You are correct that Marines used 1903s. But Claven2 specified 03-A3s, in which I believe is correct in that they were not general issue to Marines in theatre.
Remington 03-a3 Valuation
- Thread starter japhi
- Start date
You are correct that Marines used 1903s. But Claven2 specified 03-A3s, in which I believe is correct in that they were not general issue to Marines in theatre.
Yes of course. I am absolutely looking for opinions and any are welcome. Thats why I posted here, and the info above has been ben informative...if he didn't carry this gun in battle no worries, it was his gun nonetheless.
Thanks to everyone for the good info. Is it the consensus that this gun was aquired after the war?
BlackPowderBurner
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- the chesterfield
Here's a fair price: FREE. If he's getting rid of family guns they should go to family. Did your Uncle have to pay for it when he inherited it? I doubt it. A fair price for him to get is the knowledge that a family heirloom gets to be appreciated for what it is. I'd never dream of charging my relatives for family guns.
i agree if he wants to get rid of it and its a family heirloom he should give you it for free. or at least a nice discount. id have to agree that rifle doesn't look to have been carried much and must have been refurbed. is it possible he just bought a 1903-a3 out of the service and "this was like the rifle i carried" got lost in translation to "this IS the rifle i carried"? i have a rem 1903 1942/ with a 43 USMC replacement barrel that's also shot out. stock is dark brown with a few nicks. i picked it up for 300. your A3 i would expect to pay 900 for a rifle in that nice of shape. and as far as people being worried about this being a scam im quite sure the OP said he wasn't even interested in selling it. just was looking for a fair price to offer. anyways good luck on the buy. they 1903 is a really nice rifle.
Eaglelord17
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Sault Ste. Marie
As mentioned above he specified M1903-A3's weren't in use, not M1903s. This was even covered by another poster just slightly up from you. Take a moment to read, it can really help with comprehension.
Take a look at the timeline for the fighting on Guadalcanal. It ran from August 1942 to January 1943. 03A3 production started in late Nov/early Dec which wouldn't gave allowed much time for any to make it there. USMC forces initially deployed with M1903s until M1 Garands were phased in based on availability and the preferences for greater firepower.
This. O3A3 is a different rifle than a 1903. The op does not have a 1903.
Back on the subject of evaluating the rifle, I believe experts have concluded that original 03A3's had many parts of the bolt blued, along with bands,etc. The pictures may be misleading but this one appears to have the light green parkerizing over formerly blued parts which is also typical of some arsenal refurbished rifles. If you go to Milsurps 1903/A3 forum there is a sticky with photos of a presumed all original 03/A3. AS to value, if it were sitting on a table in front of me and I was able to check the bore, etc, I might pay $500 to $800 for it. For me, over $1000 would require a higher level of originality. I currently own one that appears to have been stored post refurb and has an excellent bore and completely fresh park on the metal. Some time around '92 a fellow had a case of them under the table at a Medicine Hat show.
milsurpo
milsurpo
Fwiw, if the bore is nice and not counterbored, these are selling $1000+ in that condition. Freshly refurbished 1903's sell for a little more, and are much better made. The 03-A3 had a lot of shortcuts in it's manufacture and they are worth a little less than a nice 1903.
If it didn't have a scant stock, it would be a little more valuable. The scant stocks aren't well liked by collectors or shooters, though they are perfectly serviceable.
If it didn't have a scant stock, it would be a little more valuable. The scant stocks aren't well liked by collectors or shooters, though they are perfectly serviceable.
Original parts and finish in the best condition command the top value. A lot of the Springfield's did go thru arsenal overhaul or unit /base level repairs which saw many original parts changed out. Metal was reparkerized during overhauls as dictated by the condition of the finish. Stocks and handguards were frequently replaced as were barrels which frequently went unserviceable because of shooting with corrosive primed ammo.
The M1903s, with the exception of the later Remington M1903s, are more finely made than the 03-A3s, but the 03A3 is equally desirable and some folks prefer them for shooting because of the peep sight.
I've shot them all extensively and can't find much to choose from between the M1903 and 03-A3 assuming that the bore is good, sights are tight and the bedding is properly set up. Personally I like shooting the M1903 using the peep in the rear sight leaf. The majority of 03-A3s were fitted with a 2 groove barrel to speed up production, as was the No 4 Lee-Enfield. Military testing determined that there was no significant difference in accuracy between the 4 and 3 groove barrels. M1903A4 sniper rifles were fitted with 2 groove barrels.
