The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Guns, Politics, Gunsmithing & Reloading Gunsmithing Preferred 1903 ActionGo | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Preferred 1903 Action | Login/Join |
| One of Us |
If one were looking to build a couple of custom rifles with all the bells and whistles on Springfield 1903 actions what actions would be the best? The double heat treated or the Nickel Steel? What is your reasoning for your choice? Thanks | ||
|
| One of Us |
Not sure you would necessarily have to have either double heat treated or nickle steel, but as you may well know, avoid the Rock Island or low number Springfields. Don't know of any reason why any high number Springfield or Remington 03's would not work?? Sure others here may have other suggestions or advise. I would agree with you that a rifle well built on Springfield action has that definite classy American look about it. Check out some of the Griffin & Howe builds for prime examples. Good luck. martin | |||
|
| One of Us |
The nickle steel was supposed to be the "slickest", and the strongest. Never handled one, they are scarce. Good Luck! | |||
|
| One of Us |
If you can find one, a later Remington 1903. http://forums.accuratereloadin...=927100061#927100061 http://forums.accuratereloadin...=513101199#513101199 Search "1903 Springfield" here and you'll find more. | |||
|
| One of Us |
The double-heat-treat actions are the slickest of the 2 later types. The nickle steel alloy tends to be slightly stickier in operation and the Remingtons are not as finely-finished as the Springfields or Rock Islands, so my personal choice would be a double-heat-treated one. BTW not all Rock Island actions are low #, IMO the later high-# RI ones are just as strong and well-finished as anything that came out of Springfield and I like their serif-style letter-number characters better. For some spectacular views of some of the finest custom 1903s in the world, check out the single-barrel forum on the doublegunshop.com site. G&H, Neidner, Shelhamer, Owen, Hoffman and similar, with nice photos of the details. Regards, Joe __________________________ You can lead a human to logic but you can't make him think. NRA Life since 1976. God bless America! | |||
|
| One of Us |
The “double heat treated” is the method that defines what is a low number from a high number rifle, therefore all “high number” Springfield and RI will be either double heat or nickel steel. With that said, the surface metal on the double heat treated guns is harder, and therefore the actions are claimed to cycle more smoothly. I have a low-number 03 mill surp that is quite glassy to cycle. However, the nickel steel guns are said to have more plasticity, and are considered stronger--but not as "slick" as the surface metal isn’t as hardened. Of course, these are opinons, as I have never tried to "ackley" any of these actions* Personally, I build my 404j on a Springfield nickel steel action serial numbered to 1931--and I'm quite happy. But I agree that later production 03's of Remington would be a good bet as well. Hope that helps, Ronn *Ackely (adv) to blow to kingdom come;-) | |||
|
one of us |
If building a couple of customs with all the bells and whistles I can't see using anything other than a DHT Springfield Armory 1903. My second choice would be a DHT Rock Island Armory 1903. Of all the Springfields in my safe the half dozen plus DHT Springfield Armory models are the smoothest actions, and took the least amount of work to make them look nice. These actions are still around so I see no reason to use something other than them. I would definately steer clear of a late model Remington 1903 because the tang style on them deviated from the earlier ones. They tend to have a flatter tang and don't have the blind hole rear guard screw found on the earlier ones. Here is a good thread that covers some of what I am trying to explain. http://forums.accuratereloadin...1043/m/602102518/p/1 ****************************** "We do not exaggerate when we state positively that the remodelled Springfield is the best and most suitable "all 'round" rifle".......Seymour Griffin, GRIFFIN & HOWE, Inc. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Thanks guys. I really appreciate the feedback. Sounds like the DHT is the way to go. Now for the next question. Does anybody have a couple kicking around that they'd like to part with? If not what do you think would be a reasonable price to pay? | |||
|
| One of Us |
Joshua, I don't have any to spare but since I'm building 2 right now I can give you some insight into the prices I've found recently. Prices for a clean complete unaltered DHT action have ranged from $250 to $600, depending upon whether the action was a NM one (or the seller thought it was) or whether accompanied by a Lyman 48S sight ($100-150 value). The $600 was that particular owner's pipe dream while the $250 one went fairly quickly. My friend purchased a very nice crisp one with clean Lyman 48S for less than $500, a very fair price IMO on both ends. Please bear in mind that the DHT actions are worth substantially more than the early nickle steel ones and MUCH more than the WW2 models. My personal order of preference would run: DHT, early nickle steel either RI or Springfield, later WW2 Springfield NS, Remington NS. AAFAIK RI did not make any DHTs, only low #s and NS's. JMO, like Lacey J says in the song, "I been wro-o-ong before!" Regards, Joe __________________________ You can lead a human to logic but you can't make him think. NRA Life since 1976. God bless America! | |||
