Printable View
iv been flaming these POS of a wanna be rifles for years, telling guys not to shoot them.
some say, they are ok to shoot...i say the are very unsafe...
i posted a comment to this on another part of the milsurps forum.
and the guy being a smart ars, posted some pics, of a A3 that failed.
funny thing, its a Nat Ord...proves my point, thats the 4th one iv seen that was in bits,
Ouch, I hurt and my gun is broke
he wasn't wearing shooting glasses either. You can tell by his face.
Jim
picyures are worth a thousand words...remember this the next time someone says they are {fine to shoot}
Chuck,
Just as you I have always recomended not shooting the durn things. In most cases when guys asked me about them I told them that the U.S.G.I. parts were the best part of them and to get rid of the reciever and build up a nice rifle. I've seen really nice part on them. Another important lesson to be learned from another blow up like this one is to "always" wear shooting glasses and hearing protection. Anything you put between you and the firearm helps with a firearm failure. I guess we could say the same warning about the low number 03's huh. As with the Santa Fe's I always "warn" people about the possibility of a failure with them to. Some times I hear, well it was fine for grandpa and dad I then add that "you" might not be that lucky.
Regards
BudT
Looks like a case head failure. Wouldn't the same thing, possibly more catastrophic, have happened with a low number 1903?
Not to argue your admonition on shooting N.O. made guns, but I guess I missed the post that ID'd it as such (there were 80 posts at the time). Which post # Id's it as N.O. The reason I ask is that I have a friend that shoots one and I'd like to offer him some proof that they are subject to failure.Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckindenver
thanks
Chuck, the pictures are far from perfect but from what I can see that looks a lot to me like a failure due to a case head rupture. I didn't see whether it's National Ordinance or not either but I certainly defer to you on that part. There is no mention I could see as to whether the ammunition was handloaded or not.
I just went and joined the board to see if I could find out. Chuck is right on when he ID'd it as a NO. He has several older posts of his '42 National Ordinance O3A3.Quote:
Originally Posted by kcw
Posts #23-28 talk about the ammunition used. He said he was shooting 165 grain commercial loads in the rifle. If you read those particular posts, it makes you wonder why even in this day and age people still continue the "urban legends" from the pre-electronic ages of the 50's and 60's.
Bob
i think the pictures speak for themselves.
yes, case head failure would likely destry a SHT receiver, but id bet the rifle in the pics, had some headspace issues, i stand by my posts of NO and SA being the biggest POS ever put together by a human.
second only to the rewelded Garands, made by the same company, 3rd place would be the 1911,s the welded back together.one was listed for sale on GB for a while and made it on the service pistol board.
Since your comment is conjecture I'll reply in kind. I agree about "case head failure" as the cause of the reciever failure.Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Peppers
Theres not enough definitive information in the original post to pinpoint the failure cause.
Too many variables to ascribe the incident either to the NO receiver and certainly not enough info to speculate what may have happened with a "low number" 1903 reciever
Respectively...IMO...Mike Haas :dunno:
If I was a betting man, I would bet that a low number 1903 receiver would not have survived the case head failure shown. Hatcher attributes most of the failures of the low number 1903's to case head failure, so not much conjecture is needed.
i was that shooter of that exploded rifle, i was using factory ammo and it was a national ordnance.
hey, how was i being a smart arse? lol
the cause of the case head seperation was due to improper headspace which was caused by the softness of the receiver. the front and rear locking lugs started to indent from pressure of being fired which lead to excessive headspace.
Where is the "rear" locking lug on an '03-A3??? --Jim
The rear locking or safety lug is located at the rear of the extractor spring just in front of the rear reciever ring on the right side when the bolt is closed.
I'm just happy you're alright!Quote:
Originally Posted by lovemymilsurps
BE CAREFUL and always use hearing/eye protection OK?
That's NOT a "locking" lug . . . .only a "safety" lug!
The book says you must have a MINIMUM of .004" clearance at the safety lug/receiver bridge interface.
