I have a Remington 03A3 ser# 4,000,000 plus that has been rebored & chambered to 9.3x62. I was wondering what the consensus of opinion in this community about the strength of the action to handle loads as Mule Deer posted in the famous 9.3x62 thread I've been reading? I chronoed a load the other day with a Nosler 286 Partition, I can't get to my notes on powder and charge, but at 2208 fps seems to be a little slower then the data showed? Thanks for any opinions! Oh I took a monster buck with that load at 80 yards couple weeks ago, very accurate and quite deadly![img]http://[IMG]https://i559.photobucket.com/albums/ss33/otiscampbell62/IMG_1066_zpsz9htvjxm.jpg[/img][/img]

High serial number 03’s are strong. Under 800K ‘03’s are the ones to watch.

I think it’s as strong as any modern action.

DF

Thanks DF

Can't argue much with this but I'd prefer to say "as strong as any controlled round feed" rifle.

The 1917 Enfields were commonly rechambered to .375 H&H with no trouble whatever....the load data presented by MD isn't excessive at all according to the 60,000 PSI posted and we know that the Springfields were commonly rechambered to .308 Norma magnum .....I wouldn't hesitate to work up to the loads presented by MD on this forum for the 9.3 X 62....it is a lot of punch for a Springfield rifle but many have been upgraded to even more than that.

Go for it

My first custom rifle was a on a Remington-made 03 Springfield. I thought that it turned out too heavy for a .30-06, so I had it rechambered to .308 Norma Magnum.

Never had a problem with it--and I loaded my ammo pretty hot in those days.

They do tend to run a bit heavy, but are solid, very good actions.

DF

Ah, a Remington 1903-A3! I bought one through the Civilian Marksmanship Program in 1957 and then sporterized it - barrel cut to 20", polished and high gloss blue, drilled and taped for scope mounts and installed finished Fajen stock. Had I just left it alone and bought a pre-64 Model 70, I'd have 2 collectable rifles.

Yeah, if we’d have just known....

DF

have built many 338 wm's on the 03 action.

DF,

Amazing, ain't it?

I still hadn't learned in the early 1990's, when I bought a nearly-new Model 94 Mauser in 6.5x55 for around $100, which included shipping, from a dealer in the Midwest. Shot it some as-is, and with the military sights it would stay inside 1-1/2" at 100 yards "all day long."

So I "sporterized" it by cutting back the barrel and converting the bolt handle and safety for scope use, then fitted an injection-molded stock. Sold it to a friend who needed a cheap big game rifle for what I had in it--who sold it in less than a year, not because it didn't shoot well, but because he was usually short of cash. Wish I had it back in the original condition....

Rock Island 1903's were double heat treated with S/N before the SA. I think around 300,000. Since it's a Remington no need to worry

Pre-285,000, Rock Island '03's received the same carburizing (case hardening) of their low carbon steel as did the pre-800,000 receivers made at Springfield. After #285,000 (give or take) until the end of production, Rock Island receivers were made of nickel steel and through hardened as were later Springfield Armory receivers. In fact leftover RI nickel steel receivers were taken to to Springfield Armory and incorporated into production there.

I wouldn't hesitate to use a late '03 nickel steel action as the basis for a pre-war style sporter chambered for many things under the sun (and I have). The only downside to them is the "sticky" nature of them in terms of working the bolt. They just aren't as smooth to operate as the earlier single and double-heat treated '03's.

M1903A3's are kind of sticky feeling too but that's due as much to the crappy wartime machining found in them as their steel alloy makeup. They can be made smooth but it takes some elbow grease and/or cycling about a half million times. IMO 03A3's were a solid wartime expedient but because of their overall crudeness shouldn't be compared to a pre-war 03 or 03A1. 03A3's can be made up into right nice sporters but OMG the amount of work necessary as opposed to other candidates makes them less than desirable, IMO.

All this is a moot point as the days of taking Springfield milsurps and "sporterizing" them are way behind us. But, plenty of Bubba'ed examples exist that are fair game for the hobbyist to mess with.

An 03A3 will be fine. It’s the low number 03’s that you have to worry about.

