I picked up an 03 a yr ago which is set into a sporter type hardwood stock-- mounted on pillars no less. I've done some plinking with the gun, of late I've taken it more seriously-- feeding it first line cast slugs. Previously the seconds went thru, with surprising accuracy I might add. Barrel is worn-- leading if any has always been minor. Shooten the first line hard cast I use it stays clean and with the last batch of experimental lube cleaner than the other two guns using such.

Anyways that latter sight has always intrigued me. My first efforts a few months ago minus any reference shooten at 100 for elevation were laughable. Even the backstop berm was safe-- good thing the range is remote and wooded... My loading is making 1940's using Blue Dot with ES's under 15 fps [Hard bullets set firmly into the rifling with firm neck tension]. This loading surprised in last fall's 600 yd testing [different gun scoped]-- coming in second for group size-- only edged out by 3/4". But I digress..

My first efforts a few weeks back found the cardboard backer at 6 yet with plenty of space between the holes. Good thing that surface is 6 by 7 feet. With three rds left I beared down-- paid some attention to the wind gusts and left those rds go with some care. My ruler said 10.5" with only 3" of vertical... couldn't believe it-- had to be luck. So the last trip I sent five down again watching the wind-- I know the fourth rd was a pull rt. Those five made 11.5" with almost with less than 3" of horizontal for the four-- the one rd indeed made the rt impact. What concerns me is possibly I'm using my allotment of luck up so soon in the shooten yr...

I'm just having some fun. There's a fella couple decades my junior who I run into at the range on occassion. Much better peepers than mine-- he's gonna fire a few groups out there just to see what that combo will really do. Now he doesn't know that yet, but I'm sure he'll oblige.

Aladin,

A: I picked up an 03 a yr ago which is set into a sporter type hardwood stock..

F: In this shooting at 600, being it through a paper target.. How do you see the bullet holes so as to judge "condition" for following shots?

A: Anyways that latter (Please! "ladder", as in 'extention ladder'; because the rear staff looks like one) sight has always intrigued me.

Good afternoon,
Forrest

'Ladder' it is Forrest. I spell poorly..

How to judge changing conditions? I try to watch the trees, the wind at the firing line-- attempting to shoot the same conditions. I do have a gong of sorts, an old pan painted white on the bottom side which I've hung on the next target stand. Around 10" dia and I've hit it once in one session-- a shooten friend at the next bench calling the impacts for me. I was very close several others shot also-- the wind quiet enough to allow holding 'on'. What surprised me was the impact dent at that range albeit it had very little range of motion as it was mounted.

I shot this morning and the first three shot group failed to report a backstop impact-- that 'smack' of the cardboard by the bullet impact. I had chg'd the windage doing some cleaning/investigating the other eve and hadn't returned it to my zero. The cardboard showed two impacts side by each just on the rt edge which I almost missed being locked in on viewing the center area. I moved the windage 2 lines left and lined up on the center with the next three rds-- a movement of 36" [? need to verify that]. That'd be 6 moa at 600 with two units/lines moved meaning each unit is 3 moa... least it figured that way today?

Does anyone know how the windage units/markings are calabrated on a 03 Springfield?

Aladin,

A: How to judge changing conditions? I try to watch the trees, the wind at the firing line-- attempting to shoot the same conditions..

F: Me too.

I was asking, in particular, how you see the holes at 600, especially with a small-bore 30 caliber.

In the 500 meter shooting I do for group with my various 40 - 45 caliber rifles on paper I have always found it very tough to see the holes, even in the white, if there is any mirage running at all. A 30 would really be hard.

You see, I NEED to see the results of the previous shot in order to do my best at estimating the "condidtion" for the following shots. That is if things are going well, sure, fire another. However if there is drift I may set in a bit more or less offset and hope I get the next one into the middle of the group.

In shooting at 1000 yards it is impossible to see holes at all so we use the little FM radios. One at the firing line, the other with a fellow stationed at the targets to tell us what is going on.

A: Does anyone know how the windage units/markings are calabrated on a 03 Springfield?

F: I should know, but need to get a look at the rifle to encourage my memory.

More later, good afternoon,
Forrest

At last someone is speaking my language (milsurps with cast, esp the M1903, and shooting at range and off the damn sandbags) :-)

Aladin, I am jealous that you have a place to shoot cast at 600 yards. I have had very good success with a variety of 03's out to 300 yards in NRA matches, but would really like to try the 03 or one of my Krags at 600 or even 1000.
Most places that I frequent won't allow it because of the mortar trajectory and the fear that someone will step off the catwalk in the butts and catch one in the forehead. One year at Perry, during one of the 1000 yard matches, a round went through the top of a porta-crapper that was just behind the target frames ... no one was hurt, but this was with jacketed bullets, so the concern is not without some merit.