The '03 Springfield (and the follow-on '03-A3) only have two locking lugs . . . BOTH up FRONT!! --Jim
I had a National Ordnance 03A3, serial number 5,001,680 .
It was one of the first rifles I ever purchased. I had read "Bolt Action Rifles by Frank De Haas", and his nice little quote of these receivers being given a "clean bill of health".
What an irresponsible load of CCCC. Shill gunwriters just won't call a spade a spade for fear of upsetting someone important.
The headspace on my National Ordnance increased as the rifle was fired. It became more and more difficult to open the bolt, as the bolt peened its way into the receiver.
I traded the rifle away. Today I would strip it for the GI parts.
An interesting read on the history or National Ordnance.
The granular finish on the carbine receivers is similar to the A3 I owned.
National Ordnance M1 Carbine
If you shoot enough, you will learn that you need to wear shooting glasses. I have had two out of battery slamfires in Garands. In the first slamfire, my glasses were pitted from brass particles. Later I put on the glasses and aimed a Garand at a mirror. From the pit, I was able to determine that one brass particle would have gone straight down my pupil. The second slamfire, the blown off rear section of the receiver shattered my glasses. Still, no brass particles got in my eyes.
I also have had pierced primers in M70's. That action blows hot gas directly down the firing pin shaft and into your eye. Glasses protected me again.
If you notice, David Tubb is always wearing shooting glasses. I have no doubt he learned the hard way.
I thought the Nat Ord receivers were cast in Los Angeles, CA in the late 1960's. They were not made to any quality standards. I am sure the steel was whatever was available locally. Perhaps used car parts? The good part of the story was they used real USGI parts on their receivers. Real bolt and rear barrel. They actually make a nice parts kit. If the receivers are beginning to fail, then let the shooter beware. Remember, they are a nice parts kit.
well,
if you look at the first picture of the lead post. you show a Nat Ord , in its military trim, then after i say dont shoot the rifle,
you show the pictures of what i thought to be another rifle, with a scope mounted.
then blame me for not warning you sooner?? when all along iv been telling every one on a public forum NOT TO SHOOT THEM!!.
had you just asked me before you went out and shot the rifle, and took my advise, you would have never got hurt...
FYI: id avoid any gunsmith that welling to Drill and tap a Nat ord receiver..
so, if in fact they are one in the same rifle, i am mistaken for the smart ars comment...they are just too common today on the net.
however. i stand by my assesment of the Nat Ord, and Santa Fe receivers as being unsafe to shoot and being a POS...:}
i too am glad you survived without a seriuos injury..to be able tolearn and shoot another day.
once again, for the guys that flamed my over the past few years for my harsh comments on Nat Ord receivers....nanner nanner nanner..lol.
also,
Nat ord, Santafe arms. cast receivers Carbines, A3,s and Garands were sand cast , and made in Spain. not investment cast like the Ruger 77, Browning BLR, and early Savage receivers.
the investement cast heat treated receivers work very well, fit nice, and look nice.
i own a few Rugers, and have yet to have an issue with them.
i dont feel the same for the Browning...but not do to its steel, only the company, and how it markets the POS of a rifle they sell now.
The pictures don't show any evidence of receiver failure. You can shoot with quite a bit of excess headspace and not have any safety issues UNLESS the case head is not properly supported. Case head support is marginal in any cone breech system. A defective case that blows out in any cone breech weapon will cause the damage shown. A seriously overloaded case will fail the same way and cause the same damage. Case head failures have occurred with Korean import surplus and caused the same damage in "perfectly good" USGI 03A3's and M1's. Prvi Partizan factory ammo has failed in the K-L-M area of the case and caused the same type of damage as what is shown. A similar failure would have caused a brittle low number receiver to shatter. The fact that this receiver did not fail is a credit to whoever made it.
I'm not a National Ordnance advocate, but to blame this failure on a poor quality National Ordnance receiver without evidence of receiver failure is irresponsible.