Gnoahhh's post here is spot on and + 10, sticky is as good a way to describe it as I've ever heard. Mine is the same way, both my Springfield 03 and Remington 03 are smooth and slick. I have an 03A# Smith -Corona that is pretty slick also and another 03A3 Remington that is a 308 Norma Mag that shoots very well.. Around here anymore the "hot 03 or 03A3" is one that is partially sporterized , no drill and tap job ,full length barrel with parkerized finish still present. I know several guys who take them back to full military dress and peddle them for up to a 1K bucks. An 03 Springfield to me is still a fine rifle for the field if QUALITY work was done to it, I like them period. Magnum Bob

I have two sporterized 03A3 rifles, one a 280AI and the other a 30-06. The 30-06 has been through a lot of bad weather and rough hunting without issue and I am certain I have put over 3000 rounds through it mostly at whatever the manuals said was tops for the particular powder no problems either. The 280AI has been fired maybe 100 times mostly for accuracy load workups and it truly is an accurate rifle though it's hunting carreer has been limited to one hog hunt. Neither action was particularly rough and both feed just fine.

How are the rear sights on the A3 attached?

I have two US Remingtons. One "as issued" but for the stock having been shortened into a sporter configuration of sorts. The other was already sporterized when I got it about 25 years ago. Nicely done walnut stock, glass bedded, D/T'd w/Weaver bases and low scope safety. Both are very accurate. Serial numbers in the 3 million range, barrel dates are both 6/42.

From what I've determined, these rifles were early WWII Remington production and therefore are not 03A3s, since they share the same parts as the Springfields (no sheet metal parts).

Similar to what MD mentioned, years ago I turned a 1939 K98 into a deer rifle, now with a 20" barrel, Timney, Buehler, Fajen walnut stock that I slimmed down for less weight and still in 8x57.

Matching numbers and 100% original when I got it, should have let it be. On the bright side, it's taken several deer and is a dandy rifle to carry.

I understand that 03A3's are plenty strong. But I prefer Mauser 98 type rifles or modern enclosed head actions, both for their better gas handling if getting adventurous with my loading. I use moderate loads in my CZ 9.3X62 to go easy on the slightly hard to find brass. I'm sure MD's loads are safe, but mine shoot accurately; and they exceed the original factory loads, that made the cartridge so popular in Africa and Europe. If MD's loads weren't safe we would be hearing about problems by now.

Virtually no difference in a 1903 bolt head and a M98 bolt head. Nor have I ever noticed any difference in the gas handling capabilities of either action. They are identical enough, that we paid royalties to Germany for basically copying the M98 action with the 1903, up until WWI.

The only rifle whose gas handling worth I've ever personally "tested", was the Savage M110. Have a wildcat built on that action, in which I once managed to blow a primer. Gas went where it was supposed to, after a blown primer. Years ago a friend had a 264 Winchester varmint rifle built on a Springfield 1903 action.He blew several primers in that thing, before he finally settled down and stuck to published load data.

That is a dandy of a buck, Otis!

Two I've work on. The first was a high school project, Herters French Walnut stock, McGowen barrel.

Second has the original 1942 Springfield barrel in a Fajen stock. That barrel is pristine thru the Hawkeye, obviously not shot much.

Both have Timeny triggers, both are high number '03's.

DF

Them are beautiful!

Thanks, Angus.

I gifted the bottom one to my hunting bud on whose property I hunt. He loves it, named it Dusty Springfield after the singer. I replaced the pictured scope with his VXIII 3.5-10x50. It has a really clean 3# trigger.

I had some 130 gr. Hornady SP's loaded with 59 gr. Big Game for my light weight '06 HVA. That load was a hammer in the HVA and I gave him a few rounds for Dusty.

That combo so far has killed 4 'yotes, 3 deer, all DRT, well one buck made a 20 yd. death run. Those bullets are real WT and hog killers, don't tear up as much meat as one would think, exit with impressive internal damage. And they're moving at 3,100 fps. Hornady does make a 130 gr. Varmint bullet, these are the std. S.P.'s, not Varmint.

DF

Great looking rifles, DF. Always been a soft spot in me for 1903s and M98s.

