Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Mausers and Military Rifles 03A3s, WW II combat %?

From what I've read plenty of already issued to front line infantry units 03s saw combat early in the war until the Garands showed up but not many 03A3s. Seems like some 03A3s might have but it's my understanding not many. Any reasonable/verified estimates?

Early Pacific campaigns were fought with 1903 Springfields. The Marine Corp was late to issue Garands as they thought the troops wasted ammo. Not sure about the 1903A3 given its later production.

Some of the units fighting in North Africa, also used the Springfield rifles. Jim Gavin (82nd Abn) even carried his into the Sicily campaign (he wrote that against a German tank, he felt under-armed with it). Dunno if they were O3A3s, though, and he didn't document it.
I think that the O3A3s spent more time stateside as training weapons than overseas, though they might have used them in the Aleutian campaigns, too, and the Navy, who didn't really NEED the M1s, issued a lot of them.

Wikipedia. "The M1903 and the M1903A3 rifles were used in combat alongside the M1 Garand by the US military during World War II and saw extensive use and action in the hands of US troops in Europe, North Africa, and the Pacific"
.

Well, that settles it once and for all.

The reason 03A3's didn't see frontline action in 1942 is a simple one: they didn't exist in meaningful quantities yet. M1903A3 production didn't hit full stride (such as it was) until late 1942- early 1943, and by then sufficient quantities of M1's were in the pipeline to arm the combat services as their ranks grew. The good old pre-war '03 bore the brunt of combat use in those dark days of early-mid 1942. (Note though there's documented proof that indeed a bunch of M1's saw combat in the Phillipines, and the Marines on Guadalcanal weren't totally bereft of M1's even in the first couple months when the situation was truly in doubt before Marine and Army reinforcements arrived who were by and large armed with M1's.) The Marines didn't cling to the M1903 for sentimental or preferential reasons through 1942. They would've loved to completely re-equip with M1's but then, as now, suffered at the tail end of the government supply chain.

Because the 03A3 arrived late to the party, so to speak, it wasn't needed for frontline service, although more than a few made it overseas in the hands of support troops many of whom of course had reason to fire them in anger. It saw more use as "loaners" to Allies such as, but not limited to, the Free French, European resistance groups, Greeks, etc. Even then the preferred weapons for air drops and submarine delivery to remote locales were M1 Carbines and submachine guns - stuff that was smaller/lighter and represented the better bang for the buck on those delivery systems in which weight and size mattered greatly.

Those days right after Pearl Harbor saw Uncle Sam scrambling to pull his pants up and procuring weapons wherever/however he could. Any and all ideas for streamlining arms production were paid attention to. I've recounted before how the 03A3 came about, but here it is in a nutshell: Remington was engaged in building 1903's before the War started (for us), largely to supply rifles for Lend-Lease to England after they had their butts trimmed in the fall of France and lost significant material at Dunkirk. Remington was doing this mainly with resurrected M1903 machine tools that had been mothballed when Rock Island Armory ceased production of the rifle after the end of WWI. The tooling was old and wearing out when all of a sudden Uncle Sam said to Remington that they needed to ramp up production for us now. Remington engineers re-designed the 03 for easier/quicker manufacturing with minimal new machine tools (primarily punch presses to stamp out stock furniture (trigger guards/bottom metal, butt plates, barrel bands, etc.) and some internal parts - stuff that had previously been forged/milled. Uncle Sam went along with the revised gun and Remington got busy with it - and the 03A3 was born. Alternative/support manufacturing of the A3 was also taken up by the typewriter company Smith-Corona.

The government was pretty smart, I think, to spread out manufacturing and to manufacture a diverse range of weapons alternate to the official standard. Not all the eggs in one basket so to speak.

They probably did waste some, but when your life is on the line, I know I would be doing some spraying and praying

One of my great uncles was drafted in WWII and trained with an 03 Springfield, never saw an M1 Garand until he went to the Philippines. I would give a large sack of money to sit and talk with him for just a few minutes.......................

