Sporterized 1903 Springfield,How valuable?
- Thread starter handofzeus
- Start date
The heat treating issue comes from how the guys in the factory judged temperatures by eye instead of using proper instruments. When Hatcher got into it, it was found that the steel could be as much as 300 degrees(I think it was. Not at home with my books.) higher on a sunny day than on a cloudy day. The receiver steel was actually being burned. Hence, low numbered '03s were declared unsafe to shoot with any ammo.
It's below 800,000 for Springfield Armory and 286,506 for Rock Island Armory. All this was happening during the 1920's. Some of it had to do with the hardness of the brass cases too.
There's a good article about the whole issue here. http://m1903.com/03rcvrfail/
That one, despite being in excellent condition, isn't worth anywhere near what it would be in full military configuration. Very much doubt you'd get $400 in Canada. $300 maybe. The stock, barrel and other parts might, heavy on the might, get you enough for another rifle.
It's below 800,000 for Springfield Armory and 286,506 for Rock Island Armory. All this was happening during the 1920's. Some of it had to do with the hardness of the brass cases too.
There's a good article about the whole issue here. http://m1903.com/03rcvrfail/
That one, despite being in excellent condition, isn't worth anywhere near what it would be in full military configuration. Very much doubt you'd get $400 in Canada. $300 maybe. The stock, barrel and other parts might, heavy on the might, get you enough for another rifle.
A good way to test if those low number receivers are still okay for light hunting loads only is to take the barrelled action out of the stock and give the receiver a few good sharp raps with a hammer in a couple of different spots then closely inspect after dipping the action in gasoline outdoors, if any cracks appear, which will be easy to see as the gas evaporates and then starts weeping out of the hair line cracks then it is toast, if none then it should be okay for light loads only.
This is a useful test to check for a cracked receiver regardless of the make of rifle. If you strip any rifle down to just the barreled action, hold it by the muzzle and then give the receiver a tap with a piece of hardwood or a screwdriver handle you will get a resonating tone, like a tuning fork, which tells you that there is no crack in the receiver. If you get a dull thud with no ringing sound, check further.
The issue with the low number M1903 receivers was not cracked receivers, but rather their brittleness due to improper heat treating, which would cause them to fail.
Last edited:
I didn't bother to go into details about listening for a different sound as most people have no idea what to listen for, and if they do not strip it down completely, i.e. are using a semi auto with the bolt in it or a Lee Enfield No.4 with the rear sight, etc they will not get a proper tone.
The hammer test will tell you soon enough if you have a brittle receiver or not as if it was not cracked before you whacked it, it will be after a few good whacks of a hammer if it is a brittle action. Better to crack it this way than firing it with a 60,000 psi load that turns it into a grenade next to your face.
- Location
- Central AB
I think problems with the early number receivers is a bit exaggerated sometimes. With approximately 1 failure per 100,000 rifles, the problem was far from endemic. In fact this is why the USA army didn't pull them from service, and kept using them for a long time. Even when the barrels were worn out, they rebarrelled and put them back into service. And I believe the army records don't show any of the failures from poor heat treating as having been fatal. They did however note quite a few failures when troops inadvertently shot 8mm mauser ammo in them. Has anyone heard of a 1903 receiver catastrophic failure in the recent past? Their are numerous early receivers in use throughout the states.
Shooting a low number Springfield is very much a personal choice. I've owned a couple of them and didn't shoot them.
The other one to be aware of are the civilian made clone 03-A3 rifles marked either Santa-Fe or National Ordnance on the receiver ring. These are investment cast receivers with castings done to a variable level of quality. Some are apparently OK, others aren't. There are documented incidents of failure with these. I bought one as a parts source as they were built using all GI parts on the civvy cast receiver. The receiver on mine showed excessive headspace and considerable set back of the lug seats, even though it had been fired very little judging from the bore gauges. The stripped receiver sits in my safe awaiting it's appointment with my quality control check - set in the vise and a whack with a 2 lb hammer. I won't build a rifle on it, nor will I sell or give it to someone else to use.
Actually the failure rate was around 8.5 per 100,000 during the peak failure period for low number Springfield receivers and 7.5 per 100,000 for Rock Island ones. Most of the bad low number rifles have been taken out of service and destroyed but there is always the chance that one or two were missed and are a accident waiting to happen.
This quote is why they did not destroy all of them -
"To discard approximately 1,000, 000 receivers would create a political problem of major proportions for the U.S. Military, especially at time when military was funded at an extremely low level. The decision also has be questioned from a numeric standpoint. There had been 58 reported receiver failures when the board made its decision. To suggest that 1,000,000 other receivers were defective because of the failure of 58 is extrapolating well beyond the available data."
Not all low number Springfield's are a problem and it is true a lot have seen years of use but because of the poor heat treatment and quality control during manufacture of these low number ones, people should never use full power heavy loads in them to be on the safe side, better to err of the side of safety than risk an injury.
