What to do with a low number 1903?

[gew98]

I wouldn't shoot a low number 03', even with low pressure cast loads. It's just not worth the risk, Especially since there are so many shootable 03's out there. One poster suggested replacing the old receiver with a new one. The gun would loose some collectors value, but it would be a good shooter then. Well worth the $150 (or less) for the receiver.

The following is from Hatcher's Notebook. It gives you an idea at just how little can cause one of these guns to blow.

"Another fact that will bear noting is that two of the receiver failures recorded were caused by firing the guard cartridge, which is supposed to be loaded to extremely low pressure and velocity. These guard cartridges used the regular 150gr bullet with 9.1 grains of Bullseye powder to give a muzzle velocity of 1200 feet per second."

Your preaching to the choir !. Also note some of the quoted like Dunlap for example loathed the issue 03's - very poor fit & finish overall especially in the stocking. He went on about this at length in his book ( Ordnance went up front ) .

[13Echo]

Well I now have Tim's rifle. It is a nice example of an arsenal rebuild of a 1903. The receiver was made in early 1916, the bolt is a double heat treat , the barrel is a 4 groove from 1942, and the stock a field replacement. The old soldier has cleaned up rather nicely and the action is almost as slick and smooth as my 1898 Krag. It is obvious this rifle has seen use and is old enough to have been in the Great War and has had at least one rebuild and reissue. The stock has its share of dents and dings, sling marks, and other evidence of actual field use so it was not just a depot queen. It is also apparent that it has not blown up. Since there is some brass color on the bolt face and copper in the bore it has been shot with full power loads probably fairly recently. I think she deserves a working retirement and will continue to shoot her with cast bullet loads only.

Jerry Liles

[13Echo]

Before I forget. Dealing with Tim has been an example of how these deals should go. He has been scrupulously honest in his descriptions of the rifle and in warning about its potential problems. He also went beyond what I expected for a fair deal and shipped the rifle in a very nice, high quality soft case and packed so well my FFL kept the box to use again. My thanks to Tim for being a gentleman and I hope we can do business again.

Jerry Liles

[Bob Busetti]

I will continue to fire my low number 03. Arsenal rebuilt and fitted with 1943 barrel and A1 stock. Passed proof tests. Good enough for me. Just saying.

[merlin101]

I had passed on reading this till today because I didn't have an 03 Till TODAY!! I found the ole girl at a yard sale for (ya sitting down?) $50! (I had to get $20 from my wife) I knew something about LSN and HSN's but didn't know where the cutoff was. I risked the $50 and now have a S.A 1903 Mark1 ser#10525XX with a barrel date of 12-18. I figured it would look good on the wall but now I'm all fired up to take her to the range. I'm gonna do a complete cleaning (she really needs it) and a chamber cast. It came with a leather claw type sling with very faint writing looks like 56 or maybe 5/6?? Over all I'd say it's about 8 out of 10 , can ya tell I'm all cranked up

[madsenshooter]

I really need a find like that Merlin. The CMP now has a trophy for high Springfield/Garand/Vintage combined score. I got the vintage and Garand covered, gotta find me a deal.

[Larry Gibson]

Merlin101

You scored big time! That is SA Mark I is not a LSN'd '03. It is a very, very good DHT M1903. Shoot it.

Larry Gibson

[merlin101]

Merlin101

You scored big time! That is SA Mark I is not a LSN'd '03. It is a very, very good DHT M1903. Shoot it.

Larry Gibson

YEAH!! I was just looking around doing a little research on it. Such a deal makes me wonder what that old .22 pump action he mentioned selling was and what he sold it for! I guess he never heard of the internet

[Southron]

Back around 1961, when I was 15, a good friend of mine gave me a Rock Island made '03 his late Uncle had brought back from France at the end of World War I. When he gave me the rifle he said: "Well, it is an old army rifle and I am sure you can't get ammunition for it."

Well, back in 1961 you could get World War II surplus 30-06 dirt cheap at any army surplus store or gun shop.

Around 1970, after shooting probably a thousand or so rounds out of it, I learned all about "Low Number" '03's and was dismayed to learn I HAD ONE! After that, I just didn't feel safe shooting that rifle.

So, the Rock Island '03 was retired to the gun rack and I purchased a "mint" condition Smith Corona 03A3 for around $50.00. I shot that Smith Corona for years, but somehow an 03A3 simply does not have the "class and elegance" of an '03.

As for all of the receiver failures over the years with the LN Springfields, true, some of them might have been caused by people attempting to shoot German 7.92 cartridges in them, a stopped up muzzle, etc., but I have also read instances of where people have hit LN receiver with a hammer, and the receiver shatters like glass.

My point? Well, I won't shoot a LN '03 ever again.

Caution and Luck have allowed me to become an Old Geezer.