Resp'y,
Bob S.
the receiver did fail, i took out the barrel and where the front lugs lock was mashed in causeing excessive headspace. if it was the ammo at fault, i would simply rename it danchester as i would be the new owner of winchester. i will try to get a picture of where this receiver lost its ***.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob S
here is a picture of where the POS national ord. receiver failed.....
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
look inside and see the shinney two lugs spots, they are where the receiver failed
so, i have to ask,
if you had the chance to shoot another Nat Ord made rifle. even one that looked great, and had been shot for years with no priblems.
would you shoot it???
or, would you tell the owner about your experiance, and tell him, its not safe to fire??
you are lucky the bolt didnt come loose, and hit you in the face..
I will say this, I will continue to buy N.O. 1903a3S BUT ONLY FOR THE G.I. PARTS. I WILL NEVER USE THE RECEIVER TO FIRE A RIFLE. and yes, i will certainly tell or suggest not to shoot the N.O. receiversQuote:
Originally Posted by chuckindenver
then, your experiance was worth the education.:} well said.
i was lucky, at a young age, i witnessed a N O fail at a public range, he left with a bloody face, and not on his feet.
i dont know what type of ammo, or how the rifle was set up for sure,. cal. ect.
but ill never forget, the look on his face.
for years, a gunstore i used to regular, had a N O on the wall, that was in bits..
and another that the DOW used to have on a board for display for the hunter ed classes..
and another that used to be displayed in a hardware store in Frisco Co..
they only made around 2000 rifles total.
with that many that have failed just in my small little spot of the world, id say thats bad odds.
funny thing..
iv never seen in person. a blown up SHT 1903. though i know they have failed as well.
ill shoot a SHT 03, but wouldnt ever shoot a NO or S A .
A couple of thoughts.
First having the locking surfaces on the reciever peened to the point that the headspace is altered that much is, IMHO, a reciever failure. As has been mentioned above an M1903 or M1903A3 is more suseptible to that because the case head dosen't have the best support even with proper headspacing.
Second; had that failure happened with a burned low number reciever the results could have been even more catastrophic, not just for the shooter but for the people on either side of him. That's why I don't shoot next to a person shooting a low number M1903 and yes I have moved when I realized that was the case.
Finally as to cartridge cases. I have had cases of cartridge cases failing in two instances. One was a Winchester .38 Special +P load and the other was a .303 British Remington commercial load. In neither case did I realize I'd had a failure until I extracted and ejected the spent case, which was a challenge with the .303 (SMLE type rifles handle escaping gas beautifully.) It can happen guys, and with ANY ammunition.
There isn't any strength difference between material that is sand cast or investment cast or lost wax cast. Nor is there any difference between castings made in Spain or China or the U.S. The only difference is in the material being cast, and in the quality control of the process.
I have pointed out that in my experience, those rifles proved OK, but I don't know of any that were fired enough to batter the receiver and create excess headspace. I know of none that "blew up like a grenade" or "receivers that shattered" as some writers have said.
Those pictures do clearly show a case head failure, possibly due to excess headspace, something some people say is a myth. If the rifle gradually developed headspace problems, it seems to me that any astute shooter should have been able to recognize them and stop using the rifle before disaster struck. (Sort of like never checking your tires, then blaming an accident on "baldies.")
Jim
Hate to be a pest, but could you take a picture where the peened receiver lug seats are in focus. I would like to save your picture and be able to show it to folks to explain what the problem is with these receivers.Quote:
look inside and see the shinney two lugs spots, they are where the receiver failed
unless your just arguing for the sake of the argument, your welcome to shoot all the NO and SFA rifles you like.
when it blows up,..remember, i told you so..
im suprised, that even with a pictures, and it being shot with factory ammo.
guys will still stand by them as being safe...but wont shoot a SHT 03...
baffles the mind i tell ya...
for the record. SHT 03,s should not be fired..even though i shoot mine..its my butt, and if i choose to be a dumbars. then thats my choice...
i would not shoot a SHT 03 with headspace issues, and yes, i gauge them.
other things not safe, but people still use them.
Pinto,s , mopeds that travel over 30MPH, 3 wheel ATV,s {most ride them in flip flops with no helmet.
