1903 Remington BLOW-UP

[fyrfyter43 0]

I got this email from my uncle last night. He lives in Arizona, so I have no idea how bad his injuries are, other than what he said in his email. However, it sounds like his safety glasses did their job.

 

He is one of the most cautious guys I have ever met, so I'm sure the problem wasn't with his handloads. Anybody have any ideas what might have happened?

 

Frank and I went out to the range Sunday morning . Put around 60+ rounds of my reloads I did Saturday through her , with NO issues . Then, as we were about ready to shut down...all hell broke loose..... I blew the sides and bottom clean out of the gun ! Was like a hand granade went off, with the rifle flying out of my hands and on the ground , needless to say the rifle is total junk . I got cuts, a badly bruised nose , {not broken} , a smashed right thumb, broken safety glasses, and my head is still aching . Frank got a piece of wood { the size of a pencil eraser } from the exploding stock lodged under the skin in his right temple , and had it cut out, and got 3 stitches . That was about all he suffered as he was back and to the left of me sitting at the bench rest . NO WAY was it a double load,and we { me, Frank, Lou, Clay, and some guys at work, etc } have been trying to figure it out ? All seems correct { amount / weight and type of powder I used {40.0 gr. IMR 4895 } , brand new Winnie brass at the correct length { 2.48 }, 150 gr. FMJ Hornady bullets , all which I have shot before in this rifle with NEVER a problem . I took some pic's and will forward when I get them back . Frank and I were both VERY damn lucky to come out of it like we did.

 

Was a damn good looking and shooting old gun, but the blowup never damaged the old steel Lyman Alaskan scope, rings or mount that I could see. Any ideas , we're open to any , and all ??

 

 

 

 

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

One of the low-numbered receivers that were improperly heat-treated maybe? Although it looks like the receiver held-up and the blast was directed down through the magazine.

[tj462nj 32]

wow, thank god he was alright, those are amazing photos

[lunker 274]

I am no 1903 guru, but as usual Bob may be on to something. The early Springfields 1903 A1 (?) are good for wall hangers only because of their soft steel.

[fyrfyter43 0]

Although it looks like the receiver held-up and the blast was directed down through the magazine.

 

That was my first thought. I'll admit I'm not a modern gun guy (if you can call a 1903 "modern"). The most modern technology I own is a replica of an 1860 Colt, and all my other guns are flintlocks. So, I really didn't know what to tell him.

 

I just sent him an email asking about the serial number and any other details.

[autoxnyc 4]

Glad your uncle is OK. I was looking at CMP 1903s when they had them and they had this disclaimer regarding low serial number 1903s.

 

http://www.odcmp.com/Sales/m1903.htm

 

WARNING ON “LOW-NUMBER” SPRINGFIELDS

M1903 rifles made before February 1918 utilized receivers and bolts which were single heat-treated by a method that rendered some of them brittle and liable to fracture when fired, exposing the shooter to a risk of serious injury. It proved impossible to determine, without destructive testing, which receivers and bolts were so affected and therefore potentially dangerous.

To solve this problem, the Ordnance Department commenced double heat treatment of receivers and bolts. This was commenced at Springfield Armory at approximately serial number 800,000 and at Rock Island Arsenal at exactly serial number 285,507. All Springfields made after this change are commonly called “high number” rifles. Those Springfields made before this change are commonly called “low-number” rifles.

In view of the safety risk the Ordnance Department withdrew from active service all “low-number” Springfields. During WWII, however, the urgent need for rifles resulted in the rebuilding and reissuing of many “low-number” as well as “high-number” Springfields. The bolts from such rifles were often mixed during rebuilding, and did not necessarily remain with the original receiver.

Generally speaking, “low number” bolts can be distinguished from “high-number” bolts by the angle at which the bolt handle is bent down. All “low number” bolts have the bolt handle bent straight down, perpendicular to the axis of the bolt body. High number bolts have “swept-back” (or slightly rearward curved) bolt handles.

A few straight-bent bolts are of the double heat-treat type, but these are not easily identified, and until positively proved otherwise ANY straight-bent bolt should be assumed to be “low number”. All original swept-back bolts are definitely “high number”. In addition, any bolt marked “N.S.” (for nickel steel) can be safely regarded as “high number” if obtained directly from CMP (beware of re-marked fakes).

CMP DOES NOT RECOMMEND FIRING ANY SPRINGFIELD RIFLE WITH A ”LOW NUMBER” RECEIVER. Such rifles should be regarded as collector’s items, not “shooters”.

