how weak is a springfield?

2

22to45

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
38   0   0
A 03 springfield serial 387### fell into my lap, and I am not knowledgeable about these, but I recall hearing a rumour that they were "not the quality of a mauser". It needs a bit of work, the bishop stock is cracked, and I have to make a guard screw.. The bore looks ok. I am wondering what I will have when I am done.

Thanks
Allen
 
I think what you are concerned about is the early Springfields that had dubious heat treating of the receiver. I think I also recall an issue about the firing pin. I am not an authority on these, but someone here will be able to tell you what serial number range to be concerned about.
 
Actually I was going to get it running and give it to a favored nephew. It will no doubt stay an '06 and may or may not get drilled for a scope. Probably it will not, I expect that he will use it for creeping through the willows looking for a moose.
Allen
 
Last edited:
As far as being the "quality of a Mauser" goes, some of the best features of the '98 were deleted when the 1903 was designed.
Your rifle is one of the so called low number Springfields, if it was made at Springfield Armory. There has been MUCH discussion about whether these low number rifles should be used at all. One school of thought is that they should not be fired. Period. The receiver is case hardened mild steel. Some did fail in use. Most of the failures involved rifles made in 1917, when the receivers were left brittle. During WW2, many low numbered rifles were rebuilt with new barrels and nickle steel bolts. None failed proof. If you choose to do some research, you will find lots of information about these rifles.
A double heat treated or nickle steel '03 is every bit as strong as a good '98 Mauser - although from a design standpoint it will not handle gas from a failed cartridge case as well. '98 Mausers are variable, depending on when and where they were made. Some Mausers are suitable for some conversions, some are not. High number Springfields have been converted to most every cartridge that can be made to feed through the action.
 
Important. Was your rifle made at Springfield Armory, or at Rock Island Arsenal?
Quote from Hatchers Notebook. "On February 20, 1918, at rifle number 800,000, a major change was made in the heat treatment of the receiver and bolt, which resulted in a rifle of far greater strength than before."
"On May 11, 1918, at receiver No. 285,507, Rock Island Arsenal adopted an improved heat treatment for carbon steel M 1903 receivers and bolts. Around Aug. 1, 1918, at about receiver No. 319,921, that arsenal began using nickel steel for part of the production of receivers and bolts, but at the same time continued to make these parts from carbon steel."
 
the difference is in the firing pin- the mauser uses a 1 piece and the springfield a 2- the tip is removeable/replaceable- a difference you'll probably never see in civilian life- unless you detail strip the bolt - and it depends on which mauser you're talking about- some of the very late war manufactures were very crude, and some of the licensed copies were just downright awful- i had such a 98 brasilian, which would hit the receiver ring at 1 o'clock when you closed the bolt- and the wobble at the other end( bolt open) was a good 3 inches off both sides- the other thing you should check into is which serial numbers were affected by the recall as some of the springfields were "burnt" by heat treating them to too high a temperature and making the actions brittle- serial 800,000 if made by springfield and 285,507 if it's a rock island manufacture- if it's below these numbers limit yourself to 48 k psi loads which are standard 30-06 loads- the real difference is that the mauser offers 100 % case head support, whereas the springy has only 80%-
 
22to45 said:
Actually I was going to get it running and give it to a favored nephew. It will no doubt stay an '06 and may or may not get drilled for a scope. Probably it will not, I expect that he will use it for creeping through the willows looking for a moose.
Allen
Click to expand...

for what you pay for drill and tap thesedays, you're FAR BETTER off selling it and get a COMMERCIAL rifle with the money and let some milsurp guy preseve it - all milsurps are worth far more in original condition than if bubba gets a hold of them
 
Also I can't see drilling holes for a scope mount into a possibly already brittle receiver being a very good idea.
 
