quote:

Originally posted by James C Scott:
I've seen that article before and it sure seems to point a finger at something other than the receivers heat treatment as the root cause of the failures. The double heat treated recievers are undoubtbly tougher (not as brittle), but there is no way to go back and analyze the ammunition that was in use at the time of the failures with modern methods.
Is it possible that at least a portion of the blame for the reputation of the low numbered '03s lies with the ammo manufactured prior to a certain point in time?

In a word...Yes. Hatcher and several others noted the poor quality ammunition that was made during WWI and its relationship to blow-ups.

Hatcher also noted, when researching the blow ups, that there were numerous instances of barrel obstructions and in at least one case the blow up was due to someone forcing a 7.9mm Mauser cartridge into the chamber and firing the weapon.

The double heat treated receivers were tested with 125,000 psi proof loads and none of them failed.

Please send to me all low-number springfields, as I do not want anyone to be injured. Thanks, Bill439

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
ahmm..
anyone who feels that a 1903 receiver (and the whole action is weak, too )...

please send them to ME.. i will take graet care in managing their safe disposal.


on the 1903a3...
guys, give that a rest... 2 hours of work cleans then up VERY well and you have either a built in peep sight or a mechcanical lock for a scope mount in the rear...

jeffe

jeffeosso, sorry I keep quoting you but you make sense! Ok an 03 A3, a very weak and horribly inaccurate action!! Seriously, send me your actions C.O.D. and I will happily rid you of your inadiquate boat anchors!!!

There are none so blind as those who will not see. You guys who shoot the LNs may think you are bearing the risk, but what about your wives, mothers, your children and brothers and sisters who will have to take care of you if you are injured or disabled, or who will grieve if you are killed, or who will not have you to support and take care of them. You have a responsibility to others, not just to yourselves. And you have a duty to your country, not to screw yourself up. Hang that LN on the wall and admire it at a distance, but don't be abysmally stupid enough to shoot it.

quote:

Originally posted by vigillinus:
There are none so blind as those who will not see. You guys who shoot the LNs may think you are bearing the risk, but what about your wives, mothers, your children and brothers and sisters who will have to take care of you if you are injured or disabled, or who will grieve if you are killed, or who will not have you to support and take care of them. You have a responsibility to others, not just to yourselves. And you have a duty to your country, not to screw yourself up. Hang that LN on the wall and admire it at a distance, but don't be abysmally stupid enough to shoot it.

Yeah! What he said! Don't be foolish and send me your actions!

quote:

Originally posted by .366torque:
Ok an 03 A3, a very weak and horribly inaccurate action!!

Who offered that assessment?

You guys are getting carried away.

You might at least offer to trade a high numbered action for a low numbered one. There seems to be quite the attachment to those low numbered Springfields.

GV

Grandview,

Not necessarily an “attachement†just a bit of amusement over some peoples “Ralph Nadar“ views on this topic.

It would seem logical, and reasonable, that any low numbered 03 that made it through all the inspections, reworking, and tests done at Springfield...and has made it through years and years of use as a sporter, would more than likely be safe to use.

Should they be chambered for a really hot/high pressure cartridge? Of course not, and neither should any number of other firearms that are perfectly safe to fire with the cartridge they were designed for, or something else within the same pressure range. US Krags and Lee-Enfields just to name a couple.

I’ve made my living for over 30 years taking “calculated-risksâ€... and to the disappointment of more than a few people I’m still around and kicking!

Here is a recent post from the 1903 forum at www.jouster.com:

Posted By: Kent Allen <Send E-Mail>
Date: Wednesday, 1 March 2006, at 7:07 pm

In Response To: That's correct, Rick (Clyde from Carolina)

According to Hatcher's Notebook, There were 150 SHT receivers scattered through the first month or so of production when manufacturing restarted making DHT receivers. I retrospect, I believe the rifle that blew up on me (804,000 range)was one of those SHT receivers. It had a case separation, as I can remember the case being welded in the chamber when we were picking up the pieces. Had anyone been standing next to me when it let go, they would have been dead. There were three or four large chunks of shrapnel departing the receiver stuck in the side of my Dad's home. I still had one piece of brass buried in my forehead from the experience. A few friends have told me that is why I am as crazy as I am.