The windage marks on the '03 sight are "points" which are equivalent to 4 MOA, according to the book.

It is really unusual in this day and age to find an 03 in a sport stock with the issue sight. In days of yore, before Archie Bunker's war, you could buy the Armory (Springfield) NRA stock with barrel channel cut for the issue barrel with issue sight, with the issue barrel with sight removed, or with an under-sized barrel channel for custom fitting by the user. All of the commercial sporter stocks that I have seen in my lifetime are not cut for the sight sleeve. A custom job, perhaps?

It is also unusual in this day and age to find a rear sight that is really tight enough for serious shooting. Most that are around today are cobbled together with parts that are just too sloppy. Obviously you have a good one. Do you have an O'Hare mike to go with it?

Seeing .30 bullet holes past 300 yards, even with the big team scope, is pretty much impossible. The best places to see bullets holes are where the "backstop" is a body of water, like Perry or the Navy range at Dam Neck. Then the targets are backlit, and holes in the black (and they all better be in the black, right??) light up like neon lights. It was great being able to scope your first two shots in a rapid fire string. But sometimes even at 300 yards, we had to coach by watching the trace (team match). The accepted method of reading wind is to focus your spotting scope on the target and then back off the focus a little so that you are focussed somewhere between the firing line and the target, but still able to see the spotters in the target, and then you can read the mirage between you and the target.

Keep up the good work!

Resp'y,
Bob S.

"Do you have an O'Hare mike to go with it?"

Bob whats that? What I know about military rifles you could write on the head of a pin with a lead pencil, and still have room leftover...

Thing is-- this is my 'frugal' gun, meaning it used to get the second's for bullets and charges of Blue Dot for economy. But of late it's gettin' the first liners but the charge is staying the same. 20 grs of BD just plain shoots with my hard LBT spitzers set into the lands making around 1940's in this one. Now be sure that's a max in my gun, unpublished anywhere's else and anyone shooten it is on their very own... But I've got ES's for seven rds of 13 fps-- 11 fps for five rds and seldom any vertical at 600. Rem 9 1/2M's BTW are working the best it seems.

4 MOA sounds about right for the windage, as my eyes aren't precise enough to really tell. What did surprise me was the 100 yd zero at '5' and the 600 zero at '11'... do you know if the original loading for these sights was a 220 gr round nose at say 2000 fps?

I'd like to send some down to a 1000 yd target too.. but the bull would have to be about the size of a small county...

Aladin,

You ask:

"Do you have an O'Hare mike to go with it?"

Bob, whats that?

F:

The O'Hare mike is an item (I've never actually seen one) that permits a shooter to measure the elevation of the ladder cross piece precisely, as with a micrometer screw.

These were brought into use so shooters could adjust their sights more accurately than eye-balls permit on the corse graduations of the issue ladder during match shooting.

A: Thing is-- this is my 'frugal' gun..

F: Mine too: I bought it for $37.50 back in 1958!

A: Do you know if the original loading for these sights was a 220 gr round nose at say 2000 fps?

F: I beleive the sight was originally made for the round nose bullet as in the "US Cartridge, Caliber .30 M1903". this was changed to the 30'06 we all know (I think) because the Germans were having such success with the spitzer design. After that old sight ere converted and all new production sights were made for the standard 150 grain ball cartridge.

A; I'd like to send some down to a 1000 yd target too.. but the bull would have to be about the size of a small county.

F; Not so! I have fired my M1903 at the 1000 yard target we have here (4X4 steel) and found that all I'm giving away to the fancy singleshots is sight radius: It makes it harder to see sight deviations is all. Otherwise the rifle is fully up to the job.

Good evening,
Forrest

...[/QB][/QUOTE]

F: Mine too: I bought it for $37.50 back in 1958!

A: I pd $40 for mine just last yr.

F: I beleive the sight was originally made for the round nose bullet as in the "US Cartridge, Caliber .30 M1903". this was changed to the 30'06 we all know (I think) because the Germans were having such success with the spitzer design. After that old sight ere converted and all new production sights were made for the standard 150 grain ball cartridge.

A: From my guestimations the elevation from setting to setting is around 7.5". Does that seem about right from your shooten?

F; Not so! I have fired my M1903 at the 1000 yard target we have here (4X4 steel) and found that all I'm giving away to the fancy singleshots is sight radius: It makes it harder to see sight deviations is all. Otherwise the rifle is fully up to the job.

A: I was using a 25-30" white paper square for 600-- a 48" diamond sounds about right for a thousand.

Forrest maybe you or Bob [of course all welcomed] could give me some input on a rear sight for the 45/70 'pipe'. Someone told me the Krag rear sight was a good one for windage...comments anyone?

Aladin,

A: From my guestimations the elevation from setting to setting is around 7.5". Does that seem about right from your shooten?

F: I'd have to go look at the sight card and the rifle itself. Right now I'm at the office.

A: I was using a 25-30" white paper square for 600-- a 48" diamond sounds about right for a thousand.

F: The 4X4 target is set as a square. The real challenge is the 2X2 set as a diamond at the same distance.

I find that the 4X4 is really pretty tough at 1000. At 834 yards (same taget) things are a good deal eaiser, much more so than just a difference of 166 yards would seem to make.

I think this is because our small arms loaded with cast bullets are just about running out of gas, are pretty much at their practical limit at this range. Much further, say 1200 yards, and things just don't work out very well at all.

A: Forrest maybe you or Bob [of course all welcomed] could give me some input on a rear sight for the 45/70 'pipe'. Someone told me the Krag rear sight was a good one for windage...comments anyone?

F: Go to the new 2003 Cabela's catalog, pg 58. There you will see the latest Pedersoli sights for a good price.

I saw one of these sights just last Sunday on a very nice Hi-Wall. The Pedersoli sights are a bit clunky as compared to things like MVA's production but they are solid items, made of tempered steel.

The sight I saw had the best, most easily read graduations for both elevation and windage that I have seen on ANY sight on the firing line.

It comes to mind that your rifle may not lend itself to a good tang sight; the receiver being on the short side. If so, keep in mind that a sight may be mounted with one screw into the wood. My FBW has this kind of problem and solution.

On the other hand, you might just think about getting a "real" singleshot rifle in a caliber of your choice.

You know the old deal about trying to make a machine perform beyond its design limits. Consider a new rifle made for the job.

Good morning,
Forrest

"You know the old deal about trying to make a machine perform beyond its design limits. Consider a new rifle made for the job"

I know what your saying Forrest, but it'd be a interesting deal to me to see this gun shooten at 1000. My 100 yd and 300 yd accuracy are very comparable to the top end guns-- albeit with alot of 'tuning', and that's alot of the challenge/interest for me. I doubt my ability level at extended range is beyond the capability of the 'pipe' too. The best scope sighted groups at 300 with the Lee bullet were just over 4" and one with the Postell's made 3.5" for 9 of 10 rds... methinks that's in the ballpark?

I'll have a look at the Pedersoli sights if I get near a outlet which might carry them. But admit fashioning something from another gun has appeal.

F&A:

Regarding sights for a BPCR ....

Beware of the Pedersoli tang sights, at least the Soule design. I picked a long-leaf one up from Cabelas for one of my Sharps, and it is sloppy as hell, I won't even use it. When you turn the windage adjustment, the leaf hops around like a drunken jackrabbit. The fit is sloppy and the windage screw must be bent, too. I ended up using one of the el-cheapo tangs with no windage adjustment, but I put on the wind-gage front sight that I made from John Greene parts. Now I have to break position to make a windage change, but at least when I make either windage or elevation changes, thay are at least predictable and reliable!

I have put away a Model 1901 Krag sight for use as a barrel sight on one of my BPCR's. I just have not decided which one yet. I also have a few of the Model 1902's hanging around. The 1901 is the one that is a ladder sight, like the '03 sight. Elevation adjustment is the same as the 03 sight, and the O'Hare micrometer will fit and can be used for precise adjustment. The windage adjustment is made by pushing the sight with your fingers, and locking it down with a cam lock on the front of the base. The "points" one the sight are the same 4 MOA that you see on your '03 sight. As crude as this sounds, it is rock-reliable. If you can see well enough to shoot, you should be able to estimate 1 MOA adjustments on the wind gage (I have to remove specticles and get quite close to the sight to do this), but once locked down, there is ZERO movement in the sight which is ESSENTIAL for precise shooting, esp. at long range!

The Model 1902 sight (Model 1898 is almost identical) is a tanget sight that has screw-adjustable windage. Both can be precisely adjusted for windage. There are several variants of each, but the most desireable has the "fine" teeth on the side of the sight leaf that makes more precise adjustments possible.

