Informational post on Gibbs 1903 a4

Yeah, I know, farb. However, I wanted to shoot a 1903a4 and I would not nor could not afford an original. I do shoot a lot of replicas and save my originals for future collectors. So we got that out of the way. (see my periscope rifle post in the Enfields section for other replicas)

The scope mounted on the rifle was broken from the start. Gibbs folk sent me a new one and a shipping label for the old one. Good folk. The owners manual and all reviews of the rifle point out that the Asian contractor got the windage and elevation backwards. However the new scope does not have that problem. And with much luck, after mounting it, I needed only a couple of clicks each way to meet my laser boresighter. Too cold to shoot right now so range will have to wait. BTW the old scope was shiny blue and the new dull blue.

Overall the rifle is what you would expect. Needed a bit of touching up here and there and tightening of all screws (all were very loose). Action binds a bit on the extractor but that is to be corrected soon. New stock which was not fitted as should be. Except for the bolt, all parts got parking. Like a late war rebuild. I find rubbing lanolin into the park helps darken it somewhat as the oil ages. I cannot see the serial number but Gibbs assures me that it is under the scope mount. The actions are drill rifle salvage. Like all rifles of this ilk, that is assembled by the mad beavers, cleaning out of all the debris of the assembly shop is the first action and takes care of a lot of problems.

Accessories such as sling and carry case are typical cheap Asian copies and mostly show and no go. Gibbs should change this. Further, the rifles sent out for review by gun writers seem to be better made and have more details then mine, such as the stock cartouches (check out the review in Surplus Firearms Magazine). I do not think the writers are dishonest, but they do like the special deals they get from the companies they review.

Overall, this would be a great rifle for re-enactors to use and save the originals for collectors. Also a great rifle for shooters who want the experience and can share it with fellow shooters without worrying about a pristine safe queen.

As a PS, let me say that I see two groups of collectors, one the Canfield types who only want unissued/unshoot perfect examples the other, like me, that see the honest scars of use as a badge of honor to be respected. In either case, providing the experience of shooting these heros of history is also important. (So many military I know have never experienced the fun of the recoil of a 30'06 straight stock 03 in the rapid fire of a DCM match.)

good post.
i was looking at possibly getting one of these, but think i just changed my mind. yet as stated, more for some one who wants to shoot/experience the
A4.

My last contact (30Nov) with Gibbs was that the scopes adjustments were still reversed. I asked when they would be corrected and they replied:

"NO and it appears it will not be resolved any time soon".

Here is the price.

Yes they are available Complete set $179.95, just the rings $49.95 Just
the scope $149.95 plus shipping and handling.

I desperately need a scope on my A4. My commercial scope doesn't look right.

This is a cheap Chin scope, which I suspect will not hold up too well. It is the type you see from NStar for $35 at the gun shows. I suspect that if you watch you will see them there soon enough. I would wait.

did they tell you that they are recovered drill rifles?????
Gibbs is Navy Arms..

I have not questioned Gibbs as to the drill rifle issue. However, the receiver shows tell-tale work where drill rifles are spot welded. Others have reported similar findings and Gibbs does not deny. Guns and Ammo's Surplus Firearms magazine uses the phrase "dewatted training rifles". Come to your own conclusion. On this basis I describe them as drill rifles.

And yes, Gibbs as well as Old West Scrounger, are part of Navy arms. I somehow think the senior VF would have put out a better product, or at least I think he did in his day. And remember I am reporting on a single example in hand and pictures published elsewhere. Maybe holding Gibbs to the standard of a wartime production Remington is unfair, but I think not. And the work is nowhere near the level of my Springfield 03.

I did know somewhat what I was buying (a replica) but I do express some disappointment in the apparent differences between those rifles sent to reviewers and those sold to the public. This may not have been intentional yet it remains a fact.

All that said, I do credit Gibbs with not attempting to replicate the rifle so as to fool the uneducated. Placing credit for the scope and the barrel squarely where it belongs is the right thing to do. We have enough fakes floating around as it is. The Gibbs is not a fake, but a replica. I believe the rifle safe to fire although fit and finish could have been better.

Jdmcom

A straight up review, without any BS, thank you. Have you slugged the bore?? I am curious as how well the barrel is made??

As to the scope, I my opinion the original was not all that great, way back when, when they were floating around and relatively cheap,, I would only put them on 22s. Do you think this knock-off is that much inferior???

Let us know when you get to test fire the Rifle.

45B20

No, I have not slugged the bore and think it quite unnecessary. Pedersoli has been making barrels for more then 50 years and does a very good job. This rifle was not nor will never be, except by chance, an extremely accurate rifle. It simply has not been assembled with the care necessary.

But then neither was the original {an extremely accurate rifle} for that matter. Today we accept sub MOA as the standard. In 1942 this was not the expectation. Military ammo alone had a 4 MOA allowance as I remember. Pre-war Springfield built rifles are real beauties for military rifles but the war time production rifles were more valued for their sheer numbers then their fine finish.

As for the scope, I was not comparing it to the original, but rather to the range of scopes available in todays market. It was after all in response to someones question about purchasing a replica scope from Gibbs at what I think is too high a price. You are correct in stating that the scopes available in 1942 are not at the lowest quality of scopes in the mainstream today. But this is an Asian knockoff and since the first one arrived with the crosshairs flailing loosely inside the tube I do not think my review of the scope was off.

(regrets sent)

jdmcomp:I think he was actually thanking you for a straight up review. Not a snide comment. One thing does bother me about the magazine review. They had a real 03-A4 AND a replica rifle in the article. I could not figure out which the article was talking about. More then just a little confusing. Calling a drill rifle a "dewatted training rifle" tells me what? I thought dewats were machine guns. I would like to see some photos of a customer's rifle. Would someone post some photos? Thanks guys.

demil, or dewat as per ATF standards...cut into 3 parts..
modified for Drill use, per military standards.
plug the bore with a carbon steel rod. cut a notch through the chamber welding said rod to the chamber.
weld barrel to the reciever.
grind striker point off. weld striker hole on the end of the bolt body.
install bolt,,
weld cutoff lever in the down setting, so the bolt cant be removed, and the bolt will still function, remove or grind the front sight blade off.
most if not all DP rifles were loaned to the ROTC program.
returned as they were replaced with NONGUNS made by Daisy, as the school systems now have a no weapons policy. thanks to the Libs, and feel good laws passed.
trying to avoid Colombine type shootings yada yada yada.

When I was in High School in Honolulu we had real working Garands. As a Senior cadet we drove up to Schofield Barracks and shot the Train Fire I Course. What a day that was! We brought our Garands back to school and spent Saturday afternoon, Monday morning and Tuesday cleaning them again and again. No such thing as a Drill Rifle around there. I could be wrong, but I think all of those rifles went off to Viet Nam.

Gone are the days when in college, my roommate and I each had our hunting rifles in our room. We'd head out to the woods on Saturday morings to take pot shots at squirrels. The cafeteria cook loved it when we'd bring back a few (he'd take them home to cook).

i shot on the NRA JR trap team, had a semi auto shotgun behind the seat of my pickup 3 days a week.
now, a kid would make the news, and be kicked out of school for life..

Finally got around to shooting the gun, and it shot two inch groups at 100 yds with out problems (as for me, that is another issue, but after all I am past 60 with old eyeglasses). The ammo is some of my old reloads for DCM match shooting using 147 gr FMJ bullets. Better ammo might improve the groups some.

The scope is a disaster, but no more so then the originals were I think. Lots of parallax, eye relief and focus issues. Cross hairs alone must have been 3 MOA. Comparing it to a current production scope is unfair so I won't got there as a complaint, just a comment. The rifle functions well and I am not disappointed. However, handling of rifle points to its shortcomings (as found in the originals and not Gibbs doing) with the scope interfering with the bolt and with loading the rifle. You can understand that this is a wartime short development issue item. I also suspect that I need to fiddle with the scope location in the mounts to help with the eye relief and parallax. Shooting was done with elbows on the concrete bench with rifle held fully in hands. Range rules I cannot change.

For comparison, I also took a 1903A3 to the range and was able to shoot a group almost as good with the peep sight of the A3. Between the two, the scope added little to the ability to hit the target. Today is sunny and mid 70s so could not be better weather. I need to see if low light conditions are improved by the scope. Hope this helps others in making the purchase decision.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Calif-Steve

jdmcomp:I think he was actually thanking you for a straight up review. Not a snide comment. One thing does bother me about the magazine review. They had a real 03-A4 AND a replica rifle in the article. I could not figure out which the article was talking about. More then just a little confusing. Calling a drill rifle a "dewatted training rifle" tells me what? I thought dewats were machine guns. I would like to see some photos of a customer's rifle. Would someone post some photos? Thanks guys.

---

Steve you are right. The term "DEWAT" stood for deactivated war trophy. these were mainly fully automatic weapons that had been deactivated by having a steel plug welded into the chamber. Some of the more concientious sellers also welded the barrel to the receiver.

"DEWATS" were widely sold over the counter or thru mailorder ads from outfits like Service Armament Co.(Forgett again!), Interarmco, Hy Hunter and many others. Some of the deactivation jobs were not very good. A writer for the Saturday Evening Post (IIRC) picked up a Thompson from one source and a new barrel from Numrich put the two together and wrote a story about it for the magazine.:nono:

At any rate the 1968 gun law killed the DEWAT program once and for all. Since then the term "DEWAT" has had little meaning except as it refers to the pieces registgerd under the 68 amnesty.

Since that time the govt DEMILLs surplus weapons by cutting them in pieces, crushing them or burning holes them to the point where it is real diffficult (but not necessarily impossible:D) to put them back together.

Regards,

Jim

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jdmcomp

Finally got around to shooting the gun, and it shot two inch groups at 100 yds with out problems (as for me, that is another issue, but after all I am past 60 with old eyeglasses). The ammo is some of my old reloads for DCM match shooting using 147 gr FMJ bullets. Better ammo might improve the groups some.

The scope is a disaster, but no more so then the originals were I think. Lots of parallax, eye relief and focus issues. Cross hairs alone must have been 3 MOA. Comparing it to a current production scope is unfair so I won't got there as a complaint, just a comment. The rifle functions well and I am not disappointed. However, handling of rifle points to its shortcomings (as found in the originals and not Gibbs doing) with the scope interfering with the bolt and with loading the rifle. You can understand that this is a wartime short development issue item. I also suspect that I need to fiddle with the scope location in the mounts to help with the eye relief and parallax. Shooting was done with elbows on the concrete bench with rifle held fully in hands. Range rules I cannot change.

For comparison, I also took a 1903A3 to the range and was able to shoot a group almost as good with the peep sight of the A3. Between the two, the scope added little to the ability to hit the target. Today is sunny and mid 70s so could not be better weather. I need to see if low light conditions are improved by the scope. Hope this helps others in making the purchase decision.

---

Good, rational review - thanks JDM.. Just out of curoiosity ..on the replica scope is the elevation knob on top and the windage knob on the left (as viewed from the rear). i have been a little unclear as to whether the functgion of these knobs was reveresed or just the markings?

I have no inside information on Gibbs cost or pricing structure but when I worked for a gun dealer in the late 60's early 70s typically our cost was about 65% of selling price. We were jobbers on a few items so the those costs were more like 50% of MSRP.

