I found a really nice remington 1903 with what appears to be 1942 manufacture. 3,245,xxx serial number. I know some of the early 03's are not safe to shoot and I want one that shoot. It is a 4 groove barrel. Ive tried to do a little research on it but figured maybe one of you experts on the subject could give me a quicker answer

It's safe as far the serial # goes.

https://thecmp.org/sales-and-service/m1903-m1903a3-rifle-information/

Yep. I’m not aware of any issues with Remington or Smith Corona ‘03’s..

Only the early Springfield and Rock Islands.

The problematic 03s were early. Remington didn’t build em until WWII so those are fine.

I love 03s & 03-A3s for custom rifles...

It will blow up and injure or kill you.. Please send me all that you have so that I can properly destroy them to save your life.. I have approved by the Government equipment to do the job

1st off you never ever trust any fugger who says he is government approved they don 't have the competence to tie their shoes. Those are good guns ,shoot the hell out of it well if you can find the ammo.

Safe and rather good shooters. My Remington 03A3 puts the bullets closer together than my Garand.

Vic does that range hood dampen the decibel level any? Mb

well I won the auction so as soon as i get my hands on it i'll post some pics. It is sporterized in the griffin and howe style. Look forward to t chasing some whitetails with it

The story of early 03's blowing up has been blown up. They were not as dangerous as many claim. There were a few, but there were other circumstances.

With my weapon, not that I can tell. Helps a helluvalot with a friendly neighbor who has a muzzle brake. That is if they don't have the muzzle too far back.

Yep, not in the serial range for heat treatment issues. As a side note, in general the 1903 would be more accurate than the typical Garand. A bit of work, that could change.

An early WWII Remington 1903 is A-ok. Short version: They were built on the old machinery that was mothballed at Rock Island Arsenal after WWI. Initial production was for the British purchasing commission during the dark days following Dunkirk when they were desperate for anything that would shoot, which segued into Lend Lease materiel, and then after Pearl Harbor Uncle Sam claimed them for our own use. The old machinery was wearing out by that point and Remington cooked up a bunch of changes to facilitate manufacturing which were approved by the gov't. Those cheapened-up changes (mainly in sheet metal stampings to replace milled parts wherever possible, and shortcuts taken in finishing) made for enough of a different rifle that they changed its nomenclature from U.S.Rifle, Model of 1903 to U.S.Rifle, Model of 1903A3.

Remember, these rifles were Secondary Standard by the time they were built. (The M1 rifle was Standard since long before then and by that time production snags had been worked out and they were flowing into the eager hands of the Army, the Marines sucked hind tit as always and got M1's at a slower pace.) As secondary weapons they weren't earmarked for frontline troops. (And yes, we won't forget the Marines went ashore on Guadalcanal with 03's but they were pre-war Springfields and were being phased out as M1's became available.) There's a lot of debate as to how many Remingtons actually saw service in hands of U.S. troops, but it's acknowledged by many that darned few of them were in the hands of combat troops. That was the M1's job. The bear's share of wartime-built '03's were held in reserve and/or lent to allies such as Government in Exile troops who had no access to gun factories of their own.

The so-called unsafe 03's were put into service and very few had problems. The safety issue was blown out of proportion, but it has been repeated so many times that it has now become fact.

Having said that, I don't push 80+ year old rifles. I used to have quite a few 03's and 03-A3's, but now I'm down to just a few. My deer rifle for many years was a '03 with a K4 scope and a Fajen or Bishop stock (I forget which). In the early 1950's 03's and 03-A3's could be had for $10 to $20. Many were "customized". These customized rifles normally bring less than half what a untouched one does. Of course if the custom was done by G & H or other famous outfit they bring pretty good money, but most were done in someone's garage or basement.

see this write up for better information on the unsafe Springfield '03's

http://m1903.com/03rcvrfail/

In 1966 Pershing Rifles headquarters released 15,000 03-A3's to college drill teams to be demilled and used as drill rifles. The price was $15.00 each. I was a member of the Tennessee Tech Rebel Rifles, and we ordered 50 of them to supplement our supply. Unfortunately, the supply was snapped up before our order was filled.

Might also want to check the bolt although the single heat treat bolts were seldom a problem and actually considered more "slick" (Hatcher). During the re-arsenal process bolts were not often kept with the same rifle.

I currently have two 03s'. One is a 1928 so-called NRA Sporter, star-gauged and log number on bottom of barrel, bevel on front receiver ring, bolt serialized to receiver, Lyman long slide 48. It was in a 30s' period stock. Springfield Armory also sold these as barreled actions. Macon Gun Stocks makes a good re-production of the original stock, found the correct butt plate and barrel band. Rifle is currently with Dennis Erhardt who is inletting the stock.

Second 03' is from 1932 and started out as an armory sporter. Star gauged barrel etc., had been fit with an earlier 1907 bolt. Condition not as nice as the previous and the Lyman 48 had been replaced with a Howe Whelan bolt sleeve sight/safety which is why I bought the rifle. It was in a horrible narrow combed stock which had cracked several times and been repaired. Taking this rifle in a slightly different direction and considering selling the Howe Whelan.

Both rifles have been put to use and the barrels show their age, but both shoot very well.

