In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
1903 ammo issue?
foo
Member Posts: 93 ✭✭
I have a 2 later model 1903 Springfield's. They will accept 30.06 ammo fine into the mag but won't strip one off to load into the chamber. I first tried some light home loads that have worked in my Garand fine and then I also have some original ball ammo from the 50's which I tried and has the same problem. The rifle shoots fine, loaded like a single shot? It looks as though the bolt doesn't come back far enough. Any helpful thoughts?
Comments
neat idea, an on off switch
They, ( officers ) when the Springfield 03 was designed. Didn't trust the G.I.'s, to not shoot up all their ammo. With the magazine cut off, in the "off" position. They were supposed to use the rifle as a single shot, by loading single cartridges.
Only when they were instructed. By the NCO's or officers. Were they to move the cutoff to "On". I always figured it was a holdover from the Indian wars, when they were fighting Geronimo.
quote:Originally posted by fordsix
neat idea, an on off switch
They, ( officers ) when the Springfield 03 was designed. Didn't trust the G.I.'s, to not shoot up all their ammo. With the magazine cut off, in the "off" position. They were supposed to use the rifle as a single shot, by loading single cartridges.
Only when they were instructed. By the NCO's or officers. Were they to move the cutoff to "On". I always figured it was a holdover from the Indian wars, when they were fighting Geronimo.
Naw, those were single shots or tube fed repeaters with cut offs. It WAS a hold over of the same mindset though, that had them issuing single shot muzzleloaders in the War of Northern Aggression even though the union had the capacity to field more Henrys and such.
The Krag had one too, and many other countries had similar arrangements. Up through WW1 the Enfield had a cut off for instance.
The puzzling bit isn't why it was around in the early 1900s but why, with the 03A3 in WW2 they kept it in the design. I guess that something is to be said for keeping existing designs 'as is' to facilitate faster production, but the 03A3 otherwise had enough changes to ease just that that you would think the cut off switch would have been gone too.
Now, IF this isn't the issue, it's certainly possible that there is something else wrong with the bolt or follower so let us know if that doesn't do it.
At least one thing you could say about the bolt action repeaters, the magazine follower let know when you had fired your last round. I believe I read somewhere where in the heat of battle, soldiers would continue to load their muzzle loaders without discharging them. After battle reports showed muzzle loaders with up to four loads still in the barrel.
I presume you are referring to the unpleasantness caused when some states wanted to insert and "opt-out Clause" into the Constitution.
And rather than a means of conserving ammo, it was utilized in WWI as a means of being able to take the occasional shot at the entrenched enemy while keeping a full magazine ready in event the enemy charged your line.
quote:Originally posted by jonk the War of Northern Aggression
I presume you are referring to the unpleasantness caused when some states wanted to insert and "opt-out Clause" into the Constitution.
You don't have to insert such a clause. There was a provision in the Articles of Confederation that prohibited such a withdrawal. The absence of such a clause means that they must have intended that States could withdraw if the Federal Government became too onerous as of course we know it did.
The Tenth Amendment (Amendment X) to the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, was ratified on December 15, 1791.[1] It expresses the principle of federalism, which undergirds the entire plan of the original Constitution, by stating that the federal government possesses only those powers delegated to it by the Constitution. All remaining powers are reserved for the states or the people. In drafting this amendment, its framers had two purposes in mind: first, as a necessary rule of construction; and second, as a reaffirmation of the nature of the federal system