1903 Low SN - shoot or don't shoot?

[Randy A]

You're in luck - Steve Norton just posted them on the CMP forums.

And if you read my post, by "documented history" I meant Hatchers notebook. But yes, Steve has posted documents from the Marines basically saying the report was a way for Hatcher to drum up funding during the depression.

Based on your statement I doubt you've read hatchers notebook, you also didn't read or quote "all" of Steve's post either. He continued to say that the Marines later changed their stance on Hatchers research and the risk of LN 03s. I've seen a blown up LN 03 action (case) and there were pieces 75 feet away. I see a lot of reckless remarks on this subject that are based on opinion alone, without any diligent research or heed to experience. If people only look for what they want to see, they will remain oblivious to the risk.

[browningautorifle]

If people only look for what they want to see, they will remain oblivious to the risk.

That's just about right...we keep going over this though... At least now days I can do it calmly wand without feeling. Mostly because I don't really care what others do while out of range of me...

[Kaliman]

As I was, yes, the Depression had not struck yet in 1928, but that doesnt mean the military budget hadn't already been tightened very strictly.

And if you read those docs the Marines advised against using them for rifle grenades at higher pressures, but since all receiver had passed a proof round, deemed them acceptable for regular use.

And the only reason they exchanged their LN receivers was because they could submit a B/R and receive a complete rifle in exchange, so they saw it as a way to rip off SA.

And I have read Hatchers notebook, and I've seen Steve's research long before it was posted on the CMP forums yesterday. I've decided that with rounds in acceptable specifications the rifles are fine to shoot. Experimentation and plain stupidity with ammunition had caused the vast majority of failures - and that is my assessment from reading Hatchers notebook.

Anyways that's enough of that. I'm not going to continue the conversation if people can't be respectful.

[TDH]

Respect is what you give those old rifles. I have one and I used to shoot a few rounds on Memorial and Veterans days. Then I've had two pistols blow up in my hand and Prudence raised her little head and convinced me that perhaps the old girl should just be admired instead of put to work. Now on the other hand if it ever came to the point where it was the last firearm I had left and it was life or death Then it wouldn't matter if she blows. The choice is yours of course but I can assure you having a firearm blow up in your hand is bot a pleasant experience.

[bob q]

I have fired over 1 million rounds through over 3000 different firearms , a friend had done 4x that and we have never had any " blow up " in our hand . Maybe you are doing something wrong ?

[Eaglelord17]

I love the 'I've done it a million times so it must be safe crowd'. Tell me how does that work with things like fall arrest where all it takes is one slip and you fall to your death?

FACT: Not all early M1903 Springfields are improperly heat treated. Some were done properly, some were not.
FACT: There is no real way to tell if it was improperly heat treated or not at a glance, you would need to do some serious testing.
FACT: Odds are with standard ammo and no issues you likely wouldn't have a issue be it improperly heat treated or not. Its when something goes wrong (which is when this matters most) that things become dangerous quickly.

OP make your own decision, but there is a reason they changed the process and recommend low SN rifles not be shot. When your heat treating is done by eye, not by temperature, you run into issues like this.

[rcathey]

Could a low number be tested non-destructively?
If one really wanted to throw money at it, could it be done?

[browningautorifle]

I have fired over 1 million rounds through over 3000 different firearms

I was army all my life and did way more than that. The thing you do learn is if you hang around enough firearms long enough things happen. Maybe you've been lucky.

[Doco overboard]

I have fired over 1 million rounds through over 3000 different firearms , a friend had done 4x that and we have never had any " blow up " in our hand . Maybe you are doing something wrong ?

I used to glove 13.2kv off the pole all the time until one day my safety caught on fire and I got hit. What I did was take a short cut on a knowledge/ skill based task. The safety, because it was a little around the block had moisture trapped inside that a visual couldn't detect and it was a humid day. The combination of the two at the same time almost did me in from an irrevocable act that could have been done right the first time by standing on a phase board. I knew it going in but had done it enough to fall into the trap of inaccurate risk perception.

[firstflabn]

The 1928 SA annual report describes reheat treating low number receivers and then firing high pressure tests with them. The result: mixed. Some improved, some didn't. Why might that be? Because heat treatment was not the only issue. Here's a brief quote from the report: "The reason for the ununiformity of results may be ascribed to the ununiformity of the material out of which the receivers were manufactured from time to time...." For those with zero knowledge of metallury, that means the chemical makeup of the steel varied.

Why does that matter? Because percentages of the various of alloying elements affects hardenability. SA operated well behind the times in their knowledge of metallurgy - even by early 20th Century standards. They were, at times, buying steel that was outside their purchase specs, but blissfully plunging ahead with production anyway. They had similar problems with barrels for the same reason.

For simplicity, this ignores the burnt steel problem (which can cause some of the same problems).