Like Mark Twain said: "Old Age is a Privilege denied to many."

[youngda9]

It's actually 7.5 failures per 100,000 units, so quite a bit less than a 7.5% chance of failure. By my calculations it is a 0.0075% chance that the gun will explode in your hands. While better odds, it still doesn't sound very good to me. Fascinating discussion though.

This is the conclusion that I came to last year about my 1914 570K 1903. I read Hatcher's Notebook, and most of the links posted in this thread.

My conclusion: The risk is miniscule, and those statistics are very artificially inflated by all of the lube, bad ammo, over-pressure loads, incorrect ammunition, barrel obstructions, 150% pressure loads, blah blah blah, that they were WAY overstressing these rifles with. As stated early on in this thread, the failures were caused by knows anomalies. And the rate is tiny. And the failures completely stopped the year they removed all of the brittle brass junk ammo from inventory. This is all much to do about nothing IMO...so much hand wringing. It's more dangerous for me to drive to the supermarket...It truly is. And I just got back from the supermarket. I'll have to work up the courage to go next week.

I shoot mine (a 358 Winchester), with mid range loads (36gr H4895 behind a 358009). I only neck size the brass, so I have a tight fit in the chamber and no headspace or bolt thrust issues. So much fun, what a rifle ! She turns 100 years old this year and will be my hunting companion in the deer woods. If I don't see deer, at least I'll have a beautiful rifle that is full of history to admire.

[Ricochet]

Regarding Hatcher's report of receivers shattering with the "Guard Cartridge," he said that they used the standard FMJ military bullet with a small charge of Bullseye. Something like 8 grains off the top of my head. We normally use cast boolits for light loads like that. I wonder if those jacketed bullets weren't more likely to stick in the bore in the event of something like a lighter than normal charge or poor ignition, and if it wasn't more likely that a bore obstructing squib load would go unnoticed with such a light recoiling load?

[Ricochet]

Also, it's easy for multiple loads to go undetected with a load like that. Additionally, I recall years ago a member of this board (I don't recall who it was) claimed to be able to great SEE-type massive overpressure spikes. If I recall correctly, he eventually said that it involved loading a large case with a small amount of fast burning powder and firing it muzzle down. I wonder if either of these factors could have been involved with the Springfield & Guards Cartridge receiver failures?

[Ricochet]

ARRGH! I think I've been Autocorrected and the board won't let me edit again. "great" should be "create."

[MtGun44]

The possibility of a double or triple charge of BE in a .30-06 case is very real. I think that "sensible"
use of these rifles is a reasonable risk. That would include moderate handloads if one finds it
necessary, but I think avoiding modern full pressure factory ammo might be prudent. A modern powder
can make 2600 fps with a 150 gr jbullet with a whole lot less pressure than with the powders of
1906, so handloads at this velocity with recent very slow powders should give added margins.

If the rifle were mine, it would live it's time in my care with a steady diet of something like 10 gr
of Unique or 16 gr of 2400 over whichever cast boolit it favored.

[Mr Humble]

The endless stupidity about low number 03s. As a 50+ year 03 collector (pre WW I only) I have yet to see a documented case of a low number gun, with proper headspace and using modern correct ammo blow up. For years we had a $5000 offer out on the net to anyone who could produce such an event ...... nobody collected. IF you actually read Hatcher's book and do a spreadsheet analysis of all the "blowups", the number that can not be explained by human error is in the single digits. Take your new 30-06 model 70 and shoot a full power military 8x57 in it and see what happens. Take 220 grain cupronickel bullets, smear Mobil chassis grease on them (thought to reduce fouling) and run a dozen through any 30-06 you want. The list goes on ..... as Gump said you can't fix stupid.
Hatcher is an NRA "God" so they continue to spout this BS. It helped me buy a lot of mint 30-03s and 30-06s made before WW I. A bit odd that our wonderful government sold tons of "unsafe" 03 actions to firms like G&H, Sedgley and Jaeger who made them into wonderful sporting rifles that have yet to blow up.
Then in WW II they pulled 1000s out of storage and used the actions to make a rifle with an 03 action and 03A3 parts. Sent our boys off to fight with them, guess the "brass" didn't care if they blew up.
Just more hokum like fine twist steel shotgun barrels are a bomb waiting to go off. Amazing how many of them can still be found, reproofed for Nitro and still working as well as they did in the 19th century. Not bored yet ? We could get into the Ross rifle myth next ?