|
| one of us |
Perhaps a history of the various 1903 actions would be helpful. Remington All actions are Nickel Steel Rock Island Arsenal All actions before 286,506 are considered Low Number Actions from 286,507 to 319,920 are DHT Actions 319,921 and above are Nickel Steel Springfield Armory All actions below 800,000 are considered Low Number Actions from 800,001 to 1,275,766 are DHT Actions 1,275,767 and above are Nickel Steel Although most people use 800,000 as the cutoff point for SA Low-High number actions there is some debate as to what the actual number is. Some think it is lower, some think it is higher. Vigillinus, who posts here, thinks to be safe you need to use a higher number as the cutoff point. Perhaps he will post as to what that is. The RIA actions can be pinpointed because the facility was shut down for a time and when production resumed the DHT process was instituted on resart of production. Because of this the actual number is positively known. ****************************** "We do not exaggerate when we state positively that the remodelled Springfield is the best and most suitable "all 'round" rifle".......Seymour Griffin, GRIFFIN & HOWE, Inc. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Once again thanks for everyones help. I just thought of something else though. These actions will likely be surface ground, and may have a little to a lot of welding done on them. That being said is the DHT still the way to go? From what I understand with Mausers it is generally considered good practice to reheat treat after this type of work is done. If the same holds true with the Springfields would it still be better off using a DHT action and heat treating it yet again, or going with the NS and heat treating it when finished. If one used the NS and heat treated upon completion wouldn't this leave the internal areas as hard and therefore as slick as a DHT action? Merry Christmas, Josh | |||
|
| One of Us |
There are two proper chamberings for a classic Springfield. 30-06 Springfield and 35 Whelen. | |||
|
| one of us |
Let's clear up a couple of points. First, the DHT prewar actions are actually stronger than the later prewar NS actions. This is clear from the tests reported in Hatcher's notebook. Nontheless, the NS actions are plenty strong enough. They replaced the DHT in production because they were easier to make. However, as previous posters have noted, DHT actions are slicker operating than NS actions. In purchasing a DHT action, make sure you get a DHT bolt in it. Over decades, plenty of parts got mixed up in the arsenals. A DHT bolt has a slightly swept back handle, unlike the early straight up and down low number bolts (a few early DHT bolts are supoposed to be straight but only a specialist can ... maybe ... spot them). NS bolts are clearly stamped "NS" on the top of the bolt root. As to serial numbers, there were a few reported blown actions just above 800,000 which has led to a suspicion that a handful of SHT receivers may have slipped through. For that reason I have adopted 810,000 as my personal cutoff. By the way it should be noted that the WWII actions are probably the strongest of all, they were made from immensely tough alloy steels. But whether Remingtons or Smith Coronas they are, with the possible exception of the very first Remington O3s, unacceptable as the basis for a really fine custom sporting rifle. | |||
|
| one of us |
Joshua, 1903 actions cannot be reheat treated. Springfield Arsenal tried to fix the low number actions that way and couldn't do it. The high number actions don't need it, they are strong enough as is. Sedgely in Philadelphia claimed to reheat treat low number actions but we don't have any idea what they did. The suspicion is that they just annealed the receivers and softened them up, but I have never read anything explicit or definite about it. I doubt anyone today would want to sacrifice a nice Sedgely rifle to find out. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Don't worry Craigster that's what they'll be in. Plus a matching M2 in 22LR to complete the set. Vigillinus, Maybe I'm missing something. When the Springfields are heat treated are they carburized (just the outer layer is hardened like that which is done on a Mauser) or is the action hardened all the way through? I realize the low numbered actions CANNOT be re-hardened as the temperature of the initial hardening was too hot and has therefore made them brittle. However if they were properly carburized like the DHT's (if they are indeed carburized) and the outer layer is ground away why couldn't they be re-hardened? It is done on Mausers all the time. As for the nickel steel I have seen them color case hardened which is pretty much the same as carburizing so why couldn't this be done to them? | |||
|
One of Us |
What about my .400 Whelen?