Metalurgy and heating treating was more art then science in the early 1900's. I read an article once about tests conducted on pieces of the Titanic's hull that were recovered. Article said that the steel had a high sulphur content that made the steel brittle when cold. The article also stated that the technology wasn't available at the time to lower the sulphur content. I really doubt that there is much practicle difference most low numbered 03 and anything of the same vintage. That being said I personally would want an action of more recent vintage if I was going to chamber it in some barn burning cartridge. Something like a 7x57 I'd have no concern about. Sam

Here is another pertinent post from the 1903 forum, www.jouster.com:

1903 Springfield Rifle collectors

Humpty Dumpty, Walls and Falls...

Posted By: Bruce <Send E-Mail>
Date: Saturday, 4 March 2006, at 4:25 pm

In Response To: My rant on the low numbered rifle issue. *LINK Inside* (Vi Shooter)

Let me see, if I remember right the story goes that Humpty Dumpty climbed up and sat down on top of a wall. Then, with no explanation provided, we are told that Humpty Dumpty had a great fall! Imagine that! Was it an accident? Maybe he was pushed! Maybe for just a moment he didn't pay attention. I don't know! But this I do know. According to the story, despite all the best efforts of all the concerned citizens, Humpty Dumpty could not be restored to his pre-fall condition.

Now lately I've been giving more than a little bit of thought to what happened to Humpty Dumpty. I wonder how such a good egg could have ended up in such a bad situation. Surely someone warned him that it was not such a good idea to climb up and sit on top of the wall. Maybe someone warned him of the danger involved reminding him that his shell was strong and able to sustain great pressure yet brittle and easily broken by a sudden impact. I'm certain Humpty knew of the potentially catastropic consequences that would follow if an accident were to happen. Maybe he had seen others like himself, with no untoward consequences, climb up and sit on top of that very wall. Maybe just once in his life he wanted to get out of the carton and find out what it was like to climb up and sit on top of that wall. It is entirely possible that he had on many other occasions already climbed up and sat on top of that wall. And it is entirely possible that on any other day Humpty Dumpty could have climbed up on top of that very wall and sat there all day with no problems. But sadly Humpty Dumpty did cliimb up the wall and tragically Humpty Dumpty did have a great fall and, well, you know the rest of the story.

Like most of you I am far beyond the innocent years of kindergarden. But I think I've learned some valuable lessons from the story of Humpty Dumpty, lessons that apply to both eggs and other fragile things, like ourselves and those who follow our example. I've learned that choices have consequences and that sometimes we can make decisons the consequences of which can not be undone. So I don't want to put myself needlessly at risk by doing something that really is not so very smart. I've learned that sometimes when we put ourselves in a risky situation, things can go terribly wrong so it's best not to take foolish chances. I've learned that if other folks are climbing up and sitting on the wall, it does not follow that my doing the same thing is a wise idea. Accidents can happen and if like Humpty Dumpty I choose to "climb up and sit on the wall" and if there is an accident, I shall be the one who has to deal with the consequences. About the only thing worse would be if I was to find out that someone had been watching me and had followed the example I set and that there had been an accident. Maybe we needed to remember some of the lessons learned in our childhood. Because sometimes those lesson are to important to forget. With respect. Bruce.

From what I have been told the "more art then science" idea was correct. Apparently, they didn't have or have adequate pyrometers then and a lot of the heat treaters guessed at what they thought was the proper temperature and time to "soak" when heat treating. The idea that those actions that have survived many years as '06 sporters and the like are probably safe is pretty fair thinking. I wouldn't stop using one that had been used for years. The idea that ALL low number '03's were bad is wrong, many of them were just as tough as the HN but all are suspect. The DCM used to offer free or low cost replacement of LN '03 actions but, after having looked over their website, I can't find them anymore.