Tapping it for a scope would make a $400-$600 rifle worth about $3.50.....
Sell it and buy a sporter M1917 for beating the bush. Or Tradex has HUNDREDS of sporter '98's etc for very reasonable prices. He might even do a trade with you for something, save you the hassle of selling and buying:)
 
22to45 does mention that the rifle has a Bishop stock. If the barrelled action is intact, restoration would be an option.
Drilling and tapping case hardened receivers can be an adventure. Spot annealing or a carbide drill would be needed.
Personally, I don't know how I would feel about using a low number Springfield. Obviously the rifle has been around for about 90 years, has no doubt been used a lot, and is still in one piece. While rifles did fail, the overwhelming majority didn't.
During the '30s, one large business in the US made up a lot of sporters on the early actions. They advertised that they reheat treated the receivers. What they actually did was anneal them, and leave them soft. Solved the problem of excessive hardness. Also caused other problems. US Ordnance tried reheat treating early receivers, and gave up. Reheat treating cannot repair the metallurgical damage.
There are the documented receivers that were spoiled in manufacture during WW1, and subsequently failed. There were also Springfields that failed prior to WW1. Perhaps some of the failures resulted from ammunition failures, not from the receivers breaking because of poor metallurgy. In the event of a catastrophic case failure, an '03 can break up in a dramatic manner. They were blown rifles during the Camp Perry matches. Bolt swapping to get better trigger pulls was a suspected contributing factor. There was a learning curve in the manufacture of modern high pressure smokeless ammuntion.
I have a low number barrelled receiver that was tested by tapping it with a hammer. The right hand rail snapped. Brittle is a bit of an understatement.
 
Search previous threads on the 03 & you be the judge. Like others have stated sporterizing an 03 will only devalue the gun. Regardless of whether you heed the warnings about the early manufactured receivers, The M17 or Mauser action make a far better platform on which to base a hunting rifle from...
Just my 2 cents.
 
I personally would NOT use a low number Springfield. The Springfield was a poor design, anyway. The two piece firing pin can come apart when a case ruptures, blowing the cocking piece into your eye. The coned breach allows 1/8 inch of a chambered cartridge to remain unsupported. A case separation in an '03 is bad news. Some low numbered receivers were so brittle, that the recoil lug would shear right of the receiver in normal use. Sometimes centre punching the receiver ring to mark it for drilling and tapping would split the action. Some Eddystone P-14 and M-17 rifles suffer from the same problem. The '03 was not a variant of the '98 Mauser, but a combo of the '93 Mauser and the Krag rifle. The crappy design of the firing pin and coned breach, along with the bolt release-mag cutoff came from the Krag. It does not have the best features of the '98, like the safety firing pin, gas handling system, and the internal collar in the receiver. I would suggest restoring it to original military configuration and selling it. The $$$ would buy a really good rifle for your nephew.
 
I have a low numbered Springfield that did blow up. The rifle was designed well enough that it saved the shooter's life or eyesight.

The rifle was then torn apart and converted to .22LR

Springfield1903-220.jpg
 
You folks might want to keep in mind that the AEF fought a World War with "low number Springfields."
And PLEASE no wise cracks about how we only were there for one year.
 
Mostly the M1917 though. Springfields were distributed in smaller numbers than the good old American Enfield.

John Sukey said:
You folks might want to keep in mind that the AEF fought a World War with "low number Springfields."
And PLEASE no wise cracks about how we only were there for one year.
Click to expand...
 
Pre-war 1903's were heat treated by very experienced guys who judged the temperature of the steel by eye. When pyrometers were used, it was discovered that the temperatures could be as much as 300 degrees hotter on a sunny day than of a cloudy day. That resulted in the steel being burned. Those receivers could be shattered by smacking them with a hammer.
"...give it to a favored nephew..." Don't. Low numbered 1903's are not considered safe to shoot with any ammo.
 
Hey I have plenty of hunting rifles that I am sure you would prefer.. I will trade one for your springfield..... NO PROBLEM,, I even has Mauser 98 actioned sporters already scoped to trade... PM me for details.. I will preserve the springfield..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom