To be clear review the differences in brittle fracture and ductile fracture.
When a low number Springfield fails you will get fragments without plastic deformation. A properly heat treated receiver will deform before it breaks.
If you do not comprehend the differences in the 2 different failure modes you should research the subject. Low number Springfields are junk.
Notice where the brittle failure occurs. It happens without deformation of the metal and can result in fragmentation.
Last edited by EDG; 12-08-2016 at 02:51 PM.
EDG
The problem is not that "low number Springfields are junk".Originally Posted by EDG
To be clear review the differences in brittle fracture and ductile fracture.
When a low number Springfield fails you will get fragments without plastic deformation. A properly heat treated receiver will deform before it breaks.
If you do not comprehend the differences in the 2 different failure modes you should research the subject. Low number Springfields are junk.
Notice where the brittle failure occurs. It happens without deformation of the metal and can result in fragmentation.
The problem is, they might be junk, or they might serve well for another 100 years.
-HF
I give loading advice based on my actual results in factory rifles with standard chambers, twist rates and basic accurizing.
My goals for using cast boolits are lots of good, cheap, and reasonably accurate shooting, while avoiding overly tedious loading processes.
The BHN Deformation Formula, and why I don't use it.
How to find and fix sizing die eccentricity problems.
Do you trust your casting thermometer?
A few musings.
anyone with a low number 03' as built with a fine bore and is scared of it, I'll give you 500 bucks for it !
Don't drop your rifle
http://i625.photobucket.com/albums/t...magew1aspx.jpg
EDG
Me too!! Just PM me and lets make a deal.
Sent from my LG-H820 using Tapatalk
EDG, same TIRED OLD photos that have been hanging around for decades.
NO facts, NO attribution, NO witnesses. Why don't you take some better pictures that clearly show the receiver markings ??? Most of these "low number" guns were either rebuilt for WW II service, sold to NRA members or broken down for parts and sold off, hence G&H and Sedgley sporters to only name two of the dozens of custom makers. Receivers that failed initial inspection were busted up as those shown AND some guns were destroyed by defective WW I era WCC soft headed ammo. The photos you show could be from either .... where are the bolts, stocks, etc.. Just another myth actually not supported by Hatcher's data and parrotted over and over with ZERO critical analysis or any lab testing.
Rod Bayonet customer supplied action to RF Sedgley, 9.3x62, hunted for decades all over the world, salt & pepper bore, yet to blow up !
Collecting military and sporting 03s' for 50 plus years has taught me just a "little" bit.
avogunner, PM inbound ! Thanks!
EDG, still waiting for YOUR better pictures of those actions...... we'll never see them as he "borrowed" them off the "always correct" internet. You know the same place that says the Clintons were running a kiddie sex ring from a pizza shop ! The tell tale picture is the first that shows actions that were busted up by hitting them over and over until they broke. There were NO action failures just DELIBERATE destruction a long, long time ago. Does anyone think anyone would smash up a rod bayonet action today ?
BTW the two color pics failures are typical of a soft head cartridge failure from defective WCC ammo. The bolt stays locked but gas messes up the rifle just like in this 03A4 clone.
Another tidbit from a 50 year 03' collector. SC 03A3 were harder than a *****'s heart ALL the way through, like a SHT 03' . The only way to D&T them is to punch a small hole with a diamond drill, put a piece of welding rod in it, heat that white hot, which anneals the hole. Then the action can be D&T. As in my clone SC 03A4. (Vietnam era w/Kollmorgen scope). Has yet to explode.
Here is another Sedgley Springfield that is still hanging in there after more than 80 years of use.
Be careful ! It's about to blow up ..... just sitting there. NOTE: we are STILL waiting for those better photos from our resident blow-up "expert". Like my RF Sedgley 400 Whelen that took this Elk at 250 yards. LMAO!!!
The Low # Springfield Theory, has persisted for close to 100 years. . This Theory have been Talked and Talked to Death.. Yes there were some Disasters . but the theory has been debunked years ago.
I would suggest you read the info That was written Recently Or the past 20 Years and. make up Your own Mind
I have several Pre WW1 springfield. rock Island all with Original Barrels For years I listened to The Arm Chairs Experts. . now they Go to the Range with the others
NRA Endowment Member
International Ammunition Association
New York, the Empire State Where Empires were Won and Lost
YUP ! and the best part is that when Hatcher's "evidence" is dissected virtually all the failures are due to bad ammo, the wrong ammo, plugged bores or heavily greased bullets. The facts don't fit the "experts" narrative so they are ignored. Wonder where those new photos from our own resident expert are ..... "the world wonders."
Mr Humble
"Like my RF Sedgley 400 Whelen that took this Elk at 250 yards."
You do realize that Sedgley bought up these low number receivers and put them through a temper drawing and re-heat treatment process to bring them up to the double heat treated standards of the later actions?
The Marine Corp bored the Hatcher Hole in their low number actions to be on the safe side.
Everyone who dealt with the Low Number receivers recognized that an unknown percentage of these actions were brittle and could fracture and splinter if over amped. Not all the actions were brittle but only destructive testing could weed out the brittle actions, testing that would have been very expensive and could have damaged those receivers that otherwise passed the tests in hidden ways.
I mentioned earlier that the process of boring the Hatcher Hole would likely clue an experienced machinist as to whether the core steel was burnt or brittle.
I also expect that receivers that would not be expected to benefit from the reheat treatment would have been scrapped by Sedgley or simply failed proof and never reached the consumer.
As for the difficulty in DT'ing a Springfield receiver ring. The deep carburized layer on all the double heat treat actions is rock hard as it should be.
The specifications for the steel used in 03A3 actions is very different from the ordnance steel used for the earlier 1903 actions, its hard without being brittle because that's how its supposed to be.
From 1942 onwards they used the same steel to make Springfield actions as they used to make Garand actions, WD 8620 Chrome-Nickel-Molybdenum steel carburized to a depth of .012 -.018" at a temperature of 1600F.
Hatcher's data suggested that only receivers heat treated in certain time frames when certain workmen were on duty were subject to being over heated and brittle. The vast majority of these actions are okay, though not as tough as the DHT and Nickel steel higher number actions or the Chrome-Nickel-Molybdenum 03A3 actions.
Also its not a matter of the action simply failing, its a matter of how they fail when they do fail. An action that shatters like a jelly jar is not very conducive to good health. If an action simply bursts open you only have to worry about hot gases and brass fragments, not those and ten penny nail sized razor edged shards. Neither would be any fun but one is far worse than the other. There's a reason why brittle grey iron was used to make grenade bodies, the heavier the shards the more likely they are to cause horrific wounds.
Like my RF Sedgley 400 Whelen that took this Elk at 250 yards."
"You do realize that Sedgley bought up these low number receivers and put them through a temper drawing and re-heat treatment process to bring them up to the double heat treated standards of the later actions?"
That's what Ackley did to mine.
The Hatcher hole had zero to do with SHT receivers. It was another evolutionary step is allowing the action to handle gas better. You better check out all the changes to the bolt as well. The gas issue was due to the defective soft head WCC ammo that could take apart an 03' BEHIND THE LOCKING LUGS.
The 03 JUST LIKE THE VAUNTED MODEL 70 and unlike a Mauser, has a coned breech. A lot of the case head is unsupported. When the case head fails (WCC ammo) bad things happen. Take a new case, anneal the head, load it with a std 06' load and shoot it in your prized pre 64 M 70. Suggest you tie it to a tire as it will end up in pieces. Then take your next one and load it with 220 gr Cupro Nickle bullets dipped in Mobil axle grease. KA-BOOM! Then take your third one and shove the muzzle into 6" of wet clay. KA-BOOM ! Finally take #4 and stuff an 8x57 mil spec round in it. KA-BOOM ! You will now have duplicated the explained SHT failures (the vast majority).
Never have so many clung to a myth with such ferocity. I always thought the idiot gun writers who doomed the 244 Rem and praised the far inferior 243 were as dumb as they come.
Sedgley claimed that they rehardened the actions they bought as surplus from uncle sam. Customer supplied actions like the 9.3 and 400 were no messed with.
As for your legal request ...... for 20 years I had an open offer of a payment of $1000 to anyone who could produce a SHT 03, with proper headspace fired with proper ammo that "blew up". Lots of talk but NO RIFLES !
All you can do is repeat what you read somewhere with ZERO documented evidence.
SHT 03's don't blow up unless somebody does something dumb. Hatcher's stats prove that.
I am unsubscribing as this thread is nothing but "mine is bigger than yours'" chest beating. As Abe Lincoln said of his wife Mary: " Sometimes when you make a bad bargain, you tend to cling to it all the harder."
