A British Remington M1903 ...

[Nick Adams]

[ "John," what was up with all the "new" used long guns. "The economy," he says. "Lay-offs. Also, a couple of estate sales came in. And there's about a dozen old foreign military guns some lady brought in. Her husband stored them in his basement." ]

That part of the story is true. Same thing in our shop. More used guns than space to display them. From all sources; lost a job, someone passed away, "I want a new one so I'll trade 2 or 3 in since I can't afford the new one".

You found a prize in your local shop! Nice rifle! No one can accuse you of being a thief. I have purchased more than one rare rifle well below market value. The dealer(s) selling set the price and I agreed to it. No crime in that.

Thanks for sharing!,
Emri

Thanks. When I got back to the store to pick up this rifle, cash in hand, I noted the sign on the door: "All sales final." Good policy.

[Nick Adams]

Hello Nick, I'm a home guard memorabilia collector. This is just a possibility. The majority of U.S. rifles sent to the U.K. and adapted for home guard use were P-17 U.S. Enfields in 30-06. The red paint was required so the home guard volunteers wouldn't try to load .303 into 30-06 chambered weapons. Most just brushed it on with little effeort for a neat job. Several thousand Springfields were also sent. The red band painted at the handguard is a fair clue. Is there anything else painted on the stock? Rarely, some home guard units would also paint .30 cal or 30-06 or cal 30-06 on the butt stock - usually in white paint. *Just saw the pictures. I think the British crown marking is also a supporting clue. The 12/1941 date barrel throws me though. It's very late. Most of the U.S. goods showed up in 1941. Was it rebarreled in the U.K. later? I'm puzzled. Just checked - BNP under a crown is Birmingham nitro proof.

LDVolunteer: No, the barrel is an original Rem barrel ("R.A."), w/ Rem proof dated 12/41.



Here's a better pic of the paint on the left side of the handguard (opposite the bolt). It's very worn (not sanded) but you can still discern elements of black paint that once said either: "300" or "3006" - couldn't tell which it was on this one. The pics of still-intact caliber designations I've seen show it in black paint.

[Nick Adams]

A few more pics to vet this "302":

An "R" stamped in the rear right (bolt side) of trigger guard.


An "R" found on the mag cut-off.


For John Beard or RTL:
I asked earlier about the extractor because during a brief sight-in at the local range, that red paint attracted a self-described 1903 collector/"expert" (I think he was trying to be helpful ...) ...

He thought the rifle was all correct, but insisted the extractor had been replaced at some point with a Springfield or RIA because no "R" was immediately visible during his cursory once-over.

I had greased up the bolt and the bolt raceways before shooting that day, and during cycling grease smeared on the bolt and on the smooth parts of the extractor.

After cleaning, I found this:


I assume that resolves the issue? No?

[Rick the Librarian]

Looks good, in my book! Now if you ever find her "sister".....

[Nick Adams]

My friend, you hit the jackpot! Assuming you paid the $500 mentioned, you got it for at least 1/3 or less the going rate, probably less. Yous was one that was sent to the UK in 1942. The British proof marks identify it as one that was imported back to the US, probably in the 1960s. The markings look a little worn, but you have a (based on previous sales of these rifles) a $1500-2000 rifle!

If you want to find out more about these rifles, read the article that John Beard and I wrote in the July/August issue of "Man at Arms" Magazine.

I have #3,024,801 and the markings are very similar. However, it was obtained earlier, so the proof markings on te FRSB are missing.

Thanks, Rick. I paid significantly less than "$500," though.

Again, the primer on your "302"-serialed Remington 1903 was very helpful, and while doing the initial post above I kinda thought you'd enjoy seeing another "302" made not long after yours.

On the MMA magazine article, I do have the August 2009 issue w/ the Remington Red Star piece (Vol 31, #4). I've read that several times now and have gone over the pics repeatedly looking for little "comparables." Is that the piece you're referring to, or is there a separate one on the early Rem 1903s that I missed.

By the way, on p. 24 of the Red Star write-up, where the serial #s are given, I noted mine would fall, chronologically, early in the list - between Col Levin's 3026063 and 3027426 rifles. That 3026063 is probably a close cousin of mine.

