Printable View
There is a seller who has a supposed 03A3 "tanker" with a buy-it-now
price of $4,500. Listing is: http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/Vie...Item=129819671
He has some shipping documents that he claims verify the authenticity of this
piece.
Just curious, was there ever such a thing? First I ever heard of one but
I'm no expert on these.
Mike
Looks like a very nice 03A3 some nut shortened. Never heard of a "tanker", as the TO weapon for tanks was a grease gun in the Corps. I don't know about the Army. Bill of Sale verifies nothing but the sale of the rifle to the individual named on the sales record - says nothing about the rifle being a "tanker".
If that is a "tanker", I own one, and can make one for you real quickly for only $3500.
Jim
Check out his A4 "all original as issued" with an M84 scope and a serial number of 3420108. Hmmm. Isn't that a bit early for an M84?
Jim
After 50+ years of collecting you would think the M-84 scope would be mounted correctly.....
how about the a4? I do not see the 03-4 designation, is this correct or not?
the A4 is the only 03 variant he has thats almost ok,,the A1 isnt an A1, the overrun and the tanker are just plain BS..
i hate guys that try and fill you with Sh*t to sel a rifle,
i built a little carbine 03 a few years ago, though id never sell it, if i did, i wouldnt fill the net with BS.
It is an A4 alright, but it isn't as "originally issued".
Mike Morgan, if you read this, one of your A4's is only 3 digits off from this one.
Jim
Tanker 03a3 or M1 Garand is news to me,M3 and 1911 yes.
http://m1903.com/odd1903/
If the seller is serious about selling the A4 he needs to do a better job with his description and photos.
1. The stock, trigger guard, receiver markings and s/n all appear to be the correct type or range.
2. What's missing (IMO) is a description or pictures of the bolt, stock markings, bolt relief notch, metal finishes, barrel manufacturer, barrel markings and number of grooves. Hopefully the small metal pieces have an "R" or an "RP" as appropriate.
3. It's true that no A4's were shipped out of Remington with M84's since the M84 was not adopted until about a year after the last A4 was built and probably not available in serious quantities for maybe another 5 years. However, the M84 was authorized for the A4 over 50 years ago and is a correct choice.
4. Personally I think the M84 works better with the W/E turrets forward of the front ring but Ordnance T.M.'s from the early 70's show the scope mounted as shown in the auction photo.
5. If favorable answers can be received to the questions outlined above the rifle just might be a steal at $3K,
Regards,
Jim
I guess it's time to offer up this little gem! These were first converted when Billy Mitchell put on his demonstration of airborne troops just after WW1. US military didn't seem impressed. Only 500 were converted and they were then given up in lend-lease to a country just forming it's own fledgling airborne forces.
The country that received these lend-lease carbines couldn't afford parachutes so their first mass drop was in deep snow(obviously not deep enough!).
Sooo! I have the only one still in existence.
Call me for price and shipping information.
BEAR (with tongue firmly placed in cheek)
That sucker would be a "Bear" to shoot!
Jim
Wait a minute! His A3 IS a collector grade rifle. Look at the bill of sale; it clearly states "shipped collect", so that makes it a collect-or grade.
You guys are just too cynical.
FWIW, the M3/M3A1 "Grease Gun" was tanker issue late in the war and up through at least 1960, but the early WWII issue was the pistol and the TSMG in one or another version. There was, of course, no "tanker" M1903, M1903A3 or M1 rifle. The experimental shortened M1 rifles were intended for possible use by airborne troops, not tankers. The "tanker" M1 rifles on the market are simply cut down rifles (many of them with "cut and weld" receivers), sold to suckers with the "tanker" story.
Jim