The NRA heat treated over 10,000 actions without problems. They stoped due to the high price (relative) as compared to new stock (surplus) on hand. The early actions (low number) were very high quality, pleanty hard and very functional. We have been over this conversation for years now. | |||
|
| One of Us |
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Big Earl: What about my .400 Whelen? That'll work, so will a .35 Brown-Whelen. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Please pardon the slight digression, but what, exactly, are you intending to do with these receivers? I get the impression that you intend to weld square bridges onto them for scope mounting, is that the case? BTW IMO 25-06, 30-06, 35 Whelen and 400 Whelen are all traditionally appropriate and Col Whelen really liked his own 1903s in 257 Roberts and 270 WCF. Regards, Joe __________________________ You can lead a human to logic but you can't make him think. NRA Life since 1976. God bless America! | |||
|
| One of Us |
Honestly I'm not 100% sure exactly what I'll have done to them. I may square bridge the rear but I seriously doubt that I'll touch the front. I will almost definitely surface grind it to get rid of the markings on the front ring. Also likely weld up and reshape the bolt stop/cutoff. Probably something similar to the ACGG rifle Ed Lapour did but not as drastic a change as he did on the bolt stop. I just want to make sure that the actions I get are the best ones to use for the project. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I have two DHT actions. They have been completely rebuilt. Re-stocked, new barrels, Timney Triggers, bolts turned to wear Leupold scopes. One is in 35 Whelen and the other is my 338-06. Sorry....I will not part with either of them! Barstooler | |||
|
| one of us |
Big Earl, news to me that the NRA ever heat treated any actions. Have got the magazine from its 1923 first issue, have never read amything of the kind, active in the NRA for over 60 years and never heard of it. Pardon my doubts, but I think your statement is all wet and off the wall. Please correct me if I am wrong. | |||
|
| one of us |
Joshua, as you say reheat treating Mausers is well understood. To the contrary, 1903s remain a mystery and I seriously advise, leave them alone. Do not ... and I do not understand that you plan to anyway ... weld scope bases on the receiver. Drill holes. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Vigillinus, No problems with the doubts, but you are mistaken if you do not believe the NRA ever heat treated 1903 actions. Give me a we bit of time and I will provide the proof. No problem. Also if memory serves, the 7x57 Mauser was the second or third most popular chambering for G&H. Dont weld the front ring of any reciever and I would not advise grinding off the stamp on the front ring, it says in essence "made in the USA". The Springfield is more than a tool, it's a work of art and American history. | |||
|
| one of us |
Joshua I agree with vigillinus completely on the above statement. Here are a couple of different treatments a smith did for me on 03 actions. Both are fastened with screws but I think they look nice. The first is for Buehler rings.   This one is for Kimber rings.   ****************************** "We do not exaggerate when we state positively that the remodelled Springfield is the best and most suitable "all 'round" rifle".......Seymour Griffin, GRIFFIN & HOWE, Inc. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Joshua, I've always loved 1903s and have built a number of them, doing 2 right now. I like their classic early-20th-century look as well as their slick-&-smooth operation after lapping. Their close association with such luminaries as Whelen, Griffin & Howe, Hoffman, Niedner, Owen and others adds still more attraction for me. I strongly recommend that you do not deface the original serial number in any way. Not for any legal reason, no, not at all, since a new # can easily be added to satisfy all legal requirements. No, the reason that it's always A Bad Thing to remove the original 1903 # is that the original marking is the 'pedigree' of the receiver. The number proves the origin and desirability of the receiver, placing it in either the 'desirable' or 'not so desirable' category, and would/will be a benchmark for admirers and future owners to judge the rifle. In my mind it would be akin to removing the Mauser Banner and BUG proofs from an Oberndorf receiver. IOW it would be an irreparable loss that would seriously damage the perceived value of the finished rifle. 'Cause you can bet your life that many folks will automatically assume that, since the original markings were removed, why then it just HASTA be a low number or an 03A3 that some crook made and foisted off! Otherwise why would anyone remove such a valuable provenance? JMO. Regards, Joe __________________________ You can lead a human to logic but you can't make him think. NRA Life since 1976. God bless America! | |||
|
| one of us |
Big Earl, pardon my raised eyebrows. Since it does not exist it will take you a long time to come up with evidence that NRA heat treated 1903 actions. Idared and JDS, complete agreement, especially as to the sin of grinding off the arsenal marks. I am retrogressive enough to like a G&H sidemount because it leaves the ring completely bare. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Guys, I think this is where Big Earls train jumped the tracks. The American Rifleman February, 1936 “R.F. Sedgley, Inc. has offered to check the headspace of old-type M-1903 actions for NRA members free of charge. The firm is in a position to adjust defective actions and to proof-fire the rifle at their quotations. They are also prepared to re-heat treat such old-type receivers for added toughness or to eliminate the condition of excessive brittleness. Sedgley has so re-heat treated ten thousand or more of such actions and I have not heard of any blow ups to date.” | |||
|
| One of Us |
I'll also say that the Armory could and did re-heat treated 1903's. I believe that the cost was the reason they stopped. November, 1921 Arms & the Man “Concerning the Strength of the Springfield” by Hatcher. ”The new treatment started with guns numbered about 800,000, and when guns are repaired at Springfield Armory, receivers with numbers earlier than this are either scrapped or retreated.” February 1, 1925 American Rifleman Townsend Whelen answering question about heat treatment of 1903’s. “All rifles now being manufactured and all above No. 800,000 have the new heat treatment. Many of the older ones which have been returned to the Armory for repairs have been re-heat treated.” | |||
|
| One of Us |
Vigillinus, I have 2 Jaeger side mounts ready for installation on my 2 project 1903s to avoid hiding the arsenal markings. Last year I bench-made a special extended front mount to avoid defacing or hiding a friend's Mauser Banner ring, it would have been sacrilege IMO. Regards, Joe __________________________ You can lead a human to logic but you can't make him think. NRA Life since 1976. God bless America! | |||
|
| One of Us |
It has often occurred to me that one easy method of 're-heat-treating' a low-number receiver would be to anneal it at a temp of ~600-620F. This is the temp that anneals most spring steel from a too-hard state down to a tougher springier usable hardness level but still leaves it hard enough to be quite strong. IOW in manufacture the spring steel is first hardened to the maximum or close to it and then annealed or softened down to the springy state, the state where the spring can be bent and still return to its original shape. Theoretically this would serve to at least partially relieve the brittleness of some of the early receivers without weakening them. I realize that my temp estimate may be a little off, but is my reasoning off? Thoughts? Regards, Joe __________________________ You can lead a human to logic but you can't make him think. NRA Life since 1976. God bless America! | |||
|
| One of Us |
They are all interesting with or without the Armory markings.  | |||
|
| One of Us |
so my action in the 338,400 range from Rock Island is peachy keen? now I just have to figure what kind of caliber to put a barrel on it chambered in... | |||
|
| one of us |
Might I suggest .30-06? MKane160 You can always make more money, you can never make more time...........LLYWD. Have you signed your donor card yet? | |||
|
| One of Us |
You could be right, neither Hatcher nor Sharpe wrote about it in the volumes I have from them. I do believe I am correct however.
