Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I believe it is understood that Hatcher did a lot of "blaming"/covering up of rifles getting blown up.. to not include cold-welding of the "tin-can" National Match ammunition creating a bore obstruction and blowing the rifles up.If you read Hatchers write up on the 1903 receivers the problem was actually very tiny some 29 rifles If I remember correctly. And of those many can be contributed to either incorrect ammo or as in the case with the ones that had a problem at the National Matches they had lube on the bullets and cases that caused an over pressure condition.
That said always use caution first. But and this is only my take on the situation. If a rifle has been in use for the last 100 years (the heat treating was changed in the spring of 1918) and the rifle is still in good condition its hard to imagine it is not a serviceable rifle as long as nothing is done to cause a problem.
I have a Springfield 1903 that at serial number 79K falls in between the use of Pyrometers (the first step to improving the heat treating) and the change to a double heat profile. I have never worried about shooting it with M2 level pressure ammo. As the rifle was a hunting rifle for some 60 years before I bought it.
YMMV
The problem with the catastrophic failures is that the gun could shoot well for a century with normal ammo, and then have one case failure and that specific pressure spike could rupture the receiver in a violent manner.
The army worried so little about this happening that they rearsenaled a good amount of low number receivers with new barrels and parts during WWII.
At the end of the day, this information is two-fold. One, on an original gun, it is important because any rifle with a low number receiver is not allowed in a CMP sanctioned match. Two, it is informative. People should know that the chance exists, however remote, that their gun could have a catastrophic failures. It's possible I would and have shot low number guns, but you can be damn sure I make sure I have quality eye and ear protection if I do.
like i said, i still feel bad for you!!!Yeah...mine wasn't a low number 03...it was a 03A3..that was shot with faulty re-loads.
Long story...but no one was injured ....just a fine rifle wrecked.
The worst part for me is so far...no replacement or recompense for my rifle....
Andy