I just couldn't resist buying this Rem 1903A3 anno 1943 in VG condition.



I test-shot it and was impressed by his grouping 5 shots in 2 MOA at 100 m, despite the (too) thin FS blade. It shot 5" high but then I was shooting 165 g bullets (will try again with 150 bullets loaded to reproduce the original 30 Ball M2 ballistics).

So far I've identified the stocks markings (RA, FJAZ, PP, OG) but one : "SS" near the buttplate.




Could some of you explain the meaning of that SS ? Thanks in advance.

Very nice rifle. I shoot one almost identical to that one in our club's Battle Rifle match.


.

The SS on the bottom of the stock is not, too the best of my knowledge, any kind of production nor inspection mark - not standardized in other words. It could be some kind of unit identity or rack marking, but what exactly would be only a random guess IMO.

As I'm sure you are aware, your rifle went through at least one armory re-build. Also, the butt sling swivel is incorrect for your rifle; it should be a flat stamped metal like the forward sling swivel and the stacking swivel.

A very good looking example that appears to be in very nice condition. Do you know the muzzle and chamber measurements?

I collect and have some 12 variants of M1903 and M1903A3 rifles.

Great find and a wise purchase. Congrats Andre. Might I ask where you found it and what you paid?

Thanks for the info, Mike. I must confess I had my doubts about the rear swivel (stamped with R, though) and will look after an "R" stamped flat one.

I noticed that, along its military career, the rifle went through the Raritan and Ogden arsenals and was proofed twice (repair, overhaul ?) ; also inspected by Lt. Col. Frank J.
Atwood.

I don't know bore and chamber dimensions (anyway, judging from the expansion of fired cases , the chamber is indeed larger than on my Sauer 202, wich is to be expected when comparing sporting and military guns). It shoots surprisingly nice too. I kept 5 shots < 5 cm at 100 m (2 MOA), though I'm sure it could still do better with more visible sights. It shot 3" inches high with the original "E' front blade and I calculated I should look after a "B" blade as a replacement. However, I used my hunting reloads with 165 g bullets at 2900 ft"and, before starting swapping parts, I will retest the rifle with 150 SMK's, loaded to 2800 ft" and approximating .30 ball m2 ballistics.

The rifle comes from a specialized dealer catering to collectors (I noticed an alignment of a dozen fully functional Degtyarev machine guns and a counter full of AK 47's, apparently in new condition...). For my A3, I paid substantially more than I was prepared to but then, looking around the racks, I realized that, with the passing of time, I might have lost contact with ongoing prices ?!? Anyway, the A3 was priced at 1450 € (1580 $) and after some bargaining, I knocked off a hundred, so I bought at 1350€ (1470 $).

Anecdotally, while nosing among the many gunracks, I passed along a group of P 17's and one of them caught my eye ; an Enfield P 17 by Eddingstone, looking as nice as my A3 and its sticker said 950 € (1040 $). I started to hesitate but the vendor advised me to grab the A3 as I could always come back later for a VG P 17. He reasoned that good looking A3's were becoming scarce but that he had a steady supply of P 17's. I was surprised as I would have thought the opposite...

The dealer gave you good advice as to the relative value of a M1903A3 v. a M1917 Eddystone (or Winchester or Remington). Don't know if you are actually talking about a M1917 rifle or a Brit P17, of which I know little. I have a U.S. M1917 Rifle from all three makers in my collection.

I am totally unfamiliar with M1903A3 prices in Europe, but I would guess the price you paid. given the appearance of your rifle, would be fair. I haven't kept up with prices over here, since I am not buying anymore, but I would guess your M1903A3 could sell on one of the gun auction sites here for $1000 +/-, probably +.

Sounds like it shoots well. Virtually ALL M1903 and M1903A3 rifles were rebuilt at least once and sometimes more. 2" at 100 meters with the original sights is very good and you should be happy with that. Not sure I would even mess with changing out the front sight blade, but it's your rifle and you get to do whatever you want with it. Same for the rear sling swivel; I'd just leave it, especially as it is R marked and could be a rebuild replacement part or even original as Remington did use some of their '03 parts on their '03A3s. It appears to fit very well.

Yes, shooting a 150gr bullet at WWII specs should increase accuracy. Again, a great find for you! Enjoy, and try now to locate a proper long bayonet, any date or maker will be correct. Good luck.

STOP; there is no stamped rear swivel; only the base is stamped; the bow is always round. Yours is correct; do not remove it. I have Springfields with SS on them; no clue what it means. If yours shoots high, you need a higher front sight blade; there are several heights. M2 ball ammo will help, but some of them shoot high anyway. Any WW2 bayonet will be correct for the period but the long ones look the coolest.
You made the right choice; the Springfields are more desirable even if they are more common.
Your rifle was inspected twice; once at the factory and once at Ogden Arsenal. It may or may not have been subject to any work there; since the original proofs are so nice, and the rest of the stock is too, I suspect that it was just inspected and nothing was done to it but marked. And your metal appears all original too; green dyed receiver and dark barrel. All phosphate parts.
Nice rifle.

dpcd is correct. As I said, I have not been a buyer for many years and began wondering about the rear swivel, so went back and consulted my reference books. The rear swivel is correct. Everything else I stated is accurate, including that Remington used their remaining M1903 parts during assembly of M1903A3 rifles.

