I've just watched a History Channel show called "Death in Their Hands" about infantry rifles in the last 150 years or so. In the WW1 segment they first stated the the Springfield was chambered for the 30-03 cartridge & I thought Hmmm, but was prepared to let it go, next they said that when the US army wanted more sprinfields they approached Winchester & Remington who were already producing LEE ENFIELD rifles for the British army, & that they rechambered the LE for 30-06, & clearly showed a shot of a LE purporting to be a M17 Enfield. Aaaaaggggh !!! Where in the name of goodness do the get this shite from? I lost interest after that, who knows what other inaccuracies were being peddled as fact.
Steve.

Didn't see the show but they were absolutely right re the Springfield and the 30-03. This was the inital chambering and the 30-06 evolved from the 30-03, all existing rifles were re-chambered for the 30-06. I believe the mod 1895 Winchester was the only civilan rifle ever offered in 30-03 but would not argue that point. As to the bit about Rem. and Winc building Enfield rifles, please remember things were really crazy about then.
Remington built Moisin-Nagant's, Enfields, Berthier's, etc while Savage and Winchester were also building contract arms for several of the Allies - I seem to recall Savage Arms as being the largest single producer of Lewis guns. This is a broad area, several books have been written about same.
Surprised History Channel made such a gaffe as they are usually spot on and have some excellent historians reviewing their programs - "The Young Indie Jones" being excepted, of course!

The 30-03 thing was why I went Hmmm, knowing that, that had been the initial chambering for the Springfield 03A-? rifle, but I also think that by 1917 when the USA came into WW1, any of these rifles that had been so chambered had well & truly had their barrels set back & rechambered for the -06 round. I take what you say about the various contracts which were in place at the time, but AFAIK there were no Lee Enfields produced in the USA till WW2 & then it was the No.4 Mk1s that Savage produced. The programme was quite clear that they were refering to LEE Enfields rather than just Enfields & the pic of a Mk3 No1 tended to confirm that. OOOPS !!! I have to say that while applauding the job that the History Channel does in keeping this stuff alive, I also get profoundly irritated at time with the liberties they take, showing Hurricanes when they're talking Spitfires. Me109 when likewise FW 190s the wrong types of tanks etc etc. I'm sure that to 98% of people that watch it , it is of no consequence but is does annoy when you can tell the difference. Maybe I just need to get a life.
Steve.

No, I don't think you need 'to get a life' and I agree it drives me nuts when I see just what you mention. I recall that either the History Channeo or the Discovery channel has even issued a caveat on occaission that the footage they are showing is not their creation. And the History channel is usually spot on in regard to weapons, as I remarked they have some really good consultants.
As regards the aircraft being mis-identified, don't even go there - but also remember, most views would not know a YAK[-9] from a [Brewster] Buffalo much less a Tomahawk from a Mustang. Pity!
My absolute peeve and I do have fits over this: I'm watching a Civil war movie and the troops are carrying Spingfield trapdoors or worse yet, using SAA Colts. Or the Battle of the Somme and the French 'poilus' are carrying Mausers or SMLE's. Criminal!
And finally, as to the 30-03 [some references also as the '30/45'], it was the 'original' for the Springfield 1901 and evolved to the 1903.

The Original .30 caliber cartridge, Model of 1903 (top) with heavy round nose bullet and case about 0.10 inch longer than the .30 caliber cartridge Model of 1906 (.30-06) shown below.
"The .30 caliber cartridge, Model of 1906, known simply as the ".30-06" was born. All rifles had to be modified for the new cartridge and bayonet before being issued, resulting in chaos in the Armories until about 1909. Probably less than 100, perhaps as few as 50 original rod bayonet M1903 Springfields remain, along with a similar number of rifles like this one which have been restored to their original appearance."
And no, Mother, we were not arguing - we were merely having a damn fine discussion!

Some of the shows on the History Channel tend to use a broad-brush approach to historical facts, and when it comes to GUNS & AMMO, some are often WAY off-base. (ie., "bullets" instead of "cartridges", etc.)

But I have seen a little coverage on one or two of their shows which was pretty accurate about the P14-M1917 changeover to .30/'06, and the M1917's role on the Western Front.

I consider the M1917 actually a much better combat weapon that the M1903, (more rugged, better battle sights, etc.) and think it should have been standardized after WWI instead of the 1903. But of course, it "wasn't invented here"!!

The M1903 Springfield was as you note originally chambered for the 1903 version of the round, which had a longer neck and used the same 220-fgrainb round-nose bullets used in the Krag, with just 200 FPS more MV than with the krag. A year after the Krauts changed to their 154-grain Spitz Geschoss at a MV 0f 2880 FPS, we copied then=m by cutting 1/10" off the '03 case, producing the great .30/'06. So we cut the same amount off the end of the Springfield chambers, and recut them for the 1906 version using a 150-grainer at about 2700 FPS.

The A-versions of the Springfield (A1-A4) did not come about until WWII.