I have a low-numbered Rock Island '03 that was put into service at some point. It has a Springfield barrel dated 1918, and my assumption is that I have one of those that Hatcher mentions having been punch tested and returned to service. I don't shoot it a lot, but I'm not afraid to shoot it, either.
Not all kaboom’s are from weak receivers. Here is one on an 03A3 from 1943.
Good points from both sides but it does happen to guns other than low# 03s.
https://www.njgunforums.com/forum/in...ngton-blow-up/
Paul in WNY
Think you can, or think you can't. Either way your right.
I have witnessed three low-number blowups in my lifetime and twice took the owners to the hospital.
We don't allow them to be fired on our range, PERIOD. Even low-number rifles are worth enough as collectible these days that you could sell yours and buy an 03A3 which is a better shooter.
If your low number rifle was altered and has the "Hatcher Hole" in the left side of the receiver, it is less likely to blow. Key is whether the case lets go. It is the escaping gas and how the action handles it, not the pressure per-se, which takes the gun apart.
Many of these receivers are so brittle that if you take a 4-oz. lead hammer and whack the receiver rails you will break it, as shown in the Buckshot photos.
If you plan to shoot yours, be courteous to the others on the range and warn them so they may retreat to a safe distance beyond the fragmentation burst radius, about the same as a Mill's bomb.
I don't think firing one is worth the risk. I put it in the same category as unloading misfired 60mm mortars. Most of the time you may be lucky, but...
The ENEMY is listening.
HE wants to know what YOU know.
Keep it to yourself.
I have a low numbered job as well. It has very well worn rifling. Happened long before I got it. I don't/won/t shoot it as I have a dozen other 30-06 rifles that I can shoot with no concern for my skull get split. just my 2 cents.
any body ever read Whelan or Keith ? I believe the blow ups were in the ammo. the military was trying a lot of loads back then they even cracked some krags.
I wonder how many who consider the low numbered Springfields to be unsafe would still shoot a Krag. The Krag has the same steel and heat treat of the low number Springfield. I guess what I'm saying is that if the Krag is safe to shoot with low pressure factory loads why is the low number Springfield not safe to shoot with low pressure cast bullet handloads?
Ken
One theory on the brittle 03 receivers (and I'm sure someone will debate me on this but ...) is that Springfield hired a bunch of new workers in the rush to increase production when we got into WWI, who were not well trained on heat treatment, etc. Going by that theory the earlier production of Krags was not an issue.Originally Posted by skeet1
Last edited by JoeJames; 10-22-2018 at 01:58 PM.
I enjoy my krags and ‘03. All of these old milsurp boltguns are getting old, some have seen action, a lot of rough handling [postwar too] and abuse. Mild loads and lead bullets are the way to go imo. Save the hot stuff for your Garand or FAL.
generally a blow up is ammo related, however a proper heat treat rcvr will not catastrophically fail when it happens. they may fail, but it wont be like a grenade going off. a brittle rcvr may never fail on its own accord, however when something goes bad, it can not safely handle it. not worth arguing the merits of shooting one or not, that horse has been beaten to death. best for people to make their own decision, but be courteous and dont shoot one next to someone else. your decision should not affect them.
The only low number gun I shoot is a 1912-vintage one that went through a USMC rebuild early in WWII- Hatcher hole, C stock, stippled butt plate, pipe clamp marks on barrel, wide front sight and enlarged aperture rear sight, 2-42 barrel. I'll agree with Outpost that the Hatcher hole goes a long way toward preventing catastrophic failure.
As for ammo I use, it's all very low pressure cast loads. I'm not saying that's a panacea, but it gives me a little peace of mind on the rare occasions that I actually fire it. And I only ever use fresh virgin brass for those loads that go through that rifle to minimize the risk of case failure. And yes, headspace is at an absolute minimum.
Regarding the comparison between the Krag and early '03's, yes indeed they used virtually identical steel and heat treat techniques, The difference lies in how the two actions dispel gasses from ruptured cases. Also, I buy into the root cause of failures being the uncertainty of the new employees in the heat treat department in following/knowing/understanding the protocols for carburizing the low carbon receivers. 1917 was a time of growing pains at the Armory when they ramped up from sedate pre-war production to balls-to-the-wall wartime production and the new hires didn't have the "eye" enjoyed by the old hands. (That's not to say that earlier ones are totally immune from failure, but I think if all failures of those made in that critical period were eliminated you would find a much lower rate of incidence.) Then there were succeeding incidences of bad ammo, wrong ammo, obstructed bores, and general miscreance contributing to a large percentage of failures. Net result is those left over that failed being a small enough percentage so as to mimic failures found in many other makes of rifles. I could be wrong, it's just my theory that allows me to fire mine once in a blue moon.
Partly true. The correct method for final stress relief on rifle brass was not implemented until the mid-1930s. Ammunition manufactured prior to about 1933-34 commonly shows cracked necks in storage and even if no "season cracking" is evident may fail upon firing. If the split occurs behind the shoulder of the case, particularly near the head in the K, L or M regions the release of gas is very dangerous and is sufficient to blow up an early 03 without the "Hatcher Hole" drilled into the left side of the receiver ring. Older US military rifle ammunition which shows visible anneal color down to the shoulder should be safe to fire.
Attachment 229246
The ENEMY is listening.
HE wants to know what YOU know.
Keep it to yourself.
the ammo problem was the reason Winchester stopped making the 95 in .30-06. some were blowing up. I read in one of Keith's books where 8m/m rounds were found in some blown up rifles.