I suggested the long bayonet because it is more desirable/valuable and yes, it does look better! And even a WWI dated long bayonet will be correct, as they were all re-issued for WWII.

Thanks to both of you for your precious info. Initially, my rifle shot on top of the black with 165 /2900 ft" hunting handloads, at 100 meters. My second try was with 150 SMK handloaded to 2800 ft" (thus approximating .30 ball M2) and it lowered POI to the center of the target. Much better but still about 2.7" too high (200 yds. sight setting vs. POI at 100 m). I calculated that, in therory, I would be best served with a "C" blade, .03" taller, which should be very close. Starting my quest, I happened upon an old WW I & II collecting friend and I asked him where to find replacement blades. Apart from his shooting guns, he also maintains quite a number of demil' weapons to equip his uniformed manequins. Among them a neutralized 1903A3 with a... "C" blade. Considering his rifle was purely deco and not functional, we agreed to swap blades ! I left his home a lucky man and now I'm anxious to hit the shooting range and try out my new sights. Unfortunately, the range is closed this week for maintenance, so I'll have to wait. I'll keep you posted.

Andre -

Good luck and I hope the new front sight blade does what you want it to do. BTW, battle sight zero setting on the '03s was not 100 yards; more like the 200 yards you currently shoot.

I've heard two explanations for the SS versus US stamping on the stock of 03s. SS meaning serviceable surplus and US meaning unservicable surplus, ie one was repaired before it left the arsenal and the other simply shipped. The other explanation is the CMP sold rifles were marked US whereas other arsenal procurred rifles were marked SS. Honestly couldn't say that I "know" either explanations to be 100% accurate and true.

Never heard or read that. If it was a fact then I'm sure it would be documented in some of the reference works. As to CMP, I can state that is NOT true. And remember, Andre's rifle was bought from a dealer in Europe.

Never heard that either; and I take it to be untrue. And I have seem lots of them marked SS, but none marked US.
Also, I have never seen an 03A3 with any 03 parts on it that was documented to be factory original. Remington produced 03s for a while before switching to the A3. What happened to their spare milled guards and bands? I suspect they were sold to the Army as spare parts.

http://www.teddydog.org/guns/US/sc03a3_butt_sm.jpg

On another forum, I found this picture of a 1903A3 stamped with a "US". The poster agreed with the "unserviceable surplus" meaning, vs. the "SS" (servicable) definition. It was also said that it only meant that some rifles were inspected (SS) before being disposed off to the public, while others were shipped without being inspected (US), no more, no less. I'm not taking position, just reporting for what it is worth...

dpcd-

Actually, there was an overlap when Remington was producing both M1903 and M1903A3 rifles at the same time. This is well documented by serial number production dates as well as widely accepted reference works by multiple authors.

Exactly what kind of documentation would you expect to confirm that after cessation of Remington M1903 production, remaining M1903 parts would not have been used on new M1903A3 rifles? Since parts were interchangeable on both models, why would it be necessary, especially during wartime, to surplus M1903 parts to the Army, rather than use them on current production M1903A3 rifles until exhausted? Production of new rifles was the priority, not providing "spare parts". Many of these rifles were provided to partisan and guerrilla forces, not to the U.S. Army.

I'm afraid we will have to disagree on this point.

BTW, I am leaving for safari in 2 weeks and am behind in preparing and sorting gear, so will not be checking my reference materials for corroboration.

I would have to see an A3 rifle that I thought was completely original with milled parts on it, and in 50 years of collecting and looking at thousands of 1903A3s, I have not seen one. Or any factory or Government documentation allowing an change to the A3 rifle configuration; there isn't any.
Yes, spare parts are provided with all fielding of any weapons systems.
How many extra milled trigger guards do you think were made; if you are going to produce a contract for X number of rifles? You do not make too many extra components; you would lose money doing that. The A3 Rifle contract and build drawings call for stamped parts and that is what they assembled them with; there is no documentation or evidence to the contrary. You can't change configuration in the middle of a contract, then or now, without an Engineering Change Order.
As for the SS and US marks, there is no evidence of that either except on the stocks. Which army depot did that? Another thing that could be right but can't be proven. But it sounds plausible and a reasonable idea. And I have seen lots of rifles come right out of depot storage; here at Rock Island Arsenal.
Have fun on on your safari.

Finally, I had the opportunity to test-shoot my A3 after swapping front sight blades with a friend collector. With the original E blade the rifle shot too high (+/- 5") and I calculated that I would need a C blade. With the latter, I shot to POA at 100 m, using 150 SMK handloads approximating 030 ball M2 ballistics. Accuracy was stunning : 5 shots in 3 cm at 100 m (= 1 MOA). I handn't shot a rifle over iron sights in years and I re-discovered that a close to the eye peep sight did not run far behind a scope in terms of accuracy (NB : I really mean close to the eye as I dislike the distant sight on the 1903 ). Now, I want to test some other ammo ( I have leftover bullets of 150 g WW Silvertips, Rem PP and 155 Hornady A-MAX), before deciding on a standard load. Considering I haven't access to a range over 100 m, I will forget about the distance notches of the rear sight and use them to correct elevation if needed.

Good shooting. I love shooting my smith corona 03-a3 because of exactly what you experienced, old style accuracy.

But 5 into an inch at 100 yrds... Very impressive!