Remy 1903A4 Sniper - The genuine article?

[ThirtyAughtSix]

Initial post here people.

Looking to benefit from others' insight as to whether this rifle is the genuine article or not.

Serial looks to be in the correct range and is correctly distanced from the manufacture make and model markings.

The only marking the stock bears is the 'P' on the pistol grip.

Attachment 33419Attachment 33427Attachment 33426Attachment 33425Attachment 33424Attachment 33423Attachment 33422Attachment 33421Attachment 33420Attachment 33428

I open this up to anyone to give their opinions ...

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.

[Chuckindenver]

not sure what the heck a Remmy is...my dad has a dog named that,,,but the Remington 1903A4 is genuine. barrel and scope are replacements.

[ThirtyAughtSix]

Thanks, Chuck. What makes you think the barrel and scope are latter additions?

[fogman]

Serial number shows it was manufactured between in October 1943. Barrel shows wear from having a front sight removed, 03A4 never had a front sight so barrel would be parkerized in the area of the front sight. Check the underside of the barrel where the front sight would be, is there a single dimple from a center punch? Lyman Alaskan scopes were never installed on the A4, the military had made provisions for it, even showing it in manuals, but all originals were Weaver 330. Still a very nice rifle. Mine is one of the "rush" arsenal refinished where the stock looks like it was shaped with a belt sander. It's all parked and came without scope and rings. My other is a bubba rescue, polished and blued, weaver two piece bases, barrel cut behind the front sight and dropped in a "sporterized" 1903 stock.

[ThirtyAughtSix]

My largest concern is the lack of stock markings; just a P under the grip. Should there not be inspection stamp(s), eg. FJA?

[JGaynor]

Also as it happens November 43 barrels are extremely rare on M1903A4 rifles. The only records that i have of Nov 43 barrels are on much later 2nd order rifles (one Z series and one 499XXXX). As Fogman mentioned the best data we have indicates your rifle would have been assembled in October and most probably would have had an August or September barrel.

The bolt appears to have been parkerized whereas the originals were a black oxide finish.

The stock is a legitimate Keystone manufactured replacement A4 stock. But the lack of markings suggests that it to is a replacement.
This is a rare find for the UK and don't take the criticisms too negatively. The A4 was in US inventory for over 50 years and the majority of them were rebuilt or refinished at some point. Some of them more than once.

While not factory original the M82 Scope is officially type correct as of the mid 1950's.

Regards,

Jim

[JGaynor]

Most of the time rebuilt rifles have the stamp of the rebuilding facility. This can be on the left butt stock, the left stock just to the rear of the trigger and rarely on the right stock just to the rear of the trigger. Some rifles that were rebuilt overseas havin markings applied to the barrel but they are usually under the wood. If you are in a position to dismantle the rifle it might be worth a look.

Regards,
Jim

[Chuckindenver]

front sight area is bare metal , and not finished, Original Scope on ALL 1903A4,s is a M73B1.. {Weaver 330C}, scope is military, but not original to the rifle, and likely not installed by the the military,
pics iv seen of military installed AK,s used Lyman rings, and not Redfield one piece rings.rubber eye piece looks to be a repro..
As Jim says,..not a flame, just an observation. still nice find in the UK.

[ThirtyAughtSix]

Thank you for everyone's input so far.

This rifle is for sale at the moment and I am considering purchasing. Because of this, I'm not able to physically inspect it, look inside the channel of the stock, etc.

To summarise what some have said:

* It appears the receiver is genuine, along with the redfield mount.

* The barrel, bolt handle and stock have been replaced - do you think this is part of an arsenal refurbish? If so why are there no stamps/cartouches applied to the stock? Could it have been done at an arsenal and not had stamps applied? Or, could a private individual have simply replaced these parts to improved the 'look'?

*The scope, while correct, has been added later. Again, do you think as part of a rehaul or the work of an individual?

What effects would all of the above have on the price? The seller is claiming this is an all original piece that has had nothing changed, altered or ever been back to the factory (!).

[Chuckindenver]

seller is in error, id say the the bolt is the original, though has been through rebuild, same with the stock, its a replacement, but a correct A4 sniper stock, scope is sketchy at best.
someone is fishing or doesnt know better himself. i really dont give a value on rifles anymore, as most dont like my opinion.. search GB and AA for like A4,s and see whats really selling.