Low S/N 1903 shooting

stankemp

I have a low s/n (144xxx RIA) 1903 I intend to shoot.

I will proof the metallurgy by remote firing a full house load. I'll cover it with a containment mat and trigger it from a distance. If it passes this test, I'll be using Trail Boss loads for plinking fun.

My question is : if the proof load is OK, does that imply low pressure Trail Boss (approx 13000 PSI) loads are OK from there on?

This is not a great condition gun except for the fact that it has probably never been fired. All the clues are there that it was a drill rifle - no firing pin but with a spring retainer, original June 6 1909 barrel. It does have the sweetest trigger of any rifle except a custom one that I built from a type 38.

I know I will be lambasted re the shooting of a rifle on the poison list but I am undeterred.

Stan

SoreShoulder

The problem with the low number springfields is that they are a bit too hard and repeated stresses can crack them. Full power loads are worse but trail boss loads may be enough if you shoot enough of them.

It probably won't develop into a problem but it may.

Hawk Carse

It is commonly pointed out by the Low Number Alarmists that one or more Springfields were demolished with the Guard Cartridge loaded with 9.1 gr Bullseye and the regular 150 gr FMJ. Pressure not stated, but the "shock" of fast rise time in pressure from the pistol powder is blamed.

Y'all be careful, now, you hear.

nmyers

Sore is right, it probably won't have a problem. But, if it does, you will go to the ER in the back of an ambulance.

There is no way to tell if a given low number 03 will experience catastrophic failure. Not a proof load, not magnaflux, not a Ouija board; you pays your money & you takes your chances. But, if that's all you can afford, do what you must....

Personally, I wouldn't even fire a drill rifle. Some were converted from service grade rifles, some were converted from unserviceable rifles. Your gunsmith may be able to identify which you have, I can't.

Neal

richarda

One limited precaution that does not alter the rifle is to replace the bolt body (for shooting purposes) with a high number '03 (or '03A3) bolt body (making sure the headspace is up to spec. w/the new bolt). It won't make the receiver any stronger, but is better than nothing. This is among the changes made by the U. S. military in the 1930s after it was decided NOT to scrap the 800,000+ "low number" '03s, and instead place them in the "war reserve", to be issued/used only "when & if". Among the other changes were the drilling of the "Hatcher Hole" for gas escape in the left side of the receiver (spaced to line up with the gas escape hole in the bolt).

cbyerly

Firing a "full house load" will not prove anything. I agree that a newer bolt would enhanse safety. A Hatcher hole would also be a good idea.

riley p

I too have a low number Springfield. There's a great article about Low Number failures at m1903.com Worth a read if you have one. Mine was rebarreled in 1943 and was in very, very good shape when I got it. Maybe 2000 rounds through it now. Concerned about the "brittle" folks talk about I took mine to a local machine shop that had a Rockwell Hardness test machine and had it tested. This is non-destructive and if the guy has time, takes about 5 minutes. The receiver needs to be out of the stock. Mine came out almost exactly the same as a Savage 110 (recently made). If you're looking for peace of mind that is a good way to go. It leaves a small (1/16") "dent" in the top of the receiver but it's hardly noticeable and worth it, in my opinion.

jonk

It's a fair bet that most of the 'bad' ones failed long ago, but that said, it's your choice.

I would be more apt to use a case full of 50 bmg powder, which will develop similar pressure to trail boss and similar velocity, but with a much more gentle rise in pressures.

charliemeyer007

I have seen one receiver that was shattered by a strike from a ball peen hammer. Hard and brittle steel doesn't work for me. I agree most of the really weak ones have already failed. +1 for jonk approach, I have shoot many gallons of pulled 50 cal. powder in an -06.

If there were no other rifles around I'd be shooting a low numbered Springfield until then I just leave it hanging on the wall.

Ambrose

I would suggest, before you do ANYTHING else, that you get a copy of Hatcher's Notebook (You may be able to get or order one from your local library.) and read chapter 18. The following is a brief outline from that book.

In the 13 year period 1917 through 1929, Springfield Arsenal collected information on "blown up" 1903 rifles. Two rifles in your serial number range are in there; RIA 146184, 9/16/22; "shattered receiver", excessive pressure from firing grenades, and RIA 146554, 6/10/25; "receiver blown to pieces", bullet left in barrel-second cartridge forced behind it and fired.

The anaylisis of the destroyed rifles indicate that in most instances some form of abuse, as above, was a contrubuting cause. The data collected at that time indicated that 1 in 11,896 RIA rifles "burst". In most cases, injuries reported as "slight". But, of course, there were doubtless rifles destroyed that were not reported during that period and rifles destroyed between then and now. Low numbered rifles were issued and used during WWII since rifles were needed then.

Only you can decide whether to fire that rifle. Were it mine would I shoot it? Probably. My first deer rifle was a borrowed low numbered Springfield and I fired it as often as I could. Good luck!

MIKE WISKEY

"The anaylisis of the destroyed rifles indicate that in most instances some form of abuse, as above, was a contrubuting cause.".........As in wrong or bad (soft brass) ammo or obstructed barrel, note that the there hasn't been one report of a 'blown up' springfield since about ww2. I shoot mine with surplus m-2 ball ammo (post 1940).

spirits

There was an article, I believe in the NRA's American Rifleman not certain, where the author shattered Springfield Armory (SA) and Rock Island Armory (RIA) receivers which had SNs above and below the 800,000 and 285,507 SNs where the receivers were considered to be brittle for the SA and RIA rifles, respectively. Anyone remember the article?

In addition to the brittle receivers, I have worried just a little about the cone breeching (i.e., case head not sufficiently supported) and the possible breakage of the two piece firing pin in the Springfield rifle leading to a possible injury. Safety concerns you don't want to get distracted by while shooting.

SoreShoulder

Are they all parkerized? Maybe it would be possible to have it re-heat treated by a gunsmith.

Proof loads wouldn't prove it was safe because fatigue failure comes from cumulative stress.

Maybe the cheapest bet would be to try to score a barrelled action for shooting from a sporter?