Springfield Serial Numbers

[donmarkey]

Somewhere there was a list of which actions were safe and which were too brittle. Now I can't find it.

-Don

[BobDole]

http://m1903.com/03rcvrfail/

[Guest Guest_bilurey_*]

Bob, thanks for that info. Like many older shooters who were brain washed on the virtues of the '03, I generally had one on hand. However, I prefer the Mauser M98 design, feeling it to be simpler, safer, and more asthetically pleasing. I recall a published report of a U.S. competitor who managed to afix a set of '03 sights on an Argentine M1909 during an international shooting match, he then proceded to beat his own best score with his match '03. This rifle was not permitted in formal match shooting of course but it does point out wherein much of the o3's accuracy lay.

Combat experience in WW1 caused the Germans to drop the fixed battle sight setting of 300 meters and U.S. to ultimately drop the precision target sight of the '03. Still the 03s of the 1920-30s were wonderful target arms and beautifully manufactured. Had we not adopted an enbloc magazine packet of 8 rounds in the M1 Garand, we would have been way ahead of the rest of the world. However, the Russians and Germans discovered the ultimate battle rifles in mid-range, inexpensive, reliable, semiauto assult rifles as being best suited for combat.

 

Still, I feel really good in the woods hunting deer with a beautiful sporter built on a Mauser 98 or Springfield '03 despite the fact that a herd of vengeful white tails could easily overrun my position. On the target range the targets are secured to their stands and pose little danger to we shooters and again I'm much happier with a Mauser or Springfield. Now if you wish to discuss the selection of a wife, the rules change significantly and would require an Ebay sized site to deal with this issue. Bill