m1903 help before firing sn490078

R

rockwind1

New member
UPDATE: I HAVE DECIDED IT IS NOT WORTH AND WILL NOT BE MESSING WITH IT.

i've heard there a few guys on here who can look at the serial number of a springfield and know how many times the heat-treater farted that day while working on that action back in 1904.
was hoping for a safety tip before messing around with this rifle, should i even shoot it?
springfield armory sn490078. looks like it has been sporterized.

thanks for any help

I can send pics if necessary, wont' let me upload any for some reason.
 
Last edited:
E

eastbank

New member
UNDER 800,000 seems to be the cut off for low numbered springfield 1903 rifles, according to DE HAAS AND VAN ZWELLS BOOK old bolt action rifles./
 
E

eastbank

New member
the courts still out on that, some say it will be ok with standard loads and others say no, only light loads and then there is the never fire it crowd. i have several older(high numbered) 03 springfields and one rock island 03./ i shoot standard loads out of them with no problems. if headspace checks out i would shoot it with loads under 40,000 psi, maybe even with just cast bullets./
 
P

Paul B.

New member
I think where the biggest problem lies is, "Is the one I have gonna be one that blows?" My point being, I don't think every last one of them from number 1 to number 800,000 were all bad. Problem is, how do you tell if the one you have will be one that blows up? I have no clue. There was and article quite a few years back where someone took a few low number rifles and hit the receivers with a hammer. They literally shattered like glass. :eek:

I'd have to say if you were a gamblin' man go ahead and shoot it. If it were me, I'd tie the rifle to an old tire and run a few factory loads through it, then maybe a few warmish to moderately hot reloads. Use a long string to pull the trigger. Only problem is it's not a foolproof test as the next round might be the one that lets go. :(
Paul B.
 
R

rockwind1

New member
i think you are right. fortunately i have an old jc higgins with a mauser action. 30-06. i think i will try to fix that one up instead. but if i were going to find a m1903, which ones are known as the best actions?
 
4

44 AMP

Staff
A few points to consider about the "dangerous" low number 1903s....

The first one is that the military NEVER pulled any from service. Those rifles all served until AFTER WWII. There is no record that the low number guns failed at any greater rate than any of the others.

I've seen reports on various tests done, and I've seen challenges to some of those tests. Can't speak to the validity of any of it from personal experience, but what seems to be the base is that IF a low number action lets go, it fails catastrophically. IF it fails...

Also consider the ammo the rifle is intended to use. USGI service ammo. A low number Springfield, in mechanically sound condition would not worry me being used ONLY with USGI service ammo (or equivalent). I wouldn't run it with modern commercial sporting ammo, and I wouldn't have it rechambered into any other cartridge.

Also consider all the 1903s are now well past the century mark, and should be treated as what they are, not the same as more modern guns.

IF you have doubts, simply don't use it. Hang it on a wall or sell it to a collector, or whatever floats your boat.

There is a risk, I'm not saying there isn't. ALL century+ old firearms use entails a degree of risk. When the gun is mechanically sound, not worn/rusted, damaged, etc., and the proper ammo is used, the risk is minimal. But not absolute zero.
 
J

Jim Watson

New member
P.O. Ackley said that the bolt was the weak point and that a nickel steel bolt in a case hardened action will be OK.

Slamfire1 on THR will show you pictures of blown up guns to prove it is a poor design poorly executed. But also a bunch of other demolished rifles.
 
S

Scorch

New member
Not trying to start an argument or tick anyone off, but the 1903 Springfield was manufactured under less than technologically advanced conditions (no heat treating ovens, temperature before quenching was judged by eye), and has a well-documented problem of receivers failing under pressure. No one can tell you if your particular receiver will fail or when it will fail. I have heard people postulate that since they went through two world wars that all the weak ones are gone, and yet we still hear of people blowing up 1903s. So, just my opinion here, why would you want to find out the hard way if your receiver will fail? It's in the suspect serial number range, just set it aside and leave it be.
 
P

Paul B.