20.00 hookers, {most are rode with no protection as well}, Pontiac Fiero,s .
meth, and other non natural drugs..
so, i guess it shouldnt suprise me, population control i guess, lol.
Back during hunting season a Browning A Bolt in .270 Winchester was brought into the local gun shop with the bolt locked up. The gunsmith tapped the bolt handle back and forth with a rawhide mallet until it turned loose. The cartridge case was welded to the bolt face, and required considerable force to remove it. Only about 1/3 of the headstamp was left, and the primer pocket was approximately double it's original diameter. On the A Bolt, the cartridge case is almost totally supported, but the approximately 1/16" just ahead of the extractor groove that is not supported had expanded to look like a mini magnum belt. The cartridge was the first one out of a new box of Remington .270 ammunition. The owner of the rifle was going to send the remaining box back to Remington, but I never heard the outcome.
Just goes to show that just because you are using factory ammo you are perfectly safe. Had the ammunition been shot in a rifle that did not support the cartridge case like the Browning, the results would have been distasterous.
I have a friend who had a Santa Fe. I shot it once and commented that it looked like a cheap knock off of a 1903. I had no idea they were sand castings! Fortunately, that rifle burned up in a house fire. Unfortunately, there were about 20 real milsuprs that went with it. I still have his 2 1911s that were in the fire, sitting in a can of kerosene.
So would a 30-06 field gage by the correct choice to check 1903s with?
yeah field gauge them always for your satey, but don't bother ever with fielding a N.O. because my headspace was fine until the receiver started letting goQuote:
Originally Posted by Dollar Bill
It sounds like if you are brave (dumb) enough to continue shooting one after reading this thread, you'd be smart to chech HS after every shot!
What would one of these sell for as a parts gun?
no more than $450Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Rammel
i buy them regularly at shows, never paid more then 250.00, worth the some of the GI parts, and trash the receiver.
I bought a Nat Ord 1903a3 3 years ago for $115. Refinished the wood. Had to counterbore and recrown it. It shot great, about 1.5" at 100 yds with M2 equivalent ball loads. I planned on scoping it and making a A4 clone. Have everything but the base. Have not shot it in over a year.
Thanks to this thread I'll never shoot it again. I'll soon scrap the receiver and find a Remington receiver to take its place. Anybody got a Remington Sportered receiver to sell?
That Nat Ord bugged me anyway. The rear sight dovetail was boogered and it never had a clip slot.
I also remember a couple of Federal Ord 1911 receivers coming apart at the range that I worked at. One frame split down the middle in the shooters hand. Interesting connection.
southernohiogun.com has them, 199.95 for a rem complete action but you either have to have an ffl on file to view them or have an ffl order one for youQuote:
Originally Posted by ralfus
those are recovered drill rifle recceivers...stay clear..
they sure are got mine yesterday, had to do a lot of clean up after they removed the weldsQuote:
Originally Posted by chuckindenver
though not pretty, much safer then the one you had..you will likely have to match face the receiver, the weld raises the edge just so the barrel wont index right.
yeah i feel alot safer with this one in hand, i've been doing as much work to it without getting out of my expertise. what kind of welding did they do, it won't take any bluing. i just hope it will take to park. i got a new GI stock and handguard made by USA BILLIARD COMPANY new GI remington barrel with the a mirror bore and short chambered. i am very happy but i can't stop pondering on maybe swapping the drill receiver for a unmodified remington reciever from a sporter but thats the grass is greener thing going onQuote:
Originally Posted by chuckindenver
the used a stainless steel rod when they welded the cutoff, and barrel, nothing short of black oxide mixed for stainless steel will cover it.
you can however, go over it with ultra black pen, it will cover up ok.
still cant ever hide the fact that its a recovered drill rifle. nor should you.
I understand that many Perry shooters in the 1920-30's always had a spare bolt with them. A Low Number '03 is quite safe with good headspace. However, then they develop headspace issues they will fail. But, honestly with so many High Numbers around there is no real reason to shoot a Low Number '03 today.