M1903 NM MADE IN 1918

[BuddyFoster]

I have a NM 1903 made in June 1928. It does not have serial number.

I am interested in getting any information about this rifle.


I have attached photos

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[Cosine26]

Comments
I can neither confirm nor deny that your rifle is a 1928 NM, but I make the following observations and comment for what they are worth.
1. The 1928 NM should have a headless cocking piece and a reverse safety and yours does not.
2. Your stock is cut for the very early Lyman 48 not used in the 1928 but may have been cut by the owner who converted it to a sporter.
3. The bolt is not polished as it would have been on the 1928NM. From the last picture, the bolt appears to be straight handled which may indicate a SHT bolt.
4. Someone has grafted the pistol grip and pistol grip cap on to what appears to be a type “S” stock
5. Since your rife has had all of the markings removed (quite common in the day before the NFA) it is not possible to date your receiver. You do not show the barrel date, if it still exists, nor do you mention the star gauge mark if there is one.
6. There is an end cap on the fore end, but I cannot see the barrel channel to see if it is filled an any way
There are many who are more expert than I who can probably provide more complete and accurate info/
FWIW

[cplstevennorton]

Why do you believe it's a NM?

An easy way to tell if the receiver is a NM is the rails of the receiver are polished, or otherwise in the white. Your's appear to be parked, but the pics aren't the best.

Now if your whole receiver was refinished, it would not show the rails being polished. And without a serial hit to NM in the SRS, there is really no way to prove a receiver is a NM. All that would be left as a clue if refinished is if the barrel was star marked and had the star guage number on the top of the barrel. But they fitted star guaged barrels to standard receivers all the time. You could order them that way.

So really without the rails looking like this below, and not having a serial to confirm it as a documented NM. There is really no way to prove it.



---------- Post added at 06:38 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:33 PM ----------

Cosine26 was spot on with his analysis as well. From these pics it appears to be more of a sporterized standard rifle.

Is there a star guage record number on the top of the barrel, usually under where the handguard would be. It should be a letter followed by a number, like say B 123 or G 1245 . A letter and number combination like that.

[Cosine26]

It the receiver was actually made in 1928, it should be of nickel steel. If of SA manufacture the letters "NS" will be stamped on the flat behind the recoil lug on the bottom of the receiver. If the receiver was made at Rock Island, it would be before 1928 and, if of NS would be stamped "NS" on the front of the receiver ; however, it is necessary to remove the barrel to see it. It also looks to me (hard to see) that the stock lacks the forward stock bolt which would make the stock fairly early - well before 1928. The butt plate is hard to see but it may have the fine checkering present on pre-WWI rifles.
I do not know where they came from, but many of the old SHT receivers were available on the commercial market before WWII and were used by some small companies to make cheap sporters. The markings were removed to hide the fat that they were of the SHT. R.F. Sedgley Co. was noted for this and offered many but none used the "S" stock. Look through the preWWI American Rifleman magazines and you will see them advertised.
FWIW

[cplstevennorton]

I do not know where they came from, but many of the old SHT receivers were available on the commercial market before WWII
FWIW

Both the Army and Marines actually had auctions of scrap receivers at different points of time post WWI through about the 20's. But then they noticed civilian companies weren't using them as scrap steal, (what the govt thought they were being sold as) but were actually building functional rifles out of them.

So they started to destroy them instead. In fact there is one document from the late 20's that I have somewhere, where the Army was making a big stink out of the ones they had sold at auction previous, showing up in the commercial market scrubbed of all markings. It was a letter basically stating we never again will trust anyone to sell stuff that isn't demilled properly.

[browningautorifle]

Both the Army and Marines actually had auctions of scrap receivers at different points of time post WWI through about the 20's. But then they noticed civilian companies weren't using them as scrap steal, (what the govt thought they were being sold as) but were actually building functional rifles out of them.

These are the very ones we're arguing about shooting today...and they were assembled long enough ago that they appear correct in many cases.

[cplstevennorton]

These are the very ones we're arguing about shooting today...and they were assembled long enough ago that they appear correct in many cases.

You know it's funny, they argued about low numbers back then the same way we do today. For every study that says they aren't safe, there are just as many who concluded they were. Hatcher's notebook became famous when there were just as many who concluded back then they were safe.

It's funny to see that nearly 90 years later, we are still debating the same things and in many cases they made the same points back then as I see today in the debates.

[Cosine26]

After WWII, there was a SHT replacement receiver program. For something like $8.00 you could trade in a SHT receiver for a "high number" receiver. You had to submit a request for purchase and report the S/N of the SHT receiver. Presumably so the Army could determine if it was one of the ones sold for scrap. Upon approval, you were required to send in the SHT receiver and the money before the replacement was shipped. I bought two, one was DHT and the other was NS. After the supply of M1903 receivers was exhausted , the army would s[[;y a 03A3 barreled receiver in lieu of the M1903 receiver until the suppy was exhausted.

[Rick the Librarian]

I don't see any (or much, anyway) that the OP's rifle appears to be a National Match. I would say more likely, a former service rifle modified.

[Calif-Steve]

Good chance this is an R.F. Sedgley sporter rifle. They did nice work and sold them off at decent prices.