[gew98]

The endless stupidity about low number 03s. As a 50+ year 03 collector (pre WW I only) I have yet to see a documented case of a low number gun, with proper headspace and using modern correct ammo blow up. For years we had a $5000 offer out on the net to anyone who could produce such an event ...... nobody collected. IF you actually read Hatcher's book and do a spreadsheet analysis of all the "blowups", the number that can not be explained by human error is in the single digits. Take your new 30-06 model 70 and shoot a full power military 8x57 in it and see what happens. Take 220 grain cupronickel bullets, smear Mobil chassis grease on them (thought to reduce fouling) and run a dozen through any 30-06 you want. The list goes on ..... as Gump said you can't fix stupid.
Hatcher is an NRA "God" so they continue to spout this BS. It helped me buy a lot of mint 30-03s and 30-06s made before WW I. A bit odd that our wonderful government sold tons of "unsafe" 03 actions to firms like G&H, Sedgley and Jaeger who made them into wonderful sporting rifles that have yet to blow up.
Then in WW II they pulled 1000s out of storage and used the actions to make a rifle with an 03 action and 03A3 parts. Sent our boys off to fight with them, guess the "brass" didn't care if they blew up.
Just more hokum like fine twist steel shotgun barrels are a bomb waiting to go off. Amazing how many of them can still be found, reproofed for Nitro and still working as well as they did in the 19th century. Not bored yet ? We could get into the Ross rifle myth next ?

Why if you put it out on the net...that covers the world so ergo you must be so awesomely correct I can't bow down fast enough to your internet kung fu. You keep buying up low number 03's , I'm happy you like to buy low and sell high...if it works for you it's fine by me. I'll sleep good not owning one ever again.

[Dutchman]

Why if you put it out on the net...that covers the world so ergo you must be so awesomely correct I can't bow down fast enough to your internet kung fu. You keep buying up low number 03's , I'm happy you like to buy low and sell high...if it works for you it's fine by me. I'll sleep good not owning one ever again.

I successfully resisted the TERRIBLE urge to respond to that note. Thank you for doing it for me.

Dutch

[mattw]

I own 2, 1 is a safe queen it is perfect numbers matching and the other is a converted sporter that I bought for cast shooting. I do not ever shoot full house 06 in it, but then again I do not enjoy full house 06 in a military rifle.

[Mr Humble]

I successfully resisted the TERRIBLE urge to respond to that note. Thank you for doing it for me.

Dutch

Happy for you not to point out, as did GEW, a total lack of any serious knowledge of 03s as well as the endless myths blabbed out by one gun writer and endlessly repeated by those who follow but never verify.

Funny how nobody could ever produce the mythical low number rifle that had proper headspace and blew up shooting modern factory or milspec ammo.

Having owned more, than years you have walked the earth, shot them all after checking the headspace, and never blown one up, I can only speak to my experience.

Those who actually own and shoot the rifles still have all their fingers and are not wearing a bolt in the forehead.
Those who don't repeat the myths w/o question. IF either of you had a pressure transducer you would find that modern 06 loads as well as smokeless twist steel shotgun load produce less pressure than the old Hi-Vel/ cupro nickle bullet 06 loads or black powder shotgun loads.

Facts are such a pain when they destroy unproven myths.

Have a friend with a 3 digit 03 that has been through so many rebuilds most people think it's an 03A3 as everything but the receiver is Remington and it is the ghastly sandblasted green used in WW II. Still waiting for it to blow up.

I know what it is ...... how about you "experts" ?

[Multigunner]

HiVel and other high Nitroglycerin content powders dai cause serious erosion that lead to stripped jackets and blown through bullets. They at one time issued a stuck jacket removal tooll to every rifleman, but once they switched to single base powder they issued only one per platoon.

Twist Steel and Damascus steel aren't the same.
The first twist steel barrels I've heard of were those used by the Confederate Cook Bros calvary carbine. To avoid split barrels when using lower grade iron or steel they heated and twisted a bar to force any stress lines to travel around the bar instead of lengthwise. They then bored and rifled the barrel.
If thats what is meant when they speak of twist steel shotgun barrels then they are stronger than damascus barrels.
When new damascus barrels were fairly strong, but rust infiltrating the welded ribbons could weaken them dangerously.
Also cut down swamped shotgun barrels are thinner at the muzzle than they were before being cut. A 32 inch swamped barrel cut to 26 inches can split.
I've run across a number of split shotgun barrels, some were by big name gunmakers, but theres no telling what caused the splits.
W W Greener wrote of defective smokeless powders causing many blown out barrels when smokeless first became available.

Back to the Springfield. During WW2 there were several incidents of defective ammunition being identified, enough to result in a Congressional sub commitee investigation. The records of that investigation are available at the Internet Archive.
Remington seems to have been the worst offender, but luckily testing and use in training revealed the bad lots of ammo before the ammo was shipped to troops in the field.
Soft case heads and blown primers were a big problem, and soured primers causing hangfires that detonated when the bolt was opened.

Had ammunition quality been up to snuff there would have been far fewer blown LN Springfields.
The improved heat treatment and metalurgy of the later Springfields meant that when a Kaboom did occur due to bad ammo or bore obstruction it wasn't so dramatic.