Would an 03A3 shoot as good as an 03A4 or were different parts used in the different rifles?

I don't think there were any difference in components except for the stock style. Maybe, just maybe, the barrels were inspected a little closer. By that point in time (1943) the Springfield production was slowing down a bit as the production of M1 Garands and M1 Carbines was catching up with demand.

I've only got to personally look at about six legit (I think) 1903A4's. I believe all the A4's were made in 1943 (Remington). They were marked "1903A3" but had the serial numbers stamped lower on the front ring (and in slightly smaller numerals) so that the serial number's would be visible below the front scope mount. That detail is very hard to fake.

Just because it has a C style stock does not mean it's an 'A4, as I've seen several 03's and 03A3's with C style stocks that I'm pretty certain were not issued that way.

Faking of sniper rifles of any variety is fairly common now because of the prices they command. Here's the serial numbers I've seen published for A4's...

3407088 to 3427087

4992001 to 4999045

Z4000000 to Z4002920

The reason I asked is, because one day this week, on the American Rifleman TV show. They profiled the O3A4 & shot one at the end of the segment. They fired 5 shots. The first one was off to itself. The last four went in the same hole. I don't know what distance they were shooting from. Is this typical accuracy for one of these rifles?

I'm going to guess that the first shot might have been down an oily bore. After that first "fouling" shot, the rest went sub-moa. 1st shot down a cold barrel will often result in a different POI than subsequent shots.

As for whether or not that is typical I can't answer as I have zero experience shooting an actual 03A4, let alone enough of them to make a statement about what is typical accuracy from them. Certainly the 03's of various configurations were capable of such accuracy. The 03A4's were a decent sniper rifle and I've seen several properly "sporterized" 03's that produced that kind of accuracy with original (shortened) barrels.

It would of course vary from rifle to rifle and it takes a scope sight to test the accuracy of any such rifle. Sound like the one they were testing on the show you watched was a good one.

I agree that the first shot was off due to either an oily or clean bore. I guess I just didn't expect to see that with factory ammo. I have always wanted an 03A3, I guess that I will have to find now!

When my gs was alive and he had an order for a customized 03A3 he'd use a Smith Corona barrel,when he passsed his son located the case of barrels and I told him what his father did with them.

quote:

Originally posted by hvy barrel:
Would an 03A3 shoot as good as an 03A4 or were different parts used in the different rifles?

I have both an A3 and an A4. both from the CMP. Both A3's and A4's will be found with the scant, and C type stocks.

The only difference is the position of the serial number. On the A4, it is stamped horizontally so that the number can be read with a scope mounted.
Also, the front sight was not installed on the A4's barrel, and you have an empty dovetail.

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Norman:
I don't think there were any difference in components except for the stock style. Maybe, just maybe, the barrels were inspected a little closer. By that point in time (1943) the Springfield production was slowing down a bit as the production of M1 Garands and M1 Carbines was catching up with demand.

I've only got to personally look at about six legit (I think) 1903A4's. I believe all the A4's were made in 1943 (Remington). They were marked "1903A3" but had the serial numbers stamped lower on the front ring (and in slightly smaller numerals) so that the serial number's would be visible below the front scope mount. That detail is very hard to fake.

Just because it has a C style stock does not mean it's an 'A4, as I've seen several 03's and 03A3's with C style stocks that I'm pretty certain were not issued that way.

Faking of sniper rifles of any variety is fairly common now because of the prices they command. Here's the serial numbers I've seen published for A4's...

3407088 to 3427087

4992001 to 4999045

Z4000000 to Z4002920

I am certainly not an expert on the A4 - not even on the Springfield, in fact - But I think a lot of this was of sheer necessity, battlefield expedient if you will. I recently watched a feature on History channel about the USMC fighting on Okinawa and was amazed to see the Marines using 03’s – and this was in 1945! Also showed a Marine sniper at work with a Springfield, looked like a “C†stock but it was an 03, not an 03A4, not even an 03A3 – still had the sights in the middle of the barrel! Tell me about this one if you know. How many sniper versions of the Springfield were there? Or was this just one some Corps gunsmith had cobbled together?
My own (limited) experience found some M14’s that had had the stocks sawn open and an aluminum filler epoxied in place, then an 8X Unertl scope mounted. Never saw anything in writing about these but the pieces would shoot! Wish I had one of them now.