Never replaced the two stage trigger in the US Rem. sporter I got many years ago. It's smooth enough, that I didn't feel the need for messing with it, although my M98 projects all got Timneys.

Loaded 150s in the US Rem. for years, mostly Speer Hot Cors. I did shoot one large buck with the 165 Nosler BTs many years ago, after someone had given me most of a box of them. Slightly more accurate than the Speers. I have a box of Sierra Pro Hunter 125s that I intended to try in an H&R branded Mark X Zastava ought six, but never got around to, before I sold it.

That rifle had a very slim barrel and light weight stock that beat hell out of my shoulder, even with my 150gr loads.

Shot 150gr Sierras and Speers for years in my short barreled M98. Loaded some 125gr Hornady spire points back around 1999, that not only shoot better than the 150s in that rifle, but also proved to be very effective on whitetails. I don't think Hornady still offers that bullet, because all I could find recently in an .323 bullet, was a 125 round nose?

125 Accubond is an option, just haven't tried them, although I have a couple of boxes from SPS.

The reason, like you mentioned, of going light was recoil. I built a very light weight '06 HVA and didn't want any more recoil than necessary, had the 130 SP's, and thus that load. I was amazed how well they killed stuff.

Here's a link with info on that gun and the load.
www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/10676204

DF

Roy Weatherby never had anything on Herter's for la de da stocks. I have a M95 7x57 in a Herter custom and the first sporterized 03 I ever bought for $75 had a Herter stock on it. It was left really oversized and proud wood to metal fit, I removed the black forend cap and spacer as well as the grip cap and replaced them with ebony. The barrel was a goner and replaced it with a 2 groove that was in nice condition. It's got a Williams bolt handle and DTraister LS safety as well as a Timney trigger. Had the whole thing reblued nicely. All ways wanted a nice custom Springfield 03 30-06. Don't have that much in it and it will be one of the very last last rifles I ever part with. The Fajen stock rings a bell too. They sold semi in letted like that back in the 60's for about $30-40 bucks. I could hardly wait back then to get my EC Bishop and Reinhart Fajen catalogs. If a guy wants a military rifle customized for hunting this the way to do it, find one that is all ready started that can't be reversed and just change it to what you want. You will never get your money back out of it. Military rifle values today are in for all original dress not some bubba'ed sporterizing. MB

Yeah, for sure.

Even back then when it was "cool", I didn't like all that flair, cut a bucket load of wood off that comb, including the roll over. It don't "roll over" no more......

At least Herter had pretty good wood, including this French Walnut. And IIRC, it was std. grade, not select.

DF

Yup that little M95 7x57 has one of those Herter rollover cheek pieces and light colored rosewood forend tip and grip cap. Like it or not it surely was well executed. I have several EC Bishop stocks and Reinhart Fajen ones too. Last spring a guy hauled in a Rem 03 to a gun shop I frequent that had been "sporterized" past taking back to original dress. The previous owner who sporterized it had the barrel shortened to 22.5" added a Williams Slimline ramp and frt sight with a Williams Foolproof rec rear sight. Got it cheap as it was smooth and slick with a good barrel. The full sell point to me was that it was stocked with a full up custom Reinhart Fajen with every option you can imagine. 5 diamond shaped ivory inlets, checkering, rosewood slanted forend tip. Some of the dudes around here would gag looking at it, but hell I thought it was a classic 60's sporter job and why sure it looked pretty than an all decked whore standing on a street corner in front of a church on sunday morning. The worksmanship was simply outstanding whether anyone likes the style or not. MB

MB, you gotta appreciate period stuff. Like the skip-a-line checkering I did as a lad. I thought it was cool, no way would I do that today. White lines were cool back then. Rosewood inlays were cool.

I think we need to respect a vintage gun for what it is, a vintage gun...

This is what the second '03 looked like when I got it. I gave the vintage Lyman 57 to my son to sell on Ebay, got David Christman to do the bolt handle, install a safety, drill and tap for Weaver bases. I had picked up that safety on Ebay for $12.

