M1903 USMC Sniper stock Leather Shim at Rear of Reciever - Continued

In stonger light, I can certainly see that this could be an Armorer/NM Rifle type modification.

The stock itself, and the handguard, appear to be a matched set, with S or 9 (or both) markings in evidence.

Note that it has no rebuild or proof cartouches, only the Drawing number on the butt, and the "S 9" in the cutoff cutout. The number inside the hand guard is also indistinct, but could be an S or 9.

Both the inletting in the stock and the leather D shaped "shim" measure around .100, as best I can tell with simple dial calipers.

It did not let me upload all pictures. I'll see what I can do to get the rest up. CC

Here are some more images:

Is this a "C" stock?

Yes, it is the pre-War Springfield Armory "C", a little trimmer than the WWII versions. It does not seem to have been used originally to build a rifle at Springfield, as it has no sign of it ever having a "P" Proof mark or cartouche anywhere on it. It is dated S 9 or Springfield production, 1939, which could make sense for Marine sniper use, perhaps as new parts direct from SA inventory for the National Match program of the Marines. All of this is just rambling speculation, of course.

Both handguard and stock seem to match perfectly in finish and age. It has some wear and scratches, and was notched (well done, but by hand, looks more "field" than "shop") at some point for a turned down (perhaps a replacement A4?) bolt. (I will check this when I find the reciever I want to use.)
But the cut out in the top of the handguard say it was on a USMC Unertl Sniper, at some point in time. Perhaps the bolt was replaced in the field, for some reason? If it is a forgery, and the patina says it is not, it is a darn good one. I have looked at thousands of old rifle stocks in my lifetime, and this one seems original.

(My original SA marked 1903A4 stock was reported to be from the estate of a former armory type, who had "rescued" several stock sets when the government started destroying the rifles. Perhaps this stock survived in a similar manner.) CC

I notice the stock bushing is of the later design. When was that change made?

Mike

The recess in your stock around the rear trigger guard screw is a normal inletting feature. It appears that someone made a leather shim and stuck it in to improve the bedding.

Your handguard is not a standard USMC sniper-modified handguard.

Thanks for the pictures!

J.B.

i agree with J.B. the genuine handguards iv seen the cut is straight, and have a sharper rise at the back, and have a nice milled surface,with no chatter marks from a sander, stock shouldnt have a cut for a bolt handle as well.
nice piece of wood though, it well be great for a replica shooter.

Yes, Chuck, that is what was bought for, and I'm sure it could serve well. It surprised me how much nicer the pre-War Springfield produced "C" stock feels in the hand than the later, mass production contracted Keystone, etc, stocks do. Similar to the difference between earlier M1 Garand stocks vs. the postwar models.

J.B., I compared it to two other stocks and the inletting at that spot seemed deeper and less "machined" on this example, for lack of a better term. But I will fit it up to a barrelled action and see if there is any forend pressure. Since CMP does not allow shims, that could be important in making the rifle accurate. I really appreciate your knowledge and assistance on items like these, that many of us seldom get to see or handle even once - experience counts!

Gentlemen, if it is somehow a faked USMC handguard, I am not sure how they got such a perfect match and apparent patina "look" between the two pieces of wood. But I'm sure the the current state of the art in wood forgery for fun and profit is quite advanced. I could probably ask for my money back from the seller, if we are very certain it is a fake. Is there no possibility that these handguards were hand produced at more than one time or location, with differences resulting? Should I return it as a fake and demand my money? The stock and handguard were represented as being genuine. I would hate to let a fraud artist slide - but I would also hate to give up a decent 1939 Springfield C stock in the process, too. Worse, I would hate to falsely accuse someone, if they were honest and we were just looking at an uncommon variation.

Thanks to all, CC

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Col. Colt

Yes, Chuck, that is what was bought for, and I'm sure it could serve well. It surprised me how much nicer the pre-War Springfield produced "C" stock feels in the hand than the later, mass production contracted Keystone, etc, stocks do. Similar to the difference between earlier M1 Garand stocks vs. the postwar models.

J.B., I compared it to two other stocks and the inletting at that spot seemed deeper and less "machined" on this example, for lack of a better term. But I will fit it up to a barrelled action and see if there is any forend pressure. Since CMP does not allow shims, that could be important in making the rifle accurate. I really appreciate your knowledge and assistance on items like these, that many of us seldom get to see or handle even once - experience counts!

Gentlemen, if it is somehow a faked USMC handguard, I am not sure how they got such a perfect match and apparent patina "look" between the two pieces of wood. But I'm sure the the current state of the art in wood forgery for fun and profit is quite advanced. I could probably ask for my money back from the seller, if we are very certain it is a fake. Is there no possibility that these handguards were hand produced at more than one time or location, with differences resulting? Should I return it as a fake and demand my money? The stock and handguard were represented as being genuine. I would hate to let a fraud artist slide - but I would also hate to give up a decent 1939 Springfield C stock in the process, too. Worse, I would hate to falsely accuse someone, if they were honest and we were just looking at an uncommon variation.

Thanks to all, CC

---

I chose my words carefully. I stated that your handguard was not a standard USMC sniper-modified handguard. I cannot rule out the possibility that your handguard was modified by the USMC for sniper use at a different time and place than usual. I noted the aged appearance. I am also aware that non-standard practices were commonplace in the USMC. They improvised extensively and seldom seemed bound by hard rules and procedures. But, the burden of proof rests between the buyer and seller. I certainly do not suggest or imply fraud.

USMC sniper handguards were modified by machine. While I have noted some minor variation indicating the likelihood of more than one production run, your handguard was clearly not modified on the machinery used to modify the authentic handguards I have seen. I concur with Chuckindenver in that respect. I, therefore, reserve judgement regarding your handguard's authenticity.

If you were looking to restore an authentic USMC sniper rifle, then perhaps you need to keep looking for another stock and handguard that's less questionable. If, on the other hand, you merely sought to build up a functional replica, what you have appears more than adequate.

With regard to your stock, you can make and glue a hardwood shim in your stock that would be completely undetectable and restore the proper fore end pressure. While some may frown on such practice, you're merely restoring the functionality in your stock that was originally present.

Hope this helps. Thanks again for taking the time to make and post pictures!

J.B.

i would say, look at pics of a few genuine examples, and make your own assesment, as J.B. said, anything is possible with Marine use of weapons, if they needed it, they made it happened.
many moons ago, i had a in the wrap, USMC handguard, held on to it for a long time, until i built a rifle for a USMC museum, it was worth using on that rifle.
the cut for the sight base was even, straight and likely done by a machine rather then by hand, as well as the sweep cut for the clearance.
if you building a replica for shooting it shouldnt matter, if you have a genuine USMC sniper, id do some more research.