My first 1903

[churchill]

I'm going to set the rear tang bushing just under the wood, not let it stick out and just change the torque on the bolt. It is a scant stock for sure. I don't have a picture right now but you've all seen one.

If it was a WWII rebuild it would have a punch mark in the bomb on the barrel after proofing, right? If it was sanded enough to remove all the other marks why would the AAO still be there? And if it was a WWII rebuild the stock would have cracked horribly a long time ago, I think. I just stopped the tang from touching the stock two weeks ago. If it was armory rebuilt they certainly would have not had the tang touching the wood.

I'm guessing that stock sat at Augusta Armory until it was sold when they stopped using m1903's. Someone just bolted it in. It doesn't fit well in the bedding areas.

I could be wrong! I can get more pictures later.

And thank you, Bear. So it's not a Remington front band/bayonet lug. My rear sight is missing any R mark as well. I'm thinking for maybe just aesthetic reasons one of the previous owners replaced some parts with wear marks on them. The stock was probably beat up and the barrel worn out. Somebody did some work on this! Maybe the bolt didn't headspace correctly with the new barrel so the tried different bolts until it was acceptable. What other reasons might someone want to change the bolt?

On an unrelated note I've got some swedish mauser clips on the way. I got some m1903 clips but I've already broken the tabs off one of them. I read the swedish mauser clips work better so I'm excited to give those a go. I've also got a nylon sling on the way. I like that style better than the leather. Easier to adjust and make a loop sling with IMO. I've also got some prussian blue on the way so I'll fix the stock inletting.

[browningautorifle]

Picture #1 and #6 give the impression of a bulge on the underside of the stock behind the trigger group

I agree, it's a later stock. We still need a couple of good side photos though, overalls...

[churchill]

Attachment 92685

[pickax]

I shouldn't have doubted you on the scant stock. I just relied on the first pic.
As far as Arsenal vs. home built, I remain skeptical but it is possible. It wouldn't be economical to put one together nowadays, but an old time collector or gunsmith with lots of spare parts and a park tank maybe..... (Note also the consistent parking throughout the entire rifle.)
I think the punch proof on the barrel bomb was a Remington thing on new assembly. I did a quick picture search on google and found other HS barrels with no punch mark. It may be worth a more in depth search. Also a light P stamp behind the trigger would be removed while the deeper AAO would remain.
Just throwing things out there Churchill, you are holding it your hands and have researched things pretty well. So if you have doubts you may well be right.
Good clean fun overall!

[churchill]

I guess there's no real way to know. I bought it from a gun shop so I don't have the previous owner as a resource. In any case, I did actually find a R on the rear sight slider, but not the rear sight base. So it probably has a fair amount of original parts, or just remington parts.. Anyway, I do appreciate your interest and speculation!

I guess we'll never know for sure who rebuilt it, but it's an M1903 with a good barrel and that's all that really matters to me!

I do want to replace the front sight because it is bent. the gold dot doesn't help, but I do like the fact that the sight picture has a dot as a front sight instead of a bar. I'm not sure what I'm going to do about the sights. I read today the USMC used some sights (called #10 sights) which had a larger peep hole, a battle sight zeroed for 200 yards, and a wider front sight post than the original, with a larger front sight cover. Maybe just the USMC sight cover and rear peep hole leaf would be good for me. The height of my current front sight probably brings my M1903 battle sight quite a bit back from the 547 yards it was with the orinal front sight. I'll have to figure out where the zero is exactly.

It is indeed good clean fun! Thanks, Pickax

[churchill]

Got to shoot for about an hour today before I had to get home and get ready for work.

No real serious shooting just some plinking off hand around 50 yards. I didn't miss any! My friend took a few shots with it too, I'm not sure which are his.
Attachment 92690

It looked like my rear sight base might be crooked. I'm not sure though, it could just be the machining on the rear receiver bridge which I was using as a reference. I'll have to do some measuring.

Do any of your rifles weep oil at the handguard when the barrel gets hot? I had some oil on top of my handguard near the rear barrel band, I just rubbed it into the gun.

[pickax]

Looks like sights are on! Good shooting! at 50.
Here is a link to a CMP thread with Bill Bentz cintact info. He is the best for repro Marine sights, and will talk you through it.
Anyone have Bill Bentz contact info - CMP Forums

Also, another CMP thread to a site with a PDF to '03 and A3 sight use by Allen Humphrey. Note Gunnys post #6
Using the 1903 sights - CMP Forums
Hope all the links are hot here.

[churchill]

Thanks for the compliment. We'll see what I can do with it at a real distance.

Hey thanks for the link for the repro sights! I thought I'd just prowl around online or maybe hit some gun shows until I found the pieces but that's a lot easier!

Pretty interesting to think where this rifle fits into history with regards to the sights. They go all the way up to 2700 yards because they thought they might have a bunch of troops throwing big volleys of shots way down range. At least that's what I read!

[BEAR]

I didn't miss any! My friend took a few shots with it too, I'm not sure which are his.

Well, that is easy to tell. It's your post, so the shots on the outside periphery are his and the shots in the center are yours. That's how I would tell it.

BEAR

[churchill]

BOOM. Keystone C stock.

Got it from Dupage. It came with some dents and scratches as if it was in someone's part box for a long time. The gouges by the cross bolts appear to be from some windage knobs of some sort. Some disc with knurling on the sides made them. They steamed out pretty well! they were real deep when I got it, probably 1/8th inch or more. stained then finished pure tung oil.

Aside from it being beat up, I think it was NOS! It had no hole for the front band's bolt.