Just acquired my first '03 Springfield.

I just bought this old gun from a seller who said that they acquired it from CMP some years back and have never shot it. The barrel looks possibly original to the receiver and I was just wondering if I could get some thought and comments from some here who have way more experience and insight than I do.

Some questions:
1. If the rifle was manufactured in Feb 1918, is it possible that it would have seen combat before war's end in November?
2. The inspection stamps on the furniture are really faint (except for the deep Greek serial ID stamp). On the left side, just rear of the grip it looks faintly like "CJB". Can someone confirm or tell me what this is? Anything else that might indicate it saw any action in WWII?
3. Were barrels ever not replaced if the rifles were used in conflicts post-WWI?
4. Besides the stacking swivel, is there any other obvious parts that don't belong to this rifle?

Thanks so much in advance. As soon as this current virus thing settles down, I want to take this rifle out to the range.

Attachment 47454Attachment 47455Attachment 47456Attachment 47457Attachment 47458

Attachment 47459Attachment 47460Attachment 47461Attachment 47462Attachment 47463

Attachment 47464Attachment 47465Attachment 47466

I think you have a “Greek returned” rifle with a pinned floorplate. (The “B” stamped on the floorplate is the tell-tale.)

Browse around www.m1903.com to learn more about your rifle.

SRS records can sometimes indicate the history of a rifle’s service. Post a separate message on this site requesting a SRS check and you will be contacted. In the absence of any such records, most milsurp gun owners can tell a war-worn rifle by looking at its condition.

According to www.m1903.com, CJB is an unidentified Springfield inspector.

The rebuilders often used 03A3 bolts in place of the old Springfield bolts for safety reasons. The swept back angle of the handle on your bolt is a characteristic of the 03A3 bolt. Look under the handle for a small R stamped in the bolt body indicating it was made by Remington. Rebuilders often used other 03A3 parts (butt plates, barrel bands, swivels, etc.) simply because they were available and they worked.

The 03s that were sent to Greece were put through a rebuilding process and any worn or unsafe part would have been replaced. Obviously, the original stock and barrel on your rifle survived. Some rifle’s were assigned to Navy ships and rarely used compared to those used by the grunts and might be the reason for your rifle’s condition. I have a 1943 Remington 03A3 in similar condition. It’s serial number is close to some that served aboard the USS Reno.

Good shooting. Let us know how she does.

JimF: indeed it appears its seen time in Greece. The "B" is present on the floor plate along with the last 4 digits of the serial on the stock and bolt. Thank you for your response!

Merc: Appreciate the advice. I will get that request for an SRS check as you directed. I'll definitely post a range report when this virus-thing allows.

Merc: SRS check turned up empty.. but I hear that's fairly common.

JimF: I checked under the bolt and there indeed is a Remington "R" stamped. Additionally, and it may not be any kind of artifact, but there's a dimple stamped just above the "R".

Attachment 47473

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AustinWiseguy

I checked under the bolt and there indeed is a Remington "R" stamped. Additionally, and it may not be any kind of artifact, but there's a dimple stamped just above the "R".

Attachment 47473

---

The rebuilders often used various ways to indicate that an item had been tested or inspected. They usually used an initials stamp but something as simple as a punch mark would serve a purpose. Don’t forget, your rifle was given to the Greeks who had their own ideas on marking them, so anything’s possible.

Merc, can you envision a scenario where a rifle like this one was built in early 1918 and went through both world wars and the Greek civil war and the barrel not being replaced? I'm thinking this gun maybe spent a whole lot of time on guard duty and not much else. The previous owner indicated it's still in the same condition as he bought it from CMP. Thoughts?

The SRS report might hold some interesting possibilities. The rifles Johnny mentioned in his report with close serial numbers were assigned to an US Army Training Center (USATC) and USN IND which is probably the WW2 aircraft carrier USS Independence. IMHO, a rifle that’s rarely fired and minimally handled would more likely have been part of a ships’ arsenal.

I appreciate your opinion on it. Thanks!