My uncle was drafted in 1940, trained with the '03, shipped out February 1942 to N.Ireland, 1st Infantry Division. Took part in Operation Torch (North Africa) then Sicily then D-Day and on through France into Germany before getting hit the third time and then home on a hospital ship - the whole time in combat with an '03 clutched in his hands. His MO (Infantry Scout) allowed him his choice of weaponry, and he stuck with the '03. (He said he was initially most infatuated with the 37mm anti-tank gun, until he saw rounds just bounce off German armor in Tunisia.) He said he saw no problem with the M1, just personally preferred the Springfield. He lived through a lot of bad crap, didn't talk about it at all until near his end when he opened up a bit. Most of what I know about him I got from my Dad who was the only guy he bared his soul to.

Yeah, it's why I'm into 03's.....

I study WW2 photographs. There are many photos of soldiers carrying 1903's and 03-a3's throughout the war. Just yesterday saw a quick clip of several GI's marching through a bombed-out town and they were armed with 03's. I have even seen several 1917's being used. In one photo I saw, someone had laid out a display of all US guns used on an island invasion. There was a 1903 NRA sporter among the group.

Interesting! I would love to see that pic. Maybe that explains the awful condition of one of the NRA Sporters in my collection!

I have a Remington 03-A3 rifle in unissued condition. Inherited it from my Dad who bought it from a guy who bought it cheap for joining the NRA. At least that’s what Dad told me. He may have got it through the DCM

I think a fair amount of 03-A4 snipers were issued for combat use.

Yup, stamped parts and two groove barrels. And they worked just fine.

I had an 03-A3 that I basically stole. It would not feed the last round at all. And it looked brand new.

I bought the rifle, took it home and then took it apart. After verifying all the critical stuff as good, I happened to notice it had a milled follower so I ordered the proper stamped follower. Fed just fine after.

It was one of those rifles where somebody offered the right money. It was still a good price, but considering what I paid for it, it was a deal for both of us, and the gesture was reciprocal, he had sold me a couple guns for damn good prices.

Still a springfield junkie don't have a rock island 03 but do have remington and springfield 03's as well as smith corona and remington 03-A3's. Never could afford minty dressers, allways bought bubba sporterized ones. I've enjoyed the hell out of using them. My mom's dad carried one in ww1 and my dad qualified with an 03 serving in ww2. They are still a good rifle. Mb

My dad came home with Mausers ( thought the were a great hunting rifle until he found a 99 savage LOL), so I had them around when i was a youth, My Uncle drug home a bag full of Lugers- (was in the supply depot, when war ended it was must of been a interesting time), neither thought it was a good idea to relocate back home with a '03, didn't know much about the 03's until I bought a Jaeger modified one probably 20 plus years ago now, I find them as a good action for my tinkering, I have a couple in 308 norma, a couple in 358 norma , then i used one to build a 6.8 western, all will do what asked, maybe not bench rest rifles, but my the taxidermy bills these rifles have caused me are enormous. I don't think there is a action much smoother than the chrome bolt Smith Corona's, I sold one to a guy wish i hadn't now but made room for something new. The last couple I used to build I sent the action up to JKOB and had a swing safety put on them, you have a old school action with a slight user friendly twist. Not for everyone but for me I like a gun from the past that does not have one piece of plastic in the action or anyway one can be added, BTW I have nothing against composite stocks LOL

I seen some appeared to be originals at a gun show, WOW they had no qualms about asking alot.

I haven't seen any mention of percentages of A3s in combat but they most definitely were there throughout the war. Mike Venturino had mention of a Smith Corona "Springfield" (S/C only made A3s) being policed up after the break out from Anzio which would have been mid-1944. He also mentioned seeing a picture of a US soldier using an A3 in Burma or China, I don't remember. A grenade launcher for the Garand was not approved until December 1943 so a platoon would be issued up to 3 Springfields to be used as such throughout the war. Some number of those would have been an A3.

