WTK: 1903A3 Redfield Base Mount

The "Chinese" base could be easily milled to duplicate the contour of the original. The Redfield marking is a simple job for a decent engraver. Bead blast and park it and you have it. The one I bought for my SC A3 fits the front ring perfectly. Prussian blue shows perfect contact. It also has 8-40 screws. Perhaps the variations in American wartime "rush em' out" A3 receiver rings was a lot greater than the current Redfield bases ?

The "Chinese" base for 03's fits 1903 (real) Springfields perfectly. The standards for 03s were so much higher than any 03A3, that IMO they provide a far better "read" on the quality of the "Chinese" bases.

As for the fixed Alaskans on 03A4s there is one sitting in the Smithsonian. I have 2 N/A new Alaskans.
Both were made in 52' according to the brochures in the box.
WW II no, Korea or Vietnam possible as A4s were used in both.

If you are counting on Stroebel's book for anything ...... don't. It has more errors than an Obama speech.

BTW the "Chinese" 1891 Mosin 91/30PU was as good if not better than any 330 equipped A4.
Certainly far better optics. ....... ask Whitefeather.

sorry you have some miss information.
the A4 was NEVER issued with anything but a Weaver 330C..M73B1.. no matter how you try and cook it, no commercial Lyman AK made at any time period would have been used on the A4 sniper rifle.
though you may read that they used commercial made scopes.... it just didnt happen.. the M82 and M84 were used as replacement scopes, however, the M82 was NOT a commercial Lyman AK.
the China made bases are junk, no other way of saying it, the screws are soft, steel on the base is soft, setting a base on a rifle thats not drilled and tapped, is not a good way to find fitment,
since your building a replica anyway, what base and scope you use doesnt matter, only that it functions, and stays put, if a china made base is ok for you, then thats what you should use.
its been my personal experiance after trying to make a few fit, that they arent worth the trouble, when i can spend a little more money and get a U.S. made base that fits well, and is made of quality metal.
another base that iv used is the Leupold base, it does have a 3 screw mounting system, with 6-48 threads, but works very well for vintage sniper match use. and is quality as well,
the products being made in China today, are not the same quality as other Asian made products of the last 40 or so years.

On a few points I beg to differ. I assume you were not in Vietnam in "the war we chose to lose" ? In that conflict A4s were fairly often seen and I never saw one with a 330. K4s, K6s, various Redfields, Navy guys with Kollmorgens for mine shooting and antiship sapper defense.
(from wiki) "After the Korean War, active service (as opposed to drill) use of the M1903 was rare. Still, some M1903A4s remained in sniper use as late as the Vietnam War; and technical manuals for them were printed as late as 1970.[5] The U.S. Navy also continued to carry some stocks of M1903A3s on board ships, for use as anti-mine rifles."

As for the "Chinese" mount, I'll await the metalugical analysis that shows it's pot metal. I guess I'll have to take the one off my 9 pound 400 Whelen Springfield as after 300+ full power loads it will no doubt fall off any day now.
As for test fitting, after leveling up everything, when you clamp a mount down on an action with two big hard wood blocks and two 9" C clamps, there a'int no way it's not on a lot tighter than two 8-40 screws will place it.
As for Alaskans used in combat, there are dozens of photos of troops in combat with Springfields with Alaskans on them and they were even cleaned off the shelves to get something into action as the M82/4 contracts dragged on and the 330 was a POS. Even the Brits experimented with Alaskans in G&H mounts on SMLEs as shown in Skennerton's book.

As for Chinese products, I have a friend who builds replica 428 Cobrajet engines. The ONLY country in the world that could build him "dead on spec" exhaust manifolds was China. I'd bet 10 dollars to a dime than an optical scan of 10 the terrible Chinese bases vs 10 various vintage A303s would show the bases are far more dimensionally consistent than the front receiver rings.

Found a highly rated smith in AZ who has done many, many SCs using the welding rod method with complete success. Now it's only a choice of which scope will go on it.

It's your rifle, but if it was mine, I would restore it with a correct SC stock and stock metal. I would then find a Remington 03-A3 that had been sporterized and make a FAUX A4 out of it.

[QUOTE=smlemon;304468]ound 400 Whelen Springfield as after 300+ full power loads it will no doubt fall off any day now.
As for test fitting, after leveling up everything, when you clamp a mount down on an action with two big hard wood blocks and two 9" C clamps, there a'int no way it's not on a lot tighter than two 8-40 screws will place it.

Nine inch "C" clamps to mount a scope??? You are going bend that base into what ever shape you need.


As for Alaskans used in combat, there are dozens of photos of troops in combat with Springfields with Alaskans on them and they were even cleaned off the shelves to get something into action as the M82/4 contracts dragged on and the 330 was a POS.

Kindly post one WW2 combat photograph of a Lyman Alaskan (M73) or M81 or M82 in use on an M1903A4.


The M81 and M82 did not exist until 1945. Th m84 was adopted in 1945 but did not see large scale production for some years later.

The Weaver 330C (later militarized as the M73B1) and the Lyman Alaskan (later militarized as the M73) were both approved for use on the M1903A4 in December 1942. Lyman was unable to obtain the special matched lens sets from Bausch and Lomb so no M73's (Lyman Alaskans) were delivered prior to the end of M1903A4 production in mid 1944.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smlemon

I'll await the metalugical analysis that shows it's pot metal.

---

The U.S. made bases were milled from a solid steel billet and heat treated. The Chinese version is a casting and from the looks of it Id say a low grade cast iron. In other words= pot metal

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smlemon

Even the Brits experimented with Alaskans in G&H mounts on SMLEs as shown in Skennerton's book.

---

You need to read the book again. It was the Canadians who used the Alaskan in SAL mounts on the No.4T

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smlemon

The ONLY country in the world that could build him "dead on spec" exhaust manifolds was China.

---

Bull cookies.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smlemon

BTW the "Chinese" 1891 Mosin 91/30PU was as good if not better than any 330 equipped A4.
Certainly far better optics. ....... ask Whitefeather.

---

Do you mean the "Russian" made PU scope.

easy guys....remember...someone will aways know more then you...
i say...whatever make them happy...
if they want to use crap parts, and have found someone that will dance just how they want...sweet...life is good...
gotta learn to pick your battles in life...and i for one have learned to let some go, and let someone else fight them...much easier on the soul for sure...

there are likely 4 people in the world that have the history and knowledge about 1903A4 snipers rifles, and serial numbers, correctness ect, from doing years of collecting and research, and all 4 post on this and a couple other forums.. maybe those 4 are dead wrong.... after all, anyone can drill and tap a 1903A3 and make it an A4..
heck, after years of doing so...even i learned theres more way to skin a cat... the loss of a 100.00 job, is hard sometimes..but worth the value in intertainment...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuckindenver

sorry you have some miss information.
the A4 was NEVER issued with anything but a Weaver 330C..M73B1.. no matter how you try and cook it, no commercial Lyman AK made at any time period would have been used on the A4 sniper rifle.

---

What about the M8? Ray

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rayg

What about the M8? Ray

---

Early in the M1903A4 production cycle ordnance furnished a relatively small number of commercial Weaver 330C scopes with cross wire reticles and some "330 Scope - M.8" scopes with tapered post reticles. The scopes contained no military markings and the quantities furnished are believed to have run from a few hundred to a couple of thousand.

The "330 Scope - M.8" did not really meet the specifications (cross wire reticle) but they were available and allowed Remington to get a few more A4's out the door at a critical period.

There are still quite a few "330 Scope - M.8's" around. They are unusual in that there are at least five different styles of marking and several different styles of adjustment knob in use. Also none are seen with military nomenclature or serial numbers All this points to the scope being a commercial item.

However its generally accepted that a a "330 Scope - M.8" can be correct particularly on an early M1903A4.

Regards,
Jim