Accuracy Potential of the M1903 action?

LeeEnfieldNo.4_mk1

LeeEnfieldNo.4_mk1

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
28   0   0
Location
Alberta
A few years back I was given a 25-06 rifle built on an old M1903 Action. I was thinking that since I would like to one day acquire a .308 Target rifle for long range shooting. I figure I might take the old action, fix it up, having a nice target grade .308 barrel and quality stock installed with a decent optic.

Anyone know how accurate the M1903 actions can be?

The 1903 action is neat and I figure that I could probably build it up at the same cost as a modern rifle build, but still have a "milsurp" rifle.

For those wondering, in addition to the aftermarket barrel, the action has already been drilled and tapped for a scope. So very little collector value remains.

One other thing, its a fairly low serial, and I remember reading some of the lower serial ranges occasionally blew up. anyone have input on these events?

Thoughts?
 
Last edited:
Well to answer you question on accuracy, Springfield armory used to make a run of rifles (M19030's) every year to use exclusively for target competition. It is an extremely capable target rifle.
 
In regards to the lower serial number the cut off number is 800,000 for Springfield Armoury and 286,506 for Rock Island Armoury. Basically those before that number could have received improper heat treating and can potentially blow up as it could have been made to hard.

There are two major trains of thought on this, that either 1. All those that were going to blow up would have done it by now or 2. That each and everyone is a time bomb ticking.
The thing you have to remember is when the receiver breaks it will shatter as it will be too hard and will not have gradual warning signs. It will literally be one second shooting fine, the next its blown up.

This issue was one that was considered so serious by the American military that they wrote off all unissued low serial number 1903s (until WWII when they were needed for the war). To put that in perspective the American military was willing to write off 1,000,000 rifles which isn't chump change cost wise. They even almost adapted a foreign rifle (the M17) as standard issue because of this problem.

Personally I wouldn't shoot one with a low receiver, it just isn't worth it. There is no pressing need (like a war) that requires it and the U.S. government should have realistically cut up the receivers and sold the rest as parts rather than release them to the public as surplus because they are a safety concern (nowadays those rifles would have been long recalled and the company that made them sued). Having had a bad experience with a rifle almost blowing up on me I can safely say I never want to have to deal with that type of issue again, as even though I came out fine and the rifle came out fine it could have easily been a lot worse.
 
Good to know on both points.

Mines a rock Island with a higher serial then listed so I should be fine.

Looks like I have some planning to do. The receiver needs some work, a few random drilled holes to be filled in and such. I understand Vulcan can fill in the holes and provide a refinish as well correct?
 
An accurate .308 target rifle could be built up on an '03 action.
But there are so many better choices available, that doing it for the sake of doing it would be about the only justification.
 
SW28fan said:
We are still using them for matches down here.

This is what my 1903a3 will do from the bench

pc screenshot
Click to expand...

That's about as clean as an O3A3 comes. Looks like a replacement unissued stock, machined rather than original stamped trigger guard, repro sling and a refinish.

Doesn't matter, it is very pretty and it looks like it's a shooter as long as you do your part.

Thanks for showing it. Replacement barrel as well????
 
I find this action and rifle to be extremly accurate, my own 1903A4 is a dandy shooter with cheap Rem 220 gr ammo, i hate the 30-06 caliber but this rifle is one favorite of my herd... A keeper definitly... JP.

012_zps99368e55.jpg
[/URL][/IMG]
017_zps1916e6d6.jpg
[/URL][/IMG]
 
The Springfield O3 model/variations have a reputation for accuracy. In many cases, it is well deserved.

Like most military rifles, if all is well as far as bore erosion, bedding, diameter of bore etc the rifles will shoot within specified parameters with issue grade ammo.

Take one of those rifles and feed it with ammo it likes and it can be a virtual tack driver as long as the operator has the skill set to make it perform.

I have had some spectacular 03s and some real dogs. I remember a couple of pallets of them that came in from some off shore nation that either got them as lend lease or picked them up from a broker for their military. Whoever they came from, respected them and took very good care of them. All were worn but well maintained with original barrels and relatively sharp bores. All had been counter bored. This could be for several reasons but usually it means the rifles have had their muzzles and last bit of bore rusted or the troops cleaning them with pull through cleaning kits weren't careful to use a muzzle guide and dragged the ropes against the muzzle in a rush to get the job done.

I was looking for a decent one as a shooter and had the opportunity to slug the bores of the selected rifles I had set aside before sending them up to the store for the racks. Only one of the ten or so rifles had a bore that measured reasonably well. IIRC, it was still about a thousandth large. It was well used so that was no surprise. I sent all of them upstairs and declined taking one. The next batch was almost as bad other than one gem that somehow made it to disposal. It was VG on the outside and had a perfect bore dimension. I bought it.

I took it, along with a couple of others that looked good to the range (100yds) to see if they would shoot. The "gem" was the worst performer of all of them. None of them would shoot better than about 4 inches. The rifle I had purchased had a couple of bedding issues the were easily corrected and later performed quite well with surplus ammo, better with selected handloads.

What I am saying, is the 03 rifles, no matter which variation, perform about as well as any other military rifles. A lot of the "most accurate rifle in the world" is just hype to build up the confidence of the troops using it as well as the general publics impression of the arm being issued to its protectors.

