Early Rock Island 1903

[rcathey]

Four digits! Super cool. A real survivor, for sure.

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.

[boomer656]

Attachment 96991Attachment 96988Attachment 96989Attachment 96990

[boomer656]

Attachment 96993Attachment 96992Attachment 96994

[boomer656]

Here's what I think I know about this rifle - from reading (and reading between the lines) the CS Ferris book 'Rock Island Rifle Model 1903'. ..... and this is where I hope the experts will come in and correct me.

The receiver and rifle were both made in 1905 for use with the .30-'03 cartridge. The barrel was originally configured for use as a rod bayonet barrel. Sometime, in the period between 1906 and 1908, the barrel was shortened .2", given a new front and rear sight, all as part of the modification for the 30-06 cartridge.

The stock is not an altered rod bayonet stock. It has been shortened by .2", so it was made after the decision to replace the rod bayonet and prior to the decision to use the 30-06 cartridge.

At some point, probably in the 06 to 08 time frame, the barrel, receiver and stock came together. The cartouche date may have helped in knowing the year that happened.


If this timeline is basically correct, I am left with two things I can't explain

- The rifle has what appears to be two proof marks? Is it likely the person applying the proof mark hit it twice? Is it possible the stock was originally a completed 03-03 rifle that was proofed, and then proofed again as a 30-06.

- The butt of the stock has a slot routed into the upper recess to accommodate a kit not approved until 1910. The timing for that work would seem to throw a wrench into the supposed time frame this rifle was assembled.


For whatever it's worth, this rifle does not appear to have been used 'hard'. Obviously it was made long before the heat treatment issue was identified. Although I didn't include a close up - there is no 'Hatcher hole'.


I also have a question on the bolt, and whether or not it is correct for the rifle. I'm asking not because I suspect it isn't correct, but because I don't have the knowledge to know if it is correct.