1903A3 stock question?

[DaveInFloweryBranchGA]

I've managed to pick up the critical parts of a 1903A3 rifle to complete a barreled action and am working on deciding which stock I want.

I have three options:

1. A commercially made C stock runs about 175-200 dollars with a handguard in walnut .

2. An original scant stock runs about $175.00 with a handguard in walnut.

3. A straight stock.

What I'm wondering is if the scant stock is a good shooter related to recoil like the C stock or is it more like the straight stock. I'm putting this rifle together as a shooter, not a safe queen.

Thanks,

Dave

[45 2.1]

I've managed to pick up the critical parts of a 1903A3 rifle to complete a barreled action and am working on deciding which stock I want.

I have three options:

1. A commercially made C stock runs about 175-200 dollars with a handguard in walnut .

2. An original scant stock runs about $175.00 with a handguard in walnut.

3. A straight stock.

What I'm wondering is if the scant stock is a good shooter related to recoil like the C stock or is it more like the straight stock. I'm putting this rifle together as a shooter, not a safe queen.

Thanks,

Dave


I like the scant stock the best of the three available.

[bullshot]

http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj148/bullshot_photo/IMG_4907.jpg If you're not restoring it,put the "C" stock on it. More comfortable to shoot.

[mto7464]

C stock.

[10-x]

"C" Stock for shooting.

[NickSS]

Definately the C Stock for a shooter. The others bang up my cheak and seam to have more recoil that a 30-06 should have.

[Larry Gibson]

The C stock always makes a better shooter, its why the military went with the additional expense (you get less stocks from the same blank of wood) for them when they adopted its use on the M1903A1.

Larry Gibson

[DaveInFloweryBranchGA]

Does anybody have a suggestion on which of the after market outfits are the best to pick up a C stock? I found a place that sells "collector" NOS (aka replacement) military stocks and they wanted nearly as much as the rifle costs from CMP for one of those stocks.

If possible, I'd like one that's unfinished, reasonably decently made and will require a bit of fitting, as I have the tools to fit the stock and am pretty good at doing so.


Thank you for your help,

Dave

[osage]

Dave have you looked at Boyd's? I have not fitted the stock set that I bought for a Garand yet.

http://www.boydsgunstocks.com/BrowseEbus/Militaryall.asp

[Bob S]

I would avoid Boyd's. I have had three of their '03 stocks, and three of their M1 stocks, and all have been unsatisfactory.

The '03 stocks were dimensionally incorrect in several areas: the spacing of the bedding screw holes was not correct, and the angle of the rear screw was incorrect. The spacing of the shoulder for the lower band did not match the supplied handguard, or an issue handguard, and the predrilled hole for the lower band spring was too far from the shoulder, which would allow the lower band to slide longitudinally about 1/8". The "inletting" for the buttplate was off-axis and also turned, so that the final position could not be corrected without significantly shortening the LOP. The inletting for the trigger guard was so sloppy that you could drop the guard in, turn the stock over, and the guard would drop out from its own weight.

With mucho work and glass bedding to get it to fit in critical areas where the Boyd gorillas removed too much material, you might make it work, but the stock would not conform to the "as-issued" CMP rules because of the necessary glass bedding material ... that may not make any difference to you, but it is a critical requirement for me.

The M1 stocks are better, but they still suffer from too much removal of material in production. When you put the barrelled action in an issue stock, you should have to push it in, not "drop it in": there should be no movement at all in any direction. All of the Boyd's that I have worked with have had longitudinal movement to varying degrees in the as-received condition, and that includes the ones supplied by the CMP. With such movement, the rifle will not shoot up to it's potential. That is easily correctable with epoxy bedding, but if you are interested in shooting a CMP "Garand Match", that stock would not be legal.

I got a repro "C" stock from DuPage Trading Co, and according to Jim Dupage, it was a Boyd's that he had reworked after weeding out the really bad ones. That one was satisfactory, and I still have it. I got a "high end" repro "S" stock from him also when he first started offering them seven or eight years ago, and that one is a jewel: the wood is gorgeous and it is a true arsenal fit: I did not have to remove or add any material to get it to fit snug in all the proper places. That one was $275 at that time and it was well worth it. (I think it was made by Michael Kokalus).