I had a similar situation with an M1903 Greek return rifle. It is a 1921 rifle with a correct 1921 barrel. MarineA1Sniper whose knowledge of USMC rifles is encyclopedic and who no longer posts here...unfortunatly confirmed that it was a USMC rifle. So did John Beard. The barrel has the letter "A" under the date which means that it passed inspection during a rebuild. when I asked how the rifle could go that long without a new barrel the answer was that it probably was issued to a bandsman or cook and never left the United States. It does happen. In fact very rarely a rifle will show up that apparently was never issued or was used very lightly and never went through rebuild.

Congratulations on your rifle.

The Greeks seemed to have taken good care of the 03s they were given. My 1925 03 Greek return was still mostly covered by the heavy grease they used as a preservative when I bought it. A friend bought from the CMP in 2002 sold it to me last summer. He never cleaned or shot it and didn’t have a clue that it was a Greek return. You could say that he never really got to know the rifle.

I baked the stock in the sun to get some of the oil out of the wood fibers and then treated it several times with acetone. It was a mess but there was no rust or rot anywhere after being in storage for more than 50 years, so I tip my hat to the Greeks. It has a Remington 03A3 stock, a Remington 03A3 bolt and a High Std 9/44 barrel. It’s finish is 99% with no measurable wear (and shoots nice groups).

Thank you again, Art and Merc. I'm continuing to research and came across a guy on the MilSurp forum who also had a Greek return. His had that mysterious mark under the barrel which I think is a small-case "pi" symbol. Read that this Greek letter sometimes refers to pressure and if it means anything, I'm guessing it might be another inspection mark of theirs. The point about being issued to support troops is a good one. I suppose mine may have been rear-guard issued and then made its way to a Navy ship's small arms arsenal.

Question: Is there a difference between an 03 and an 03A3 stock? Can you point me to any references that would describe it? Thanks again for helping me get more familiar with this rifle. Love this history.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AustinWiseguy

Thank you again, Art and Merc. I'm continuing to research and came across a guy on the MilSurp forum who also had a Greek return. His had that mysterious mark under the barrel which I think is a small-case "pi" symbol. Read that this Greek letter sometimes refers to pressure and if it means anything, I'm guessing it might be another inspection mark of theirs. The point about being issued to support troops is a good one. I suppose mine may have been rear-guard issued and then made its way to a Navy ship's small arms arsenal.

Question: Is there a difference between an 03 and an 03A3 stock? Can you point me to any references that would describe it? Thanks again for helping me get more familiar with this rifle. Love this history.

---

biggest difference is the cut for the rear sight, on the 03's and the cut for the rear band or retainer (that held the A3 handguard near the front of the receiver,)

there were replacements made that had both features,


after a very quick search the best pic I could find, of a replacement stock with both features

note the small cutouts in the stock just in front of the barrel mounted sight collar,



https://www.fototime.com/26116953779A120/standard.jpg

The 03A3 stocks that I’m familiar with were made without finger grooves and will have Lt. Col. Frank J. Atwood’s initials (FJA) and the Ordnance Wheel symbol stamped on the left wrist. There are four different inspectors marks just forward of the trigger guard and a circled P stamped just behind the trigger guard.

http://www.proofhouse.com/cm/us_inspector.htm

Inspector chart.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Merc

I baked the stock in the sun to get some of the oil out of the wood fibers and then treated it several times with acetone.

---

In the '60s, when dirt-cheap milsurp rifles were being advertised in all the gun mags, I bought a good many of them, including several with stocks so oil-soaked they were black as tar. Fortunately, the professional do-gooders & bed-wetters had not yet banned the sale of carbon tetrachloride, the most effective of all oil & grease solvents, & unlike acetone, not flammable--in fact it was used in liquid fire extinguishers! Could be bought at any drug store. If you find yourself doing this again, I'd suggest wrapping the wood with paper towels, then black plastic, before leaving it in the sun.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clintonhater

In the '60s, when dirt-cheap milsurp rifles were being advertised in all the gun mags, I bought a good many of them, including several with stocks so oil-soaked they were black as tar. Fortunately, the professional do-gooders & bed-wetters had not yet banned the sale of carbon tetrachloride, the most effective of all oil & grease solvents, & unlike acetone, not flammable--in fact it was used in liquid fire extinguishers! Could be bought at any drug store. If you find yourself doing this again, I'd suggest wrapping the wood with paper towels, then black plastic, before leaving it in the sun.

