My Military Babies!! Pattern 53 Enfield Rifle - Model of 1903 Mark I Springfield

[carolina556]

Well I wanted to share some joy with everyone. Here are the two babies. The P53 is my wife's gun, she has been wanting it for a long time and finally found one... The other is my 1903 Mark I, which is actually on a delivery truck on its way here, so hopefully it remains in one piece!! I am looking for an original sling and sight hood (circle P) and oiler for the 1903 if you see one, I'd be interested.


http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/ja...?sort=3&page=1

[Scharfschuetze]

Looks like lots of fun is on the way. When the Springfield gets in, fill us in on the details of the weapon.

[carolina556]

Will do... Providing it comes to me in one piece, it is supposed to be a Pattern of 1903 Mark I made and barreled in 1918 w/ Pederson cutout. Has arsenal stamp where it came into RIA probably between the wars and was marked "A" for acceptable on the barrel and put back into service.... these things are hard to find especially with the proper markings and with the correct parts and original barrel on them, so I was excited to find it. Looking for a 1918 sling and 1918 bayonet to finish it off. Already bough a NOS in greese floor plate and follower spring.

[Scharfschuetze]

I was wondering about the floor plate from the photos. Looks like you solved that problem.

Here is a good article on low number Springfields from both Rock Island and Springfield Armory. It makes for good reading:

http://m1903.com/03rcvrfail/

I have a circa 1915 Springfield Armory 1903 and while there were no reported troubles with receivers made in 1915, I use it only as a cast boolit rifle.

[carolina556]

I was wondering about the floor plate from the photos. Looks like you solved that problem.

Here is a good article on low number Springfields from both Rock Island and Springfield Armory. It makes for good reading:

http://m1903.com/03rcvrfail/

I have a circa 1915 Springfield Armory 1903 and while there were no reported troubles with receivers made in 1915, I use it only as a cast boolit rifle.

Yeah thats the only reason I went a little higher in number to the 1918 variety because of the heat treatment everyone talks about... I didn't want to take any chances. The price of an older one would have been cheaper though but I plan to shoot near military spec loadings from it nothing really hot like the new hunting ammo, just a mild 150 grain probably or lead when I get around to casting some. I have a long way to go with it hah!! Still messing with my 1911 and casting for it, so making lead for the 1903 is going to be a down the road project for sure.

I also liked the bit about WW ammo possibly playing a role in the BOOM of the receivers... I could definitely see that happening as they rushed to put out ammo one mistake could have definately caused some of the problems double powder is not a good thing

[Multigunner]

Less is said about defective barrels provided by a subcontractor being a major cause of receiver failures at some point.
The practice of bumping up the steel of an under sized blank to form the shank was fairly common, and if done properly caused no problems, but burnt steel as occasionally an issue.
If a burnt steel shank was subjected to too much stress it fractured and caused the receiver to crack as well.
Though most common to the subcontractors Springfield barrels some other rifles occasionally failed for the same reason.
Those with barrels made by the known subcontractor were supposed to be re-barreled , around 1918 IIRC.

[fouronesix]

Sounds strange, but your better half's Pottsdam Enfield with the bore gauged and marked at 24 looks interesting to me. Do you all plan to shoot it and what is the true bore diameter?