I think Humpty fully understood that his role in life was to make an omlette.

Those that tried to put him back together again was the ones screwing up.

They should have scraped him up and headed to the frying fan with some cheese.

Surely they could have taken off some time from sporterizing those low numbered Springfields to make breakfast.

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:
I think Humpty fully understood that his role in life was to make an omlette.

Those that tried to put him back together again was the ones screwing up.

They should have scraped him up and headed to the frying fan with some cheese.

Surely they could have taken off some time from sporterizing those low numbered Springfields to make breakfast.

I like cheese

Thomas Jones, I think the answer to your question lies somewhere in this thread. Maybe you can find it, I couldn't

Terry

In the movie business one of the ways we roll cars over is to weld a large steel “cannon†to the frame and the roll cage, insert a three foot long section of telephone pole, and top it off with a six ounce black powder charge. The driver brings the car in at about 50 or 60 mph and slides it to just short of 90 degrees and fires the charge. The pole shoots out, lifts the light side, and starts the car rolling.

I’ve done about 30 of those over the years and they can get pretty violent. Once while getting ready to do one a couple guys on the crew came up and started asking me if I had thought of this, and thought of that...had I consider this, and considered that? I finally replied to them that if I thought about every single possible thing that might or could go wrong I wouldn’t get in the car in the first place!

Every time you chamber a round in a rifle (any rifle) and touch it off there is a “possibility†that something might go wrong...just like every time you start your car and drive to work there is a possibility that you might be involved in a wreck.

It’s up to each individual to make their own decision as to what risks they are willing to take in life...and that’s as it should be.

Here is another from the 1903 forum:

Posted By: Jim Keenan <Send E-Mail>
Date: Thursday, 2 March 2006, at 10:50 am

In Response To: Re: Mark... (mark k benenson)

I didn't want to repeat myself too often, but I did break one of those receivers with a one-pound hammer, so I have no question that some of them are brittle. I believe that the brittle receivers are a minority of the SHT receivers and always were. I accept that many of the bad ones have already failed, so the chances of any given rifle being bad are reduced; reduced, but not eliminated.

It is not comparable to 100,000 miles on a car. It is not a question of wear, rounds fired, age, use, or the state of the weather. The steel is brittle, period. A given brittle receiver may never fail, or it may fail on the next shot. It may fail with a light load, with a service load, or with a heavy load. It may fail on Sunday or Wednesday. Or it may never fail.

Those who want to take a chance for themselves may do so. But it is a disservice to preach, as some have, that there is no problem and that those of us who urge caution are hysterical, foolish, and stupid.

Jim

And here is the last one from the 1903 forum that I will post here, FINGER PRESSURE breaks a low number receiver:

1903 Springfield Rifle collectors

a story from a fool

Posted By: Dave Hammond <Send E-Mail>
Date: Monday, 27 February 2006, at 12:34 am

In Response To: Re: M1903 Low Serial Number Q's (Rick the Librarian)

Hi guys,

This may shed some light on this as I too agonised over this question. I had a low serial number Rock Island that I wasn't game to shoot. I went to remove the rear sight sleeve and, not doing my homework, having knocked out the visible bottom pin, was trying to remove the sleeve by "screwing" it off the barrel (I didn't think about the horizontal barrel alignment dowel!). Obviously, It wouldn't rotate straight up so I dropped a brass rod through the reciever magazine opening and exerted a little pressure. Now I hadn't exerted much pressure at all(only using my hands and had it in the back of my mind that it was a bit fragile)when I heard a metalic ping and a piece of the reciever rail flew across the room! Stunned (having done this rod thing for years with Brit Lee Enfield 303s), I picked up the piece and looked at it. It was very, very crystaline and had large crystals. It had not distorted at all, just failed completely under virtually no pressure at all. This convinced me of two things: (a) I had just been a fool (b) I most definitely shuddered at the thought of several tons of pressure being contained by something so brittle six inches in front of my face and eyes. It was obvious that the reciever ring would only need a micron sized fault in it to cause the whole thing to fragment totaly under pressure. Add the possibility of faulty war ammo and, mate, it's just not worth the risk as far as I'm concerned. I now use a Nickel Steel 1941 Remington '03 and thrown my brass rod in the rubbish!

