1903 Springfield 30-06

[akajun]

The issue with investment cast NA recievers is not BS, its a legit concern. I have one sporterized that I hunted with for years. When I learned of the issues with them I contacted a friend of mine that does NDT and asked what he thought. He told me to bring it to him with the barrel removed. He magnafluxed it and ultrasonic tested it. He said there was a few "suspicious spots" in the back of the receiver but the threaded area and area behind the locking lugs was fine. If you are worried about yours then pay to have it checked out.
As far as someone stamping a 1 on a low number receiver to make a high number, I seriously doubt that is possible. Those 03 receivers are pretty damn hard, I think if you were to try you would crack or otherwise distort the receiver badly, not to mention having to match the numbering font exactly.

[randyrat]

Well, for the money I have in this gun, it is no sweat to destroy the receiver...The gunsmith did say it was a bit soft, but was fine for cast bullets..I just don't know and value mine or someone else's Face and hands to be worth more than $100. The "Do not know for sure" factor bothers me. What happens in the future after I am long gone and someone feeds it a steady diet of high pressure rounds? That is what bothers me

[Rany A]

The only part that Nat'l Ord usually made was the stripped action, the rest of the parts were all surplus GI. I've been around a few of these and most were well done, decent looking rifles. The problem was how some of the actions handled failure or excessive pressure, so yes I'm sure many people have ones that have worked fine for decades but someday that, one too many times reloaded case fails, or an overcharge and bad things could happen. A gunsmith in Denver who many of you probably know (he's registered on here) has collected failed NO actions and interviewed the owners regarding the failures, he refuses to do any work on these actions.
On another note, don't ignore them completely when on a gun show table or yard sale. Usually sellers have found they're not worth as much but it's the other parts that are usually worth the asking price. Last one I ran across had a pristine 6 groove Smith Corona barrel on it, the owner was clueless.
Low pressure/ cast bullet shooters and .22 conversions are good uses for them though.

[Dutchman]

Photo is from 1968. Springfield Model 1903 s/n 394506 barrel date December, 1909. This rifle came to me for $35 which was about par for the course at the time. I was informed about the issue of low number 03 and was told to handload using slow powders like IMR4831 which I loaded maximum compressed loads using Sierra MatchKing 200 gr.

This rifle was un-rebuilt in beautiful condition. There was a very slight warpage in the receiver. The bolt would rub the left side-wall of the receiver. Cause was from quenching.

I've read Hatcher's Notebook a dozen times (at least!). There is no better authority on the issue of 1903 Springfields than Hatcher. Brophy's book on the 1903 doesn't even go into the issue of low number 1903!

It is a fallacy to believe all the bad 1903 have surfaced therefore those that are available today are "ok". Not true. That statement shows the issue isn't understood. If it was me, today, I'd make a low number 03 a cast bullet shooter and be happy with it in that capacity. Even so treated you can have problems with double loads of fast pistol powders (as with all firearms). There are enough high number rifles to make it a non-issue.



My only 1903 Springfield is this high number, double heat-treat with barrel dated 1918. It came from CMP as one of the Greek Lend-Lease rifles. Original C-stock makes it a 1903A1 (big deal!). Excellent original barrel.



Another Greek Lend-Lease. Remington 1903(modified) with scant stock, from CMP. Very interesting example in the 1903 lineage.



I have a long history with 1903 Springfields and I truly love them for their Americana. But I prefer the 98 Mauser

[Larry Gibson]

Apparently Hatcher changed his mind after writing/publishing "Hatcher's Notebook"........

Attachment 249925

[WILCO]

Thanks Larry.

I liked reading that.

[Eddie1971]

Larry you got the goods on this topic! I think that he was right about this because there were no issues with these low numbers in WW2.