---

The acetone seemed to have pulled the oil out but placing the stock in a black plastic bag will definitely raise the temperature a lot higher. I heard adding cat litter inside the bag also works to absorb oil. I remember when Carbon Tet was still being used. Nasty stuff.

My 03A3 was still covered with dried cosmoline when I bought it several years ago. Acetone and a rough dish washing sponge worked well to remove it without disturbing the metal finish or the stock. No oozing oil with cosmoline.

The thing that I wonder about is how some gun owners can buy an old gun that’s still covered with a preservative and never clean or shoot it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Merc

I remember when Carbon Tet was still being used. Nasty stuff.

---

If you have heard that, or read that, allow me to correct this false impression. It's no more "nasty" that acetone or lacquer thinner (the best substitute for carbon tet I've found; each time I go to the hardware store to buy a can, I wonder if EPA will have banned it, too), provided it's used with some element of common sense--but that's always excluded from EPA testing. Years after I was cleaning those stocks, I had a job in a lab which involved cleaning glassware with carbon tet, done inside a ventilated hood; probably used a quart every day. I have survived to the age of 77, with no reparatory or other serious health problems beyond controllable hypertension.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Merc

The acetone seemed to have pulled the oil out but placing the stock in a black plastic bag will definitely raise the temperature a lot higher. I heard adding cat litter inside the bag also works to absorb oil. I remember when Carbon Tet was still being used. Nasty stuff.

My 03A3 was still covered with dried cosmoline when I bought it several years ago. Acetone and a rough dish washing sponge worked well to remove it without disturbing the metal finish or the stock. No oozing oil with cosmoline.

The thing that I wonder about is how some gun owners can buy an old gun that’s still covered with a preservative and never clean or shoot it.

---

some of us think we are collectors,

and some are bought cause the price was right and we have others to shoot,


I did clean all the Greek 03's I bought from the CMP,

however, I still have a No 4 Mk2 in the mummy wrap, and a Long Branch No 4 (made in 1950) I bought from a guy out of NH or VT back in the 90's that was used, but packed in some white grease , and I never cleaned it off

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clintonhater

If you have heard that, or read that, allow me to correct this false impression. It's no more "nasty" that acetone or lacquer thinner (the best substitute for carbon tet I've found; each time I go to the hardware store to buy a can, I wonder if EPA will have banned it, too), provided it's used with some element of common sense--but that's always excluded from EPA testing. Years after I was cleaning those stocks, I had a job in a lab which involved cleaning glassware with carbon tet, done inside a ventilated hood; probably used a quart every day. I have survived to the age of 77, with no reparatory or other serious health problems beyond controllable hypertension.

---

The company I worked for used to clean parts with it but switched to something a bit tamer. It supposedly caused liver and kidney problems if over exposure occurred which was something we evidentially avoided.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lyman

some of us think we are collectors,

and some are bought cause the price was right and we have others to shoot,


I did clean all the Greek 03's I bought from the CMP,

however, I still have a No 4 Mk2 in the mummy wrap, and a Long Branch No 4 (made in 1950) I bought from a guy out of NH or VT back in the 90's that was used, but packed in some white grease , and I never cleaned it off

---

There’s undoubtedly a separate market for NOS rifles still wrapped in the original factory packaging. Those should be kept undisturbed as collectors items. The same treatment might be given to uncommon rifles and those that were never fired or rebuilt and still have all their original parts. It sounds like you have some that qualify.

I’m talking about the old, used, banged up, rebuilt mixmaster rifles that are common and went into long-term storage after the war. I’m glad to see that someone thought that they were good enough to be saved and were coated with a preservative. To me, the enjoyment of owning one of these relics includes restoring it to its former glory by cleaning and oiling it, checking to see if everything works, identifying all the parts, checking all the critical measurements, replacing anything that’s defective and shooting it a few times a year.

