Skip to main content
Help Center Community Shop

Remington 1903 questions

Comments

8 comments

  • Hawk Carse
    No Remington 1903, 1903A1 or 1903A3 falls in the "low number" category.

    Rifles made at Springfield Armory and Rock Island Armory during WW I had case hardened actions that in some examples turned out to be brittle. The heat treatment was improved at Springfield by or before serial number 800,000 and at Rock Island at serial number 285,507 in 1918. The next series of "double heat treated" actions are plenty strong and very smooth in operation... as military rifles go. They later changed to nickel steel which may be even stronger if not quite as smooth in operation.

    All Remington 1903s were made right before and during WW II and are of nickel steel with no worries as to strength.
    0
  • badsbsnf81
    Caution is advised if you buy a Springfield below 800,000 due to heat treatment issues.
    0
  • txjackass
    everything i have read or seen about 1903 springfeild says do not shoot with # below 1903 springfield 800,000 or rockisland 285,506.i have 6 under those # that are stamped 1903 made in 1906 to 1918 they are not safe to shoot in my mind.
    0
  • Tailgunner1954
    TxJack
    I read a study on the -03's somewhere, and it seems all the ones that cracked in military service (they kept records even back than) were made on days wwith a certain kind of weather (can't remember if it was cloudy or sunny). It seams the early (low number) ones were heat treated by "eye", that is the craftsmen judged the steel temprature by eye, and the different lighting is what caused them to overheat the problem guns.
    The authors conclusion was that if they had survived military usage and perhaps a arsonal rebuild, that they were one of "the good ones" and were safe to shoot.

    IIRC that study is posted on the web somewhere, you might take a look around and draw your own conclusions about the deal.
    0
  • Hawk Carse
    quote:The authors conclusion was that if they had survived military usage and perhaps a arsonal rebuild, that they were one of "the good ones" and were safe to shoot.

    The late Dave LeGate, art director for Rifle and Handloader magazines and a Springfield collector, sacrificed several of those surviving low number actions in the 1970s. There were still some in use that were brittle and would break if whacked with a hammer or dropped on a hard floor.
    0
  • sandwarrior
    I heard that some of them would show up when shot in extreme cold. They would pass the 'test' in normal temps then come apart in below zero weather. That to me would coincide with the "heat treating by eye" story.

    I never knew the serial numbers, so I never really trusted the 1903's. There is a Remington model 30 I wish I had another chance to buy though. Of course it took me years to overcome the same thing with Mausers. My dad thought they'd blow if you just handled them. Being a little kid during WWII led to certain myths. Like if it was made in Germany it was no good. "We beat them because our stuff was better," He'd say. Which of course was pretty far from the truth. Overcoming mythology is hard to do in cases like that.
    0
  • jonk
    Most of those that failed were due to imporoper ammo (like firing a german 8mm round) or bore obstructions.

    I agree, it is most probable that any that would let go let go a long time ago but I wouldn't chance it, except maybe with very low pressure cast bullet loads.

    But for all Remingtons or the Springfield/Rock Islands above the serials referenced above, you are fine.
    0
  • v35
    NOT TRUE.
    It wasn't the heat treatment that resulted in defective receivers, it was that the receivers were left in the furnace too long and the steel was BURNED, a technical term which you may want to look up, it means carbon around the grain boundries, greatly weakening the steel.
    There is nothing that can be done to improve those affected receivers.
    There is also no way to determine whether a receiver within that s/n group is good or bad. That is why all rifles within that whole group were recommended to be destroyed.
    With the winds of war coming up, the recommendation was ignored and the rifles were pulled from service and stored.
    Now they are being foisted on the public.
    It's Russian Roulette if you want to play it.
    Do you feel lucky?
    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Recent Activity