Our forebearers made some very intricate sights for our old service rifles, most very good on the target range, very useless on the battle field. IMHO, the first service rifle that had a decent battle sight was the M1917, and that was a british desgn.

A:

The M1903 Springfield sight ... the first one was a tangent sight like the 1898 and 1902 Krage sight. The second one was a ladder sight similar to what you now have on your rifle, but it was graduated for the M1902 cartridge ... 30-03, longer neck, and 220 gr RN. The sight was calibrated out to 2400 yards. When they went to the 30-06 cartridge (shorter neck, 150 grain spitzer flat base) that we all know and love, the ladder was redesigned for that cartridge, and the max range was 2850 yards (!!!)with the notch on the top of the ladder. They dispensed with the notch at the end of WW I as a cost cutting measure. With the 30-06 sight, I think the max range you can get using the peep is about 2375 yards. Interesting thing, when they went to the M1 cartridge after WW I (172 grain boat-tail), they did not re-calibrate the rear sight. When they went back to the 150 grain flat base just before WW II (Ball, M2) the sights were again at least close. Whew!

The really nice thing about the '03 rear sight is that it has PLENTY of elevation adjustment for cast shooting at longer ranges. It can still be a pain and take a lot of work to get the sight tight enough so it has no lost motion or won't move from recoil, though. The sights on armory rifles before WW II were assembled from parts that had a slight interference fit and they were "lapped in". If you find a rifle like this, it is a thing of beauty to shoot! Unfortunately, most rifles have been mothered too much. Most parts that available today are either worn out old parts disposed as scrap before the war, or WW II spare parts, which were made "loose so that they could be assembled without lapping.

Back in my undergraduate days, before undergrad school was interrupted by my fisrt hitch in the Navy, I used to build match rifles out of '03's and 03 A3's. It was one way to help pay tuition. A lot of my "customers" were poor college students like myself, and most also became bullet casters and cast shooters for the economy, but most found out if they worked at it, they did not have to give up any points at all to the jacketed-bullet shooters, at least out to 300 yards.

Resp'y,
Bob S.

Bob,

Thanks for the informative post!

B: Beware of the Pedersoli tang sights, at least the Soule design..

F: It is unfortunate that Pedersoli sold you such a marginal sight!

The sight I have on my CPA Stevens 44 1/2 is a little crude as you say, but solid, reliable and now that I've re-graduated the staff to something readable, quite user friendly. It repeats right-on and is smooth in adjustment.

Aladin,

OK, I'll buy it that your rifle is basicly accurate enough for most anything, including the 1000.

However, keep in mind that it is on the light side of good for stable shooting off the cross-stick rest. This is important since the sticks are nowhere nearly as stable as bench & bag with a scope!

Good morning,
Forrest

"However, keep in mind that it is on the light side of good for stable shooting off the cross-stick rest. This is important since the sticks are nowhere nearly as stable as bench & bag with a scope!"

I'd agree Forrest. Way to the lite side. I think it weighs around 10 pounds, that with the stock filled with lead shot from the first owner and a scope. Must be around 8 stripped. They shoulda put about two pounds of barrel on that figure...

Aladin

What bullet and how much Blue Dot are you putting behind it to get that kind of shooting?

LouisB

Nosey folks wanta know!

[ 05-04-2003, 16:33: Message edited by: TCLouis ]

TCLouis:

you ask:

What bullet and how much Blue Dot are you putting behind it to get that kind of shooting?

Me:

Aladin shooting Blue Dot is exceptional in my expiereince: I never got the stuff to perform well in any rifle I ever tried it in.

In my shooting of the M1903 at long range I use the conventional Lyman/Ideal 311284.. the old design, dropping bullets of 0.314 or so.

For sizing I have one of Ed Wosika's "Coaxisizer" tools that sizes and tapers bullets at the same time, then they're run through the SAECO to lube only. I load to an over all length that jams the bullet hard into the origin of rifling, keeping in mind that "origin" is kind of a loose term here since the rifling is quite worn in this rifle which was built in 1921..

I shoot the 311284s over 31 grains IMR 4198, no chronographing at all, but as Aladin and I have compared sight settings the old blunt 311284 shoots flatter at long range than his light spitzers. (if memory serves)

Now, I'm sure Aladin would like to know too: Do you have a M1903 which still wears the issue ladder sight? Do you shoot it at extended ranges?

Come on back; everyone likes these rifles.

Good evening,
Forrest