• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Low number Springfield 1903 rifles

low# 03s

there is quite a no of post on other sites.there was considered no more problems after 1929. the navy never got rid of theirs and the marines used them in WW2 in the pacific.I have one an am not afraid to fire it.I do shoot lead loads,because the barrel is perfect,and my loads go in to 1" at 100yrds.
my barrel is 1914.I have seen many 03s shot before WW2 in the NG at wakefield mass. [rolleyes] [grin]
 
Last edited:
WILDCATT said:
there is quite a no of post on other sites.there was considered no more problems after 1929. the naavy never got rid of theirs and the marines used them in WW2 in the pacific.I have one an am not afraid to fire it.I do shoot lead loads,because the barrel is perfect,and my loads go in to 1" at 100yrds.
my barrel is 1914.I have seen many 03s shot before WW2 in the NG at wakefield mass. [rolleyes] [grin]
Click to expand...

Agreed, but since there is no way of knowing absolutly, if someone asked me for advice.... and I am not claiming to be an expert by any stretch, I'm telling them not to shoot it. After that they can do whatever the hell they want. I am sure many of the other sites and info out there will also state not to fire the older 03s even though we know people do and if I am not mistaken I believe the CMP site also posts a warning.
 
Last edited:
1903

in reply. there is a book,with info on them I use several on guard duty and fired them.the last one that had probles was in early 20s and after that none failed there were only a few and it was determand that it was at certain times that the workers got the heat treatment wrong. also some were determined to have broke when 8 mm mauser were fired in them.they were recalled but the navy never turned them in.and the marines used them in guadalcanal,til they could steal army garands.
 
I am not arguing with your facts, they sound right on but for the purpose of giving someone advise I will always warn them. Like I said above after that they can do what they will.
 
RL Phillips

Gents,

I have a lower serial RIA 1903 1852XX (1910) that was used by my grandfather, father and now I use it for deer in our family bottom land. I would say we've harvested 70 plus deer with her over these many years and never an issue with her...as smooth an action as you can find. I've also used her for varmint and ground hogs...how many over the years???? Accurate!!! We can't remember a jam or malfunction of any kind over these many years and that's why she spends so much time in the field.

I've heard about and read about the receiver failures and I've also noticed a lot of issues noted with the poor ammo of the day back in those early years. I also read an interesting article and the army study on the failures. Is it a concern... I guess. Is this gun a wall hanger...No! I'll be preparing a table this week with deer provided by this good old lady. She's sill going strong 101 years later. Use modern manuf ammo!!!

My two cents..from a third generation shooter of a (1910) RIA 1903.

Good shooting!

RL
 
I looked at Rock Island 1903 today. Serial number 3,4XX. Barrel dated 1905. As mint as they come. My friends father had it for decades.

I did not get a chance to get any pics of it. I might swap something from my collection for it. Are the 4 digit rock islands worth a premium? I don't want to low ball a friend.
 
I have a lower number rifle, I believe it's around 752xxx. It was passed to me from my grandfathers collection. I haven't been able to find anything by pictures that look quite like mine. Everything on it looks really well kept and if it saw service you wouldn't know it. There is no rust or corrosion. The stock looks nice (I do see it as being possible that the stock was replaced). If I can remember how to post pictures on these forums I'll post a picture. I have no interest in sellling it, but does anyone know a price range for these lower serial number rifles?
 
If you research the documents about the problem of them 'blowing up', I think you'll find there were less than 2 dozen that were actually reported, but it was enough for the gov't to do something about it, although they never did pull the low numbers from service, that I know of. The danger is MINISCULE, but I don't want to be the one in a million who swallows a bolt.


Sorry I can't help you with a value.
 
Speedway said:
I looked at Rock Island 1903 today. Serial number 3,4XX. Barrel dated 1905. As mint as they come. My friends father had it for decades.

I did not get a chance to get any pics of it. I might swap something from my collection for it. Are the 4 digit rock islands worth a premium? I don't want to low ball a friend.
Click to expand...

Wow. Lots of factors to consider. First, it is likely a 30-03 which is rechambered to a 30-06. If this is all original, there are VERY few remaining. Serial number matches the barrel date very closely. Check for plugs of wood in the forearm, for the early rod bayonet. And/or the high wood along side the receiver.