I really enjoy these rifles. The only hunting rifle I remember my father owning was an 03' with a Lyman 48, ivory bead replacement front sight, and a cut down stock.

I was down to the last 03, a 1903A3 Modified and wish I had never parted with it.
Then I was down to NO unmodified military rifle.

Guess I'm a little late but all Remington made rifles were manufactured well after (about 30 years) the heat treating problem was identified and corrected. No worries.

Early Remington 1903's are a real treat, barely indistinguishable from the Springfields that preceded them. It's the later ones and the 03A3's that left a bit to be desired in the eyes of riflemen.

As for the "low number" 03's from a generation before, make no mistake they are still coming apart at the seams. Certainly not at a rate to chill the hearts of riflemen near and far, but it has happened in very recent times nonetheless, when supposedly all the bad ones had long since been weeded out. I too used to take a fast and loose attitude about shooting them but decided that the risk, while being infinitesimal, is real. I don't feel as lucky as I close in on 70 years as I did when I was in my 30's.

I have what appears to be a unissued Remington 03/A3. It's a pretty crude rifle compared to the earlier '03s. My Dad bought it for like 17-25$ from a friend.

Some of the early '03s under S/N 800,000 were rebarreled and used in WWII.

Gnnoah is right and can't reiterate it enough
I do a lot of gunshows allways some asswipe trying to pedal a low number 03 either springfield or rock island for big money . Hatcher's Notebook is the best refererence , as a shooter the low #'s are a major risk. A guy I know had his low number immaculate Sedgley sporter come apart like a bomb at a cast.bullet shoot awhile back.
The brittle receiver shattered. He sustained minor injuries and luckily no one adjacent to him was injured. I have and shoot all my springfields but do NOT have any 03's less than 875,000 serial number wise or rock islands under 280, 000 serial range. Hatchers Notebook is the best reference on that factual history of the 1903 Springfield , if you want to own and enjoy using a Springfield get one there is no doubts about not one some bubba that says bullshit I know more than Gen Hatcher did. Magnum bob

They were held in emergency reserve and not used.

There is at least one major facility not far from where I live that flat out bans the firing of low number 03's on their firing line, as that was where one let go a few years ago.

Sedgleys, as beautiful as they are, are a real crap-shoot. You don't know if you're getting a low or high number gun as they, in their infinite wisdom, obliterated the serial numbers on most of them. On top of that, Sedgley claimed to have a process whereby they could safely re-heat treat low number rifles making them safe. Kind of a P.T.Barnum-like claim, as due to the low carbon primitive alloy that was used it couldn't be done. (Once steel like that is "burned" there's no fixing it.)

I think if you look at this link, you might have a different view of the unsafe '03's.

http://m1903.com/03rcvrfail/

Interesting read. I'll still leave the shooting of low number Springfields to others though. Statistically he makes a lot of valid points.

He makes one point I disagree with: that the adoption of the "double heat treatment" didn't really fix the problem, that said receivers continued to fail. But, notice that said receivers merely bent, they didn't shatter which to me makes them a lot safer.

I used to shoot ‘03’s a lot - there was a time when the only center fire rifles I had was a 6mm Remington on a 98 Mauser action and a “customized” ‘03.
If I owned one of the low numbered ‘03’s I’d probably shoot cast bullets in them - even though I believe that the often stated alarm regarding danger on these is over stated.
If the only rifle I owned was an ‘03, I’d be hunting anything I could in the USA with it and I’d bet it would work well enough. It would work pretty good in Africa too for most game. But I’d not push the pressure beyond factory level pressures.

I still shoot 03's a lot. I own 10 .30-06's and 8 of them are 03's. My 03A1 Sniper, Style T Target, and NRA Sporter see the most use and to lessen the wear on their bores I shoot mostly reduced cast bullet loads, but that's just me as I'm a lifelong cast bullet experimenter and would shoot such loads regardless. My service rifles stand by with ammo belt and bandoliers stuffed with 5-round clips of home made Ball M2 ammo, as well as the trusty M1 with several ammo cans full of the same stuff in enbloc clips. Let those Zombies try to crash my party, haha!!

I had what I thought was a great supply of 4895 and Sierra 150 FMJBT's until last year when the Zombies got restless. I still have those components but now they are in the form of over a thousand M2 Ball copies.

I may have mentioned before that I have a pristine early Remington 1903 (not 03A3, I really don't have much time for them) action that I'm on the fence whether to "restore" it, sporterize it, or sell it.

Thanks. I did not know that.

Model 70 man that's what Hatcher said. The barrels aren't the problem it's the brittle receiver that is.

The story of early 03's blowing up has been blown up. They were not as dangerous as many claim. There were a few, but there were other circumstances.

I have read similar, lots of hype, and little evidence as to the exact cause. Lots of variables in those days. I have a beautifully done, low number 03, a classic for the 50's. Like Bugger I don't push it.

My first deer rifle was a Remington 1903-A1, sporterized. I still have it and I haven't shot it in decades.

Dan

Have a couple US Rems, both 6/42 and numbers in the same range as the one the OP noted. One sporter, one original except for the stock. Both are good shooters. And the original one is pretty much the same as the 1903s turned out by US armories.