But my $500 offer for an unmolested, as built SHT 03' still stands. If it is a 30-03, I'll up that to $1000 AND if it has a rod bayonet, I'll pay $5000. (Won't be holding my breath as I probably own more than all the "experts" pontificating on this thread.)
BTW these have yet to blow up.
See something odd about this Sedgley ? Hint they only made 3.
Or a Mauser Werke 03'
Sedgley made 6.5x55 and 22-06 (yes 22)
"The Hatcher hole had zero to do with SHT receivers. It was another evolutionary step is allowing the action to handle gas better. "
Then why is it found on Marine Corp issued LN receivers and not found on later actions?
The whole purpose in boring that big honking hole in the receiver was to prevent those possibly brittle LN receivers from turning into fragments in the shooters faces if a cartridge case burst.
BTW
How do you explain the LN receiver that turned into a jigsaw puzzle when firing a low powered guard cartridge?
Hatcher made it plain enough that chamber pressure itself was only a factor in that the pressure was too low to expand the case enough to grip the chamber walls. The casehead hammered the bolt face and the action shattered falling apart in the shooter's hands. No blow up was necessary, the steel was as brittle as glass.
Last I heard the Mauserwerke 1903 was manufactured by Mauser after WW1 as a one off prototype commercial sporting rifle so it would not have been a Low Number Springfield product and the steel used would not have been the same steel.
Sedgley drew the temper and re heatreated the LN actions he used to build sporters. The process that Springfield had considered but decided was not cost effective.
The incidence of brittle Low Number receivers is well documented. Hatcher gave a very detailed account of the situation which you seem to have misread or choose to misrepresent.
If a recent production rifle of any brand had a proven percentage of defective receivers that shattered causing severe injuries to the shooter no one would consider a safety warning to be out of place, except for a very few knotheads who ignore reality.
The Sedgley reheatreated actions are evidence enough that major gunmakers recognized the possibility of a LN receiver being defective.
The LN rifles used during WW2 were used only because they needed rifles fast. When Springfield rifles were given to foreign allies they chose to manufacture new rifles specifically for the purpose rather than palm off LN rifles.
The USMC LN 03 rifles with Hatcher Hole were not to be used for launching rifle grenades, the 03A3 rifle was commonly used to launch rifle grenades so they recognized which was the better action and the steel and heat treatment were the only deciding factor there.
So Mr Humble the actual professional experts with access to all the available testing equipment and production data and who had to stand behind their decisions have spoken very clearly on the subject long ago.
What is your source of information concerning this statement? My belief is that this is exactly where most of them went, specifically to Nationalist China.
I use mine with 24 grains of 4227 and Lyman 311467
Fun load,
Mike
NRA Benefactor 2004USAF RET 1971-95
"What is your source of information concerning this statement? My belief is that this is exactly where most of them went, specifically to Nationalist China. "
The US supplied Nationalist China with M1917 Enfields. Many of those rifles were later converted to 7.92X57.
Other Asian allies such as Thailand received smaller shipments of newly manufactured Springfield 1903 models made by Remington. New Zealand also received 40's manufacture Remington 1903 rifles and the British bought up a large shipment of the Remington 1903 for various purposes including supply to allies and resistance fighters, most were to remain in storage apparently since they had enough Enfields and M1917 rifles for the purpose.
The main visible difference between pre WW2 Springfield 03 manufacture and Remington WW2 manufacture 1903 rifles it a simplified rear sight base.
The 1903A3 is an entirely separate subject other than that all WW2 manufacture Springfield rifles were made from the same high strength Chrome/Nickel/Molybdenum alloy used for the Garand rifles.
Posting Permissions
| BP | Bronze Point | IMR | Improved Military Rifle | PTD | Pointed |
| BR | Bench Rest | M | Magnum | RN | Round Nose |
| BT | Boat Tail | PL | Power-Lokt | SP | Soft Point |
| C | Compressed Charge | PR | Primer | SPCL | Soft Point "Core-Lokt" |
| HP | Hollow Point | PSPCL | Pointed Soft Point "Core Lokt" | C.O.L. | Cartridge Overall Length |
| PSP | Pointed Soft Point | Spz | Spitzer Point | SBT | Spitzer Boat Tail |
| LRN | Lead Round Nose | LWC | Lead Wad Cutter | LSWC | Lead Semi Wad Cutter |
| GC | Gas Check |