New member
"i think you are right. fortunately i have an old jc higgins with a mauser action. 30-06. i think i will try to fix that one up instead. but if i were going to find a m1903, which ones are known as the best actions?"

If it were me, I'd forget about the Springfields and concentrate on that J.C. Higgins. As you said it's a Mauser action I'm betting on either the M50 or M51 as those are the ones I use to base serious custom rifles on. Only one so far but have three more to build on as soon as I fine another gunsmith to work with locally. The one I had passed away. Nice thing about them is they're usually quite accurate as is and have a chrome lined bore. The stock is a bit clubby with wood being rather plain but a little judicious whittling and a refinish can make a very nice rifle for little money. I have two done that way and the last is strictly stock and all original. I think you can google up JC Higgins M50 owners manual and print out a copy. The manual is good for the 50 and 51. Some people replace the trigger on them with a Timney. I did it for a couple but never have had a problem with the originals. The problem arises w wen the action screws get loose but I always checked the screws on my rifles before serious range work or just before a hunt. It's never been a problem for me. If they get too loose, the gun may fire when closing the bolt.
Frankly, and this is just my not very humble pinion, that FN Mauser you have is one hell of a lot better than any of the 1903 Springfields. Also, if you decide to go semi-custom or full bore custom. there's not as much work that needs to be done on the FN. They're the same guns as the Browning FNs with most of the difference on the Browning being cosmetic.
Paul B.
 
J

jaysouth

New member
Does your JC Higgins have a serial number? Mine does not. Early 50s regs did not require actions to have a SN. Sears imported actions, fitted them with surplus Savage barrels and put them in cheap Bishop stocks. Mine is MOA with any ammot that will chamber.
 
R

rockwind1

New member
hi jay, sorry, after i decided to not mess with that springfield, i stopped looking at this thread. I will have to check that. i was just going to put a remage stock on mine,,, i hope it will fit.
 
P

Paul B.

New member
"Does your JC Higgins have a serial number? Mine does not. Early 50s regs did not require actions to have a SN. Sears imported actions, fitted them with surplus Savage barrels and put them in cheap Bishop stocks. Mine is MOA with any ammo that will chamber."

I have one J.C. Higgins that did not have a serial number and four more that do. :confused: Never figured that one out. It was originally a .270 Win. but is now a 7x57 Mauser as a custom rifle.

I do know that no firearm required a serial number until passage of the Gun Control Act of 1968. (GCA68)
Paul B.
 
O

oldbear1950

New member
I have seen 22s and shotguns with no serial numbers, but none of those J C Higgins, and it I did with that mauser action, I would shoot, that 98 Mauser is as strong an actiion as there is
 
O

oldbear1950

New member
But, I have heard all my life, to not shoot below that 800,000 serial number, and I am now 72. I think I would follow that advice
 
H

Hawg

New member
44 AMP said:
the military NEVER pulled any from service. Those rifles all served until AFTER WWII. There is no record that the low number guns failed at any greater rate than any of the others.
Click to expand...

The military did replace a lot of early receivers. I have heard of one account where one was dropped on a concrete floor and shattered.
 
4

44 AMP

Staff
The military did replace a lot of early receivers.
Click to expand...

If there was ever any official program to collect and replace the low numbered receivers, documentation of that is not widely known. I'm sure those that failed in service were replaced, but those that didn't weren't, or not to any large degree. Had there been a full "recall" type effort, we wouldn't be discussing those guns issues in civilian hands today.

I have heard of one account where one was dropped on a concrete floor and shattered.
Click to expand...

I've actually seen that, local smith had it happen to him and kept the receiver to show off. Fell from workbench to concrete floor and broke. Broken. but not shattered into bits.

Other side of the coin is rifles with those same actions still in use today, and fine in all measurable dimensions.

Dave LeGate at Rifle Magazine sacrificed some low number actions.

An overly hardened one was not hard to break.
Click to expand...

And P.O. Ackley intentionally blew up a bunch of rifles, too. The point is, if you are testing to destruction, you always get there.

I'm not trying to defend the indefensible, I just think its an over hyped thing these days, but I recognize that risk assessment today is much different from what it was in the past.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top