My dad gave me a Sante Fe 1903A3 with s/n # 5,005,375. He didn't know much about it.

[barbarossa]

Thanks Barbarosa,

Another person mentioned they have never heard of any action exploding ever, but for some reason you get people who are afraid of them. It's not a new gun and it's almost 50 years from the 60s so I would venture a guess it's been shot once or twice, hehe. I'm gonna look for some site mounts and take it for a test drive. I'll post with pictures of my half blown away face in case that happens Do you know where I can get site mounts? At Turner's the guys said he thinks I need mauser mounts.

As your rifle already has two holes drilled in the receiver ring, I'd see if the one piece Redfield M/1903A3 base would fit it. They are attached with two screws in the front and slide onto the rear sight dovetail at the back. That's my best guess.

[Jeffrimerman]

As your rifle already has two holes drilled in the receiver ring, I'd see if the one piece Redfield M/1903A3 base would fit it. They are attached with two screws in the front and slide onto the rear sight dovetail at the back. That's my best guess.

The front receiver ring only has one hole, and there is one hole on the rear part of the receiver, so two holes total. Is there another style of mount that might work with that?

[Chuckindenver]

this Nat Ord, failed on the 75th round, and one a of a few that i have seen fail, they made less then 2000 Nat Ord, and Santa Fe rifles, and iv seen 3 that have failed, in my area, not very good odds.
they are known to be way out of spec, and have a weak point on the bottom side just behind the recoil flat...
the rifle pictured was someone like youyrself, that ignored my post on not safe to fire,,,,
then a week later he posted these pictures....
soooo.....dont say i didnt warn you....
if you choose to fire said rifle, wear good gloves, and saftey glasses, this shooter got a trip to the ER as well, yes, thats his blood on the scope.
i have a few more gross pictures, that ill not post, i have also agreed not to post a pic of his face for security reasons.

[barbarossa]

Chuckindenver, well, I too have to go by my own experiences in life. I'm not doubting your word or expressed caution. I have personally fired hundreds of milsurp .30/06 cartridges out of these rifles without a lick of trouble. However, if there is one thing I know for certain, it's the truism "Never Say Never". Tell me, as a matter of academic interest, do you know whether the rifle failed on a factory cartridge or somebody's pet handload? Any rifle can be blown up if you try hard enough as P. O. Ackley demonstrated. Also, Frank DeHaas in his excellent book "Bolt Action Rifles" found no problem with these actions. My point is, I have personally seen several firearms blown up by a bad handload or the wrong cartridge inserted in the chamber, ranging from Ruger Redhawks, and Super Blackhawks, to an AR-15, and a high number Model 1903 Springfield which blew out just like the one you've photo'd with your remarks. That one was blown by the owner inserting the wrong cartridge in the chamber and letting rip. Splintered the stock, blew off the floorplate, and extractor, leaving the cartridge head welded to the bolt face. Guy was shooting right next to me off the bench at the rifle range. He was wearing shooting glasses and that's what saved his eyes though I distinctly recall watching horrified as bits of powder were still burning on his face and there were little bits of brass buried in his face for good measure. Sh*t definitely happens!

I appreciate the cautionary remarks!

[Jeffrimerman]

Thanks for the words of caution Chuckindenver. I didn't mean any disrespect. I just wonder why I didn't find any articles mentioning anything like this happening. From the pictures the rifle looks extremely different than mine. Maybe it's the pressed metal parts not being connected well to the receiver. My trigger area and magazine both look like milled parts versus the pictures you showed me. Maybe those ones were put together really poorly. Making them with stamped metal parts makes them basically a different rifle. It's kinda like calling a Galil an AK47. Similar, same round, but different construction. But maybe there is also some like mine that can be unsafe also. You wouldn't happen to know if there is any built like mine with all milled parts from Sante Fe that blew up? I can't find any articles other than one stating potential problems from an early production of the 1903.

[Griff Murphey]

Sir:
Milled parts mean nothing. Stamped parts mean nothing. It is a commercially made, cast receiver of questionable quality assembled with whatever random collection of GI parts they had on hand, or someone else switched out later. It is not a forged receiver made for the U.S. government. Whether you choose to take the risk and fire it is up to you. From your tone I think you are trying to convince yourself it is a U.S. Arsenal Quality receiver.

