springfield 03
I recently picked up an 03 Springfield whose serial number indicates it was made in 1919. This seems to be a correct gun in all aspects.
However the 4 grouve barrel is dated 1913.
My question is this a replacement barrel or did they make MANY in 1913 and diden't get around to installing some of them until 1919?
Thanks for any help.
However the 4 grouve barrel is dated 1913.
My question is this a replacement barrel or did they make MANY in 1913 and diden't get around to installing some of them until 1919?
Thanks for any help.
0
-
I have heard that actions on springfield 03's with serial
numbers under 800,000 were brittle and could blow up can these
actions be rehardened or is it a lost cause
col elect1mike Illinois
volinters RRG
O give me a home where no democrats roam0 -
Not Actually Blowup in your Face...But Crack a reciever with Modern Sporting Loads..Here's What H.E. MacFarland had to say about the Springfield...Avoid the Model where the Serial Number is below 800,000 for Springfield Armory Manufacture and 285507 for Rock Island Arsenal Manufacture. Those with the smaller numbers are the early, brittle, case-hardened type made prior to WW1. These Rifles these early rifles are relatively safe for the Standard Factory Load, but lack the great strength anf safety margin of later types......
Captain Kirk, Tech Staff
Edited by - captkirk3@earthlink.net on 11/21/2002 14:18:330 -
A very interesting topic! The Govt. tried several experiments in this area and gave up on it, primarily because some of this group of receivers had been over heated and a lot of the critical carbon burned out of the steel. There is no way to put the carbon back into the steel (this is different from surface hardening), and they had no way of knowing exactly which receivers fell into this group. In fact, indications were that it was a few here and a few there throughout the entire production. If you search the CMP website you will find (if it's still there) a very interesting statement by the Chief of Ordnance at the time who decided to keep the low number Springfields in service until they required rebarrelling or rebuilding at which time they would be withdrawn and stored. It was pointed out then, and has been pointed out many times since, that most of these low number rifles had seen extensive W.W.I service; and that it takes an awful lot of rounds to wear out a barrel. Probably those receivers that were prone to failure had failed by that time, although a few blew up as late as 1929 (which was only 11 years after W.W.I). Although these rifles were withdrawn from service many were reissued for W.W.II and many given to allies. They are still frequently encountered and many have been successfully used by hunters for years. Whether or not you should shoot yours is a decision you must make alone and bear the responsibility for. I have two such receivers which were returned from China in the 1980s and rebuilt into rifles by the Federal Ordnance Corp. to look like new with a hodge podge mixture of 1903 and '03-A3 parts. I have fired them frequently using handloads of approx. .30-30 pressures and cast bullets (discretion being the better part of valor!) without incident and excellent accuracy. It should also be pointed out that metallic cartridge cases as currently produced are much better that those of 1918 vintage. My thinking is that if the U.S. Army wore them out once, and the Chinese wore them out a second time, they have been well proven. Others will vehemently disagree and advise you to never fire a low number Springfield under any circumstances. But, the short answer to your question is, "No". 0 -
There was a study made in 1923 to determine practicability of reheat treating the early receivers mentioned above. In tests it was found that reheattreated early receivers would stand a 50% overload. However,Springfield Armory findings were that old receivers varied widely in chemical composition and would not give uniform results. In addition, some of them were found to have been overheated or burnt during the forging process.These were dangerous and could not be made safe by reheattreating. They said early rifles are dangerous if pressures are above normal or if headspace is excessive.
The Board recommended they be scrapped. However, in 1928 the Chief of Field Service recommended the low numbered rifles not be issued but kept in war reserve since many of these rifles had seen a bit of service and had stood up. They were to be scrapped only when they came in for repair. This recommendation became Army policy;
explaining why these receivers are still around.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
4 comments