View Full Version : Longitudinal play of the uncocked bolt
Hi guys!
I am new to this forum and have also been a question:
Recently I can purchase a Springfield 1903 A1. This rifle is hard to get here in Germany and mostly only at exorbitant prices.
What makes me a little worried is about 0.02 inches wide longitudinal clearence of the bolt in a closed but non-tensioned state. However, the used catridge shows not a sign of a to large headspace such as a ring above the cartridge base. Is this clearence to be considered normal?
The rifle himself is in a very good condition but it seems to me refurbished either by a private person or in an arsenal. Some markings on the receiver and on the rear sight base are unknown to me. The barrel is manufactured by Remington marked RA 07/1944 and has 2 grooves.
Please excuse my poor english:icon_redface:
Best regards from germany!
Thomas
[QUOTE=FC-Fan;457011] . . . . . What makes me a little worried is about 0.02 inches wide longitudinal clearence of the bolt in a closed but non-tensioned state. However, the used catridge shows not a sign of a to large headspace such as a ring above the cartridge base. Is this clearence to be considered normal? . . . . . /QUOTE]
Yes, this is normal --Jim
What makes me a little worried is about 0.02 inches wide longitudinal clearence of the bolt in a closed but non-tensioned state. However, the used catridge shows not a sign of a to large headspace such as a ring above the cartridge base. Is this clearence to be considered normal?
.020” longitudinal travel. Without a load that has little to no function of the rifle. I am the only person that takes advantage of the design. There is no limiter on the 03 unless there is a gage in the chamber or if a round is in the chamber. I thought that was handy until I found no one had ever notice that feature before.
I use a feeler gage to measure clearence between the bolt face and case head. The 03 has a 3rd lug that is visible in front of the rear receiver ring. When checking clearence I pull the bolt to the rear amd measure the gap, on an older o3 the gap can be as small as .004”, on o3A3s the gap can be .015” and more. Andyhow I chamber a head space gage and then measure the gap between the receiver ring and safety lug; and then I push the bolt forward to measure the rifle for clearence.
I do not shoot head space gage I shoot loaded ammo so I chamber a round and then pull the bolt back and measure the gap, then push the bolt foreard and measure again; the difference between the two measurments is ‘clearence’.
My cases do not have head space, I off set the length of the chamber with the length of the case. And then I have bolts that are designed to remove clearence for measurements.
F. Guffey
Thank you for the answers. At my 98K with a probably very similar system only this clearence is much lower. That irritates me something.
The measuring I did it in the same manner you recommend, F. Guffey. Thank you.
Richard H Brown Jr
05-15-2016, 07:35
Greetings:
According to http://www.vishooter.net/sa_serialization.txt your rifles receiver was made at the U.S. Arsenal at Srpingfield Massachusetts sometime during 1931. With an approximate date of sometime during March of 1931.
Picture No 1: This the the M1905 sight used on the M1903 rifle. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3vgQuY3vA0FMlVOcmE3NS1Lbkk/view?ths=true Detailed information can me seen at that url.
Pictures 3 & 4: These are problematical, as U.S. Military issued rifles did not have any of those stamped markings. This could indicate that sometime in it's life, the rifle was sent as Lend/Lease to another Allied Nation. The 30/06 indcates that that is the caliber the refle is chambered for. I have no Idea what the TOM stamping means. In Pic No 3. those stamps might be proof marks and acceptance stamps of the nation accepting the rifle for Lend/Lease.
More information on the M1903 and it's variations are in this book. https://www.midwayusa.com/product/764207/the-model-1903-springfield-rifle-and-its-variations-3rd-edition-book-by-joe-poyer It can be found on the net and downloaded for free in the .PDF format.
As for the longitudinal looseness you mention. That is built into the parts, because as the rifle is fired, the metal's temperature increases, and the metal can stretch. I once read that the Concorde Airliner at Mach 2 lengthens anywhere from 5 to 12 inches depending on who's quoted. If there isn't any allowance for metal stretching the rifle can jam if it gets too hot, and you have a club or spear (with the bayonet attached) until the rifle cools down enough for the bolt to function again.
Hope this helps.
RHB
The Mauser has a limiter; the bolt is limited by the bolt handle hitting the rear receiver ring. Then there is that design feature, the Mauser is a control feed design meaning ammo is feed up from the bottom and in front of the bolt face and behind the extractor.
It is possible to lock up a Mauser by forcing it to push feed; meaning the Mauser was not designed to push feed.
F. Guffey
Thank you, Richard. Your comments have helped me.
The book by Joe Poyer I own for some time. Yesterday I received the book by William S. Brophy "The M1903 Springfield Rifles".
This evening I will have in look in it.
Rick the Librarian
05-15-2016, 08:52
More information on the M1903 and it's variations are in this book. https://www.midwayusa.com/product/764207/the-model-1903-springfield-rifle-and-its-variations-3rd-edition-book-by-joe-poyer It can be found on the net and downloaded for free in the .PDF format.
RHB
I would find another source - Poyer's book has it's problems - especially for a newbie. I'm being far more charitable than John Beard.
Also, on the link - it was simply offering the book for sale. It doesn't appear to be viewable online. Brophy is, I believe.