Far be it from me to try to convince someone to do something they don’t feel comfortable about.

For me (and this is nothing more than my personal view) this whole subject is very much overblown...on both sides of the argument.

Yes, some low numbered 03’s have blown up due to a variety of reasons, one of which was poor heat treating...and a whole bunch more of them didn’t and haven’t blown up. What any of this proves I’m not really sure since allot of rifles other than low numbered 03’s have experienced blow ups over the years.

I would bet that somewhere at sometime one or more of the sacred Mausers has blown up for no apparent reason.

quote:

Originally posted by Hot Core:
Hey Rick, Just read today of the first RUM blowing up I've heard of. The young guy it happend to was VERY QUICK to point out it was a "Reload Problem"(overload), not an issue with the rifle.

He had his left hand laying atop the scope and when he fired, his left thumb was destroyed and his Right eye damaged. Medivaced to UofL where they put the thumb back together as best they could and then on to Nashville to get his eye worked on.

It looks like he will be the best High School Archery shooter in KY this year. Still hunts and still uses his Right eye as the Master eye.

Do you have a link to this?

I would like more information about this to ensure that I can safely reload my 7mmRUM.

Hey Soncorn, I saw it in the Sports section of last Sundays(12Mar06) Courier-Journal which is a newspaper in Louisville, KY.

HA, just found it again. It is on page C13. The young fellow is a High School student in Trigg Co. by the name of Graham Cofield.

Says he is going for his 4th straigh NASP High School Boys crown and the Overall National Boys Championship.

The Tournament is currently going on in Louisville for this entire week. 107 schools in the Tournament.
---

All it says relating to the Blow-Up is:

The shell(sic), which Cofield says probably was reloaded with an improper mix of powder, exploded in the chamber, destroying the rifle and nearly severing his thumb.

That was bad enough, but the blast also split his left eyelid and splattered his face and eye with slivers of metal. Blindness in his left eye was a real possibility.
---

They got him all put back together and he can still see out of his left eye, but the vision is reduced.

quote:

Originally posted by soncorn:

quote:

Originally posted by Hot Core:
Hey Rick, Just read today of the first RUM blowing up I've heard of. The young guy it happend to was VERY QUICK to point out it was a "Reload Problem"(overload), not an issue with the rifle.

He had his left hand laying atop the scope and when he fired, his left thumb was destroyed and his Right eye damaged. Medivaced to UofL where they put the thumb back together as best they could and then on to Nashville to get his eye worked on.

It looks like he will be the best High School Archery shooter in KY this year. Still hunts and still uses his Right eye as the Master eye.

Do you have a link to this?

I would like more information about this to ensure that I can safely reload my 7mmRUM.

here's the link

Thank You both for your quick responses.

quote:

Originally posted by GrandView:


Who offered that assessment?

You guys are getting carried away.

You might at least offer to trade a high numbered action for a low numbered one. There seems to be quite the attachment to those low numbered Springfields.

GV

Not carried away, but my own sarcastic way of trying to garner 03-a3 actions!

quote:

Originally posted by .366torque:
Not carried away, but my own sarcastic way of trying to garner 03-a3 actions!

Heh Heh....

Still lots of them available......as well as 03's. Which I guess is one reason why I've never found the need to use or go after a low number gun.

I must admit there are a few sellers that think Springfields of any flavor are golden however.

GV