Then, there are various allied units such as the Free French, Poles, Chinese, Greeks, etc. that were issued US arms. I've seen many pictures of the Poles in Italy being armed with Model 1917s so it would not be surprising to me to see them and others carrying A3s either. That history books mostly tell of the US fighting and winning WWII with a little spassistance from Great Britain, it is not surprising there is so little mention of the various "Free" forces that contributed as they could. They were often issued second tier equipment as the parent military armed their own forces with the most up to date equipment.

So, A3s may not have made up a large percentage of frontline US arms they likely made up a far larger presence than believed. With the Garand getting so much of the publicity, rightly or wrongly, the other arms have been left far in the shadow.

Dad said you never leaned your Garand against a tree, while eating, some jarhead would leave his 03, and vanish with the Garand. Island hopping the Pacific, Americal Division, WW2!

I love them have several and lots of parts all of them bubba modified

Marines on Guadalcanal,who "swapped" their Reising sub machine guns for army Thompsons, got a rude suprise when the returned to New Zealand for refit. They were charged for the cost of the Reising's with no credit for the Thompson's the big green weenie confiscated from them.

I have literally studied thousands of war photographs over the last 50 years. I look at everything from shoelaces to gas cans. It was probably a decade ago I saw the photo. IIRC, the photo was taken most likely by a soldier and again IIRC that they were all laid out on the deck of a small boat bow. I will check my book on the 1903 Springfield and see if the photo is in the book. Maybe this information will jog some other members memory and know where the photo can be found.

Maybe, but the A4s were not manufactured until 1943.

The 1941A1 was a little earlier. It was a 03 with a C stock, Standard 1903 sights and either a Winchester A5, Winchester B5, Winchester B3, or Unertl 8X scope. I think the Unertl scope was issued to the Marine Corps.

The M1903A4 was an 03A3 receiver, 03A3 hand-guard, no sights, C stock or scant-type stock with a variety of different 2.5 power scopes.

This is a link to most of the 03 and 03A3s manufactured. There was a lot of the last 03 receivers that Rock Island built that were finished by Springfield Armory that are not listed on the website. I have one I bought from the CMP. The rifles were built in the 1929 time frame and mine was re-barrel in November of 1942. My Rock Island receiver is serial number 420XXX.

Serial Numbers

The really cool 03-A3 is still in service and killing elk. This one is super cool, it is an Ogden Arsenal gun with Elmer Keith’s inspection stamp in it…

Nice. That really does make it special.

Winchester A5's were tried in the WWI period, often encountered with Niedner scope blocks. (Often is a relative term, only a handful were procured.) The A5 was a fairly crummy scope (and the B5 was a really crummy scope - I know, I've owned/used them both) but after Lyman bought the rights to the Winchester lineup of scopes in the late 20's they fixed the A5 and called it the 5A. That's the one that has shown up in USMC spec sheets/procurement documents/purchase orders early on, rarely but sometimes. Mostly the Unertl 1 1/4" 8x was spec'ed and the few pics that exist of Marine snipers in the Pacific usually show that one. Trouble was Unertl was a relatively young company and had trouble meeting the demand, not that there was a huge demand. Alternatives were accepted into service including Feckers, and Lyman Targetspots but proving it is sketchy - hard documentation on these rifles is scarce.

It's pretty much nearly a moot point however because the number of M1903A1 USMC snipers (M1941A1 was never an official nomenclature) was a small one, only numbered in the hundreds. One wag stated that only 800 were procured but that nowadays 8000 exist. Buyer beware if offered one. Heck, I even built one up (with a 1930's NS action, pre-war new-old-stock SA barrel, unissued early war Type-C stock, Unertl scope blocks, and a commercial 8x Unertl) and I could probably pass it off as the Real McCoy were the scope not missing the "USMC" stamp - and even that can be faked. Genuine USMC snipers that have righteous provenance fetch enough to buy a late model low mileage F-100. Just the 8x Unertl can command $4000+ these days. Crazy. (And to think a couple decades ago I walked away from a genuine USMC 8x Unertl, in the micarta carrying tube, for $800 because I thought it was too expensive....)

