Springfield 1903 cleanup

N

North of 58

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
16   0   0
I have a full military 1903 Springfield, SI#857,230, that I'm planning to put up for trade. It was made in May, 1918 according to the barrel stamp at the muzzle. I bought it over 20 years ago and I'm not into collecting milsurps, so I might as well trade off. Old SxS shotguns are where my interests lie. When I got it there was a heavy layer of grease all over it. I took a bit off and put it in the gun safe as it has been there since. It still has alot of grease on it and I was wondering how much, or if, I should clean it up before it goes to someone that knows what he is doing. I did clean the bore and the rifling is excellent with no pitting. I read an article where they recommended soaking the wood in solvent to remove the grease. Is that a good idea? What type of solvent should be used? I took a few pictures, but it would look much better cleaned up. I'm sure it is all original but I can't find any serial numbers other than on the receiver. Did the Springfield have any other places it was marked? Thank you for your advice. Here is a picture

SArightside.jpg
 
I wouldn't do a thing, especially taking any solvents to the wood. Just leave it alone. It is worth more to people, to be as close to "in the grease" as it can be. IMHO
Pete
 
Solvents = bad.

If you are going to trade it, any serious collector will appreciate your not mucking it up before he gets it.

In terms of value, $450-650 is about right unless it's a MkI with pedersen cut, then add $50-100.
 
Thanks guys. The solvent bath didn't sound right to me, but that was what was recommended in the Shotgun News article. I'll get the best pictures I can and post it in the milsurp section. Is there any particular features of the gun that would be of interest to collectors that I should show pictures of?
 
Pics of entire rifle, close ups of receiver (both sides). Pics of wood (good one of wrist) and any markings embosed on stock. A pic of the top muzzle end of barrel at sight, where a 3 digit date should be. I wanna seee....!
 
I took one of the end of the barrel at the muzzle. It has the SA, a bomb?, and 5-18 on it. Here it is. I'm told the May 1918 matches the serial number date. I'll get some more pictures tomorrow when there is better light and post them with the add in the milsurp exchange forum.

SAfrontsight.jpg
 
Looks like a typical late-ww1 SA M1903, refurbed post-war. The sand-blasted and parked finish gives it away as a refurb, but most of these are. I'm sticking to my estimates from earlier :)
 
Claven, what type of finish would this have had when it was made? The only book I have says they were case hardened until around 800,000 when they started the double heat treating, but it doesn't say what replaced it. Thanks for the information.

Bob
 
"...doesn't say what replaced it..." The original steel was changed to a nickel steel around 1 Aug., 1918 at about S/N 319,921. Carbon steel was still used for a while though.
A 1903 could have parkerizing or be blued.
 
The Springfield Armoury book I have shows the ones of that time them being blued with a machine finish from the factory originally, ie. none of the metal was ever polished to fine finish. As Claven2 stated arsenal refurb usuallly got a new barrel & a parkerized finish. But I might be inclined to think that was the original barrel, just a guess though.
 
Barrel were only replaced at refurb if they were out of specification. Yes, the originals had machine markings in places, but they were NOT sandblasted except at refurb. The above rifle has clearly been blasted. Still a nice rifle though.
 
Sunray, according to the book I have it was the Rock Island Arsenal that started using the nickle steel at 319,921. They used a different number series than the Springfield Amoury. SA started using nickle steel at 1,275,767 at the end of 1927. SA guns between 1 and 800,000 were case hardened and 800,000-1,275,767 had the double heat treated receivers. There is just a few paragraphs on the Springfield in this book. It is a U.S. made gun values book, The Gun Traders Guide 26th edition. Prices in Canada are much lower, but the double heat treated guns are listed at more than 2 1/2 times the value of the nickle steel guns in excellent condition and 2x in good condition. When I bought the gun I took it to a retired U.S. army sargent living in Grande Prairie, AB, who worked in the amoury for his entire career. It was a long time ago, but I don't recall him mentioning it having been refurbished. At the time he said it was a good, original '03. He must have assumed I knew it was refurbished if it was.
 
Last edited:
Claven2 said:
Barrel were only replaced at refurb if they were out of specification. Yes, the originals had machine markings in places, but they were NOT sandblasted except at refurb. The above rifle has clearly been blasted. Still a nice rifle though.
Click to expand...

Agreed on all points. But from what I have read & told by old timers; the barrels were usually toast by the time they got to refurb. 'during the wars & in between'. I checked the serial no. this definitely a 1918 receiver and so is the barrel. My guess & just a guess is that this rifle saw hardly any action (maybe reserve after WW I ?) before getting a blasting & parkerizing. Probably better than the average shooter.
 
Just a few more questions please. I looked all over the stock and only found one tiny stamp. Its located just back of the end of the trigger guard tang. It looks like a bronze cup? Does this stamp have a name or is it just a ding? Would there be anything marked under the butt plate? There is also a horizontal U stamped on the right side of the barrel band where the metal retaining bar touches the band. Finally, I did remove some of the grease from the metal to see if I could find anymore markings. I added a photo of the receiver ring after it was cleaned. I don't think this was sandblasted later in life. I used a lighted 30x magnifier to look at the receiver stamping and the letters and number bottoms have a much smoother metal finish inside than the surrounding area. Wouldn't the sandblasting have given the same rough finish if it was done after the stamping? Thank you very much. I will have this posted on the milsurp EE tonight.

SAwoodstamp.jpg

SArecringCU3.jpg
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the information in this thread, guys. The education is much appreciated. She's up on the EE now with some additional pictures, but I hope this thread doesn't die. Please post some comments on the pictures or if you would like some with other views.

Bob
 
Once again nice rifle. I have no idea what that 'cup' mark on the stock is & it looks pretty small for any kind of factory inspector proof mark. Albeit thats a pretty strange ding. Off the top of my head, could it be some kind of inspectors mark from a shoot this rifle may have been in? ie. Rifle had to have the once over for some kind illegal mod before it could be used in a competition? Just a guess, maybe someone could shead some light on this. Then again maybe it's just an engraving someone gave it or a batch of surplus 03's somewhere down the road?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom