1903 springfield

[JNG]

I need info from you folks. Last year a kid wanted to trade his pistol for a rifle. ( Well he is not a kid, he is 41 like my oldest, known since him he was 8, what can I say.) Anyway, they traded a rifle for a M-9. I asked him about the rifle and he said that the first time he shot it, he did not like the recoil and after 10 rounds the cases were hard to eject. This was in 98+ temp. He was shooting CMP 30-06 ammo.
Well I like both of them and since I was in the middle..Well I now own a sport 1903 a rifle in a trade for my M&P 45. I have little use for it, but I do have a M-1. Checked the serial number, was made in 1912.

First 03 I ever had. I use small base dies for the M-1. Will they shoot out of an 03?
The gun is tits. I will like to know what is a good feed for them.

I will post it a pic soon.

Thank,
Joe

[Chuck 100 yd]

Look up the s.n. On line and make sure it is one of the later,double heat treated ones ,and that it is safe to shoot. Next, have the headspace checked. If it is an early one, not double heat treated, it could be a bomb. Stay safe friend.

Also, some of the very earliest ones were not chambered for .30-06 but for it's predicesor the .30-03.
A chamber cast would tell the story as some early WWI rifles were made up of mixed parts I have read.
A little research should reveal the information you need to stay safe.

I have never owned an 03. I have owned a bunch of Mauser 98's though.

[Griff]

Pre-war production utilized questionable metallurgy. Some receivers constructed of single-heat-treated case-hardened steel were improperly subjected to excessive temperatures during the forging process. The carbon could be "burnt" out of the steel producing a brittle receiver.[7] Despite documented evidence indicating some early rifles were improperly forged, actual cases of failure were very rare. Although several cases of serious injury from receiver failure were documented, the U.S. Army never reported any fatalities. Many failures were attributed to use of incorrect cartridges, such as the 7.92×57mm Mauser.[8] Evidence also seems to suggest that improperly forged brass shell casings could have exacerbated receiver failure.[9]

Pyrometers were installed in December 1917 to accurately measure temperatures during the forging process. The change was made at approximately serial number 800,000 for rifles made at Springfield Armory and at serial number 285,507 at Rock Island Arsenal. Lower serial numbers are known as "low-number" M1903 rifles. Higher serial numbers are said to be "double-heat-treated."[8]

[jnyork]

Look up the s.n. On line and make sure it is one of the later,double heat treated ones ,and that it is safe to shoot. Next, have the headspace checked. If it is an early one, not double heat treated, it could be a bomb. Stay safe friend.

Also, some of the very earliest ones were not chambered for .30-06 but for it's predicesor the .30-03.
A chamber cast would tell the story as some early WWI rifles were made up of mixed parts I have read.
A little research should reveal the information you need to stay safe.

.

Pay attention to this before you shoot it.

[Malamute]

Interesting article about receiver failures on this site.

http://m1903.com/

[Malamute]

Look up the s.n. On line and make sure it is one of the later,double heat treated ones ,and that it is safe to shoot. Next, have the headspace checked. If it is an early one, not double heat treated, it could be a bomb. Stay safe friend.

Also, some of the very earliest ones were not chambered for .30-06 but for it's predicesor the .30-03.
A chamber cast would tell the story as some early WWI rifles were made up of mixed parts I have read.
A little research should reveal the information you need to stay safe.

I have never owned an 03. I have owned a bunch of Mauser 98's though.

I believe that most if not all the barrels made for the 30-03 chambering were set back and rechambered, giving a slightly shorter than spec length. They would be the very first 3 years of production in any event (1903 to 1905). It wouldn't be a problem to fire 30-06 loads in a 30-03 chamber in any event. The only difference was the length of the neck. It was common to shoot 30-06 loads in 30-03 chambers when '03 ammo wasn't available. The model 95 Winchesters were chambered for both.

[JNG]

Thank you for all the info. Malamute, thank you for the web site. The gun serial number 407xxxxx was made in 1910.
I load for my M-1, I believe that I'll stay with that load for the 03.
Anybody have any sweet loads for them?

Joe

[Griff]

Thank you for all the info. Malamute, thank you for the web site. The gun serial number 40,7xx,xxx was made in 1910.
I load for my M-1, I believe that I'll stay with that load for the 03.
Anybody have any sweet loads for them?

Joe

Your serial number is too high for any 1903, -A1, -A3, or -A4. Even serial number 4 million would be outside the range for S-A manuf'd rifles. Serial # 407,000 would be 1910 if it's a Springfield Armory; it would be after 1920 if manuf'd by Rock Island, and would be correctly heat treated. Serial # 4,07x,xxx would be 1942, and manuf'd by Remington... if it has a "C" prefix it would be a Smith-Corona and manuf'd in 1944.
Per Oldguns.net:

All rifles recalled and rechambered for .30 caliber in 1906.
Improved heat treatment started at 800,000.
Introduction of nickel steel started at 1275767.
Model 1903A1 rifles were made after 1929 with a full pistol grip type C stock, but were otherwise the same as earlier Model 1903 Rifles and marked Model 1903.
About 25,000 National Match rifles were scattered throughout production from about 1920 to 1940, and many can be documented by serial number to their original purchaser by payment of a fee to Springfield Research Service, Silver Spring MD.

