Printable View
New member here. I recently acquired the following 1903A4:
Serial#: 3421904
Barrel Date: 10-43
M73B1: #23298
It looks to have had an arsenal rebuild (blued -> park) and has a Keystone C-stock with the only mark being the inverted K in the well.
The scope appears to be rotated several degrees clockwise around the barrel so I need to figure out how/if I can accomplish that fix myself or need a smith... waiting for a Tipton Ultra Gun Vise.
Attachment 128970Attachment 128969Attachment 128968
Nice, I always wanted to shoot one to see how they shot.
nice rifle. welcome to the forum, neighbor! Can you post a pic of the underside of bolt handle recess in the stock? as well as the underside of the barrel beyond the forend?
You can remount your scope pretty easily. make sure you have a good set of screwdriver bits...only use one that fits absolutely perfectly. I would also recommend a torque wrench for re-tightening. 15 in*lbs is all it takes.
Requested pics added to original post.Quote:
Originally Posted by ssgross
Original barrels should have a punch mark on the underside of the barrel, about an inch from the muzzle, like in the photo below.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...22152146-1.jpg
Original stocks have a very distinctive recess for the bolt handle, like in this thread...https://www.milsurps.com/showthread....l=1#post205733
I don't have one with it's original barrel and stock to compare.
I took another pic of the underside of the barrel in natural light and it seems to show the remains of a punch mark.Quote:
Originally Posted by ssgross
Attachment 129154
Agreed on the bolt handle cut-out... I assume it was a DCM gun that was re-stocked back in the day.
I now have a rifle vice, bore laser and "Firearm Accurizing Torque Wrench" (The Fat Wrench) so I'll be taking a stab at re-installing the scope so that it lines up with the barrel. Iron sites are certainly more convenient.
Your pics are a little too dark, but I think I can see the "problem" with the barrel. It looks like the Redfield mount is directly mounted on the barrel, not shimmed at the front. If so, you can order a set of shims from Brownell's. I don't know how a gunsmith does that & gets the correct height.
Neal
the original mount has a sort of tab looking cut in the rear. some rough elevation can be adjusted by filing the rear in this area - then shims in the front if this isn't enough. I use small cut out beer cans.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neal Myers
The base of the receiver and the top surface of the scope mount must be parallel for correct base installation. The gunsmith uses a known level surface to which he clamps the receiver, then uses a level and shims the base as required, if required, to ensure the top of the scope base is level with the base of the receiver. Clamping the receiver to the level surface typically requires a spacer (a machined block). Any good smith will do this when he mounts a scope.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neal Myers
I am not certain what you meant by "correct height".
I bought a specially machined block from Brownell's for the 1903 for this purpose. I tap the receivers, and/or barrel, using a Billy Best rig. I have D&T'ed numerous SHT receivers in this manner.
I have never had to spot temper the SHT receivers to drill them, but if required, I use an old soldering iron with a pointed tip, heated red-hot, and momentarily, maybe 3-4 seconds, touch it to the spot to be annealed. Never, and I mean never, use a torch to heat the spot to be annealed. You will ruin your receiver and make it very dangerous to shoot. An acetylene torch burns at about 4,400 to 6,000 degrees F, with a relatively broad flame, and such a flame will ruin your receiver in a matter of seconds, because the case-hardened surface of a SHT receiver is only a few thousandths of an inch thick.
I mention this because I saw where someone recommended the torch procedure on a forum, and he obviously has absolutely no knowledge of the subject. All information on the net is not correct, so beware and investigate what you read, including what I post.
I hope this helps.
turn your scope to the left so the top knob is facing left and your right knob is on top.. i would say this is a parts gun, that had the barrel replaced as well as the stock, it looks like the stock had a repair behind the bolt cut, and then they for some reason, opened the bolt notch a little, base is a later commercial base thats been parked and added, youll need 2 shims to get it to zero, there is a seller on ebay that sells original shims, i would remove the base and look under it , the receiver looks like someone welded on it , as the dark area right by the front ring, but that could just be the picture, not to scare you, but iv seen a good fake that had this issue, they ground all the markings off, and got the steel hot, then lazer engraved the markings spread apart to make them look right..
Shoot it first to see if it needs shimming.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neal Myers
The scope base doesn't look right to me. I can't see the bevel that supposed to be behind the rear screws. It makes me think it's a replica.
