So bummed

[rick benjamin]

is this some sort of aftermarket peep sight on this rifle? YES - WILLIAMS, REDFIELD, LYMAN, ETC
Could the forward sight leaf have been removed and this new peep been installed at a much later date? YES
Even the front sight blade doesn't look correct. IT'S NOT THE ORIGINAL
Has this rifle been extensively modified? YES
What a shame to do this to such a historical piece!

These military rifles were disposed of as trash. In the eyes of the custodians at the time, they were scrap.
Sold at auction by the truck loads. Re-sold in the American Rifleman, gun shops for whatever the market offered (and delivered to your home via USPO).



Chop off the heavy parts, a bit of elbow grease and sandpaper, a deer hunter for cheap.
I acquired a 30.06 1917 Enfield

"Improved" by an old former Alaskan guide. Hand carved stock.





As you can see, the "Ears" (rear sight) were chopped off. Will never be original again...

 

[rick benjamin]

Enfields were originally "cock-on-un-lock"
a modification to the firing pin made them "cock-on-lock"
My rifle has the mod installed. I also have the original.
Roy Dunlap's book Gunsmithing discusses several military surplus modifications.

 

[semperfi68to70]

Pictures or it didn't happen. You must appease the gun gods...

And so you shall have photographic proof! Here is my $10.00 03A3 manufactured in December of 1943 by Remington.

 

[semperfi68to70]

These military rifles were disposed of as trash. In the eyes of the custodians at the time, they were scrap.
Sold at auction by the truck loads. Re-sold in the American Rifleman, gun shops for whatever the market offered (and delivered to your home via USPO).
View attachment 103726

View attachment 103727
Chop off the heavy parts, a bit of elbow grease and sandpaper, a deer hunter for cheap.
I acquired a 30.06 1917 Enfield
View attachment 103728
"Improved" by an old former Alaskan guide. Hand carved stock.
View attachment 103720
View attachment 103721
View attachment 103722
View attachment 103723
View attachment 103725
As you can see, the "Ears" (rear sight) were chopped off. Will never be original again...

I still think it is beautiful.

 

[solv3nt]

And so you shall have photographic proof! Here is my $10.00 03A3 manufactured in December of 1943 by Remington.

She's just a few months younger than mine. I'll give you $20 for her, double your initial investment! Nice rifle BTW

 

[semperfi68to70]

She's just a few months younger than mine. I'll give you $20 for her, double your initial investment! Nice rifle BTW

Thank you, I think I will hang on to her. One of these days I will tell you about my WWII Nazi Luger I picked up for $200 in about 1998. It came with a holster dated 1915 and six rounds of 9mm Parabellum head stamped 1942. It is amazing what people sell when they think they need money.

 

[solv3nt]

Thank you, I think I will hang on to her. One of these days I will tell you about my WWII Nazi Luger I picked up for $200 in about 1998. It came with a holster dated 1915 and six rounds of 9mm Parabellum head stamped 1942. It is amazing what people sell when they think they need money.

Bah! I have a hard time "liking" your post when you have something that I want for $200

 

[orygun]

This 03 the OP has was obviously someones pride and joy. The rear sight is likely a Williams.

I'd have a hard time not shooting this baby. It wouldn't be something I'd restore, as the metal has been modified, but is something I would cherish as an American Sporter.

Ironbar, I have a sporterized SMLE that I'm selling and is safe to shoot. If your interested, I'm up for a trade.

 

[bolus]

Anyone know if a black powder cartridge would be safer to shoot in it?

http://www.buffaloarms.com/black_powder_ammo_pr-4431.aspx

 

[Ironbar]

Well, I'd like to say that the rifle "is" mine, but today some developments have happened that may take it away. All I will say is that money changes people, and often times not for the better. If the person in question decides she wants these firearms to go to other people, I will have no say in it.

 

[pdrake]

I can't be the only forum member reading this thread, thinking "Yep, my Springfield looks like that one.......yep, my sporterized has that mod, too......." I think it is that time of year to take the Model 1903 out of storage, and shoot something with it. Like maybe a deer.

 

[Certaindeaf]

It's too bad that that rifle is questionable.. oh well.
I actually like the sporterized models better than stock.. I have a sporterized by me model and love it.
It's a triple nickel (close to stainless) Smith and Corona.

 

[Provincial]

My dad sporterized a very low number 1903 Springfield when I was a kid. He "proof-tested" it with a cord tied to the trigger, pulling the cord from the back side of a huge tree. We shot hundreds of rounds through the old girl with no problem. Almost all were handloads using surplus 4831 powder, and never maximum loads. The loads were about midway between the starting load and maximum load in the Lyman manuals of the day. My father's theory was that the slower-burning powder was less likely to stress a brittle receiver.

If you read the pertinent section of Hatcher's Notebook carefully, he did not feel that the surviving low-number Springfields were particularly dangerous. By then, most of the brittle receivers had failed. Most failures were attributed to defective ammunition produced during WWI, and once that ammo was removed from service failures (not just of low-number Springfields, but of higher-number Springfields as well) declined drastically. That ammunition exceeded design pressures by a large margin. Of course, the low-number rifles had been withdrawn from active use by then, so there was no data to confirm their safety with normal ammunition.

Given that there were plenty of Springfields with the improved heat treatment, it made sense for the Government to withdraw the suspect rifles from active service. Notice I say "active", because the Army kept them in inventory for ceremonial duties and as a reserve in case they needed to be issued in an emergency. The Army never truly "condemned" the low-number Springfield.

 

[Certaindeaf]

yep, yer gonna die. true story

 

[U201491]

Any idea where this could be done??

You might call Lee at Riches Guns in Donald, OR.
He can refer you if he can't do it himself. I know his dad could have done it. Maybe Allison & Carey in Portland if they are still in business. Any good gunsmith that has been around for 40+ years can help you get it done or refer you to someone that can.

Dean Enstead in Canemah would have proof tested it for you. He did lots of good stuff and some crazy stuff too LOL.
Kind of miss that guy.

 

[Medic!]

Any gunsmith telling you he tested your low serial number 1903 Springfield, and it's good to go! Would be putting his pride before his brain.

 

[Certaindeaf]

Kinda what I was thinking. I wouldn't re-proof an old and suspect 100 yr old Damascus barreled shotgun etc. just for the "fun" of it!
Perhaps a hardness test, reduced loads, sell it, hang it above the fireplace or say "f it!" and use full power loads (lol, are there any other options?).. it's up to only you.
Good luck.. I like that rifle though.

 

[U201491]

It would eliminate a potential grenade.
This is the right way. If it falls into the description here. Demill it and hang it on the wall or make a lamp out of it.

Information On M1903 Receiver Failures

http://m1903.com/03rcvrfail/

A good proof test would fix it though
Anything in a cf cartridge that has a track record of blowups should be made inoperable before it someday does someone serious harm. The collector value is not worth the potential harm it can eventually do.
There are too many good firearms. A Damascus bbl speaks for itself. This masquerades as a modern supposedly safe cf that can kill or maim .
Demill it and make it safe for future owners.

 

[Certaindeaf]

.Anything in a cf cartridge that has a track record of blowups should be made inoperable before it someday does someone serious harm..

True.. check out all those Glock kabooms.. travesty.

 

[U201491]

True.. check out all those Glock kabooms.. travesty.

Anything can blow up, but when there is a 6 lane wide track record, there is a problem that needs appropriate action. I really prefer that some unsuspecting person does not get hold of one, loads it up heads into the field then leaves a blood trail for the sar teams. Better to make the bad ones simply inoperable. There are lots of good ones to choose from. There are a lot of good 03's to choose from.