What do you make of this M1903MkI USMC rebuild?

[Chuckindenver]

it has some character for sure, the light grey finish on the USMC is from them not cleaning and refreshing the tanks as much, the markings on the barrel are from a plumbers table, like a 3 legged table with jaws and what not to thread pipe, the stock is a mystery for sure, looks for sure someone has played with the grasping grooves,
every USMC rifle iv seen has had a hatcher hole, stippled buttplate, serialed bolt, and a few other things that add them up to Marine use. other then if it hit on SRS, its hard to say for sure

[Smokeeaterpilot]

I'll probably get some pushback on this but it is what it is.

Below is link to one of my 03s (actually my first one).
M1903 657707 - Google Photos

Since then a handfull of stocks have popped up very similar to yours.

A lot of common traits are
1) Crudely cut grasping grooves. (with some variations from stock to stock)
2) Crudely cut cutout well. (with some variations from stock to stock)
3) J stamped on the foretip of the stock (I see yours has that)
4) Some have a J stamped at the top of the buttstock.
5) Lacking a lightening cut in the buttstock. (please check yours and post)

Also, I notice yours has a buttplate similar to mine which looks like incomplete checkering. During the late 1930s, the USMC ran out of checkered buttplates (this is in the USMC QM records at NARA), complained that smooth buttplates slipped against the shooters shoulder. They purchased a "checkering" machine but couldn't get it to work. I always wondered if some of these unfinished checked buttplates were USMC before abandoning it and going to simply stippling them. I don't know if this is the case but it's the only primary source that would somewhat make sense.

Lastly, the USMC was unable to obtain more M1903 S Stocks after a 1940 Springfield Armory contract for a small run of S stocks.

You can identify these by M1903 S stocks with grasping grooves and "S0" stamped in the cutout well. Like the C stocks of the same period. In 1942 they were in negotiations with RF Sedgley for replacement S stocks (in addition to other replacement parts like barrels). There was some back and forth before the correspondence stopped (because NARA only has through 1942 and Federal Records Center at Suitland Maryland destroyed the USMC QM records from 1943-1945, I just got confirmation on that last year).

These stocks show up on USMC rebuilds with M1903 S stocks without grasping grooves with a "J" stamped in the cutout well (similar J to the one on yours). Collectors sometimes refer to them a "USMC J Stocks"

Everytime I see one of these stocks (like yours) do seem to pop up on rifles with some USMC rebuild traits. There's another CMP member I met for a cigar years ago that has a very similar rifle. I don't remember the specifics but I just remember it had a lot of usmc rebuild traits and the stock was very similar to mine. I understand the Mark I receiver makes it less of a solid argument given that the USMC rejected Mark I rifles from the Army during the interwar years.

Unfortunately, we'll never know for sure because the National Archives destroyed the paperwork that would've concluded the story with primary source documentation. These are just observations. These stocks appear to be uncommon to say the least but they do surface with common denominators. Who knows.... thanks for posting the pictures!

[browningautorifle]

They purchased a "checkering" machine but couldn't get it to work. I always wondered if some of these unfinished checked buttplates were USMC before abandoning it and going to simply stippling them.

That's interesting and makes perfect sense to me. I had no idea the crude stippling was because of this. Always thought it looked like children were employed to do it.

[Claven2]

5) Lacking a lightening cut in the buttstock. (please check yours and post)

Not sure which lightening cut you are referring to, but here are some more photos with action removed:







Definitely been some hand fitting or relief work under the rear sight base, not done recently.





Wood near the trigger guard ends:







Looks like either an A or V where you grip the stock behind the trigger guard.

[browningautorifle]

Not sure which lightening cut you are referring to,

5) Lacking a lightening cut in the buttstock. (please check yours and post)

I think he refers to under the buttplate...shown in his pic.

[Claven2]

Also, I notice yours has a buttplate similar to mine which looks like incomplete checkering. During the late 1930s, the USMC ran out of checkered buttplates (this is in the USMC QM records at NARA), complained that smooth buttplates slipped against the shooters shoulder. They purchased a "checkering" machine but couldn't get it to work. I always wondered if some of these unfinished checked buttplates were USMC before abandoning it and going to simply stippling them. I don't know if this is the case but it's the only primary source that would somewhat make sense.