They’re fun to shoot but to see the look on the faces of fellow shooters at the range when they see one of my relic rifles is priceless. The M1903, 03A3, No. 4 Mk1* and M1917 are impressive rifles. They bring their AR to the range that might weigh a few pounds and I hand them a nearly 10 pound 102 year old M1917 and they light up. I make a lot of friends that way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lyman

biggest difference is the cut for the rear sight, on the 03's and the cut for the rear band or retainer (that held the A3 handguard near the front of the receiver,)

there were replacements made that had both features,


after a very quick search the best pic I could find, of a replacement stock with both features

note the small cutouts in the stock just in front of the barrel mounted sight collar,



https://www.fototime.com/26116953779A120/standard.jpg

---

Got a chance to take a closer look at my stock. It doesn’t have the cutouts as you shared on yours. So giving the absence of the cutouts and finger groove as mentioned by Merc, I’m thinking i actually have the appropriate M03 stock and not the 03A3 as suggested previously. Is this correct?

You have a M1903 stock.

Think of the 03A3 as a cheaper version of the M1903 that was much faster to produce. All the various parts that took hours to make on milling machines were now being mass produced by stamping them from sheet metal. They eliminate unnecessary things such as finger grooves in the stock. They found that cutting 2 grooves in the barrel instead of 4 had little effect on accuracy. The Army was happy because they got their rifles in weeks instead of months and the price was cheaper. The M1903 was a fine rifle but was sacrificed in the name of speed of production and cost.

Great! Now to get past the lock-down so I can take this rifle and bring it back to life. Thanks again!

Don't worry, it never died.

If cleaning the rifle bore is high on your list of things to do, take a look at the Otis Cleaning System with its pull through cable design. The original cleaning kits that were issued with the 03s were also pull through. Metal rods can wear away the muzzle crown.

@JohnnyP: No, not dead, just sleeping. It's great to see them doing what they've been made to do.

@Merc: Thanks for advice. I do tend to use pull-through bore snakes with casual cleaning. This one looks like it's been cleaned, polished and freshly oiled. The previous owner bought it from CMP years ago and swears he's never fired it so I'm not sure the last time it's actually been put to use. The bore is pretty bright for 102 years old.

However, I will be using rod and solvent elbow grease on a recently acquired 105 year old Finn-capture Mosin. Lots of lead and copper build up there. It still shoots well and no crown damage but a shame how some of these old guns get neglected. I have a rod guide that I'll be using on it but it sure looks like it's going to take a long afternoon to get most of it cleaned out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Merc

The M1903 was a fine rifle...

---

Except for the M1905 rear sight, merely a modified Buffington Trap Door sight little changed from the original design of 1884; which was an advanced sight...for 1884! For shooting, give me the A3 sight, crude looking as it may appear compared to the M1905.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clintonhater

Except for the M1905 rear sight, merely a modified Buffington Trap Door sight little changed from the original design of 1884; which was an advanced sight...for 1884! For shooting, give me the A3 sight, crude looking as it may appear compared to the M1905.

---

I tinkered a lot with both sights before finally reaching zero. The longer eye radius on the M1903 worked to its disadvantage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Merc

I tinkered a lot with both sights before finally reaching zero. The longer eye radius on the M1903 worked to its disadvantage.

---

Think you meant to say "longer eye radius on the A3." But a longer sight radius is never a disadvantage in terms of accurate aiming. Chief disadvantage of the M1905 was its placement too far down the barrel, because it was supposed to be a compromise between an open sight, which some Army troglodytes wanted to retain, & a peep sight, which must be close to the eye for max effectiveness. It's deficiencies were quickly recognized by the leading rifle experts (such as Crossman, Whelen, Hatcher), but they didn't sit on the Ordnance Board that approved it. The same Buffington who authorized the trap-door sight in 1884 was Chief of Ordnance until late Nov. of 1901, which suggests that the resemblance between the two sights was not accidental.

I was referring to the placement of the sight on the 03 and it’s distance from the shooter being a disadvantage. I once bought a “long eye relief” scope for a Mauser that was designed to be placed several inches away from the eye and somehow my mind shifted into neutral and confused “radius” and “relief.”