The brittle low number actions were excessively carburized during heat treatment. That is an excessive amount of carbon was infused. these actions cannot be properly annealed and rehardened. Now not all low number actions are unsafe. After all an awful lot of them gave good service for many years. The problem is figuring out which are and which aren't. I suspect, but am not certain, that if the annealed action does become properly soft it will be ok to reheat treat. I'd refer to a proper steel metallurgist before taking my word.

Bear in mind that a large factor in making the low number Springfields turn into hand grenades was failure of the cartridge case where it is unsupported. Back then, brass quality was not as uniform as it is now. When gas escaped a ruptured cartridge, the over-hardened, brittle receivers blew up, rather than handling the pressure.

If you are going to use any low number Springfield (not advisable from a pure safety standpoint), be sure to monitor your brass and after the first firing, neck size only. Bump the shoulder back a couple of thousandths when it gets hard to chamber. I would also keep pressures mild, myself, and any case that even looks like it might be thinking of an incipient crack would be tossed immediately.

Naturally, using new, high quality brass goes without saying, not some ancient TW52 stuff that turned up on the range one day...

Hope this helps!
John

I agree with what Jerry Liles said. Some of them have been used safely for a long time. But that doesn't mean that they are safe. I know someone who purchased a low-number custom rifle that had apparently been safely used for some years, but he blew it up with a stiff load behind a cast bullet. So, apparently 50 ksi with rifle powders didn't stress the action to brittle failure, but a load of faster powder just pushed the action over the edge.

As always, caution is the byword. Because of the unpredictability, that says to me that it is wise to stay away from ALL low-numbers. It's not hard to find either a high-number action or a 03A3 that is not a potential accident waiting to happen.

ClaMar

I do not use them and I do not recommend anyone else use them for anything but hanging on the wall. Yes, it is a one in 800000 chance it will rip your fingers off and blow your eyes out, so, just how lucky do you feel.
I feel, unlucky.

Yep, the bad receivers have burnt steel, it can't be fixed.

Here's a "collectable" that may become a sporting rifle some day.

This is a bargain National Match rifle that is currently having the rear sight sleeve removed and a NECG front sight installed.

If this is, or was, a real NM 03, with the star mark on the muzzle, someone is taking a very valuable collectable rifle and making a sporter out of it. I know, it's yours.

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
If this is, or was, a real NM 03, with the star mark on the muzzle, someone is taking a very valuable collectable rifle and making a sporter out of it. I know, it's yours.

It is a real 1920 NM rifle, (the second I’ve owned in the Mark 1 serial range) with a a 1926 dated Star gaged barrel. The bolt was modified for scope use many years ago.

Springfield Model 1901

I have had up to 10 03's and 03A3's in the house after the Band of Brothers movie and when the price shot up.

I sold all my full military ones and invested that money in modern sporting firearms.

I am much happier for it.

Just me, but since 1903 bolts are quite readily available, I would have restored the NM rifle to original configuration. TIG up the notch if necessary.
I have a 1901 like in the last picture as well. They do not have the closing cams cut nor are they drilled and tapped for guard screws. They take a bolt with a lower safety lug. .

I hope someone can shed some more light on the re heat treatment of low numbered Springfields.

R.F.Sedgley built rifles on the low numbered Springfields for 12 years. NRA reported he bought thousands of them from the US government, re heat treated them and proof tested them at 70,000 lbs psi.

quote:

Originally posted by Craftsman:
I hope someone can shed some more light on the re heat treatment of low numbered Springfields.

R.F.Sedgley built rifles on the low numbered Springfields for 12 years. NRA reported he bought thousands of them from the US government, re heat treated them and proof tested them at 70,000 lbs psi.

The Army experimented with re-heat treating the actions and nixed the idea. I would avoid low numbered 1903's for shooting and save them for the collectors.