Low Number Springfield M1903 Safer to Shoot?

[Chuckindenver]

keep this in mind, when your making a choice to fire or not, and ill keep this as simple as i can,

your holding a small 50,000PSI bomb, less then 10 inches from your face, and holding it with a bare hand usually right were the rifle lets go,
your life, can change in a micro second, and likely those standing next to you.
with the amount of DHT and NS 1903s...some lessons in life can be avoided.

[Rick the Librarian]

Since it looks like this subject is going to have a life of it's own" again, I guess I might as well enter my opinion, which is worth exactly what you're paying for it!

I stand somewhere in the middle between the two of extremes of "Use a LN M1903 and you'll die" and "LN M1903s are perfectly safe". I do agree that probably most low numbered M1903s are safe to use. However, I have made the decision to not use LN M1903s because I don't enjoy taking chances, even small (avoidable) ones.

As was stated above, they did shut down production in the middle of a war to correct the problem, so that's telling me it wasn't a small one. Low numbered receivers continued to be scrapped on the arsenal level between 1927 and 1941. Yes, I know they were used extensively in World War II and by the Marines. However, the term "war emergency" comes up. Taking a M1903 to the range for an afternoon, hardly qualifies as a "war emergency". Again, it is a risk, however small, that can be avoided. Yes, if an intruder was in my house and I needed a bolt-action rifle, I wouldn't dig through my '03s until I got to a high numbered one, I'd grab the FIRST one ... but again, the term "emergency" comes up in that situation.

I agree that there are ways that having a receiver burst can be lessened, but, again, when going to the range, it isn't that hard to grab #1205868, rather than #230477. (Both are serial numbered M1903s I own).

Obviously, this is a choice that any of us who own low numbered M1903s would make and I wouldn't even START to tell people what they should or shouldn't do.

(P.S. I will admit, the last November 11, when I wanted to honor my WWI ancestors, I DID take RIA 272,505 to the range and fire off 11 shots! )

[Chuckindenver]

though i dont recommend anyone do so.
im a rebel. and i am planing a Wyoming iron sight Antelope hunt, with my 1917 dated RIA.. yea, against my own advise ill be using handloads,
no, i wont shoot the rifle alot, likely range test it with bystanders behind me, and will check cases as i fire..
my load will be 47 Grns of 4064 behind a 168Grn Swift A frame bullet, in a NM case.
i know,..reckless, but have wanted to do this for many years, so it will be done...no, you shouldnt do it lol

an observation...most of the nay sayers and people that want to fire SHt actions lately are those with no or little experiance with 1903s, handloading or Vintage rifles all together..
rather then listen, they want a cheering section.. and i understand thats human nature..
they want to start collecting and shooting 1903s or ad one to the small collection of other milsurps they already have, that usually include a variant if Mosin Nagants, SKS and a Mauser of some sort,
rather then take some time, and educate themselves they jump the gun {no pun intended} and pay money for a SHT 1903 that was rebuilt 1 or 2 times and since it has a 1942 or USMC barrel,, that thing has seen combat,, its not gonna fail,..my gunsmith says its ok...
yes, thats true,, it may last for another 90 years, and it may fail as soon as you run a couple of the Russian bear steel case 30-06 you got with it at the last gunshow,
many of us here have been collecting, shooting, and working on 1903s for years..so we know the chance of a case head failure, and likely wont take that rare pre WW1 rifle out to the range and fire every weekend, hell, doubt any of us would do it once a year...
all pun asside....educate yourself, and know the dangers, and keep those who shoot next to you at the range safe...and only use quality ammo.

[Cosine26]

*I do not believe that this “dead horse” will ever be put out to pasture. The single heat treatment (SHT) rifles are known to have burst with defective ammunition. I do not believe that General Hatcher ever indicated that his list of destroyed/ damaged rifles was complete. I think that he only reported on those that reported the failures to the Springfield Armory during his tenure.
*In the pre-WWI era after the M1903 was adopted, the military budget was not great and the major equipment cost for the average soldier was the M1903 rifle. I am sure that if one were destroyed in the course of business a Report of Survey (or its equivalent at the time) must have been must have been submitted. Somewhere in archives, if they have not been destroyed, these reports must be stored if they have not been destroyed in the last 100 years. This would give a much clearer picture of how many service rifles were destroyed or damaged. This may or may not record the failures of those in civilian hands.
*Whether to fire one of the SHT rifles should be at the discretion of the shooter. Many of these surplus military rifles are inherited by heirs who know little or nothing about firearms in general and M1903’s in particular. I one observed at a DCM shooter, a shooter firing a NM Special during a local match. He had no idea what he had; he had just inherited it. I believe that those of us, who are knowledgeable, can provide a service by answering questions from these individuals giving these facts as we know them. I think that the general consensus is that when a SHT rifle does burst, the results are often catastrophic.
*If an experienced shooter elects to fire his SHT receiver with high pressure ammo, or any ammo he knows the possibility and accepts the responsibility. The later 03A3 is rougher than the M1903 but the material is better being of alloy steel. As a consequence it is probably stronger.
*Just after WWII there was a lot of discussion about SHT rifles. A report a noted metallurgist of the time appeared in the AMERICAN RIFLEMAN. In his opinion the type of carbon steel used in both the SHT and the DHT receivers was unsuitable for this use-his words, not mine. He indicated that in his opinion, the double heat treat process was no better than Segley’s annealing of SHT receivers. There has been a large discussion about the TITANIC, and one of the conclusions was that the steel was inferior. I believe that steel and the measurement of its contents was in its infancy and the knowledge of its physicals was limited. The GEW 98 fared much better than the M1903 and one can only conclude that the GEW 98 design handled ammo failure better than did the M1903

JMHO

[firstflabn]

I believe that steel and the measurement of its contents was in its infancy and the knowledge of its physicals was limited.

burned steel metallurgy - Google Search

If they understood Martensite, pearlite, and cementite, their understanding of the chemistry and its relationship to physical properties, they weren't as primitive as you have assumed. Need to look elsewhere to explain spec requirements.

[Calif-Steve]

The M1903 design, with its cone breech, does not handle case failures very well. It is an inherent problem and is a matter for ALL M1903 rifles. Add to that the issues of the low number steels and you do have some concern. It is not hard to find high number rifles for sale at all big gunshows, so why shoot your low number. Fun keepers, but not fun shooters. I am currently re-barreling a WWII Chinese M98 Mauser. I have no fear of this action and will shoot it all day long. But I do not shoot my 2 low number '03's.

[TDH]

And with all arguments aside the question remains. To shoot or not to shoot? And the question remains to all of us that own a low number. On a personal note I haven't shot mine in over a year and that is usually 10 to 15 rounds on Memorial day and Veteran's day and with light loads. When I finally settle in my last home it will probably go on the wall for good along with the proper bayonet and my grandpa's dog tag. I would love to have a WW1 era Purple Heart and Silver Star to add to it.

[mark1]

I have a SHT receiver that the bolt was sticking. So I used a brass hammer and tried to "Tap" it out. After several taps that did not work so I gave the bolt handle a good hit and the receiver shattered. If I can find it I will post some pictures. It is in one of those boxes in the basement. You know the brown box.