Pay attention to what chuck100yard said.

[JNG]

Well, I looked at her again, and it is 407xxxx. Took the bolt out, the rail says B-uehler, Orinda,Cal.
If I was not lazy I would pull out the rail and read more. The bottom mag box is machined. Now
this is my only my 2nd bolt. Love levers. The rail is new to me. The front has a big hole where the nob fits in.
The back tightens on the rear with a stud. I know this has nothing to do with the gun. Got to say it looks tits! Trigger pull is 3/1/2 pounds per my tool. The only mark on the bolt beside safe and ready is a R.
This gun is an adventure.
Thanks,
Joe

[AJMD429]

Improved heat treatment started at 800,000.
Introduction of nickel steel started at 1275767.

I get the advantage of heat-treating, but what is the advantage of the nickel steel ones...?

[Malamute]

Well, I looked at her again, and it is 407xxxx. Took the bolt out, the rail says B-uehler, Orinda,Cal.
If I was not lazy I would pull out the rail and read more. The bottom mag box is machined. Now
this is my only my 2nd bolt. Love levers. The rail is new to me. The front has a big hole where the nob fits in.
The back tightens on the rear with a stud. I know this has nothing to do with the gun. Got to say it looks tits! Trigger pull is 3/1/2 pounds per my tool. The only mark on the bolt beside safe and ready is a R.
This gun is an adventure.
Thanks,
Joe

The "rail" is a scope base. Buehler was an old school brand. They made good bases and rings. I don't know if they are still around. They were popular when sporterizing military guns was common, but the older style bases aren't used much any more. Redfield and Leupold make or made similar type bases and rings.

Your bolt may be a later one made by Remington. There are some differences like the angle of the bolt handle which help identify the type-era of manufacture. The makers mark is also a good clue. The bolts also changed as to heat treatment and type of steel.

If its been shot without problems, its probably OK for headspace. The 1903 bolts were made to very tight specs. One gunsmith that built tons of them said he saw one in 20 years that didn't headspace. They basically interchange.

Do you have the scope rings?

Thank you for all the info. Malamute, thank you for the web site. The gun serial number 40,7xx,xxx was made in 1910.
I load for my M-1, I believe that I'll stay with that load for the 03.
Anybody have any sweet loads for them?

Joe

You arent clear on the serial number, is it 4 million, or 400 thousand? 4 million is 1940s, 400 thousand would be correct for an earlier date. Try doing it with only 2 X's. The number you posted in the quote is 40 million (I added commas to your date to clarify). There aren't any that high.

Can you see the actual makers name on the receiver ring? It may be worth taking the scope base off to seethe makers name. It may be a Remington if its 4 million, in which case, you got one of the best of all the 1903's.

Improved heat treatment started at 800,000.
Introduction of nickel steel started at 1275767.

I get the advantage of heat-treating, but what is the advantage of the nickel steel ones...?

Tougher grade of steel.

[AJMD429]

Improved heat treatment started at 800,000.
Introduction of nickel steel started at 1275767.

I get the advantage of heat-treating, but what is the advantage of the nickel steel ones...?

Tougher grade of steel.

I guess the real question is - do you have to 'baby' the pre-nickel ones...?

[Malamute]

I don't believe so. I probably wouldnt choose a pre-nickel steel receiver for a conversion to 300 win mag. On standard factory level 30-06 I wouldn't worry too much.

[coop923]

Did you have the Buehler rings? Maynord P. Buehler had a shop near Oakland, CA and patented some really slick rings and bases. He passed maybe 8 or 10 years ago, but there was talk that an old employee was going to begin production of his rings and bases. You can find his stuff on eBay but it can be pricey.

[M. M. Wright]

Springfield numbers below 800,000 and Rock Island Arsenal below 285,507 are suspect as to their metallurgy and heat treatment. These are what we called "low numbered" 03s. I had an early Rock Island that was re-heat treated and made into a 25-06.

See the article by Holt Bodinson in the March 2016 issue of Guns magazine.

[Malamute]

There was much discussion of re-heat treating the low number guns. It was generally figured that it wasn't possible to get a proper heat treat, as the problem was some elements of the steel were burned out of it when overheated the first time. If it was brittle when manufactured, its not any better after re-heat treating. If it was OK when manufactured, its probably OK re-heat treated. Not really gaining anything.


The link I posted earlier has some numbers as to the failure rate. Today, and over time, low number 1903's have generally been met with OMG!!! BOMB!!!!!. The actual numbers are very low for failures (a total of about 58 out of about a million guns?), and there have not been any fatalities. Small comfort for those that did get hurt, but I believe there have been as many or more early glock 40 cal pistols come apart than low number 1903s, yet few get all that worked up about them. Are the surviving low number guns actually safe? Nobody has figured out a non-destructive way to test them. Most were used over time, including all through WWII. There may be some low number guns that are still in circulation that are brittle. Its also possible all the brittle ones were damaged in use (and that took quite a while of use before they cracked) and all that are left are possibly fine. Nobody really knows. According to the available info, there hasn't been any low number guns that have had failures since 1929.

All of which is probably off topic, as it seems the gun this thread is about isn't a low number gun, unless we get a clarification of the serial number. So far its been 4 million and 40 million serial range.