Hey all 1903 Lovers : See July 20 Shotgun News 1903 Springfield Article

You guys need to see the newest Shotgun News July 20th, I got it today.

Very nice 1903 Springfield article with tons of historical pictures.

Just saying, worth buying from the news stand! :clap:

Thanks for the heads up. I remember when they did one on Guns of the Boxer Rebellion. It was super!

I read the article and, for someone who wants a quick rundown on the M1903, very decent.

One thing - Paul got this picture over the internet and it actually originated with me. It is not of two soldiers in the Punative Expedition as the caption suggests - it was taken at Fort Casey [WA], a coast artillery fort, probably in the 1908-1910 range, and was courtesy of the Fort Casey Volunteer Battalion, a group I belong to, that gives tours of the old fort. Trust me, that photo AIN'T of Mexico, but nearly Crockett Lake.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...standard-3.jpg

The original picture was about 10 Mb and you could get a nice, tight closeup of the M1903 being used by the soldier in the foreground (it appears to be a "high wood" no-bolt stock. Note the smaller windage knob :

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...standard-4.jpg

I couldn't resist - here's a similar picture of SA #230,477:

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...standard-2.jpg

...and since I'm probably going to be asked, either on this forum or by PM/email, here's the mistakes in the article:

P. 88: The new folding leaf rear sight (the M1905) was developed before the advent of the 30-06. An earlier version was made for the 30-03. It is easy to recognize because the highest number on the leaf was "23", not "27, like in the later versions. If you have Bruce Canfield's 2004 ed. of his book, look on p. 26 at the picture and you'll see the difference.

Also on p. 88, he mentioned that the earlier rifles were brought up to 30-06 standards by February, 1907. Not true - it took until @ 1909-1910 before all the earlier rifles were modified. A lot of the delay had to do with targeting problems caused by the new sight. I have two rifles, one 78,180 and the other 230,477 (Both SA) that have 1908 barrels.

Regarding the Mark I rifles, slightly over 100,000 were made, but only about 65,000 Pedersen Devices were made. It is easy to get confused between these two numbers, I know I have. In this same place he said that "...During the war, some 65,000 M1903 rifles were modified to use the Pedersen Device." Had WWI lasted well into 1919, as many generals expected it would, the PD/1903 would have seen action. However, all but a tiny number and test models were made in 1919-1920, not during 1917-1918.

This is probably starting to approach "picky" but the last M1903 receiver was made at Springfield in late 1939, not 1940. The author was right that sub-contractors made many parts, but Springfield continued to produce fairly large numbers of M1903 parts through mid- to late 1944. (If you don't have a copy of William Brophy's book Arsenal of Freedom, you should pick up a copy. Very interesting book!)

At the end of page 94, he mentioned that 1903s and 1903A3s were assembled with either original straight stocks, Type Cs or the Scant stock. It might be just bad wording, but it gives the impression that the Scant, at least, was used on new rifles, which, except for a small number of M1903A4s, it wasn't.

Despite what seems like some detailed errors, I thought the article, over all, was quite good and would be a good introduction for a "M1903 newbie".

It appears that the handguards on both rifles have no clips. They have no sight grooves! Cool!

I didn't notice the missing handguard clips - thanks!

Why does the solder in the front have his shirt sleeves chopped off? If this is in the field at a military post, isn't he out of uniform? Or is this just another of the Army's staged photos?
I love the photo regardless.

I've had several questions about that - no idea. Maybe they were doing some "recreational" shooting, although having all the gear on sort of discounts that possibility.

Both rifles also have the front sight covers on. I betcha that they hadn't actually started shooting yet while this photo was being taken. and that the photo was staged to appear like they were firing in a combat zone. "Here, you guys get down here like you've just come up the hill". The soldier probably liked to wear that modified shirt whenever he was out at the range on his own time and off duty. Notice that he alone is wearing suspenders on his ammo belt while the other man isn't. He wisely brought his canteen along while at the range though (the suspenders help with the added weight). Maybe it was just more comfortable for him to shoot without the long sleeves. I've known guys like that in the army. In 1981 and 1982, I and another Lt. sometimes took our Krags and 03's out in a jeep to the tank gunnery range when we were stationed at Ft. Irwin, CA and shot at the various Russian tanks that were set up out there. 1000 and 1500 yards away, you could see the rounds hit the dusty armor plating. John would allways wear his WWI campaign hat with his BDU's (that were just being phased in) and I'd wear my non regulation BDU cap with the longer than regulation bill and made of 100 % cotton material that was thicker. Nobody seemed to mind me wearing it on duty and I didn't own another.

The slings are adjusted like they took them right from the gun rack, certainly weren't hiking with them that tight. Just a guess to go with the staged event observation.