Had any of the authors of all the books on the 03 had an understanding of forward travel of the bolt and its relationship between the third safety lug and rear receiver ring the length of the chamber from the shoulder of the chamber to the bolt face would have allowed the 03 head space to be tracked in thousandths. Instead they choose to use the head space gage in three lengths, the go-gage, the no go-go gage and the field reject length gage.
Again, I do not shoot head space gages, I shoot ammo, I want to know the difference in length between the ammo I am shooting and the chamber. It is possible to measure the length of the chamber 3 different ways; problem; convincing someone it can be done.
F. Guffey
Richard H Brown Jr
05-15-2016, 01:04
I didn't mean to imply that Poyer's book was the ONLY source for 1903 information, with at least 4 revisions, he's found errors or more information for his book.
I only added that URL to Poyer's book to show the title and dust cover illustration, I did mention that .pdf versions were available on the internet and could be downloaded for free.
After more consideration, I believe the rifle had been marked on the rear sight collar, and on the receiver down by the serial number to indicate it had been issued at one time as Lend/Lease to one of our Allies in WW2. And then rebuilt by a field depot or arsenal and/or re-barrelled. Since FC-Fan didn't include a picture of stock cartouches on the underside of the stock in front and behind the trigger guard assy, and on the left side of the stock, we can't tell if the stock was a WW2 replacement from the parts bin during rebuild. The imprints on the rear sight collar seem to be acceptance and inspection stamps of a foreign nation. The 30-06 stamp would remind the user that it's chambered for the U.S. .30 caliber cartridge. I have no idea what the "TOM" stands for. From the condition of the metal finish, I think that it's possibly a battlefield pickup that was squirrelled away for a few decades before it was sold on the continent. If it had been kept in the UK, it probably would have been de-milled to a non-firing condition. Of course I have been wrong on many occasions.
RHB
I compared the acceptance/ inspection stamps to British proofing marks, not close. It would be interesting to know which country applied them.
Rick the Librarian
05-15-2016, 02:15
I didn't mean to imply that Poyer's book was the ONLY source for 1903 information, with at least 4 revisions, he's found errors or more information for his book.
I only added that URL to Poyer's book to show the title and dust cover illustration, I did mention that .pdf versions were available on the internet and could be downloaded for free.
RHB
I briefly checked the 4th ed. and a lot of the mistakes are still there.
Get yourself a NO-GO headspace gauge to see if the chamber is within specs. If the bolt closes on a NO-GO gauge then you will need a bolt set-back tool to determine if the problem is the barrel or the receiver. Then get a Hornady Comparitor tool to check the actual size of the chamber from the base to the ogive of a fired case.
Simple :1948:
Get yourself a NO-GO headspace gauge to see if the chamber is within specs. If the bolt closes on a NO-GO gauge then you will need a bolt set-back tool to determine if the problem is the barrel or the receiver. Then get a Hornady Comparitor tool to check the actual size of the chamber from the base to the ogive of a fired case.
Simple :1948:
If he is talking about the bolt going forward with no load (case in the chamber) what is wrong with simply chambering a round or a case that is minimum length/full length sized or a case that has been fire in a rifle with a trashy old chamber? My favorite cases are cases that are too long to chamber from the shoulder to the case head; because, that is the reason RCBS and Herter put threads in their presses and on their sizing dies.
Again, there is no valid test when checking the 03 type rifles that includes shoving the bolt forward. WITH ONE EXCEPTION! Me; I measure the length of the chamber from the shoulder to the bolt face by measuring bolt travel. It does not matter is it is a head space gage that is called go-gage or no go-gage or the field reject length gage. I am the fan of standards and transfers.
F. Guffey
FC-Fan,
This thread has got some "bad" information in it, I sent you a pm.
FC-Fan,
This thread has got some "bad" information in it, I sent you a pm.
I checked, I will guess the PM will arrive in the AM.
It does not matter is it is a head space gage that is called go-gage or no go-gage or the field reject length gage. I am the fan of standards and transfers.
And then there is modifying a go-gage to measure fron go to infinity or a more practicle .016" longer than a minimum length case.
F. Guffey
I checked, I will guess the PM will arrive in the AM.
And then there is modifying a go-gage to measure fron go to infinity or a more practicle .016" longer than a minimum length case.
F. Guffey
PM was addressed and sent to FC-Fan... the OP
PM was addressed and sent to FC-Fan... the OP
And then there is modifying a go-gage to measure from go to infinity or a more practical .016" longer than a minimum length case.
Randy, I did not receiver your PM in the AM and I will have to assume there is something you do not understand about using one gage to measure the length of a chamber. That would be one gage to measure the length of a chamber from go-gage length to infinity; or as I said a chamber that is .016” longer than a minimum length/full length case. That would be .011” longer than a go-gage length chamber + .002”.
I can understand you wanting to argue if you do not understand what is being done and or said. One gage that has the ability to measure the length of the chamber in thousandths in 16 different lengths has more utility to me than 3 gages with 3 fixed lengths.
Go or no go, or as they said in the old days go and not go.
F. Guffey
fguffy,
I think you're misunderstanding the posting process, I "am not" sending you a pm. When a post addresses a specific member (in this case FC-Fan) that means I'm sending FC-Fan a PM and it has nothing to do with the previous post. Just because it came after your post does not mean I am sending you a PM.
FC-Fan,
This thread has got some "bad" information in it, I sent you a pm.
That is what it was; bad timing; ME? I would have sent the PM without the fan fair.
F. Guffey
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.