CMP ALSO DOES NOT RECOMMEND FIRING ANY SPRINGFIELD RIFLE, REGARDLESS OF SERIAL NUMBER, WITH A SINGLE HEAT-TREATed “LOW NUMBER” BOLT. SUCH BOLTS, WHILE HISTORICALLY CORRECT FOR DISPLAY WITH A RIFLE OF WWI OR EARLIER VINTAGE, MAY BE DANGEROUS TO USE FOR SHOOTING.

THE UNITED STATES ARMY GENERALLY DID NOT SERIALIZE BOLTS. DO NOT RELY ON ANY SERIAL NUMBER APPEARING ON A BOLT TO DETERMINE WHETHER SUCH BOLT IS “HIGH NUMBER” OR “LOW NUMBER”.

[echo five foxtrot 1]

Wow.Great pictures, I would like to see the bottom of the receiver. Any idea if this fell into the "low" serial number range?

[fyrfyter43 0]

OK. It was NOT an early 1903. It was a Remington 1903A3. According to the serial number it is from 1943.

 

The brass is still in the chamber. He is going to try to pull it on Saturday when he has more time (he has a very long workday, with a 2-hour one-way commute).

[Dan 177]

That hole on the left side of the receiver might be a "hatcher hole"

 

Numbers below those listed are best fired with factory loads or better yet used as collector's items. General Julian Hatcher, then a young ordnance officer suggested drilling a hole in the left side of the receiver as a gas relief port to cut the incidence of burst receivers. While this was generally ignored by the Army, the Marine Corps took the suggestion to heart and many of the Marine Corps low numbered '03s of the era will be found with the so called "Hatcher Hole" in the left side of the receiver. After W.W.I, the Marines solved the "low number gun problem" by rebarreling them when sent back for refit, drilling the Hatcher Hole and reissuing them with instructions that they were not to be used for firing rifle grenades. The high numbered guns are extremely strong and never experienced any problems.

 

http://www.snipercountry.com/articles/springfieldm1903.asp

[fyrfyter43 0]

I think he sent me a picture of the bottom of the receiver also. Will try to post it tomorrow from a real computer instead of my phone.

[BMWR12 35]

_{3rd pic looks like it shows some serious heat treating related damage. I almost had my K43 blow up in my face due to badly treated parts. He is one lucky person.}

[Cemeterys Gun Blob 165]

I was recently told that pre WW2 firearms should not be used with modern cartridges, meaning they're 'hotter' today then they where back then, due to the composition of the metal. So these cartridges should be loaded to the low end of the scale when people roll their own.

 

But maybe it was 'hot' round that got trigger time.

 

Just my $0.02.

[Murphy4570 15]

That's a late reciever, as noted. Early ones were cast prior to and during WWI. Heat treat issue was solved by the time that war was over. You can also tell by the stamped magazine plate, early ones were all milled.

 

The M1903 is basically a copy of the old 2 lug Mauser action, and is not particularly strong. You can see the crack in the side of the reciever where the locking lug ripped the reciever apart. The safety lug at the back of the bolt did it's job, and held that bolt in place! Otherwise it would have blown rearward into his face.

 

 

 

Tell him that if he wants to use an old American battle rifle to fire hot 30-06 handloads through, to use a M1917 Enfield. The action in that is absurdly strong, and has been used for decades to fire belted magnum cartridges out of.

[BMWR12 35]

Probably would have blown up a Garand too.

[blksheep 466]

He is lucky.

[9X19 125]

Tell him that if he wants to use an old American battle rifle to fire hot 30-06 handloads through, to use a M1917 Enfield. The action in that is absurdly strong, and has been used for decades to fire belted magnum cartridges out of.

I have heard that the Arisaka's, (not the Last Ditch rifles) had very strong receivers.

[9X19 125]

Probably would have blown up a Garand too.

Probably. That is why you need Surplus ammo.

[Murphy4570 15]

I have heard that the Arisaka's, (not the Last Ditch rifles) had very strong receivers.

 

I've heard the same thing, but have never had an Arisaka, so I can't comment on them. The Arisaka is a Mauser-type action, like most bolt action rifles. The Enfield I mentioned is a British design. Mauser was pretty much the only game in town as far as bolt actions go back then, besides Enfield and Mosin-Nagants. Lots of armies used Mauser-style rifles.