I've become curious about the 1903 rifles for possible future use for a custom rifle. In reading here on this site and other places I have seen some people talk about the weakness of the "early" actions and that only "late" actions should be used for custom rifles. Just what serial number cutoff constitutes an "early" vs. "late" action? Or is there another criteria that can be used to choose a safe 1903 for building a rifle?

Thanks,
Bob

Springfield Arsenal started double heat treating @ SN 800,000 and began using nickel steel @ 1,275,767. Rock Islan Arsenal double heat treated @# 285,507 and switched to nickel steel @
319,921.

Regards,
hm

hm,

Doesn't get much more specific than that! Thanks for the info.

I realize theat the double heat treat would provide a strength advantage, but does the nickel steel also add more strength on top of that? Sorry if this is a dumb question, I'm no metalurgist. Is the double heat treat of sufficient strength for use in a custom rifle chambered for a .30-06 class cartridge, or should I go all the way and look for one with the nickel steel?

Thanks,
Bob

Bob:
The source of the serial numbers is Julian Hatcher's "Hatcher's notebook" which contains loads of good Springfield development information, records of investigations of cause of many 03 failures, etc. It's been many moons since I read the book but use is as a reference fairly regularly.

IIRC most failures were traced to abuse such as firing 8mm ammo, bore obstructions, firing pressure test rounds by mistake, etc. Double heat treated receivers were considered to be safe for use with all GI ammo of the era. Not sure if they would handle today's ammo such as the "light magnum" loads or not.

Having said that, personally, I have opted to stick with the nickel steel receivers, but, as you I am not a metalurgist.

Perhaps you could get JBelk, Systeme98 or others who are vastly more knowledgeable on the subject to weigh in on this matter.

There is an excellent thread going now on a P17 blowup you might wish to check out @

http://www.serveroptions.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=006540

Regards,
hm

Bob:

The "double heat treated" Springfields are the most desirable. The actions are "slick as snot" and will handle any reasonable load in any modern chambering.

The nickel steel are also quite strong but are not as smooth as the double heat treats. They feel a bit sticky in comparison.

I built a 358 Norma Mag on a nickle steel and it's quite adequate for the round.

Rick

bobvthunter,

Last month's "Precision Shooting(er?)" magazine had an article on sporterizing M1903s, and it included some of Hatcher's notes regarding number and pressure of loads the different HT/alloy actions would take - interesting reading. You might want to track down a copy, or send me a PM and I'll see if I can help you out .

Cheers, Bill

Bill,

I was able to find that article and print it off the web. I look forward to reading it. Thanks for pointing me to it.

Bob

Glad that I could help, Bob!

Bill

According to some, Hatcher included, "The double heat-treated actions were the strongest of all Springfield actions".