The 22/5" barrel is the result of cutting it off just behind the sight. I removed the sight band, smoothed up the rough area under the band and cold blued. Not that pretty, but still has the original 24" barrel which shoots great. I could have cut it, have a Brownell .30 cal. 11 degree chamfer tool, just chose to do it this way. The original crown was perfect as was the bore. If the crown had been rough, I would have cut and recrowned.

DF

.

That barrel marking appears to be SA for Springfield Armory? The date is what I noticed. Can't make out the month, but it is 42 (1942), which is the same year on the barrel of my original US Remington's barrel (6/42). Also has the dreaded flaming bomb ordinance stamp. My rifle has RA where yours has the SA.

Interesting to see a Springfield with a similar barrel date as my US Rem. Serial # is in the 3,122,000 range. The original one is a mere 22,000 rifles newer. I think the same serial #s carried through from the SA rifles, when Rem. took over 1903 production?

As for stocks, my sporterized US Rem. has a plain, but nicely grained walnut stock. Nice job, nothing fancy though. It appears to have been finished in tung oil, because it shows no discoloring when wet, like most that were done in boiled linseed oil? I make it to have been done in the 50s or 60s. Had an old but mint K4 that I put on it years ago. Looks like it belongs on that old gem.

When I was converting my 1939 K98, lucked into an old, but unused Fajen stock already inletted for the M98. Cut the black plastic fore end cap off, removed quite a bit of external wood to make it lighter. If you guys recall what those unfinished stocks often looked like, the outside of it was pretty rough. That one I did in multiple coats of tung oil.

Yeah it's 1942 Springfield Armory.

Thru the Hawkeye it's an amazingly well preserved barrel with no pitting, actually beautifully machined rifling without tool marks. Near mint.

And it shoots very well for such an old gun. They evidently took pains with their workmanship back then.

Can you post a picture of that K98?

DF



Edited to add, it's 10/42.

David Christman is a Guild member, a top smith. He was out in WA, retired and moved home to Delhi, LA, a couple hours up the road. He's fitted barrels, done other work for me. He did a great job with the bolt handle. Turnaround was really quick, price reasonable.

DF

SA= Springfield Armory. They made runs of barrels through 1942, not many if any after that when 03 and 03A3 barrel production was contracted out. Barrel date is a very unreliable indicator of gun manufacture date. 03's and 03A3's went through rebuilds (often to include re-barreling) at arsenals, depots, and in the field by ordnance artificers long after the last barrel was made, and they certainly didn't take care to match barrel dates with receivers. Likewise, those barrels were sold as surplus after the war for, literally, just a couple dollars. Many a hobbyist and basement gunsmith re-barreled many a Springfield with them during the 50's and 60's. Heck, I barreled a shot out '03 with a fresh SA '42 barrel a few years ago myself.

Remington didn't continue the Armory's serial numbering when they took up manufacturing the '03. They started fresh with numbers far higher than the last receiver Springfield made in 1939. (The machinery Remington used was the old tooling from Rock Island Arsenal that was mothballed after WWI. The stuff by all accounts was rusty, full of cobwebs, and pretty much worn out, but Britain and us needed rifles so they did their best. As the old Rock Island tooling crapped out they jerry-rigged and whined to the powers that be for permission to re-vamp/cheapen the rifle to facilitate production, and the 03A3 was born and took off running.)

Couldn't recall how the serial numbers worked out, so looked it up. They appear to have started at 3.000,000 with the Rems, or thereabouts.

Checked and the 6/42 dates on my rifles' barrels correspond fairly well with the dates of manufacture per the serial numbers on my receivers: Knew most of the lore relative to the manufacture of US Rems. Read about them so long ago, forgot some of it. Over the years with most internet discussions, as soon as I mentioned having a US Rem. 1903, most jumped on me about them being 03A3s, when actually they are not.

Somewhere around here I have a stock and handguard for a 1903 that a customer gave me years ago.. Since the one I have that's all original metal-wise, long ago had the stock cut back, I'd love to put it back to somewhat original condition. But would need the bands and other parts to do it. Did talk to a dealer at a big gun show once, that said he probably still has some of those parts, but lost his card.