You don't need a Tipton vise to work on it. I don't have one (I have several vises one of which is a 4" Wilton a couple that is older than myself). Just cut some pine to fit your vise and rubber band them onto the jaw. You need two of them. Pine being softer than walnut should not mar it. BTW, I made padded jaws with plywood and cork. Think of it as a squared shaped "C" with the arch of the "C" being several inches long and the legs skinny.
BTW, I also donated worn rubber farm boots so that the rubber could be salvaged for gluing onto metal or wood for rubber vise jaws. They're easy enough to make.
You hold out hope that the gun you bought off GB, without actually seeing it in person, is what the seller says it is. It shouldn't have taken me this long to come to the truth, but I now have.
Attachment 129476
This same seller has more fake A4's for sale on GB right now... says he's selling them on consignment for a local collector in Texas. Not sure I buy that... nor should I.
Expensive lesson... and not the first.
Thanks all.
Yes, clearly a handjob...
Hopefully not too expensive. Get it shooting good and have fun!Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryWKeim
Don't feel too bad. I've socked my share of cash into unauthentic rifles, often more than they are worth...but I built them myself from scraps or old mutilated or neglected barn or pawn finds - sweat equity ha!. My satisfaction was worth every penny.
Don't feel too bad. Every time you shoot a good group, your disappointment will be slightly diminished.
Hand engraved, and not very good either.
one time, i wished i was wrong.. sorry you got burned
But I still wonder... why is the serial number proper looking and in the correct range?
Is there any way to tell possibly by markings like the British have as to this receiver being rejected but then reactivated after repair?
Could it be the defect was the markings didn't strike correctly and had to be filled in by hand for this receiver to continue down the line?
By scrutinizing the picture the US looks overstruck at the top and had it possibly moved while being struck? The Remington looks proper enough except much lighter at the bottom than the top especially at the R and E. Even the I is very angular. It's possible the Model 03-A3 hardly struck in that instance and had to be followed up by hand. Round surfaces can be a real pain to work with when all involved is not perfect.
No way of knowing for sure this is just a supposition on my part.
Is it certain this is not a Federal Ordnance receiver that had the commercial maker markings removed and bogus markings added?
How can I go about ascertaining that?
Gary - I was referring to the receiver photo that 'Chuck in Denver' posted with the bogus markings on the left-side of the receiver.
I believe 'reproduction' receivers that were marked National Ordnance & Santa Fe Arms were rough investment castings.
Taking such an action out of the stock would likely reveal casting marks and seams.
Attachment 129542
Federal Ordnance/Santa Fe/ National Ordnance rifles, (all related), with cast receivers have been showing up at gun shows for years.
The poor quality receivers, combined with nice G.I. surplus parts, can look like a good condition 1903A3 Springfield rifle at quick glance.
Chuck in Denver posted the photo of a 1903A4 with bogus markings. That receiver looked to have kind of rounded edges, like it was cast or markings had been ground & polished off.
I was supposing some unscrupulous varmint might put bogus markings on one of these 'knock-off' 1903A3 rifles and sell it as legit.
Worth being vigilant!
I'll post some more detailed pix of that area of the suspect gun... after the NFL wild card games!
To be honest, I can't see what Chuck is trying to show, but my pix should provide some contrast.
Ive found in the past the Nat ordnance receivers had the wrong threads for the front bottom metal screw.
A GI screw will not work in them fwiw, they're 1/4x25 if Im not mistaken.
I cant recall how the rear or long screw panned out for that instance.
I am amazed at the 'Bucky Beaver' trim job on this handguard.
I cannot make out the obliterated receiver markings.
The Natl. Ord. receivers are in the 5 million range.
This is photo shows #4,996,921, so I guess it could be Remington?
Attachment 129551
If there is no stripper clip guide in front of the rear sight, then it's a National Ordnance or Santa Fe. Salt FlatQuote:
Originally Posted by GaryWKeim
Pretty simple.Quote:
Originally Posted by Salt Flat
OP's receiver appears to be a real 1903A3 and not aftermarket cast Fed. Ord.
I have an A4 that someone sporterized and I restored. The serial was likely not struck very deep, then bubba wheeled over it to blue. I had it parkerized to match the NOS barrel. light sand blasting made what was left of the serial pop. I got lucky - it still had it's original bolt, GI base and rings on it too. Also lucky I was able to buy it as little more than scrap. The cut back barrel was a real sewer pipe.
Attachment 129561Attachment 129560
SSgross, Interesting, Can you show us some more pictures of the whole rifle-- maybe start a new thread?
I did a thread on my build. It's somewhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by Salt Flat
EDIT: looks like that thread was just before the great milsurps.com reset of 2021, and all but the last couple pics are gone, and I can't seem to find my originals. Oh well. I think the rifle is coming up in the queue of my shooting rotation. I'll get some fresh pics then and post.
For now, here she is all done up in her NOS scant.
Attachment 129595
EDIT2: found some of the before pics...rings were fancy. mount screws had been previously staked, but staking no longer intact when it got to me. Rear of the base is beveled, and marked REDFIELD in the correct spot. I found some original split top rings for it, but have not parkerized it yet - Brownells has been out of Manganese for some time now. I was going to use the scope base and rings as my first lesson. I conserved the bolt, but otherwise left it alone. Bolt looked correct against those I compared it too. The cocking piece had the knob cut off and had to be replaced. I found a NOS barrel, dated within a couple months on the later side of the expected range. If you expand my first pic, you can see some of the U.S. Remington....on the left side. I'll get some closer pics when I get it out again.
Chuck did the parking of the receiver for me...by the way happy retirement Chuck!
Attachment 129597Attachment 129596Attachment 129598Attachment 129599Attachment 129600Attachment 129601Attachment 129602Attachment 129603
ssgross, That is a very worthwhile project. It's getting hard to find projects like this. The bolt looks right on and I like the scant stock. I hadn't heard that Chuck had retired. Hopefully he will still share his expertise on this forum. Salt Flat
my last phone conversation with him was last summer, and he was planning on retirement in December. While I'm typing...happy new-year-new-you Chuck! He always answered the phone and was a pleasure to speak with, and never hesitated to point me in the right direction on things I'm not quite setup to do, and share his experience in a friendly and courteous manner. A true gentleman and professional, through and through.Quote:
Originally Posted by Salt Flat
I have all the luck! Funny I was in the middle of building a clone from an already drilled and tapped sporter when this one came along. They both shoot so darn well I can't get myself to let either of them go.Quote:
Originally Posted by Salt Flat
We are fortunate that there are still plenty of these NOS scants around. Unless one has a different purpose, these are the "correct" stock to use when overhauling an 1903 or A3 sporter back to service - the same as the arsenals would have done if a stock was too far gone to continue. I like to think of my work as just part of their service life, but with a little more love and attention to detail ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Salt Flat
im not retired, yet, 2 more years to go, i had originally planned on retiring 2023, but after looking at the numbers, id take too big of a hit doing it at 60, that and some unforsean Cancer with my GF, we had originally planned in moving to Gillet Wyoming this year, buying a shooting park, she has stuggled with Chemo since Aug, spent 29 days in the hospital over Christmas and Newyears.
to add to the pictures,
its is a Remington A3 receiver, you can see the ghost of the old markings were the ground them off, the serial number isnt indexed, it runs under the handguard ring.. FYI: changing or altering a serial is a Felony.
you cant tell in those pics, but the new markings were done with a pentagraph, you can see the chatter marks in them.
no such thing as a fed ord receiver, National Ord, and Santa Fe were the 2 names of the cast built actions, yes, i have seen a few fakes built of those. to make this worse, someone is building repro 1903A3 receivers in Europe from scratch, havnt seen any in the USA yet,
Thanks, Chuck. I too am nearly 60 and was hoping to retire this month, but common wisdom is to not retire into a recession, so that's what I'm doing. So sorry about what you GF is going through... I've got multiple (extended) family members with breast cancer at the moment.
I'm looking for a smoking gun to take back to the seller. What does "the serial number isnt indexed" mean? One or more smoking guns would be best. The hand etched model marking is one, I would presume. I'm not going to complain about the stock as I knew it was a replacement.
hopefully some members can conjure some pics of these for us.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chuckindenver
Chuck in Denver - Thanks for clarifying about National Ord. and Santa Fe Arms being the names found on the 'sketchy' privately made cast 1903A3 receivers & parts guns.
(Federal Ordnance appears to have been involved with importing parts, and cast M1 carbine and M14 receivers. Apparently, they were physically next-door and eventually had some connection with National Ord.)
Best wishes and prayers for you and the health of your Girlfriend.
indexed is not line up, straight or squared up correctly