I acquired this 1903 over the summer in payment for doing a powerwashing job. I don't know much about these rifles, but I couldn't turn it down. I can tell from the serial number that its not a heat treated barrel. My buddy thinks it was factory rebuilt and never saw service again. The barrel gauges as like new. What are your thoughts?

Another shot

Front sight

Butt plate

Last one

Nice looking rearsenaled rifle. Any cartouches on the stock? Did it have a sling?

You missed the heat treated receiver by about 60,000.

Is this rifle safe to shoot?

Depends on who you ask.........I certainly would have hesitation about shooting full power loads in it.

What's the rifle worth

If its rearsenaled, why wouldn't it be safe? Why would they put time and money into a rifle that wasn't a shooter?

Because the officers that write the orders are not the ones pulling the trigger! There was a war on and they could not make the rifles fast enough.

The receivers were not properly heat treated, they would shatter in the soldiers face. Similar to the early M-16.

Njbanshee, on 18 Sept 2013 - 8:36 PM, said:

Is this rifle safe to shoot?

nope...

CMP advises that all low number 1903's are not to be shot. Why argue, I suspect they know  what they are talking about

http://m1903.com/03rcvrfail/

 

 

Read this and see for yourself, I have a 400,000 with a 43 USMC barrel no Hatcher hole, haven't fired it yet ........

 

A lot of contrary info out there, google and see.

Springfield Armory Receivers.

 

The overall failure rate of the 33 Springfield receivers was 4.13 failures per 100,000 receivers. This is shown in table 1 and figure 1. The failure rate was variable by year. Of the 15 years between 1903 and the end of 1917 when the heat treatment method was changed, there were no failures in five of the years (1908-10, 1912, 1915).

 

The highest rate of failures occurred among the receivers manufactured in 1904 (8.71/100,000), followed by 1911 (8.53/100,000), 1916 (7.53/100,000), then 1907 (7.26/100,000). The belief that the problem with brittle receivers was caused by inexperienced workers overheating the receivers in 1917 is not supported by the data. Only one of the 11 receivers that failed in 1917 was made in that year. The other ten were made before 1917, two in 1904. The distribution of these rates by year suggests that the problem of overheating the receivers was present during ten of the 15 years of manufacture, and was worse before 1917, especially in the earliest years of production, with 10 of the 33 known receivers being made before 1908.

 

The absence of receiver failures in some years suggests that the problem may have been specific to some workers who only worked during some years. At Springfield Armory the worst three years for receiver failure were 1904-1907 with 1905 being an exception. Receivers made in these four years account for nearly 45.5 % (15/33) of all the receivers that failed. The absence of failed receiver among those produced in 1908-10, 1912 and 1915 suggests that the problem was not caused by hastily trained war time workers unfamiliar with rifle manufacturing requirements.

Edge, This report does Not take into account battlefield failures.

I sold a low number RIA to a member here to use strictly with blanks while reenacting.  If you do not just want to exhibit it, this might be an avenue to pursue.

 

http://www.78thinfantry.org/mifflin.htm

 

Please do not shoot it.

Edge, This report does Not take into account battlefield failures.

I'd be interested in where that data exists, gotta be interesting reading. Hatchers notebook is quite extensive and doesn't make any distinction on where the failures occurred. Certainly he recommended the "Hatcher" hole for a reason......

From what I remember reading, the worry over the low serial number is generally overblown, and the ammunition it's self probably played a large part for the failures. If I remember correctly the low numbered receivers tested all with stood higher pressure than what proper ammunition would produce it just was not as high as they would have liked. If I had one of those 1903's I would not think twice about shooting it, though I definitely would not use any thing like a hunting round and prefer to only shoot stuff less powerful than M1 ball ammo. That's just me and I am willing to take the risk, but if you asked me whether or not I think you should fire yours I'd tell you don't. unless you absolutely willing to have it blow up in your face. 

I have a few low # ones with barrels that GA. zero, Would think twice about shooting.

Now you guys are gonna make me buy another one, just to shoot a few times. I have a strict personal rule "never sell a firearm"

Don't shoot it. 1903's are cool to collect, but it's boring. That's why I traded both of mine a few weeks ago.

Now you guys are gonna make me buy another one, just to shoot a few times. I have a strict personal rule "never sell a firearm"

 

 

1903's are ...* BORING *.............????? 

 

they are and can be some of the most accurate rifles out there...rich in history and helped shape and save america...  ******BORING *********???????????????????????  WOW !  LOL

 

Now I am soprry BUT ar-15's are BORING.....

Maybe someone would trade it for a shooter?

I would take an 03,A3,M1,1911,1911a1, ANY day over anything black!!!!

1903's are ...* BORING *.............????? 

 

they are and can be some of the most accurate rifles out there...rich in history and helped shape and save america...  ******BORING *********???????????????????????  WOW !  LOL

 

Now I am soprry BUT ar-15's are BORING.....

Yup, exactly what I said. Boring. I got them because of its history also but I have others. Like a Krag, enfield smle, no imported marked Mauser with the original screws tons of swastika markings, I mean I can live without 1903's but I'm sure I will get another soon enough.

A Mauser with swastika markings interests you, but a 1903 doesn't??????

A Mauser with swastika markings interests you, but a 1903 doesn't??????

Because a swastika on a Mauser I'm sure has a lot more history to tell that a rebarreled 1903. It is a possible bring back, possibly brought back from an American soldier taken from a battlefield. The Possibilities are endless. Hmmmm..... Interesting enough?

Upon further review I think I'm going to slitely bend my no selling a rifle rule and sell the 03, but buy another in its place. If anyone is interested let me know.

Also possibly interested. Pm with a price/location.

PM replied to.