quote:

Something like this?

That is it! Maybe just a tad forward more for me, but that is it!

What type of bases are you using on your rifle? Also, I notice that my third/safety lug is a solid block and all of these rifles taper down to the extractor? Is this because mine is a Rock Island?

The mounts on the above rifle are a set of Weaver Grand Slam bases and Warne rings. My other action shown earlier has a set of custom bases that use Buehler rings. I have another 1903 that has a set of custom bases that use the older Kimber lever release rings also.

I don't know what the serial number of your rifle is, but the bolt looks like it is one of the last series that were made for the Remington 1903A3 rifles, it definately didn't come with a Rock Island Arsenal action originaly. Some of these were very rough and had lots of machine marks on them, as a matter of fact most 1903A3 bolts have plenty of tool marks on them. Many of the last made A3 bolts also had the big square block you referred to rather than the nice taper down to meet the extractor. You could always get another bolt to replace the one you have now, someone obviously has already done that, especially if you plan to rebarrel your action. If it were me I would look for an early smooth bolt body or a nickel steel bolt body. From the looks of the photo of your rifle the bolt sleeve is from a 1903 and not a 1903A3 so you could still use everything on a new bolt body if you wanted to.

I think the bolt will be modified enough that changing it will not matter. I plan on having the LaPour safety and pin setup installed (just got his info in the mail today), and a new pear shaped bolt handle. I actually like the square block of my bolt more...oddly enough. I have a particular place I want the knob on the bolt. I prefer it to have 1/2 of the knob below the line of the guard and the wood, and the knob positioned in the front 1/3 of the guard bow...see my sketch. Please I did this in like 5 minutes so no critics, you can get the point from the drawing. I want to blend early M/98 Mauser Sporter with an American Springfield Sporter, then us an English express style stock to complete the project.

then us an English express style stock to complete the project.

Something like this?

Pretty close. maybe an ebont tip and longer slender forearm. Continental cheecpiece too, but no pad. I need a 15" LOP to a metal buttplate.

Here is the cheekpiece. The forearm is much slender than it looks. In real life I doubt you would want it much slimmer if any.

I love the cheek, the long open and what appears to e oval grip. I didnt realize it was also an 03 until this last picture. What caliber is it in? I wanted a 6.5X55Se with a long throat for the 156-160 gr bullets, but in the Springfield I do not know? I would need a full 3.0-3.125 inch length magazine.

What caliber is it in?

338 Winchester.

What can you do with an 03? Trade is for a descent mauser 98!

Red,
where/what stock pattern is that?

jeffe

jeffe

The pattern is what was referred to as the "Europeon Special" in the old Fajen lineup. I was fortunate enough to snag a utility grade stock in the pattern for a Springfield so I can duplicate it for other Springfields I choose to assemble.

Midway must have used the same pattern as the starting point for their "Europeon Classic" that they sold for Mausers a few years ago. The lines aren't exactly the same but it isn't hard to figure out where the starting point came from.

Here is the same stock pattern in a Mauser. This one is a Yugo 24.

333_OKH

Here is a picture of the bsases on the 338. They use the old Kimber or Warne rings.

quote:

Where did you get eh old Redfield barrel band front sight?

I have been lucky enough to squirrel away a few band front ramps in both Redfield and Lyman configuration in various diameters. They do come on Ebay occassionaly but are usually pretty pricy. I actually prefer Lyman because they use a dovetail bead while the Redfield is more of a slotted blade with a pin through it.

I have a hood for the Redfield front sight that started life out as a Williams and was fitted to the Redfield. It just wasn't on the rifle for some reason when I took the picture.

What problems should one expect when converting a Springfield to a custom rifle compared to a M/98 Mauser?

quote:

What problems should one expect when converting a Springfield to a custom rifle compared to a M/98 Mauser?

From my experience the biggest problem is finding a smith who is comfortable working on a Springfield. To start with a Springfield has square and not vee threads on its barrel. Add to this it is cone breached with an extractor cut in it. This is not a problem for any good machinest but some just don't want the hassle or if they will do it the price is higher. There is a person on Ebay who does rebarreling that states, and I quote:

i will also have to completely thread and chamber the blank since no pre-threaded and short chambered barrels i know of are available. when i recut these barrels i DO NOT cut them with the cone breech and extractor slot. it is not necessary and will work fine with out them, just like a mauser does. if you absolutely have to have the cone breech and extractor slot in the barrel for whatever reason i charge $50 more because it's a pain in the butt to do it.

This is just one thing you may run in to.


There are no where near as many after market accesories for a Springfield as there are for Mausers and also a lot of smiths just don't like to work on Springfields. I don't have any problem with this, but it does cut down a Springfield owners options considerably.

The Springfield has a rich past history in custom rifles but if a person is thinking about doing one today I would definately check with a few smiths before collecting a lot of things for the project. Don't get me wrong, I love Springfields. It easily is my most favorite action to work with although Mausers with Springfield triggerguards aren't to bad either.

It also was the basis for the Winchester 54 which evolved into the much revered pre-64 model 70 so it surely can't be all bad.

I have been contacting both Jim Dubell and Ed LaPour. I have already heard back from Ed, Jim was only e-mailed and that was a Friday.

From what I have seen and heard you can't go wrong with those two people. I'm sure they can do anything you want done and it will be a first class job.

Good luck on your project.

IMO if you are building a rifle for a standard head standard length cartridge like the '06, the .270, .35 Whelen, etc., 1903 bolt operation is faster and smoother than an 1898. I have always suspected this is because the Ordnance designers fondly remembered the slickness of the Krag and tried to hold on to as much of its operating character as they could. Also the 1903 receiver is stiffer than an 1898 - no thumb slot - and a rifle built on an 03 will be theoretically more accurate, although I don't think the difference counts for much on a hunting rifle.

I recognize that Springfield. Thats the nice thing about living close to Jim. I get to see these projects develop.

One of the faults of the 03 is the two piece firing pin, it softens the striker fall and, in theory, the collar can break and the rear of the striker come flying back. Sedgely made a U shaped safety washer and there have been, from time to time, various one piece strikers described and rigged. You might take a look at gunbroker 42589405, where it seems supersmith Dennis Ehrhardt has grafted M70 one piece strikers into a couple of 1903s. This is a new one on me but might be worth looking into if you are trying to put every possible refinement into a 1903. Also, Numrich offered a one piece striker made out of M2 .22 parts.

I plan on replacing the pin and safety with Ed LaPour's design. Will this handle the problem? I have been shooting this gun for the last 20 years in the field without issue. It is a saddle gun and ATV rifle on the ranch.



from Ed's page : http://www.edlapourgunsmithing.com/

333, I don't know anything about LaPour's modification but he is a very high class smith and knows his business. It would be interesting, when you get around to it, to post a photo.

To keep the cocking piece or not? That is the question. I think it stays? But what about the bolt stop and what type of floor plate to have made. Now this bottom metal question is a tough one.