Pretty much a given that when people started sporterizing miilitary rifles, all that stuff got tossed. I also have a minty WWII bring back VZ 24 that's unmolested, but for the stock. Wouldn't mind putting that one back to close to original, either. I've killed deer with both of those old rifles and would sooner have them as semi-restored keepsakes, as I will never take them hunting again. Both belonged to relatives.

dube , I know a guy who probably has all the parts you need send me a pm MB

When I bought my first Springfield, a high numbered 03 Remington, I used that as my favorite "deer rifle" for at least twenty years - it was one of the most accurate rifles I've ever owned it wore a 4x Weaver. Dad modified a military stock. added a cheek rest and a recoil pad and some other minor mod's for that rifle.My cousin has it now and uses it in cast bullet matches. I got a lot of guff from fellow shooters who thought their rifles were much superior. I still have a 03A3 that has been used for military matches and 500 meter paper. It now wears a Olympic steel rear sight and a custom front sight. I probably have had at least a half dozen Springfields in my lifetime, I've lost count.
Heldts in Sioux Falls had a wooden barrel of new in cosmoline Springfield barrels for $.98/each in the 50's. Gunsmiths used to use those cheap barrels for 308's through magnum chamberings.
Dad bought a half dozen or so 03A3's through the NRA/Marksmenship program back in the late forties and early 50's. I don't think he paid much more than $5 each if that.
Of all the Springfields I've been around only one had an issue with accuracy - one of the rifles dad bought would 'walk' the bullets after the barrel warmed up. But for the first three rounds or so, it to was accurate.

My favorite load for years - 180 grain Remington core-lokt and H4895, military brass.


Lots of gun shows coming up... Maybe another Springfield will find its way home.

Need to find one is good shape that's already had some "bubba" work. That keeps the price in check.

Original ones need to stay that way, besides they're too expensive to alter. You wouldn't want to, anyway.

DF

Yeah, I just got done looking over a 03 Springfield real hard in this shape. They knocked off the original frt sight and put on a Williams ramp frt and knocked off the original 03 rear and replaced it with a Williams ramp rear, to bad they didn't get that one on straight it would have followed me home. Most of the original metal finish with chopped down military stock , good bore $300. If a guy has the parts, it would go back original with only 1 plug screw. MB

remington was making 03's at the very beginning of WWII before they switched to the 03a3. They have a real wierd finish on the metal in a class all by itself.

Yup, late spring/early summer of '42, going by my serial numbers?. Mine in original guise, has faint machining marks on the barrel and receiver, so they apparently didn't waste a lot of time on final polishing, but I've seen worse?

Barrel and receiver are both sort of a low luster dark grey. I would say it isn't parkerized, as the finish is on the thin side, but intact. The rear sight is slightly darker. Only metal parts up top that are slightly polished to any degree, are the bolt and bolt handle. Floor plate/trigger guard, also.

Looking around recently to see if there were any online sources for the 1903 missing barrel bands, etc, came across a site that offers all kinds of WWII milsurps in some manner of original condition. Mostly European stuff.

As my old WWII vet gunsmith buddy predicted years ago, I blew it on my K98 years ago, when I turned it into a deer rifle. There are some K98s on there in as-issued condition w/matching numbers, going for well into four digits.

They were Parkerized. Might be a little thin, but that would be because the surface wasn't prepped with a sandblast.

I have Dad's 03A3 that he sporterized after WWII. It was surplus, still in much cosmoline. The barrel is a 4 groove and shoots fairly well, about 1½ - 1¾" at 100 yards. A Timney trigger and Weaver 4x scope have been added. I killed a hog with it last year.

I also have an 03A3 with 2 groove barrel, that I bought cheaply. I was told it was unsafe to shoot, but headspace was good. I modified the stock to more closely resemble a Sedgley, with an eye toward making it like a classic sporter. It wears a Lyman receiver sight, and has never been D&T. It's quite accurate with 180gr Noslers - with my then-young eyes, I could put 3 shots in a little over an inch at 100 yards. One day I was studying the barrel, and discovered the dark spot 1/2 way down the barrel was actually a slight bulge So it's been in retirement since then.

Not an A3, this bubba'ed O3 sits in the safe.

Should have it scoped and ready to fly this winter