SNIP

Everytime I see one of these stocks (like yours) do seem to pop up on rifles with some USMC rebuild traits. There's another CMP member I met for a cigar years ago that has a very similar rifle. I don't remember the specifics but I just remember it had a lot of usmc rebuild traits and the stock was very similar to mine. I understand the Mark I receiver makes it less of a solid argument given that the USMC rejected Mark I rifles from the Army during the interwar years.

I think that by mid1941 it’s well established that the marines began swelling their ranks. I have read a number of references (online and in print) that they pulled their war reserve rifles and began refurbishing them as fast as possible as relations with Japan were deteriorating (and Japanese diplomatic pressure on French Indochina to essentially allow a Japanese occupation that threatened the Philippines, caused the US to put intolerable oil embargoes in place on Japan - reference - Logevall - Embers of War - 2013.)

By late 1941, there was a massive infusion of US Navy M1903’s to the Marine Corps. By most accounts these guns were in poor shape, having been used for training since WW1, and the Navy having not invested in them because they expected to get new M1 rifles in due course. This definitely included mark1 receivers, there are many documented mark 1 USMC rifles with 1941-1942 rebuild traits, with and without hatcher holes, presumably from either the Corps’ war reserve or the USN transfer.

After Guadalcanal, you see pictures of marines with a variety of hastily refurbished 1903’s, virtually none with earlier traits like the wider front sight post or large diameter front sight protector. In 1941 onward, it seems all the refurbs were rebuilt basically to army specs, narrow front sight, etc. you also see pictures of rifles with contract Remington stocks (no grooves), C stocks, etc.

I’ve now found pics of 3 rifles (including yours) here and in gunboards’ older posts showing photos of these J stocks, so mine is not a 1 off home gunsmith job, in my opinion. They all have narrower less typical grasping grooves, cruder inletting, etc.

It also seems only the Philly depot drilled hatcher holes for the USMC (not something I can say definitively, but I found multiple online sources stating this) though rebuilds occurred to varying degrees of completeness at several other places on behalf of the USMC. There is some online speculation the navy and army may also have done some rebuilding for the marines in 1941.

All this doesn’t prove anything, but it’s well established not every USMC rifle got a hatcher hole, and that mark1 rifles served in the corps in WW2 as they scrambled to acquire enough rifles for the expanded infantry.

The link I posted earlier in this thread also shows manually/crudely checkered buttplates like ours on verified USMC rifles, so I would consider these crudely checkered plates to be normal on a USMC rebuild, alongside stippled plates.

Wish there was more info out there, but this is what I’ve got so far.

[Claven2]

here's a photo with the buttplate removed.



Looks near identical to your stock though I don’t have those star stamps.

[RCS]

This rifle was purchased in 1962 at Kleins in Chicago by an employee working part time. later he sold it to me, never fired this rifle. Barrel is also 9-41 plus all the other (I think) features related to USMC rebuilds. The late Frank Mallory of SRS told me he was certain it is a USMC rebuild as ther serial number is among other USMC rebuilds.

Stock is from WW1 but without cartouche but has small eagle stamp - stock was not a rebuild.

[ssgross]

I've never seen a 1903 stock where the lower band spring's pin was visible, nor where the inletting showed the rear cross bolt. Then again I admit I haven't handled enough to know for certain whether they ever came that way or not. Now I'm curious.

[Claven2]

Me too. This was clearly made a long time ago on machinery, but there is a lot of hand fitting and differences to RIA, SA or RA stocks.

It’s also black walnut, so not likely made outside North America.

Some people seem to postulate Sedgley may have produced a run of these J stocks in 41 or 42, but as mentioned above, there are records discussing a negotiation to buy S stocks from Sedgley but anything that might prove an actual purchase definitively took place was destroyed and is no longer archived?

In any event, I plan to keep this rifle the way it is, shoot it and enjoy it. Who knows, maybe one day there will be more info about these that turns up. I’m happy with it as a representative M1903 in my collection, maybe some day I’ll add other examples if I come across them. Any 1903 is uncommon in Canada.