If it's the real deal, these are going for "What a true collector will pay", and $1,500 and up is not unheard of. Still, probably not a shooter.
 
Most of the failed 03's were attributed to the single treated bolts than the receivers failing. Most if not all the marines 1903's in WWII were low numbered and we're used to great extent.
 
I have a Springfield 1903 I bought for $375. It's in superb condition for its age and looks very serviceable. That being said, I understand the warning here and I believe its quite appropriate. That being said and taking everything I've read about this subject in consideration, I wouldn't hesitate to fire it using commercial ammo. Mine was rearsenalled and has a 1942 barrel installed. That tells me it was in service for many years without exploding.

This is a great sticky and I hear the message, I'm just not too concerned about the weapon blowing up
 
the_shootist said:
I have a Springfield 1903 I bought for $375. It's in superb condition for its age and looks very serviceable. That being said, I understand the warning here and I believe its quite appropriate. That being said and taking everything I've read about this subject in consideration, I wouldn't hesitate to fire it using commercial ammo. Mine was rearsenalled and has a 1942 barrel installed. That tells me it was in service for many years without exploding.

This is a great sticky and I hear the message, I'm just not too concerned about the weapon blowing up
Click to expand...

I've got a under 800,000 serial number Springfield too and I feel the same way you do about it.
Another factor is that I don't have it out to shoot much either. It does more sitting in the safe with the collection than anything else but if I wanted to I would not be afraid to shoot it.


But then again, someone else may feel different about it so for those buying one of these read about it and make up your mind about the rifle you're looking to buy
 
my friend was just given a 1903 springfield by some idiot who had it stashed in his basement rafters with a serial number in the 13,000 range. he has no idea what it is worth but would like to find out and potentially sell it to someone who will appreciate it, i figured you guys would be able to help.

ill try to get pictures.
 
Where is he located? Its probably going to need a live inspection to see what he's got if its not obviously re-arsenaled.
 
need better pics. Closeups of the sight ladder, the nose, the bolt, cartouches on the left and underneath and the barrel stamp behind the sight.

looks to be in pretty nice shape though
 
She's a little beat up but looks like some original parts. Supposedly the guy he got it from's grandfather carried it in WWI.


 
Wow, sure looks right. Its got the cursive 1904 inspector's stamp and the C counterstamp next to it which its believed indicates it was converted from the original 30-03 to 30-06 caliber. And the barrel date and sight ladder indicate that as well.

Curious to know if its a converted rod bayonet stock. Tell him to look at the nose of the stock (where the barrel leaves the stock just before the muzzle) and see if there is a square “plug” in that part of the stock.

also have him check the trap in the butt and see if there's anything inside there like a cleaning kit or spare parts kit (bonus!). I'd say the sling is definitely not original to the gun btw.
 
Is this what you needed to see for the bayonet lug?



Anybody have any opinions on what it is worth?
 
No, the nose is the wood part under the barrel at the end of the stock.

AllaSnackbah said:
Is this what you needed to see for the bayonet lug?

Anybody have any opinions on what it is worth?
Click to expand...

Looks like the lower barrel band is missing, does he have that or is it just what you see is what you get? Its NOT for shooting so its probably worth at least a grand to a collector I'd say.
 
It is a converted rod bayonet stock, the inspector date is 1904 by JS Adams. Hope this helps.

He looked under the buttplate and found an oiler, the barrel band is unfortunately missing.

Bolt is marked C8 on the locking lug.


 
Wow, very nice! Yup looks like a converted RB alright. I'm sure there's a collector who will snap that up.

The correct barrel band can be found pretty easily. I'm going to point a couple of people to this thread who might be interested in it.
 

Similar threads

1903 decock when bolt closing.
Replies
14
Views
536
mac1911
M
CMP 1917 Service and Field Grade Rifles
Replies
29
Views
1K
nitsuj
N
Springfield trapdoor 1884
Replies
3
Views
448
jpm
J
1903-a3 price?
Replies
29
Views
2K
polska1957
P
Winter Warrior 2022-2023 Postal Match for Iron Sight Military Rifles
3 4 5
Replies
144
Views
5K
CulperJr
C
Back
Top Bottom