The Marine Corp always used the '03, until they adopted the garand, because of the ladder sight was simply more accurate for distance shooting although more expensive to produce. Of course, the jarheads resisted adopting
the garand because they felt that the autoloader would cause a reduction in aimed fire. During the war they finally understood that there is no substition for lead down range. The army(the green machine)adopted the garand with alacrity and they had been using the '03a3, except for snipers which used the '03

The stock design of the A4 has a "pistol grip" stock. In addition, the front sight was left off, as well as the rear, and a Redfield Jr. type scope mount base was installed for mounting of a scope sight in Redfield style rings.

Despite the fact that the A4 was intended as a sniper rifle, there was no special selection process or accurizing involved. They just put a scope on it. So a good A3 is just as apt to be accurate as an A4....

This may be a little off base, if so please forgive me. In the movie "Saving Private Ryan" I'm still trying to figure out how the sniper was able to mount a Unertl and a Lyman Alaskan (if that's what it was) on the same 03'. Any clues? Thanks...Bill.

quote:

Originally posted by model70man:
This may be a little off base, if so please forgive me. In the movie "Saving Private Ryan" I'm still trying to figure out how the sniper was able to mount a Unertl and a Lyman Alaskan (if that's what it was) on the same 03'. Any clues? Thanks...Bill.

There was a military version of the Lyman Alaskan in use during WWII. It could have been used on an 03A4 with 7/8" rings for the Redfield base. But none were fitted with TARGET STYLE scopes such as the Unertl, at least not by the government. But perhaps there were some 03's that people has made up at their own expense......

quote:

Originally posted by El Deguello:

quote:

Originally posted by model70man:
This may be a little off base, if so please forgive me. In the movie "Saving Private Ryan" I'm still trying to figure out how the sniper was able to mount a Unertl and a Lyman Alaskan (if that's what it was) on the same 03'. Any clues? Thanks...Bill.

There was a military version of the Lyman Alaskan in use during WWII. It could have been used on an 03A4 with 7/8" rings for the Redfield base. But none were fitted with TARGET STYLE scopes such as the Unertl, at least not by the government. But perhaps there were some 03's that people has made up at their own expense......

That's not true, some were fitted with Unertls. The USMC
M1903AI/Unertl sniper rifle was the best U.S. sniper rifle of the
war and saw quite of bit of use in the Pacific theater by Marine
Scout/Snipers.

If I might interject a comment, I am too young to have used the 03 , the 03a3, 0r the 03a4 in combat, but I do enjoy shooting the various 03's and 03a3's. The early 03's are a pleasure to shoot. I have found for the most part that they are as accurate as any commercial 30/06. You find some doge. This is assuming the rifle is in pretty good condition. I have heard that between the wars I and II the manufacturing got sloppy and accuracy was the pits. I do not find the same accuracy in the 03a3's they are not bad but few are as carefully tunes as the earler 03's. Remingtons in particular are well made and accurate. I have one that came out of the NRA new in cosmaline in 1959 that is as good as most hunting rifles.
I suspect that the sniper rifles were cherry picked and tuned up. The USMC in particular was picky about firearms and resisted adopting the M1 grand because they did not think it was a "rifleman's rifle". As to the scopes, I am sure that what ever was avalible was used. Unertl I think was specified, but Lynman and others were used. I have heard that some snipers did not use scopes at all, but had retro fitted target iron sights. Battle sights were a little course for precision shooting.
And don't underestimate the ability of the line rifleman to make great shots with his issue weapon. When you live with a mistress for months at a time, you learn a lot about her peculiarities. That is what the wweeapon became, the iron mistress to the GI.
Judge Sharpe