National Ordinance 03-A3
A good friend bought a National Ordinance 03-A3 new in the early 70's, he thinks. It has never been shot, and is the box it came in, in like new condition, with a shiny-new 2-groove barrel and other apparently new surplus GI parts. I have heard the receivers were perhaps unsafe, and the rifle shouldn't be shot. Is there a basis in fact for that statement? It seems hard to imagine a U.S. made rifle would have been produced with unsafe metallurgy. The serial number is 50012xx.
0
-
The unsafe receivers were for the Model 1903, not the 03-A3, made by Springfield Arsenal and serial numbered below 800,000 and Rock Island Arsenal numbered below 286,506.
However, according to this article:
Those considering an 03 purchase should also be aware of Sante Fe and National Ordnance rifles. These companies manufactured rifles with surplus GI parts and new cast recievers. The safety of these rifles is suspect and they hold almost no collector value except the sum of the GI parts they were put together with. Some dealers, whether decietfully or honestly unaware, will sell them as Remingtons (many of the surplus parts are R marked) and the unknowing buyer will not get what he thinks he is getting.
http://www.northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/threads/18937-Low-number-Springfield-1903-rifles
In another article:
In the book The Springfield 1903 rifles by Lt. Col. William S. Brophy, USAR, Ret., he discusses the National Ordnance 03A3 rifles.
I'll try to summarize.
A company named Golden State Arms built 1903 rifles using investment cast receivers made in Yugoslavia and surplus 1903 parts. Workmanship was poor, with very poor fit and finish. After relatively few of these were sold, National Ordnance of El Monte, CA produced them under their own name, using a better investment cast receiver (better than the Golden State version, but still a poor substitute for a real '03), again with surplus parts . In the author's opinion, a collector is wasting his money if he invests in one of these ersatz rifles for any reason other than curiosity. The good news is, in 1963, H.P. White Laboratory tested 3 of the N.O. receivers and found no weaknesses or flaws during the abusive and destructive testing. If yours headspaces correctly, it should be safe to shoot. Accuracy will depend largely on the condition of the barrel.
http://www.perfectunion.com/vb/showthread.php?t=39970
In summary, I highly recommend that your rifle be throughly inspected by a qualified gunsmith before attemtping to fire it.0 -
It was made in 1969, according to my reference.
Back then legal liability in the gun business wasn't what it is today, with a bottom feeding lawyer slithering under every toilet seat.
If he really want to shoot it have him take it to a competent gunsmith for inspection, headspacing and test firing.
Have him secure it in a rubber tire and fire at least 20 cartridges remotely with a string prior to taking it to the gunsmith. This is to see if the locking recesss in the receiver will compress causing excess headspace.0 -
These are commercial production rifles using in house receivers or scraped USGI surplus receivers that have been welded and then refinished. Since NO irlfes are not actual military production the safe/unsafe numbers for Springfield and Rock Island don't apply. The serial number above 5 million is outside of any USGI range (which is why they used thsoe numbers) so it is either a new production receiver or one that has been scrapped, welded together and a new number applied. These receivers have a spotty reputation for quality and the welded examples are particularly bad in regards to proper feeding and functioning. NO was very tight lipped about where they sourced their parts and many were suspected to have come from Asia. After the rifle was assembled with the paerts on hand it was completely parkerized, which was the same process NO used for it's M1 carbines. 0 -
Adding to the excellent information stated-
I personally reviewed a new* N O* 03A3 that had blown up.
The receiver was not the cause of the failure-it was the
barrel. The barrel appeared to be a NOS Remington.
It had been relined and the liner had come loose.
The shooter escaped injury.
Best.0 -
Thanks to all for the input; I'll pass it all along to him, especially advising to have it checked out for headspace, and test fire remotely. It is definitely an investment-cast receiver, not a re-weld. I have used the "old-tire and string" remote test-fire system for many years, starting with old military rifles I bought as a teenager for $5 to $20 (The good old days! Enfields, Springfields, all sorts of Mausers! Pick the one that looked the best out of the crate or barrel!) 0 -
I built a military '03-A3 on a Nat'l. Ord. investment cast receiver back in the '70s. Shot several boxes of military ammo through it with no problems. 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
6 comments