julian Hatcher investigated the accidents with the Low Number Springifelds, found (IIRC) only 2 production years with bad ones-long before WWI, the story that the problems were the result of hiring new and inexperienced
workers is just that-a story.

 

[DWalt]

I haven't read either of these sources recently, "Hatcher's Notebook" and "The Springfield 1903 Rifles" by Brophy. There were some very tragic accidents with the low number Springfield receivers coming apart.

They would likely be safe for low pressure cast bullet loads, but I'd use only a Springfield with a receiver number above 800,000 even for mild loads.

The Army did not consider the problem to be severe enough to pull the early '03s out of service. Most of the blame is placed on the ammunition, not the guns. You mention Hatcher's Notebook. In it he discusses the situation thoroughly, along with investigative details of many of the failures. I have one in the low 6xx,xxx range, and have fired it extensively with GI Ball ammo with no concern about failure. Once had a friend with a very early '03, I think it was from around 1907, no issues with it either.

 

[Ματθιας]

I'd put $400 cash on the counter just to see what they say. $450 OTD is about all I'd willingly pay - especially having to source the stock.

 

[Onomea]

I'd put $400 cash on the counter just to see what they say. $450 OTD is about all I'd willingly pay - especially having to source the stock.

That's a good approach. If rejected, up to you to proceed or not.

Buying guns, the process, is fun. I like the back and forth.

 

[444 Magnum]

I think I'd pass on it unless they reduced the price significantly and you just want it.

You don't show the entire rifle in the one pic, but I suspect that 24" barrel looks disproportionate for the stock. Most of those that were sporterized had the barrels shortened or replaced.

I don't think any money spent to "improve" it will ever be recouped. That said, if you want a project "just because", it's not a whole lot of money and it's your money.

 

[sigp220.45]

Its a consignment gun. I doubt it will go below $500 until it sits there for a while. Its been there less than a week, but the shop is almost all black plastic stuff so it could be there for months.

I already have a really nice 1903. I think I’ll look at it tomorrow, see what the bottom line is and most likely let it sit. Maybe I’ll see something shiny to buy instead.

I appreciate all the input.