That list of M1903 serial numbers is fairly accurate but not concise. The gents who prowl the National Archives searching for '03 stuff have poked holes in it. I can personally poke a small hole - it shows the last serial number as being 1532878. I'm sitting here as I type with a mint M1903 Springfield Armory service rifle on my lap with serial number 1534475. (I swear it's never been issued and I think was one of the rifles thrown together after Pearl harbor when the Armory was directed to pull all remaining leftover 1903 receivers off the shelf and build them into rifles. Previous to that leftover new receivers were designated for use in only building National Match rifles, trophy rifles, and repair jobs. This one is fresh as a daisy - I had to scrub the cosmoline out of it, the metal finish is dead uniform from head to toe, it's stock is flawless, the mint 2-42 dated barrel didn't reveal a spec of copper fouling when I cleaned it. I could be wrong of course but my gut tells me it's the Real Deal.)

Were Lyman 2.5 scopes ever issue on the 03’s?

Yes on the serial numbers. Mine is not listed.

The historical aspect of these rifles is very interesting. They are a blast to shoot. The Vintage Sniper matches are fun as are the Garand-Springfield maches. Both are sanctioned by CMP.

We are running two Garand Springfield matches this weekend on ETargets just outside of New Orleans.

Neat rifle. A nice late Rock Island/Springfield has eluded me. How does it shoot? I'm curious: It would seem to have a straight bolt handle. Is it stamped "NS" under the safety lug? That's how RI identified their early nickel steel bolts even though they retained the old single-heat treat style straight bolt handles.

When John Beard talks I listen!

Wish I lived close by, would be fun joining y'all in one of your matches.

To my knowledge none of the 2.5x scopes made it onto 03 USMC snipers. Would've meant going through some rigamarole to make it work, only to end up with a scope deemed inferior to the Unertl target scope. The Unertl et al worked on the rifles because by their nature they sat high enough so that bending the bolt handle wasn't necessary. Plus, if presented with the choice between an 8x and a 2.5x scope what serious rifleman today would turn down the 8x? - and serious riflemen back then weren't dummies.

Marines recognized the utility in having a few snipers sprinkled through the ranks, hence the 03A1 Unertl program. For some reason unknown to me the Army snubbed the idea pre-war and early-war, and after waking up they then settled for the 03A4 sniper (which was a fine rifle saddled with a poor scope).

Thanks for the link.

I am just starting to learn the historical aspect of these firearms. My plan was to remove the scant stock and replace it with the C stock, drill and tap the receiver and barrel for the Unertl mounts. A buddy looked at it and advised against it as to not destroy the historical value.

I have an 03A3 that was sporterized back in the 60s that I will build a rifle with the 2.5 Lyman scope for the sniper matches. The CMP allows the 2.5 power Lyman on the 03A3 but not the 03.

Ferris's book on the Rock Island rifle is available, I will order one soon.

First time at the range it held under two inches with a front rest for 5 shots. Shot one match and did ok. The rifle is plenty accurate. Being left hand, the rapid fire is challenging. I will check the stamping under the safety lug.

Yeah, I wouldn't D&T that one, but I would swap out the scant grip stock for a C-stock though.

Factoid: 03's were test fired at their test range a couple miles from the Armory. Minimum acceptable group size at 200 yards for a National Match rifle was 2 1/2" (1 1/4 MOA), fired with Frankford Arsenal Match ammo. Most surpassed that.* Service rifles had a bit looser standard but also regularly did better.

I've seen pictures of those guys at the test range shooting out of windows in a wooden building, with piles of empty brass on the floor around them. Helluva job - getting pounded all day every day from shooting Springfields. By all accounts they were a close-knit group (and probably all deaf as door knobs), so much so that they formed an after-hours social club where they got together on weekends, at a local range, to shoot....