All of the 03-A3s were originally issued with the straight grip "S" style stock. The scant grip stocks were a wartime expedient replacement. They are actually better for shooting because of the longer length of pull. The "S" stocks must have been designed for a race of dwarves as seen with the short length of pull. They are notorious for having the thumb knuckle bop the shooter in the snout when shot from a prone position. That's why a lot of folks learned to shoot them with the thumb along the grip instead of across it.
The M1903s, with the exception of the later Remington M1903s, are more finely made than the 03-A3s, but the 03A3 is equally desirable and some folks prefer them for shooting because of the peep sight.
I've shot them all extensively and can't find much to choose from between the M1903 and 03-A3 assuming that the bore is good, sights are tight and the bedding is properly set up. Personally I like shooting the M1903 using the peep in the rear sight leaf. The majority of 03-A3s were fitted with a 2 groove barrel to speed up production, as was the No 4 Lee-Enfield. Military testing determined that there was no significant difference in accuracy between the 4 and 3 groove barrels. M1903A4 sniper rifles were fitted with 2 groove barrels.
All of the 03-A3s were originally issued with the straight grip "S" style stock. The scant grip stocks were a wartime expedient replacement. They are actually better for shooting because of the longer length of pull. The "S" stocks must have been designed for a race of dwarves as seen with the short length of pull. They are notorious for having the thumb knuckle bop the shooter in the snout when shot from a prone position. That's why a lot of folks learned to shoot them with the thumb along the grip instead of across it.
I saw 2 Springfields at the Chilliwack show this weekend. One was an ersatz 03A4 clone made up on a Rem 03-A3 action with a Weaver K4 scope I believe. Too bad, because it bu99ered an otherwise good 03-A3. The other was a Rem M1903 in nice cosmetic condition which had been refinished and fitted with a scant grip stock. There was a pretty good sprinkling of Remington parts, but others had been swapped in. I didn't bother to look at the bore after seeing the $1600 price tag.
There was also a $4000 Garand which looked to have been re-parkerized and fitted with a Boyds stock set. I didn't ask, but it might have been the one that Ike used for informal plinking sessions behind SHAEF HQ in Versailles with his aide/mistress Kay Summersby.
There was also a $4000 Garand which looked to have been re-parkerized and fitted with a Boyds stock set. I didn't ask, but it might have been the one that Ike used for informal plinking sessions behind SHAEF HQ in Versailles with his aide/mistress Kay Summersby.
Remington did issue most 03A4 sniper rifles with C style pistol grip stocks, altho scant grip stocks were installed on the last ones out of the barn. I have one of these. Tough to say about scant stocks on the 03-A3s. All the original 03-A3 stocks I've seen were the straight grip style with either reinforcing crossbolts or headless pins. Could be that some scants were used at the end of the production run. Original Remington stock markings would tell the tale.
I seem to recall that when the Ottawa Citizen had that abridged form of the Registry posted, 03A3s were far less common in Canada than 03s.
My only 03A3 is one that had been badly bubba'd in an attempt to make a sporting rifle. Replaced the ruined bolt with one from a Parker Hale Midland, fitted a base and installed a Weaver 330, to simulate an A4. Claven2 supplied a scant stock. The receiver already had a number of scope mounting holes, most out of line. So, no 03A3s were harmed making up this rifle.
The rifle shoots very well. Weaver 330s were actually issued on some A4s. It isn't as bad a scope as one might assume at first glance, although it certainly can't compare with a scope like the No. 32s or Lyman Alaskans.
My only 03A3 is one that had been badly bubba'd in an attempt to make a sporting rifle. Replaced the ruined bolt with one from a Parker Hale Midland, fitted a base and installed a Weaver 330, to simulate an A4. Claven2 supplied a scant stock. The receiver already had a number of scope mounting holes, most out of line. So, no 03A3s were harmed making up this rifle.
The rifle shoots very well. Weaver 330s were actually issued on some A4s. It isn't as bad a scope as one might assume at first glance, although it certainly can't compare with a scope like the No. 32s or Lyman Alaskans.
