Springfield Arms mod1903 30-06 (Pic Heavy)

[wgamble89]

I know everyone is gonna hate the sporterized stalk, not my doing it was done before I was even born, posting in part to show the rifle and also see if anyone can tell me anything about it. I know the serial number dates back to 1911, it's a US gun not really sure under what circumstances it came to be in Canada, but it's my stepfathers and was given to him by a family friend many years ago, In the last 15 years its only had three rounds through it (about a month ago by me and my brother to see how she performs fires nice not as much recoil as I would have thought). I believe at one point it was used as a Safari big game gun, as the previous owner was an avid hunter and traveled the world to hunt, it was often referred to as his elephant gun, I'm not certain if he ever shot one with it but that's what they called it. Sorry some of the pics are rough camera phone and all.

Seems to be a little S punched into the stalk

Hard to make out but its BF1

Weird little sticker on stalk just saying gun maker and caliber not sure when it was put on

 

[flying pig]

Have you read Hatcher's Notebook? There's a lot of info on there about the older low serial numbered 1903's. They changed the heat treating process because a number of the rifles under the serial number 800,000 had had receivers fracture or burst. A few men were killed and a number were injured too. I personally would hang that one on the wall and not fire it. If modern factory 30-06 loads are hard on Garands then a 1903 that was too soft for the military loads would seem very sketchy with modern stuff I'd say!

 

[wgamble89]

Ya after shooting it I had actually read about that, that being said I think shes had a lot of rounds through her over the years.

 

[hatman1793]

Early s/n, late barrel.

It appears that your Springfield has an early serial number. However it seems that the action/receiver was re-barrelled. Your picture of the markings on the barrel end show the barrel to be January 1942.
Many early and WW1 1903's were re-barreled to be used for home guard use and "other Armies use," plus the US Marines used the 1903 during the early stages of WW2. Production of the Garand needed to catch up to the burgeoning army.

 

[Claven2]

FWIW, it wasn't a matter of receivers being too soft, the few that failed were too brittle and fractured apart instead of absorbing pressure spikes.

 

[flying pig]

FWIW, it wasn't a matter of receivers being too soft, the few that failed were too brittle and fractured apart instead of absorbing pressure spikes.

Yes sorry Claven I didn't really think about the wording in my post. By soft I meant that they weren't up to snuff.

Didn't they keep some of the low numbered ones in service even after it was found that the heat treatment was no good?

 

[Claven2]

None were withdrawn from service really. The Army weeded them out, stored them, but re-issued them to foreign troops in WW2 (e.g. free French, etc.) and the Marine Corps just continued to issue them.

I'd have to go check Hatcher, but if memory serves there were no documented incidents after 1927 or so. Apparently ammo got better and the worst receivers exploded before then anyhow.

 

[TGC]

I found a site once that listed the searil numbers and date of manufacture for the serial numbers, a frind of mine was sad that her 1903 was made in the 20's and was not a ww1 model

 

[smellie]

In his Notebook, Hatcher lists ALL US military rifle failures and incidents from 1917 through 1929. Total wasn't much over 100, about 1 rifle in 9000 if you want the proportion.

Our ROSS is still being slagged because idiots refuse to read the Manual!

Hmmmm......
.