I have a 1912-era '03 with what looks like a very interesting track record. The rifle and all my accessories are pictured below. Here's what I have sorted out using Joe Poyer's 4th edition:

Springfield serial number 513,100 was produced in 1912.

The rifle was re-barreled at RIA in May 1918, after WW1. So, possible overseas action, barrel shot out, arsenal rebuild when it comes home? I've included a photo of the left-side stock cartouches. The original 'S' for Springfield is clear. In the background is a cartouche for the 1918 arsenal rebuild: OHA 1918, for Otto H. Armstrong, an RIA inspector from 1918-1919. Prior to 1939 there would not have been a crossed-cannons Ordnance Dept cartouche, and there doesn't appear to be one. I can't make out any of the original Springfield inspector's initials.

There is a clear B.A.-W.L. cartouche in a box on top of all the other cartouches. This is a post-WW2 Benicia Arsenal stamp. So, the rifle saw service in the Pacific before coming home to the West Coast? All in my imagination of course, but feasible.

My question is the cartouche on top of the OHA 1918 and behind the B.A.-W.L. It looks like a sans serif POD followed by a serif D, with the following serif D at a slightly different angle. Also looks like one or two boxes around these letters. I don't see these initials anywhere in Poyer. Any ideas?

An afterthought. In my imagination, 513,100 fought on the Marne, came home for a new barrel, ended up many years later on Guadalcanal, was relegated to rear echelon duty when her owner got his Garandicon, then came home to Benicia after the war for a final arsenal inspection. (With the exception of her barrel, all parts appear original.) The afterthought? Low number receiver! I shot her for years in the 1980's and 1990's before I heard of the potential issue. I'm thinking she's proven herself sound enough to continue shooting...

Thanks in advance for any thoughts on the markings. Hopefully I didn't hijack my own thread bringing up the low-number thing...
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.