U.S.M.C 1903 Springfield

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Warrior1354

    Marksman
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Jun 25, 2017
    149
    28
    Carthage
    Thought I share a very interesting Springfield 03 here.

    Whats interesting is its a Rock Island low numbered receiver type with alot of Rock Island parts. You can tell that this one has the hatcher hole added which is typical of these. You can also seen punch test marks that were found under the stock on the receiver for what looks like testing receiver strength. It has the grey parkerizing finish which is seen on these weapons. There are also vise marks on the barrel, plus the barrel is a July 1941 Sedgley barrel marked USMC not the 1944 barrels typical found on fake USMC rifles. The serial number for the rifle is electric pencil on the bolt, not the bolt handle which are found on Greek returns. I believe the stock is a replacement being how there are not marks on the stock expect Post 297 and a number mark by the bolt handle. The stock is also unsanded. I honestly believe that this rifle was a VFW or American Legion used piece. Any stock marked USMC in some way are fake. The hand-guard is also neat being its mark D28179 which I have read are found on Marine Corp 03's. The smooth butt-plate has also been stippled which was another Marine Corp practice most likely helped prevent the rifle from slipping from the shoulder while shooting. And last but not least the rifle is still full of cosmoline in places and believe when I took it apart that was the first time it has been taken apart in a very long time.

    The only bad thing about this rifle is I will never shoot it due too the risk's of the low number receivers. But I believe if this rifle was shot and used again this Devil dog would still have teeth.

    Finding a United States Marine Corp used weapon is rare and this rifle has all the traits on that.

    This rifle does fall in the serial number range of these rifles being rebuilt in San Diego by the Marines.

    269486 09/21/1937 USMC - SAN DIEGO
    269824 09/28/1938 USMC - SAN DIEGO
    270005 02/14/1931 USMC
    270119 10/08/1930 USMC - SAN DIEGO

    Enjoy

    attachment.php
    attachment.php
    attachment.php
    attachment.php
    attachment.php

    attachment.php
    attachment.php
    attachment.php


    attachment.php
     
    Last edited:

    rob63

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    20   0   0
    May 9, 2013
    4,282
    77
    Great rifle, thanks for sharing.

    Regarding the punch marks on the receiver; those look like marks typical of hardness testing. I have read that although the low-numbered receivers were pulled from use by the ordnance department, some of them were used to build new rifles due to the shortage of weapons at the beginning of WWII. Your rifle certainly looks like it must have been one of those. This is just a guess, but I would bet that when they rebuilt the rifles using low-numbered receivers they did a hardness test on them to make sure they weren't too brittle. I'm not saying that means it would be safe to shoot, just saying I suspect that is the story behind the punch marks on the receiver.

    Also, I am sure I have read before that USMC rifles typically had higher front sights than US Army rifles. You could check that.
     

    Thor

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Jan 18, 2014
    10,704
    113
    Could be anywhere
    Very nice. I wonder what in the world they were butt stroking with that butt pad...that must have been put on during the depot rebuild as there is no marring on the screw or to the stock (which if some Jar Head was using it for a hammer I'd expect to see). The blows all seem to have the same shape but at different angles.
     

    Warrior1354

    Marksman
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Jun 25, 2017
    149
    28
    Carthage
    The Marine Corps rifles had higher front sight protectors the normal protectors you see on your 1903a3 rifles or other 03 rifle's block the sight picture. The Marine Corps ones sit on them higher so they didn't block your sight picture and they protected the front fragile sight on the Springfield. I actually found one for this rifle expensive but it made it one hundred percent complete. And Thor the stipple buttplate was done to prevent the rifle from slipping from the shoulder, believe they held better. Why they didn't change it too a checkered buttplate is beyond me. But the Marine Corps at that time was low on funds.
     

    cerebus85

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 83.3%
    5   1   0
    Mar 5, 2012
    326
    18
    I have read quite a bit about the low receiver numbers exploding and I don't really think you would have a problem if you used the right ammo.
     

    Warrior1354

    Marksman
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Jun 25, 2017
    149
    28
    Carthage
    The biggest problem with single heat treated receivers is they shatter during a case head separation. Many were pulled from use but the military scrapping millions of receivers was something not feasible. Remember in the 30s the military was broke. Not to mention in the beginning of the war we were more worried about having a shortage of rifles then having receiver issues.
     

    tribeofham

    Plinker
    Rating - 100%
    11   0   0
    Jun 21, 2017
    117
    18
    Fishers
    I have read quite a bit about the low receiver numbers exploding and I don't really think you would have a problem if you used the right ammo.

    I would imagine using low pressure ammo, like what the Garand is designed for, would likely suffice. I've seen a number of videos on YouTube of people shooting low number 1903's without a care in the world. I, however, wouldn't feel comfortable with a potentially damaging object next to my face. Low pressure ammo or not, I'd rather not take the risk.

    Excellent article with stats: Information On M1903 Receiver Failures
     

    Warrior1354

    Marksman
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Jun 25, 2017
    149
    28
    Carthage
    Too this day these receivers still fail. At the time the military couldn't afford to replace every single low number receiver and soldiered on with them. Remember the 1930s the Army was working on adopting a semi-automatic rifle. And producing millions of receivers for older rifles that were possibly going to be replaced. Didn't seemed like the best solution.

    Plus there are a lot of 1903 Springfield low numbers that I wouldnt shoot mainly because of their collectability. If you found a 1905 made rifle that was all original and unreworked would you risk shooting an over $3,000 rifle and up?

    I mean the same question has come up the receivers lasted this long why should it fail now. When you think about it the calvary still used the horse, and washing machines were still the old-fashioned way in those days. So do you really want to shoot a 100 year old plus receiver that had heat treating problems from the get-go.
     

    cerebus85

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 83.3%
    5   1   0
    Mar 5, 2012
    326
    18
    mine is the 200's its a beautiful rifle with a barrel from 44 i just don't necessarily see an issue if I'm selective on ammo.
     

    Warrior1354

    Marksman
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Jun 25, 2017
    149
    28
    Carthage
    Always remember even if the barrel was replaced with a later date barrel the receiver is still single heat-treated. Keep that in mind.
     
    Top Bottom