I have a low-numbered Rock Island production '08. It apparently passed the punch test as it was rebarrelled during its service life and has a Springfield Barrel dated 11/18. I shoot it with normal, full house loads, although I'm going to do a plinking load with Trailboss (I've done Trailboss in my 30-40 and it turns it into a beginners rifle -- accurate, quiet, and essentially no recoil).
Sometimes low-numbered 1903s are useful for gaining a little 'space' when you want to shoot at your club's range on a crowded day.
Say, for example, I want to do some shootin' on a day my club happens to be crowded for the annual pre-hunting season sight-in. Not a problem.
I'll just pull out my 6-digit RIA 1903, show it around a little, talk about how brittle the receiver is due to poor early-20th Century metallurgy, and then say - quite loudly - how there's no need to share a bench. Why, I'll just zero this antique while standing over the nearest shooter's shoulder using with my buddy's super-hot 'Alaskan bear handloads' topped with 220gn Hornady RN slugs, about 2600fps ...
Man-oh-man, you haven't seen how fast hard-core hunter guys can clear out space on the benches. Talk about good ol' boyz up-n-doing the mad dash ...
Who-hoo, ... that old trick works every time!
Last edited by Nick Adams; 10-30-2018 at 06:55 PM.
Underneath our starry, starry flag,
We civilized 'em with a Krag.
Was at a range when a Springfield blew up. It was loud. The shooter was lucky as I heard the blood dripping down his face was from a bit of metal that got stuck in his skull. He must have been hardheaded. People who knew him said he was an experienced guy.
that proves nothing. it could have been a pluged barrel or an over load. I saw a 336 marlin split and a ruger sbh blow up. but we still shoot them.
I too have read that there were poorly trained workers who mis-read the color of the steel during heat treat before instrumentation was put in place. And that the "old hands" were much better at turning out quality heat-treated receivers in the early guns, just as reliable as the Krags. So I shoot mild pressure reloads in my 17,xxx numbered Springfield 1903, as it was produced well before any rush to build rifles for WWI and re-built at Raritan, likely after WWI, as it now wears a barrel dated 1918...
I have three very low-numbered rifles in my safe -- two Springfields and one Rock Island. Both Springfields were "sporterized"; the RIA was not -- it's factory -- and none of the three were labeled as "unsafe to shoot". One of the Springfield had a barrel (dirty!) clearly showing it had been shot, and the other indicates similarly. I have not shot any -- they were incredibly cheap (imho) -- which is why I now own them.
Reading this thread, I just had a "flash". Fifty or so years ago, I bought a Montgomery Wards 12 ga shotgun of questionable integrity, and an old sage suggested we "proof it". After tying it to a tractor wheel, we put in a magnum-load, pulling trigger with a string from quite a distance away. (Actually, I recall how difficult this was, as the string -- bailing twine -- actually had enough "stretch" to exacerbate getting requisite poundage to pull it..). Anyhoos -- cutting to the chase -- we managed to fire three shells in the scattergun with no subsequent damage. I was satisfied, and this was my "bird" gun for six or seven years; again, with no problem. I gifted it to a fellow, and heard of no failures from his use.
Has anyone have thoughts on doing similar with the low-numbered, UTS, 1903s? If one was to make the decision (as I have) NOT to shoot them as their value may be greater as a collectible than a firearm, fine. BUT, if the firearm was acquired to be a shooter, why not tie it to something immovable, and -- with a string at a safe distance -- load it with HOT rounds and fire away. Is this not kind of what manufacturers do in what they refer to as "proof testing"?
Just curious if anyone else had similar thoughts...?...
Ahhh...the never-ending Low Number Springfield debate. Any thread with Low Number Springfield in its title is likely to eventually acquire a hundred or so posts! Seems that those who feel one way or the other have their opinions pretty well set in concrete. My opinion about it hasn't changed either.
Of course, shooting them is an individual choice and one assumes the liability and consequences should their LNS blow up. But I still believe that, in view of the facts that they were manufactured over a century ago, used in two World Wars, most rebuilt at least once due to the barrels being shot out, many given to and subsequently returned as surplus by foreign countries, and the weakest examples already eliminated in incidents documented by Gen. Hatcher, the risk of shooting one is reduced to the likelihood of a blow up being no more or less than any other rifle.
When you consider the total number of documented blow ups and subtract those in which the issue ammunition was of poor quality and failed, or an 8mm Mauser round was fired, one is left with a small number of LNS receiver failures where the metallurgy can be positively identified as the cause, and that number is compared to approximately 813,000 LNS produced, many of which have seen continuous use for a century, one gains a different perspective. I think those which were destined to fail did so long ago. Now if someone presented me with one that was in pristine condition like it was just pulled off the assembly line and kept in a closet for all these years, I would view it with suspicion and proceed cautiously. But I do feel that the
LNS rifles that are veterans of thousands of rounds and years of combat are safe to shoot, and will gladly accept all donations of such rifles.
Personally, I own two of them, one each Springfield and Rock Island (424xx), and occasionally shoot them. But, I use cast lead bullet of approximately .30-30 Win. strength or less and derive excellent accuracy as both were supplied with brand new barrels by the importer.
Der Gebirgsjage -- very well written perspective -- thank you! Mine have original barrels, but the barrels were not the "issue". I suspect reserving .30WCF loads is an ingenious way to keep these in the "shootable" rank. But, still, should I try, I may just tie the rifle to a tractor wheel and pull the trigger with a long wire -- just in case
.
geo
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 |
Reply With Quote