Curious about Remington 1903A3

[Ridolpho]

Attachment 31434Attachment 31435Attachment 31436Attachment 31437Attachment 31438Attachment 31439Wondering if anyone can help me understand what the history of this rifle might be. I bought it many years ago at a show in Medicine Hat, Alberta where a guy had several like it that he said had been simply cleaned of storage grease. Serial number is 3,503,414 from Remington. It appears to possibly never have been shot as the bore is like a mirror, the parkerized reciever has no wear marks, and the stock only has a few storage dings. Being used to Lee Enfields with abundant markings on the metal, I'm intrigued by the lack of marks on this rifle. I have taken a few photos that show the few marks I can find that are not obvious Remington marks and wonder if anyone has any thoughts about whether this rifle was issued to any organization or simply put in storage. The photos show a star-like form on the right side of the knox-form, the characters A28/V midway down the barrel, a pair of faint characters adjoining the barrel indexing mark, and a funny banana shape on the left of the barrel about one inch in front of the knox-form. Thanks, in advance, for any thoughts.

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.

[Mike D]

Ridopho - It appears to be a rifle fresh from rebuild. Some parts have been replaced and/or refinished.

I notice the bolt sleeve is Smith Corona and possibly the bolt. Hard to tell from the distance of the photo.

I believe the A28/V is the barrel steel lot code. All the other stamps look like the usual inspection stamps.

What is the barrel date? Do you see any stamps on the left side of the stock, above the trigger?

Mike

[Ridolpho]

Mike: Thanks for the quick response. The barrel date is 3-43. The stamps in the wood on the left side are: RA, FJA, and the crossed cannons which are all standard Remington based on posts I've seen recently in this forum. The only other marks on the wood are a few faint stamps in front of the magazine which are shown on one of the photos. Are there specific marks that might be indicative of a factory repair or are you thinking a private rebuild? I have a hard time understanding why anyone would undertake a restoration as it has the typical 03A3 crude components on top of which it would be an extremely thorough rebuild as every last part looks brand new (for example all bolts/ screws look like they've never been touched with a screw driver). Do you know if there were factory repairs of the 03A3's? Thanks again,

Ridolpho

[Mike D]

Ridalpho - Check the "sticky" at the top of the '03 forum page in regards to "original configuration". It displays factory finishes. Blued vs. parked, etc.

Likely the original barrel. I think the original stock should have pins vs. bolts. Do you see any encircled "P"'s under the wrist?

The mix of parts and color of the park on some of them is common with rifles that have been through an arsenal rebuild.

Mike

[Ridolpho]

Mike: Yes, there is a clear encircled P under the wrist. Comparing my rifle with the one on the "sticky" I see one main difference- all parts of my bolt assembly are a matching colour of parkerizing (only the sight doesn't match). The stock throughbolts are identical. I should mention the metal of the receiver, barrel, etc. shows no scratches or dings of any kind other than a couple of tool marks on the barrel. Would arsenal rebuilds have been done at Springfield? It's amazing to put this one beside a 1918 Rock Island '03 that I have. I know it was a "wartime expedient" but they sure did cut some corners.

Ridolpho

[Chuckindenver]

originally...the only parts that were phosphate finished were barrel, receiver, front sight base, safety lever, and on some early Remington A3,s bayonet lug..the rest of the parts were blued.
most of the parts on your rifle are parkerized, and done so during rebuild... not a bad thing, just an observation.

[Ridolpho]

Mike D. and Chuck in Denver: Thanks for the useful comments. I'm not concerned about its originality, just interested in its history. I don't think my photos adequately illustrated how unused it appears to be. If it is an arsenal overhaul they did one heck of a good job! Do either of you see any markings on my photos that relate to either original issue or site of later overhaul. I gather from some references that these were not intended as front line weapons but were issued on an interim basis whilst production of the Garand was ramping up. Thanks again,

Ridolpho

[Johnny Peppers]

The rifle is possibly unused after rebuild, but it shows all the signs of having been rebuilt.

This photo shows the correct blued bolt with phosphate safety mentioned by Chuck, and blue hand guard retaining ring.

[Ridolpho]

Johnny: Thanks. It would appear there is a clear concensus that Remington didn't parkerize their 03A3 bolts. Do you know if there is anything I could look for as an indicator of where the rebuild was done? Appears to be nothing on the wood so did any arsenals put marks on the barrel or reciever that would tell the story? The barrel still bugs me as it is as close to unused as a barrel could be but it's date agrees with the serial number. It seems strange a rifle would need an overhaul that saw the bolt replaced (or original parkerized?) with pristine barrel. Looking at the bolt, I see a small "R" on the underside of the handle and an "8" on top. Pretty much the whole thing was parkerized (including locking lugs) except for the extractor and collar. It may be hidden by the parkerizing but it doesn't look at all worn (believe me, as a Lee Enfield collector I know worn!). In any case, thanks to all that responded. I'm not trying to put a value on this gun- eventually I try to put together a little history on all my Milsurps and with no new Enfields to play with this one came out.

Ridolpho

[Johnny Peppers]

There is no doubt that the original Remington bolts were blued. All the rebuilds were not marked, and the ones that were are marked on the wood instead of the metal. For any number of reasons the outside of the rifle could have required a rebuild, but may have been fired very little, leaving the barrel in excellent and reusable condition. It is not unusual at all for the barrels to be reused if they met specs.