Also, after reading that one, I became curious about the time-line for the changes to their 1903s that Rem began in late 1941, and whether there were any "firm" dates that corresponded w/ specific serial # ranges. I was trying to gauge how my rifle "fit" into what became a progressively modified rifle, eventually morphing into the 03A3. (In his famous Notebook (p.8), Hatcher identifies the 03A3's date as 5/21/42, but he omits specifying other dates even while mentioning the various changes made).

I came across Canfield's Illustrated Guide to the '03 Service Rifle, where he discusses the Rem M1903s (p. 117). He identifies 12/19/41 as the date of approval of eliminating the lightening cuts on the sides of the rear fixed sight base. It appears that was the first modification to the process of streamlining production of the receiver. He then identifies 2/19/42 as the date of approval for the rear guard screw hole to be completely drilled through. Mine doesn't have that mod, as shown in the pic above.

I had thought my serial # was consistent with a born-on date of mid-to-late Feb '42, but based on this statement perhaps it was made much earlier in the month and then put aside for later assembly with others en masse.

On the other hand, it's got a 12/41 barrel. So my receiver was made later than Rick's, but was then mated to a barrel produced in the plant a month before his (a 1/42 tube)? Interesting. Maybe one of the factory rats hadn't quite recovered from double-fisting it on New Year's Eve ...

Finally, Canfield then identifies the "next month," i.e., March 1942, as a general date for approval of a stock "redesign" that eliminated the finger-grasping grooves.

So, looking my "302" rifle over again, and assuming the accuracy of this general time-line, the only feature on it that distinguishes it from being a 100% "non-modified," early Rem 1903 is the absence of the lightening cuts on the sides of the RSB. Is that correct, John or Rick? (Or any other knowledgable individuals - feel free to weigh in. Citing sources too would help me. Thanks!)

[John Beard]

Nick,

I note the "R" stamped on the top rear corner of your extractor. I have not seen one in that location. But, I'm not the least bit surprised. The "R" is usually on the bottom. Thanks for the picture!

The approval dates for the changes you cited are somewhat dubious. Remington rifles do not necessarily reflect those change approval dates. The rifles themselves show that elimination of lightening cuts and grasping grooves all occurred at the same time. And the rear guard screw holes were drilled through at about that same time or perhaps a week or two later at the most.

The Red Star article we wrote focussed exclusively on the uniqueness of the Red Star rifles. Space did not permit addressing the common peculiarities of early Remington rifles in general.

Hope this helps. And congratulations on such a splendid find!

J.B.

[Nick Adams]

Nick,
I note the "R" stamped on the top rear corner of your extractor. I have not seen one in that location. But, I'm not the least bit surprised. The "R" is usually on the bottom. Thanks for the picture!
***
J.B.

Thanks, John. Good to know. Now I'm interested in where the "R" on the extractor of Rick's "302" is located, since our serial #s are close, ... just curious as to whether, perhaps, mine is a factory odd-ball ...

Maybe Rick could check and weigh in on that ... Would be interested to know if the extractor of anyone else's Rem 1903 has that stamp in the same location?

[Nick Adams]

Nick,

***
The approval dates for the changes you cited are somewhat dubious. Remington rifles do not necessarily reflect those change approval dates. The rifles themselves show that elimination of lightening cuts and grasping grooves all occurred at the same time. And the rear guard screw holes were drilled through at about that same time or perhaps a week or two later at the most.

The Red Star article we wrote focussed exclusively on the uniqueness of the Red Star rifles. Space did not permit addressing the common peculiarities of early Remington rifles in general.

Hope this helps. And congratulations on such a splendid find!
J.B.

Thanks for that information also, John.

From the reference works, I'm trying to understand where mine most probably lands in terms of its creation during the chronology or timing-sequence of those initial changes you mentioned, when compared to the early unmodified Rem 1903s. Just want to get an idea of what I have.

I guess maybe those dates to which Canfield refers aren't so "firm."

[Rick the Librarian]

Nick,

I agree with John that going by "firm dates" is usually not possible with Remington M1903s. For example, it is true that the M1903A3 was adopted as standard on May 21, 1942. If you visualize hundreds of M1903A3s suddenly appearing on the assembly line the next day, you'll be wrong. Often, these changes took weeks or even months to happen. In the case of the 03A3, the first examples (to my knowledge) didn't appear for a few months, and due to targeting problems with the new rear sight, high production wasn't achieved until nearly the end of 1942.

