'03 Springfield Receiver

dutchjaeger

I have an opportunity to buy an 03-A3 rifle, based on a Santa-Fe receiver. I understand these were manufactured post-war, as a private venture; no problem since I would buy this one as a shooter, not for collection purposes. My question concerns the receiver: in researching this, I have seen some opinions that the heat-treatment is faulty,and could possibly even cause catastrophic failure, while others claim the quality is quite good. I can't seem to pin down a reliable source. I just want to verify (assuming gunsmith checks on the entire rifle give it a green light) that the rifle is safe to fire. Does anyone have any actual fact on this? Thanks.

nmyers

The heat treatment problem only applies to certain USGI receivers (& bolts).

You only need to worry about the usual problems, such as headspace, NS bolt, bore quality, MW, & TE. (If those terms don't mean anything to you, then you shouldn't buy ANY used Springfield-type rifle.)

I wouldn't pay > $150-200 for a Sante Fe rifle.

Neal

nononsense

dutchjaeger,

"Golden State Arms Corp., maker of the SanteFe rifles, was a sizeable gun store located at 386 W. Green Street in Pasadena, California. They did a land-office business in the '50s and '60s importing and selling surplus military firearms; their 1958 catalog lists thousands of firearms, many of them one-of-a-kind items. Golden State Arm's "Santa Fe" division sporterized military rifles--Lee-Enfields, Mausers, Springfields and a number of others.

Golden State Arms went out of business in the late '60s, but several of their employees founded Federal Ordnance (Fed Ord), which did much of the same kind of work. Fed Ord fell by the wayside in the '80s and was succeeded by the Brinkle Trading Co."

Here is an excerpt from a pretty good article on the Springfield problems. The link is for the rest of the article:

"The result of this process was a receiver that was hardened all the way through, with a surface that was harder than the interior, for a case hardening effect. As these receivers were quite hard, they were very strong and highly resistant to slowly applied loads. The converse to this is that the harder the steel, the more brittle it is when subjected to a sudden shock. Among the benefits to the hardened surface were longevity, and a very smooth action. Up to the time of the First World War, when properly headspaced and using good quality ammunition, there had been few recorded problems with the M1903 receivers. However, the situation changed at the beginning of US involvement in World War One in 1917. Rifle manufacture was significantly increased and several new ammunition manufacturers stepped onto the scene. The result was the acceptance into service of a great number of cartridges of dubious quality and issuance of these cartridges on a far greater scale.

As 1917 progressed, the Ordnance Department began to receive a number of Springfield rifles with significant damage that had occurred either during test firing or after a relatively small number of rounds have been fired. Typical damage was a demolished receiver and an intact barrel with the remnants of the fired case still in the chamber. The diagnosis was burnt steel. Burnt steel is that which has been heated too hot prior to quenching. The result is crystallization in the interior structure of the metal, creating a great weakness. However, a contributing factor was identified in the ammunition fired in the ruined guns. It was apparent that the case heads had been too soft when they left the factory, thus expanding and splitting at the moment of firing and letting high pressure gas into the receiver ring. As a result of these findings, half a dozen receivers were taken from the Springfield Armory production line at random and struck sharply with hammers. Several of them shattered."

http://www.cruffler.com/trivia-July00.html

"There is no known date when Springfield Armory converted entirely to the double heat treatment process. The change occurred between receivers number 750,000 and 780,000. It is known that receiver number 800,000, completed on February 20, 1918 and all subsequent receivers were double heat treated. Rock Island Arsenal records indicate that by May 11, 1918, and beginning with receiver number 285,507, the double heat treatment was adopted."

Best.

MIKE WISKEY

WHILE THE INFO THE OTHER POSTERS GAVE YOU ABOUT THE EARLY 1903 SPRINGFIELDS IS CERTAINLY CORRECT IT DOESN'T APPLY TO THE THE NEWLY MGF. RECEIVERS OF THE GOLDEN STATE SANTA FE RIFLE. I'VE SEEN A FEW OF THESE OVER THE YEARS AND QUALITY HAS BEEN SPOTTY AT BEST. YOU MIGHT WANT TO CHECK OUT THE 1903'S OFFERED BY THE CMP, YOU COULD BUY A BARRELED RECEIVER FROM THEM AND PUT THIS RIFLE BACK TO A QUALITY RIFLE.

Pinhead

I have only encountered one of these Santa Fe rifles in my years of shooting. It belonged to a fellow who came to the local range with it one day when my shooting buddy and I were shooting. He asked us to shoot it and we both looked it over before hand. After observing that it had a very loose fit of parts and the bolt kept hitting the top of the receiver when it was cycled, we declined. The stock had some fairly large gaps in the inletting and the finish looked like it was done in a hurry. Now it quite possible that it was not a representative sample of Santa Fe's workmanship but it is what stuck in my mind all these years. I think I would go with Mike's recommendation if it were me.

Frogbert

quote:Originally posted by MIKE WISKEY
WHILE THE INFO THE OTHER POSTERS GAVE YOU ABOUT THE EARLY 1903 SPRINGFIELDS IS CERTAINLY CORRECT IT DOESN'T APPLY TO THE THE NEWLY MGF. RECEIVERS OF THE GOLDEN STATE SANTA FE RIFLE. I'VE SEEN A FEW OF THESE OVER THE YEARS AND QUALITY HAS BEEN SPOTTY AT BEST. YOU MIGHT WANT TO CHECK OUT THE 1903'S OFFERED BY THE CMP, YOU COULD BUY A BARRELED RECEIVER FROM THEM AND PUT THIS RIFLE BACK TO A QUALITY RIFLE.


This sounds like a pretty good idea. Here's the link:

http://www.odcmp.com/