Mr. Petrov, I promise my train has been derailed for some time now. By the way, you did a real credit to history with your book. Thanks. I did e-mail the NRA on this (actualy their National Firearms Museum)and the C.M.P. and I will post their replies, even if it does show me all wet. Here is what I wrote: Dear NRA, I am guessing that I am e-mailing the wrong person on this but I am hoping that you can pass this e-mail to someone with Historical knowledge on the subject of the NRA’s involvement with the Army’s Director of Civilian Marksmanship post World War One. As I understand it, The D.C.M made available to NRA members Springfield 1903 Rifles and a short time after offered the recipients of these rifles the option to return these rifles to have the actions re-hardened. Also as I understand it, this was soon abandonded with new “high number” Springfields given in replacement. Am I wrong on this? There is on-line debate currently and I would dearly love to prove that I am not “all wet”. Thanks for you time and please keep up the good fight for us all. Earl Baumann. | |||
|
| One of Us |
| |||
|
| One of Us |
Idared, That is some nice work on those two rifles! Just goes to show how close a fit you can get with a little measuring, proper tooling set up and a little Clover. My current Springfield project (barrel in the lathe now) Will be another .400 Whelen with one of Duane’s drop bottom metal units and a single square bridge. Duanes bottom metal is every bit a nice as other posters have stated. And would really help to make a full custom something special.  | |||
|
| new member |
New guy--- Did I not read somewhere that the problem with low number Springfields was overheating prior to quenching causing excessive grain growth in the metal. This would be a tough problem to fix by re-heat treating and drawing the temper would not do any good. Chuck | |||
|
| one of us |
Big Earl Whose barrel are you using and what are the specs. Many thanks ****************************** "We do not exaggerate when we state positively that the remodelled Springfield is the best and most suitable "all 'round" rifle".......Seymour Griffin, GRIFFIN & HOWE, Inc. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Hello all. A few things that may help clear up some details. The reason that I would grind off the original markings would be to stipple the front ring. Looking at the early Whelen, Griffin & Howe, Hoffman, Niedner, and Owen customs that you mention this is done on roughly half of the really nice ones I see. I therefore don't see how my doing it is sacrilegious. I'm definitely not ashamed of the markings and consider myself quite patriotic. If fact I'm writing this from my tent in Afghanistan where I disarm IED's to keep all our troops safe. I just happen to prefer the stippled look and since I'm building them for me that's what they'll get. As far as perceived value due to the lack of the original serial number you may be correct. I would counter though that if one is going to dump $30,000 into a trio (doing an M2 as well) of rifles and likely have them built by a guild member that the receiver should not be in question. For someone to spend that much money on the rifles and try to save $200-300 by using low number receivers defies all logic. This is the very reason for this thread. To ensure I get the best receivers possible for the build. So I guess what it comes down to is am I better off to start with DHT receivers despite the fact that the surface grinding and welding may weaken the very layer that provides the strength, or use NS receivers as they don't rely on this for strength and then possibly carburize them at the end to slick them up? Duane, what are your thoughts on this? I know your not a fan of carburizing any action. Thanks, Josh | |||
|
| One of Us |
Josh, If you are going to all that effort then stippeling would be a poor effort compared to checkering. A couple years ago I used a Melin 90 degree mill cutter along with a rotab and center and did a very nice job “checkering” the front ring of a Springfield. Even my effort looked a ton better than the best profesional stippeling. I would believe a profesional checkering job would be much better and a lot more pleasing to the eye. I also, on the two Springfields I had welded REAR bridges to, used Kasenit on the two small 1/8” x 1 “ contact areas before welding (I had a friend weld them, as I am a lousey welder) and they at least felt slicker after final clean up.  Idared, I am using a Douglas barrel I received uncontoured and am having indentured servents turn it with an off set tailstock. My last .400 was ordered as a “400 Whelen” barrel from Pac-Nor in the coarse of convervation with Penny out there and I just had her add it too the list of barrels I was ordering, no real thought. After I fitted it too the reciever I discovered my reamer did not fit, they sent me a .408 barrel. I ground the pilot and had CH4D make me some dies. I discussed this with Pac-Nor and they stoped advertising a “400 Whelen” chambering until they started making a .411 barrel. I also have two more Springfields in the works, a 7mm Weatherby and a .375 in a matched set but it will be a couple years on these.  Indentured servant pulling yeomans duty on a .411 barrel. | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia