Front sight protector

[RBruce]

One might argue that a good sight picture can be obtained with the 1903 Springfield front sight protector in place, however, it is an argument with little merit. There are two problems with the sight picture when using the 1903 protector.

1. In most cases, depending on the sight blade height, the top of the blade is not centered within the upper portion of the protector which makes the sight picture confusing with the 1903 rear sight, and unreliable with the 1903A3 peep sight.

2. Since the protector is not fixed to the front sight it moves side to side which makes it near impossible to acquire a repeatable sight picture. And, some model were not entirely symmetrical which caused them to cant when attached to the sight base.

In a previous statement the writer argues "Every battle rifle I own or have used which was built from WWI to the present day has front sight protectors. Most are permanently affixed, some can be removed easily, some with great difficulty, some with a few minor tools. All are designed to see the sight through them whether they are permanent or not."

Most of the rifles mentioned have fixed sight protectors which are ears, and do not surround the sight blade. The Swedish Mauser has a removable front sight protector, however it is more firmly attached than the '03 sight protector, and it is larger in diameter so that it doesn't interfere with the sight picture.

Another issue with the '03 sight protector is that some models were oval in the area surrounding the sight blade, especially model built by some WWII contractors.

Here's a comparison of sight protectors:
- 1903 Springfield 3/8" inner diameter
- USMC 1903 Springfield 4/8" inner diameter
- Swedish Mauser slightly larger than 5/8" inner diameter

[Allen Humphrey]

Personal opinion: If you feel like you need to have a sight protector, and you can see and shoot well with it, then do so. For me, the gap between the top of the sight and the protector is too small and it interferes with re-acquiring the target during rapid fire strings. While I own a protector, it just sits on the shelf because I don't want to scuff the finish by taking it on and off all the time. I also won't be taking my rifle on a troop ship or other such places where the sight is likely to be damaged.

My 91/30 has a full loop and it makes me crazy. Maybe it is just me

[Aragorn243]

I like the full rings, don't know why, not something I can explain. But may be because I'm primarily a scope shooter. Round sight pictures are something I'm familiar with.

The movement of the sight protector is an issue with me. I will probably shim it before I do any serious shooting. I personally find the large ring easier to get more consistent centering in the peep. Used the outward prongs on the M16 sights in the same manner.

[Mike D]

I've shot a very good group with it on, that is slow-fire, from the bench. While shooting at targets, it's obviously the shooters choice. In combat, it would have to come off, quickly.

That's the reason the small peep on the '03's rear sight is not used as a "battle sight", it's too small. What is used, is the combination of open rear, open front, which provides the best sight picture.

The top of the rear ap ring does not interfere with a man-sized target at 100 yds., but the top of the front sight protector does, that's why so many battle rifles have front sight "ears", and not "hoods".

It definitely makes a difference in low-light combat situations.

[45B20]

Aragorn

Perhaps you have a USMC sight cover, they are higher and are meant to be left in place while firing, if the shooter chooses to do so. In other words the rifle can be fired with or without the USMC sight cover.

I have USMC sights and cover on one of my 03 and leave the cover in place all the time.

The Army sight cover comes down much closer to the top of the front sight and were intended only to protect the front sight and were not to be used while shooting. Of course you can leave it on while you are shooting but it makes it very difficult to get a good ’sight picture’ as several posters have pointed out.


The Army sight cover and the USMC sight cover,, while similar in shape, they are DIFFERENT. RBruce gives some measurements


Chuck, the correct term is, “COVER, front sight”. Source ORD 7 SNL B-3 15 Nov.44

I have given a quick look thru my 03 FMs, 40 & 43 and I can find nothing on the ft sight cover , what it is or how to use it other than it is something the G.I. can remove. The Cover is illustrated on pg 2 or the 40 ed. and pg 2 & 3 of the 43 ed.

So I am uncertain of my source in the first three paragraphs. Maybe ‘old wives tails’????

But there are two different ft.sight covers, the taller one is known as the USMC type and the shorter, the Army type.

Other than the correct name for the shorter one and that there is two height, I am not sure right now.

54B20

[45B20]

I found a source as to the use of the Army type sight cover. It is from the early 60s. In a ‘M1903 Firearms Information Services Fact Booklet’ put out by the NRA. In answer to a question about the use of the front sight cover, Harold E. MacFarland answered that,, “the Springfield front sight cover is intended only as protection during storage, transportation, or carrying when it is not intended to fire. It is always removed for firing”. This is a source but is not the primary source.

45B20

[Chuckindenver]

i think i have a copy of that same thing someplace, the USMC was made larger to cover the #10 front sight, and was to be removed as well.
non of my rifles in military trim have a cover, protector ect,
a Lyman front target sight is what i use for fine target use.

[Aragorn243]

Took my rifle out of the safe today to show some relatives. My front sight cover is 3/8's in diameter which would appear to make it the army version although it does have a slightly oval appearance to it. It is still 3/8 inch wide and 3/8th's inch high from the flat bottom to the round top. The top of the front sight is dead center in the center of the sight protector. In no way does the sight protector block the sight picture. There is a very clear and large gap between the top of the sight and the top of the sight protector. Theoretically, if I center the sight protector in the peep sight equal distant from all sides, the tip of the front sight is dead center in the peep. Perhaps I have a shorter front sight than is normal.

[Wullie]

I shot one for years with the sight protector installed. Never caused me any problems.

Wish I still had that old rifle. I'm still kickin my butt for selling it. LOL

[Johnny Peppers]

Ample evidence has been provided that the front sight protector was not intended to be left in place when firing which answers the original question, but for those that like the challenge of using the front sight protector as a makeshift globe sight, there certainly isn't anything wrong with that.