Do a complete rebuild on just about any milsurp, do it right and they will shoot extremely well if you feed it good ammo and do your part.

OP, that looks like a fun project. My only advice to you is to do a cost evaluation before hand. If you plan to keep it in full military configuration be prepared to put out as much money on it or more than a sporting rifle built up on a modern receiver. If that isn't a deterrent go for it.

I have a project rifle very similar to the rifle of the Fort Worth poster sitting with all of its parts waiting for final assembly. I have been trying to decide which trigger guard set to use. I have one of both in new condition. Many folks with the No4 MkI* Long Branch rifles change out the stamped trigger guard assemblies for the stiffer milled assemblies because they feel they are stiffer. Oh well, at least I can swap out one for the other, depending on which does the best.

Before the weenies start, this rifle was rescued from a fellow that was going to turn it in to an amnesty several years ago. It is a Remington 03A3 with a perfect bore and sits in a very nice Bishop replacement sporting stock. It was drilled and tapped for a scope and the bolt was ground to clear a scope. I have a new old stock surplus, type C stock and new metal to put onto this rifle. Can't decide if I want to scope it our set it up in a similar fashion to the Ft Worth example. Will just have to see how the wind blows.
 
I've done a lot of shooting with a number of M1903s, 03-A3s and an 03A4. Apart from the shooter, accuracy depends on the mechanical condition of the rifle (proper bedding, tight sights, and barrel condition) as well as the quality of ammo used. Assuming that the rifle is in good mechanical condition and the bedding is to spec I expect at least 2 MOA accuracy with quality handloads. And some will do better. The M1903 is fairly easy to set up for proper bedding and the barrel is quite heavy which is a big help for accuracy.

A worn, pitted barrel is an accuracy killer and I will reject any rifle like this unless I am going to re-barrel it. Just for fun I once tested a Remington M1903 with a muzzle gauging 303 and a measurement of 307 on the military throat erosion gauge (308 is the reject limit). The rifle still turned in 3 inch groups! I since rebarreled it with a NOS GI barrel and it now shoots like a champ. The military barrels, incl the wartime 2 grooves, are surprisingly accurate. I`ve shot them all except for a post WW1 replacement barrel made by Avis. I have a M1903 sporter which I rebarreled with a new GI barrel and installed a 6x Burris scope in a Redfield Jr mount. I have developed 1 MOA hunting loads for it using 150, 165 and 180 gr bullets which goes to show what you can get from careful load development and better target resolution by using quality optics. My best handload for my 04A4 sniper rifle with a 2 groove barrel using a Lyman Alaskan scope where the reticle subtends approx. 4 in @ 100 yds is 1.4 in.

NOS GI M1903 barrels are tough to locate and run around $400 a pop when you can find them. NOS 03-A3 barrels are a bit less. I recently got hold of a 10-18 dated Rock Island Arsenal barrel which gauges 302 at the muzzle and has an excellent bore. I`m looking forward to testing it on a Rock Island receiver of the same vintage.

Handloads for the M1903 work best with any of IMR4064, IMR4895, H4895 and IMR4320 with a preference for IMR4350 with 180 gr bullets. IMR4064 is probably the best choice for bullets in the 150-168gr range. The M1903 is the original home for the eternal .30-06. No surprise that this is an accurate combination as a lot of military and commercial R&D effort went into developing quality rifles, bullets and ammo for it.
 
OP is asking about using an '03 action as the basis for a .308 long range target rifle.
Yes, it could be used for the purpose.
Yes, it would be an interesting project, and, yes, it should shoot well.
But it is in the same category as using a Mauser, P'14 or any other obsolete military action for the purpose.
Would it be cost effective?
The fitting of a new barrel would be more complicated and expensive than on most any current action. Square threads, coned breech, extractor cut.
Stock options? Pretty limited.
Trigger mechanism? Speedlock?
An interesting project, if the work is done by the owner. But if a 'smith is paid to do the work, it could wind up as a rifle worth less than sum of the parts and labour.
 
Thanks for all the input. I am currently looking around at options and costs.

Like Tiraq said, The barrel is going to be the tricky part. Looks like I am going to have to get one turned from a blank. Does anyone know a smith that know the '03 action and can turn a barrel?

As for the monetary value, hard to say if its worth it but the thing about me is if I like an idea I tend to go for it regardless of cost. I rarely sell firearms so the chances of me selling this one are very slim. Also, the action was free and I try not to sell free things, kinda greasy IMO.
 
Eaglelord17 said:
...

They even almost adapted a foreign rifle (the M17) as standard issue because of this problem.

...
Click to expand...

Almost? They made twice as many M1917s as they did Springfields. They did not "almost" adapt and adopt a foreign rifle, it became the unofficial service rifle of the American WWI infantryman.
 
I think what Eaglelord meant was that after WW1 the U.S. army considered dropping the 1903 and making the M1917 standard. Both Pershing and Hatcher wanted to do it. The Army had more M1917s and the heat treating was suspect on 1,000,000 of the 1903s. Several members of Congress (Particularly those from Massachusetts) managed to kill the idea.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom