Possible USMC 1903?

I ran into this 1903 yesterday and couldn't pass it up. It was super cheap and it needed to be rescued! It has a few problems that I'll outline in a minute, but I am now starting to think that it might (?) have some USMC "signs" but not sure. I am interested to see what everyone here thinks.

The bad:
*Stock has been sanded or is very worn, it shows signs of someone trying to add very poorly done checkering and then was worn over time. I'd guess it's more wear than sanding.
*Upper hand guard has been sanded recently and bare wood is showing over the entire hand guard, of course it does not match the rest of the stock
*all sling hardware has been removed from the stock and is missing
*it's starting to turn brown in some areas of the receiver, but barrel and bolt are very nice
*I'd guess the front sight has been replaced

Suspected issues that might indicate USMC history:
*It has a greenish color bluing that does not seem to be worn parkerizing. It does not show well in the photo, it looks more brown in the photos
*I think it has the hatcher hole...but not 100% sure what that looks like
*The serial number has been etched in the bolt, older and worn but it's there
*Serial number might be in the right range? 360,731
* Replacement barrel is 9/27
*the guy I got it from said it came from the Navy, not sure why he thought that but I'll try to find out
*I'll note the butt plate has NOT been stimpled

I'll get more photos posted in a day or so.

Bolt Etching:
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h7...psgv054bol.jpg

Receiver:
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h7...psrccoasf2.jpg

Lots of people marked the bolt with a matching number to keep things from being mixed up. This receiver is very low numbered, that won't keep you from rebuilding though. I don't think there's any sure "Signs" that it was USMC issue...

There has been a lot of debate about shooting low# 03's. If it was me I would not shoot it. Even the military in the 1930's tried to scrap all low # 03's. Research it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Detroit-1

There has been a lot of debate about shooting low# 03's. If it was me I would not shoot it. Even the military in the 1930's tried to scrap all low # 03's. Research it!

---

Is this a Rock Island rifle? If so, it is a high number and safe to shoot if it is in good condition other wise.

I have no need to shoot it, I have a WWII rebuild that I can shoot and it shoots well. I am more interested in the thoughts on the USMC use. Sounds like browningautorifle is thinking not but would like a few more opinions and reasons why yes or no so I can learn. From my VERY limited knowledge it seems like a possibility given the color, bolt number and serial number range. If not no big deal, I'd just like to understand why!
I did call the fellow I bought it from and he said it came from NAS air station New York, Floyd Bennett Field if that helps at all. He bought it sometime in the 60's. He said he shot it once right after he got it and never shot it again. He also noted that the stock is just the way it came when he bought it- some signs of an attempt to checker it and a stripped (of finish) handguard, all the parts to mount the sling are missing.
Thanks in advance,
Bob

I'll ask again.........IS IT A ROCK ISLAND ARSENAL or a SPRINGFIELD ARMORY rifle???? It makes a difference when trying to do you a favor by looking it up in the Springfield Research Service records. It might be listed as a USMC rifle.

360527 is USMC to Nicaragua and 361281 is also. What I said was there are no sure signs...many guns have been altered as you know. As it is, it may have been but hard to say without an actual hit.

It's a Rock Island. How does one get the SRS list?

The list is in a published book. There are a couple of versions I've seen, probably on line too by now. Apparently RIA and SA used the same serial number blocks for 1903s. 364296 is listed by SRS as being a RIA but it went to the Texas NG.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by browningautorifle

The list is in a published book. There are a couple of versions I've seen, probably on line too by now. Apparently RIA and SA used the same serial number blocks for 1903s. 364296 is listed by SRS as being a RIA but it went to the Texas NG.

---

Thanks Jim, I really appreciate your help.

No sweat, that's why we're here. There are guys here that will fill in all the blanks if you wait a minute...

ISBN for the book I have is 0-9603306-1-5 Cut and paste that, be prepared for heart failure when you see what they want for these little books...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Detroit-1

There has been a lot of debate about shooting low# 03's. If it was me I would not shoot it. Even the military in the 1930's tried to scrap all low # 03's. Research it!

---

While it is true that the Army scraped (and Bannerman bought and rebuilt) low # 03s, the Marine Corps did not. As an "oh by the way" quite a number of low # 03s were on Guadalcanal. The records of failures in that time period were compiled and the low # ones were close to twice as likely to fail as the high number ones....but neither approached the odds of being struck by lightening (and although you wouldn't think it by the way folks talk, the high # ones had a failure rate as well.....as do virtually all heavily used military weapons). Since Army scraped them and the Marine Corps (and most of Navy) didn't, a WWII issued to US military low # rifle was 95% certain to have been Marine Corps. Many of these were reworked when turned in by the Marine Corps and became part of the anti-communist military aid shipments to Greece. So the low number ones that were returned from Greece not too long ago were likely MC rifles as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Richardwv

While it is true that the Army scraped (and Bannerman bought and rebuilt) low # 03s, the Marine Corps did not. As an "oh by the way" quite a number of low # 03s were on Guadalcanal....Since Army scraped them and the Marine Corps (and most of Navy) didn't, a WWII issued to US military low # rifle was 95% certain to have been Marine Corps. Many of these were reworked when turned in by the Marine Corps and became part of the anti-communist military aid shipments to Greece. So the low number ones that were returned from Greece not too long ago were likely MC rifles as well.

---

I'm the head cheerleader for encouraging looking at the scattered data available to see what can be sniffed out, but what I see here is a series of unsupported conclusions. When using terms like 'many or 'quite a number' or 'likely', the poster owes it to the reader to explain what that means and how it was determined. How many is 'many' - 37, 152, 14 kagillion?

Further, the assertion is made that the army scrapped something approaching 100% of their low number '03s. I am certain that is incorrect, but would like to understand the thought process leading to the 95% claim.

New info pops up all the time, so I'm willing to be convinced, but claims such as the above either need to be supported by facts or identified up front as wild guess or opinion.

Richard,

The Army did not scrap all their LN M1903s. While I don't have a specific figure, only those rifles with LN receivers that were sent in for major overhaul between 1928 and 1940 were so-treated. I doubt if "95%" of those LN rifles surviving were issued to the Navy and USMC. Undoubtedly a fair percentage but not to that extent.

For those who may be interested, here are some hard verifiable numbers and observations:

Total quantity of low number rifles manufactured: 1,085,000

Total quantity of low number rifles issued to Navy, USMC, and sold to NRA members, etc: probably no more than 100,000

Total quantity of low number rifles remaining in the Army: 1,085,000 – 100,000 = 985,000

Total number of low number rifles scrapped by the Army after 1927: approximately 250,000.

Total quantity of low number rifles remaining in Army inventory at the beginning of WWII: 985,000 – 250,000 = 735,000

The Army incurred combat losses during WWI. So the actual quantity was somewhat lower than 735,000, but still very substantial.

Richardwv’s assertion that the CMP Greek low number rifles were almost all USMC issue is erroneous. I worked at the CMP and saw hundreds of Greek low number rifles. Indeed, one of my jobs was to grind off the striker points so the low number rifles couldn't be fired. A few Greek low number rifles were USMC issue, but most were not. I had trouble finding one to buy.

For what it's worth.

J.B.

JB--Thank you. I recall in the early 1990's a huge pile of bolt guns came out of China. Many M1903 rifles were included in this bolt gun deal. I talked to one of the dealers involved and he said the US Army shipped China large numbers of Low Number rifles. They must have been in depots in WWII and they were shipped to China as aid to our ally. I have heard many Low Numbers were returned by the Greeks, as well. Hardly surprising as the Army likely was happy to move them along.