All of this experience is 7-8 years old. Maybe Boyd's has cleaned up their act, but I seriously doubt it. Their idea of "drop in fit" is to me overly sloppy. Most of their customers don't know how and don't want to be bothered with fitting a stock properly. If it falls into the wood with a minimum amount of work and looks OK, most folks are happy, and truthfully most of them aren't good enough shooters to be able to tell that the thing isn't bedded right. As long as Boyd's can sell their junk (and it does sell), they won't be motivated to improve the product for old curmudgeons like me who remember what "quality" was. YMMV. Rant Mode OFF.

Resp'y,
Bob S.

[Bob S]

As for the relative merits of the various stock designs ... the "C" is the gold standard, designed by the target shooters of the day. It was also the basis for the classic Winchester "Marksman" stock on their Model 54 and later Model 70 target rifles. It has a relatively straight comb and slightly longer LOP than the old "S" stock. We used to turn up our noses at the scants, called them "warthogs" because they were ugly when compared to a Springfield "C", or even an early Keystone "C" (letter K stamped in the cut-off clearance). In more recent times, I have owned and fired several rifles with scant stocks, and the shooting properties are very similar to the "C" if you can just get past the unorthodox appearance. The first scants were made at Springfield for '03 rebuilds before the 03A3 was developed, and the fit and finish rival the pre-war "C" stocks. By the drawing, the drops at the comb and heel, and the LOP are the same as for the "C" stock, you just don't have the support for the little finger of the trigger hand. Exterior dimensions got sloppy in the later contractor production, but I would still take a scant over a Boyd's "C". Type "S", and it's WW II cousin, the 03A3, have shorter LOP, about 1/2" shorter than the "C" and the scant, and has much more drop at the comb and heel. That drop is what makes the recoil "feel" more severe, and it forces you into a higher prone position, which may not be a bad thing if you wear prescription glasses ... you look through the part of the lens that has less distortion than the upper perifery of the lens. If you have short arms like I do, that 1/2" shorter LOP makes it much easier to operate the bolt in rapid fire without disturbing your position.

This is one of my favorite shooters these days:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v76/BobS1/Rem_4179xxx.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v76/BobS1/Rem_2groove_target.jpg

Sometimes I still take the Classic Poor Man's Match Rifle, circa 1965-1968, to the range, too:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v76/BobS1/Springfield%2003s/Classic%2003A3%20MR/Classic03A3MR.jpg

Resp'y,
Bob S.

[sundog]

Dave, have you thought about synthetic?

http://home.windstream.net/corkyconnell/sporter_small.jpg

I have this one and a RI 03 with Lyman peeps front and rear. The Bell & Carlson stock is VERY comfortable. The scoped sporter in the picture is acru-glass bedded, the other one is not. Both are GOOD shooters.

[DaveInFloweryBranchGA]

BobS,

Thanks for the information. I"m a good enough shot to tell the difference in the bedding. At least I was, until my eyes changed. If I can't find a quality stock, I'll pick up one of the scant C's as an alternative. I have long arms for my height and really appreciate all the length of pull I can get. My son, who will one day inherit the rifle, has even longer arms than I. His LOP is 16-16.6" where my is about 15 - 15.5."

Sundog,

I'm very familiar with Bell & Carlson and like them, but I really prefer a wood stock. No good reason why, except I just prefer the feel of the wood over synthetics. I agree they're top notch, I built my son's custom Mauser 98 sporter with one.

Regards,

Dave

[Char-Gar]

Dave... I have a new USGI 03A3 upper handguard that is yours for the cost of postage. I can also come up with a triggerguard/floor plate and probably a follower and spring. I also have some other small parts, but don't know what. Any and all are yours for the cost of postage. just let me know what you need.

[DaveInFloweryBranchGA]

Chargar,

That's a mighty fine offer and I'll take you up on it. PM inbound.

Dave

[Bear Claw]

I know not about what boyds stocks were like a few years ago, I have since last year done an 03 mk1 in a c stock and an m1 garand with boyds stocks with no problems at all, so mabey they cleaned up there act. If they had been a problem I am thinking boyds would make em right but thats just my .02


anyway my vote is on the C for a shooter, a scant for 2nd choice :drinks:

[stillhunter]

Nice project. Lyman 311284 will shoot great in it. EBay has had several respectable C stocks for around 125.00. Good luck.