*Due in no small part to the excellent star gauged barrels selected for NM applications. Truth is, all pre-war 03 barrel bores were star gauge inspected for uniformity and not many failed, but some were a teensy bit more uniform than the others which had also passed the test. Those were the ones earmarked for match rifles and given the coveted star gauge stamp on the crown. The record card from the test, which listed the dimensions of the bore in 1" spacings over the entire length, was included with the new match rifle along with the 200 yard test target. It's rare to find one of those cards still with its rifle today. Here's one, that shows perfect uniformity the length of the bore:



And the rifle it goes with (one of the stars of my collection, but alas its test target is absent):

Trying to remember the last time I saw an all original Springfield 1903 in the flesh................

At one time I owned five. Three Model 1903, including a 1918 Pederson slot model, and two of the later 1903A3.
You will see the 1903 drilled and tapped for scopes in sporter variations. At one point the surplus market was flooded with them and many were converted to sporters by various gunsmiths across the country.
If you still have one in original form, please don't modify it....
Although the scant stocks are still found, they were not original. I was one who preferred them. I still prefer a pistol grip stock on my Marlin lever guns.

When my Father landed on Guadalcanal in 09/42 he carried his issued 1903A1. Before he left Guadalcanal, he'd been issued an M1 Carbine, he was an avionics technician, but managed to hold on to his Springfield until it was stolen on Okinawa in 1945.

I understand that in the USMC the infantry got priority for the Garands. Then the support and crew served weapons troops got M1 Carbines, while the clerks and cooks who were farther from the front lines kept their Springfield much longer.

Regarding the 1917 Enfields, my Father said that there were lots of them in the Philippines because they had been issued to the Philippines Army before WW2. The Filipino guerillas were supplied with a lot of M1 Carbines during WW2, both because the size better suited the Filipinos and they showed the Japanese that the U.S. could land supplies in the Philippines wherever and whenever they wanted to.

J**f, my father was a Gunnery Sergeant in G-2-1 on Guadalcanal. He was issued a Reising sub-machine gun. He said it was such a piece of junk that he threw it in the Tenaru. He went back to the '03 but was later issued a Thompson. He was a DI at Parris Island and his platoon shipped out together in August of 1942. Your dad is/was a hero!

When setting up supply lines via submarine to Filipino guerillas, a Naval officer asked Wendell Fertig, commander of said guerillas on Mindanao, what weaponry he wanted he was told "12 gauge riot guns and plenty of 00 buckshot ammo." He was told "sure, we can bring them but guess what it's not just about weight on a submarine it's as much about space - we can bring you a lot more M1 Carbines + ammo than we can shotguns or rifles plus ammo." "We'll take the Carbines," Fertig replied.

Thanks for all the history here guys! Mine is a pretty decent O3A3 that shoots great.



Also have an older Springfield that was sporterized by my grandfather for my father. I bought the 2-7x Redfield for Dad back in the 1970's. Need to hunt more with this one!



Again, thanks for the terrific history lesson!

Regards, Guy

Nice rifles, both.

Regarding the 1917 Enfields, my Father said that there were lots of them in the Philippines because they had been issued to the Philippines Army before WW2. The Filipino guerillas were supplied with a lot of M1 Carbines during WW2, both because the size better suited the Filipinos and they showed the Japanese that the U.S. could land supplies in the Philippines wherever and whenever they wanted to.[/quote]


Off topic but I believe the forum might find the following interesting. Yes, the US government issued 1917's to the Philippine army. When the Japanese captured the Philippines, they had so many captured 1917's that they started issuing them to their own troops.

I once owned a A3 that was completely rebuilt at a depot in an Australia in 1944. If it wasn’t in combat then it was certainly in a very bad accident.

Gnoahhh got it right as usual.
And as he said the Marines were the last on the supply chain. That was still true when I was in. My M16 was a worn out pos. A discard from the army.
I’m into 1903’s and M1’s also.
Don’t own a M16 or an AR-15.

The front site is a little to thin for my liking as a combat site. Perfect for target shooting.