Assuming Gibbs is working with similar margins and that both they and theire respective outlets (AIM etc) are making a profit they are getting quite a bit of work done for not a whole lot of money. Unless somone had a basement full of parts aquired years ago @ little cost I find it hard to believe some one could craft their own A4 clone for Gibbs price. Sos as the man says - 'you pays your money and you make your choice!" :thup:

Rergards,

Jim

El in on top and windage on the left side, and I have no idea which is the correct direction for the knob to turn. I really did not pay attention to the markings. Setting a scope means looking at the bullet holes through the scope and moving the cross hairs from the bull to the bullet holes. Sorry.

Gibbs claims they had a basement full of A4 bolts from a parts purchase much earlier and uses reclaimed drill rifle actions with new made barrels to seal the deal. I agree that the margins look slim. I even bought mine at a discount from the AIM price.

In many ways it is not a thing of beauty but for the price a reasonable deal. Somewhat of a crap shoot as to what you get in the way of parts such as wood and small parts. I noticed the guns provided to reviewers seem to have original stocks with markings intact. Mine has no markings and is a new stock. This would also be true of many 1903A3s on the market today. The days of $100 Springfields is a distant memory now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jdmcomp

El in on top and windage on the left side, and I have no idea which is the correct direction for the knob to turn. I really did not pay attention to the markings. Setting a scope means looking at the bullet holes through the scope and moving the cross hairs from the bull to the bullet holes. Sorry.

Gibbs claims they had a basement full of A4 bolts from a parts purchase much earlier and uses reclaimed drill rifle actions with new made barrels to seal the deal. I agree that the margins look slim. I even bought mine at a discount from the AIM price.

In many ways it is not a thing of beauty but for the price a reasonable deal. Somewhat of a crap shoot as to what you get in the way of parts such as wood and small parts. I noticed the guns provided to reviewers seem to have original stocks with markings intact. Mine has no markings and is a new stock. This would also be true of many 1903A3s on the market today. The days of $100 Springfields is a distant memory now.

---

JDM...i suspect they had a basement full of "altered" bolts. In the photographs i have seen of the replicas the bolts just don't look like the real deal. Besides considering the price point for the completed rifle it would not make good buisness sence to use a real A4 bolt - they are too valuable as parts.

Regards,

Jim

Just a quick question about the scope. Is the Numrich scope the same? Theirs is over $400.00 and I think they claim US made? I need to ck this?

But are they the same scope? If so, Numrich is ripping people off.

There is a complete rifle on Gunbrokers right now. I have looked at Gibbs site.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by byronroland

Just a quick question about the scope. Is the Numrich scope the same? Theirs is over $400.00 and I think they claim US made? I need to ck this?

But are they the same scope? If so, Numrich is ripping people off.

There is a complete rifle on Gunbrokers right now. I have looked at Gibbs site.

---

I don't think so. Gibbs is offering a reproduction of the Weaver 330C/M73B1.

I just searched the Gunparts Corp. site and only came up with a reproduction M84 which is a different scope. It was also used on the A4 beginning in the 1950's but did not exist when the original A4's rolled off the line At Remington.

Considering the price point I would be surprised if the M84 reproduction is made in the US. The website didn't say (or I missed it!)

Regards,

Jim

I have heard Gibbs has a pile of '03 (not A4!) bolts out of England from Parker-Hale. This was 20(?) years back. I'd guess the bolts cost a quarter? Maybe. Also hear the Italian barrels are NOT cheap. Gibbs is paying real money as they are coming via a 3rd party. Italian wood isn't cheap either. Scopes out of China most likely cheap. Factor in labor and Gibbs can't be making any real money on these things. They make an interesting toy, so good luck to all.

Maybe Chuck can answer this: Is a drill rifle safe to shoot?

Neal

I have built numerous sporter rifles from drill rifle receivers including calibers 22-250, 257 Roberts Imp, 243, 30-06, 7mm, 8mm, and 270 Win. Not one has developed any issues where safety is concerned, and I do push the envelope in the 22-250 and the 257 Rob Imp. After hundreds of rounds, no change in headspace in any of them.

My father was a professional welder (nuclear industry), and I am less than professional although I have been welding for over forty years (professional welders can do amazing things I cannot). I fail to see how the small tack welds I have seen can change the heat treatment of the receiver, particularly when the weld is made with the barrel attached (huge heat sink). People unfamiliar with the nature of welding and heat treatments are more likely to have unfounded fears, in my opinion. I for one, do not.

No one I know, including me, is going to make any guarantees due to liability issues in a litigious society. Evidently, Gibbs is willing to make that leap in faith. I seriously doubt they would do so unless they have extreme confidence in the safety of the rifles.

The choice is one the buyer must make, just as firing LN 03's is a matter of choice. I also think waiting for a LN 03 to fail is like waiting for a huge asteroid to hit the earth.

Jim

"waiting for a huge asteroid to hit the earth." I saw that movie Friday night. I'm a believer.

I believe one will eventually hit:eek:, but not in my lifetime:madsmile:, which is the point of the comment.:beerchug:

Jim:cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neal Myers

Maybe Chuck can answer this: Is a drill rifle safe to shoot?

Neal

---

Hi Neal,
i was going to stay out of this post do to my opinion on Gibbs rifles...
however..
are recovered drill rifles safe???hmmmm...
lets straighten this out..ok.
the 1903A3 recovered drill rifles that didnt get welded by Rosey the welder seem ok, iv done more then a few, and my personal shooter is such a rifle.
things to look for, deep welds, and real hot spots. warped rear bridge..
pour workmanship when cutting the welds, and cleaning up those areas is an issue, seems anyone with a dremil tool can be a pro..
its been my experiance that the heat from having the barrel welded to the reciever ring, raises up that edge, and it must be surfaced, or a new barrel will be pretty tough to install,
again, the quality of craftmanship in this area will surly effect accuracy.
iv seen a nice uneven gap between the barrel and reciever face,,not good.
forcing the barrel to index will likely bend, or break the reciever, and you may not see untill its too late.
all that being said, if someone takes the time, and uses a lightly welded rifle, and checks for all the above issues, i dont see an issue with safety over any other 1903A3 with factory type loads, hand loads? your on your own.
recovered 1903 drill rifles...DHT..use caution..watch for cracks and heat damage as well. and use the above guidelines...
SHT???are you nuts?? not only no, but HELL NO..
Nickle steel RIA and SA...same as the Remington 03,s and A3,s..
all this being said...im on record saying that you should NOT make any 1903 or A3 thats been modified for Drill use, into a live rifle...and if you do,,please use the basic common since that most humans now a days seem to be lacking.
ok...
thats out of the way.. i really dont have an issue with someone recovering and selling a drill rifle...however..i have an issue with anyone, private or commecial selling one without telling future buyers and owners EXACTLY WHAT THEY ARE.. not side stepping the truth, and putting in soft hello kitty words... THEY WERE WELDED SHUT, WITH A 4 INCH STEEL ROD DRIVIN INTO THE CHAMBER SO THEY WOULDNT BE FIRED. and the gov says they should not be made to fire.. if anyone asks.,.thats what should be said..
dont sugar coat it..tell it like it is..most guys wont care, and will take it for what it is..some guys will walk away from them...and thats ok.
these were being advertised as old salute rifles,, they were never used for salute teams, ever,, they were used by the ROTC Rifle drill teams, some were used very hard, tossed in the air, drug through the rocks and dirt by highschool aged kids, painted silver, white, and gold..some chrome plated for honor guards..
many were in such pour shape and the stocks broken off, that they were sold for 40.00 by the CMP as barreled actions...{i ended up with 40 of those}
some had bent barrels.,a couple had parts broken off , like the bolt handle ect..
all the rifles Gibbs ended up were the last bunch the bottom of the barrel so to speak, well after all of us had picked through them and they were sold in bulk at a one time buy to old western scrounger.. cuz the CMP didnt want to deal with them anymore, and so on.. so take that for what its worth.