It's Not.

[Chuckindenver]

like i told the guy that shot the rifle pictured.....dont say i didnt warn you....
same thing was said on the forums by other shooters....that they had shot them, and that they were OK,,,i said no way...
being a gunsmith by trade, and one that works on 1903,s likely iv rebarreld, and rebuilt more then anyone around today....my observation is....they are unsafe to shoot, no way of sugar coating it...id bet your rifle will close on a feild reject headspace gauge....all the Nat Ord and Santa fe rifles iv checked....have failed headspace....
iv killed many many of these time bombs....take the rifle out of the stock, youll find a cavity just behind the recoil lug...imagine what happens when you get a case head failure....
when it comes to shooter safety,.,i dont pull punches...if it quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck....
heres another thought....though i dont recomend anyone do so,...ill shoot a low number 03, without a problem...i would never ever shoot a Nat Ord, or Santa fe arms..
the fact it has a milled trigger guard, or nice sporter stocks doesnt add to the strength....the shooter should be happy that he had a stamped trgger guard, and it flexed rather then breaking...he might have had the loss of a hand..
i have personally seen 3 of these rifles localy, and a couple on the net pictured, that have failed., all shot with factory 30-06 ammo...
your rifle has nothing to do with a AK 47 variant, matter fact...if you rebarreled that rifle in 7.62x39...it might be safe to shoot...
i knew a guy that rebarreld them in 7x57 mauser, 6.5x55, and 45-70...as long as they kept the pressures low, and cut the receiver ring back so that it would headspace up...then it seemed ok....but...they wont take the pressure of the 30-06 or .270 for any period of time..
please understand, in no way is this a flame on your grandpa, or the fact that he gave the rifle to you....
what i would do....
look for a sporterized Remington or Smith Corona and pay someone to put that barrel and bits together in that stock you have, then your good to go..
i happen to have a Smith Corona that has been drilled and tapped, that i would make you deal on, and drop in in tour stock ect...
id rather see you shoot a good quality rifle thats safe...then chance at ruining that stock, and possibly getting injured...

[TDH]

Well said Chuck. thank you

[Jeffrimerman]

Sir:
Milled parts mean nothing. Stamped parts mean nothing. It is a commercially made, cast receiver of questionable quality assembled with whatever random collection of GI parts they had on hand, or someone else switched out later. It is not a forged receiver made for the U.S. government. Whether you choose to take the risk and fire it is up to you. From your tone I think you are trying to convince yourself it is a U.S. Arsenal Quality receiver.

It's Not.

OK Griff, yeah thanks for the psycho analysis, hehe. I know for sure it isn't military grade. Obviously you're not reading the threads where tons of people have shot them with no problem(the non military ones). Also since you're not realizing what other said about the receiver being produced at was seems to be quite a few places around the world, technically it isn't a questionable receiver, but many questionable receives unless they have some awesome technique of recreating the exact same conditions around the world when reproducing them. It could be one manufacturer that did a horrible job or two who really knows. I'm going to follow chuck's advice and wear gloves and goggles and basically lean away for the first few rounds. My statement about milled versus stamped is basically stating it is made from completely different parts than the pictured rifle. Different receiver from different factory, and everything else being different. If mine blows up in the same manor then that would really be something.

I appreciate the help Chuck. I don't really shoot too much lately. It might sit in my closet for another 20 years, but I will definitely wear gloves. I didn't mean to compare it to an AK, more that aks are made around the world in different factories so one can't say if chinese is bad then all of them are bad. Who knows where my receiver is made, so it could very well be one of the majority of them where people have had no problems. But I do see your point. Even if 1% of them self destruct that is a whole lot of rifles injuring people. I imagine 1000s were made so there could be a few hundred bad ones out there. I will take it apart at some point before shooting and look for the cavity you mentioned. Would you happen to have a picture of the cavity so I can see exactly what I will be looking for?

[jonnyc]

"they are unsafe to shoot, no way of sugar coating it...id bet your rifle will close on a feild reject headspace gauge....all the Nat Ord and Santa fe rifles iv checked....have failed headspace"

Chuck, I'm a bit confused by all the above. Are you saying, in your quote above, that a Nat. Ord '03 that does not fail a headspace check is ok?