The same is true with other changes - they were often slowly phased in. John sometimes uses the term "floor sweepings" to describe earlier parts showing up on later Remington M1903s. An example of this is the "lightening cuts" on the fixed rear sight base. They generally were phased out about 3,020,000. However, they continue to be seen on some later rifles. I have noticed several on rifles up into the 3,051,000 range, and I once had a Remington in the 3,084,000 range with them. When these changes were introduced, we were in the middle of a war and they weren't about to dump a whole bunch of parts and hold up production, waiting for the new parts to be produced. Going back to late 1942, when there were problems with the new M1903A3 rear sight, it was decided to continue with Remington M1903 production until the sight was perfected.

If you are looking for nice, neat, dates when changes took place, you won't find them on Remington M1903s and better take up butterfly collecting!

Regarding barrels and dates, it was very common to have barrels with manufacture dates as far as three months before the indicated receiver date of manufacture. My rifle, 3,024,801 (pictures below) has a 1-42 barrel, which is a little closer to the serialization date. However, three months "before" is often seen. Both our rifles were made in February, 1942, but a 12-41 (or 1-42) barrel would be normal.

As far as the "drilled through" rear tang, #3,024,801 doesn't have it, a 3,040,000 range rifle I had did and a 3,051,000 range I have didn't...and so forth. See the picture immediately below:



I'm sure John can correct or add to what I have said.

Now, let me "brag on" #3,024,801. It is very similar to your rifle, as far as specific features. It is still one of my favorite rifles and my first really "nice" M1903. I got it about five years ago from a really good friend, who gave me a great deal, in exchange for some help I gave him in identifying some other M1903s he had.

It has a 1-42 Remington barrel and a decent RLB inspection stamp. It is one of the "Red Star" rifles. The only flaw is that it has a replacement handguard. You can see from the picture that the red band doesn't match up. The handgurd was replaced during British service. This was far from unusual.

You can see it doesn't have the British proof marks because, as you learned in the article, it (and 199 others) was imported "out of the ordinary".

It has the "4-3" stamp, as well as the four subinspector symbols ahead of the front tang.

It came covered in grease, but not the "deep" grease found on the CMP rifles, and I cleaned most of it off in an evening. It was in excellent condition and had seen little or no wear. The bore is almost perfect.

As you can see from my "signature" to the left, I use a picture of this rifle as my "avatar", so you can see how much I like this rifle. (OK, I had to give a little "dig" abou my afghan!!)

[Nick Adams]

Nick,

I agree with John that going by "firm dates" is usually not possible with Remington M1903s. For example, it is true that the M1903A3 was adopted as standard on May 21, 1942. If you visualize hundreds of M1903A3s suddenly appearing on the assembly line the next day, you'll be wrong. Often, these changes took weeks or even months to happen. In the case of the 03A3, the first examples (to my knowledge) didn't appear for a few months, and due to targeting problems with the new rear sight, high production wasn't achieved until nearly the end of 1942.

The same is true with other changes - they were often slowly phased in. John sometimes uses the term "floor sweepings" to describe earlier parts showing up on later Remington M1903s. An example of this is the "lightening cuts" on the fixed rear sight base. They generally were phased out about 3,020,000. However, they continue to be seen on some later rifles. I have noticed several on rifles up into the 3,051,000 range, and I once had a Remington in the 3,084,000 range with them. When these changes were introduced, we were in the middle of a war and they weren't about to dump a whole bunch of parts and hold up production, waiting for the new parts to be produced. Going back to late 1942, when there were problems with the new M1903A3 rear sight, it was decided to continue with Remington M1903 production until the sight was perfected.

If you are looking for nice, neat, dates when changes took place, you won't find them on Remington M1903s and better take up butterfly collecting!

Regarding barrels and dates, it was very common to have barrels with manufacture dates as far as three months before the indicated receiver date of manufacture. My rifle, 3,024,801 (pictures below) has a 1-42 barrel, which is a little closer to the serialization date. However, three months "before" is often seen. Both our rifles were made in February, 1942, but a 12-41 (or 1-42) barrel would be normal.

As far as the "drilled through" rear tang, #3,024,801 doesn't have it, a 3,040,000 range rifle I had did and a 3,051,000 range I have didn't...and so forth. See the picture immediately below:


I'm sure John can correct or add to what I have said.

Thanks for clarifying that. It's good to know all this about the modification chronology. Also thanks for clearing up the barrel dating with respect to their actual installation into a given '03 receiver. That saves me some hair-pulling and butterfly collecting. I'd rather be shooting ...