"low numbered" M1903's and German 8mm ammo

With the 100th anniversary of the US entrance into WW1 I have been re-reading a few books that are personal accounts of American participants. Two that I have enjoyed are “Make the Kaiser Dance”, by Henry Berry and “Doughboy War” edited by James Hallis. In the latter, there were a number of references to the book, “I Remember the Last War” by Bob Hoffman. Hoffman was a Sergeant in Co. A, 111th Inf Reg., 28th Division. For those of you who might have lifted weights many years ago, Bob Hoffman was better known as the US Olympic weight lifting coach, York Barbell founder and publisher of “Strength and Health” and “Muscular Development” magazines.
When Hoffman’s unit went to France in 1918 they were trained in a British camp. “We were equipped at this camp with British rifles which were somewhat different from the Springfields we had in the beginning of the war and the Enfields we used later”.
The last portion of his book describes his experiences in Fismette, France. They were short of food, water and ammunition. “…had to be careful of their ammunition for one never knew when we would get any more. The hand grenades and German ammunition we had found were brought up to the lines. It would fit our guns [!]. Later he continues “Fortunately, we could use their ammunition, and the potato-masher grenades were of considerable use to us.”
It would be interesting to know if Co. A, 111th Inf was using the M1903 or the M1917, or both, and if they really did fire the 8 mm German rifle round in their rifles due to shortage of .30-06 ammo. Having looked at the listings of failed, “low number” M1903 receivers, at least 4 in the 1920’s (according to Hatcher) were caused by using an 8mm round.
I wonder how many other Doughboys thought that the German 8mm round could be used in a .30-06 rifle? If they did, were they lucky or WIA or KIA?
Thought this might be of interest to “low number” ’03 collectors and WW1 history buffs. Hoffman’s book is a very interesting read. I paid $50 for an original 1940 copy a few years ago. It is now available from Amazon on Kindle and reprint. I wish he had included his experiences in the Argonne.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chuck Russell

With the 100th anniversary of the US entrance into WW1 I have been re-reading a few books that are personal accounts of American participants. Two that I have enjoyed are “Make the Kaiser Dance”, by Henry Berry and “Doughboy War” edited by James Hallis. In the latter, there were a number of references to the book, “I Remember the Last War” by Bob Hoffman. Hoffman was a Sergeant in Co. A, 111th Inf Reg., 28th Division. For those of you who might have lifted weights many years ago, Bob Hoffman was better known as the US Olympic weight lifting coach, York Barbell founder and publisher of “Strength and Health” and “Muscular Development” magazines.
When Hoffman’s unit went to France in 1918 they were trained in a British camp. “We were equipped at this camp with British rifles which were somewhat different from the Springfields we had in the beginning of the war and the Enfields we used later”.
The last portion of his book describes his experiences in Fismette, France. They were short of food, water and ammunition. “…had to be careful of their ammunition for one never knew when we would get any more. The hand grenades and German ammunition we had found were brought up to the lines. It would fit our guns [!]. Later he continues “Fortunately, we could use their ammunition, and the potato-masher grenades were of considerable use to us.”
It would be interesting to know if Co. A, 111th Inf was using the M1903 or the M1917, or both, and if they really did fire the 8 mm German rifle round in their rifles due to shortage of .30-06 ammo. Having looked at the listings of failed, “low number” M1903 receivers, at least 4 in the 1920’s (according to Hatcher) were caused by using an 8mm round.
I wonder how many other Doughboys thought that the German 8mm round could be used in a .30-06 rifle? If they did, were they lucky or WIA or KIA?
Thought this might be of interest to “low number” ’03 collectors and WW1 history buffs. Hoffman’s book is a very interesting read. I paid $50 for an original 1940 copy a few years ago. It is now available from Amazon on Kindle and reprint. I wish he had included his experiences in the Argonne.

---

I don't remember trying to chamber an 8 mm Mauser in a M1903, maybe someone can tell us how hard that is to do. My father was a WW2 veteran and he had a story about the Japanese. He, and other WW2 vets, would in all seriousness repeat a story they had been told, and that was the Japanese had been planning to go to war against the US and being forward thinking, chambered their service rifles in a larger caliber than the 30-06. Because their rifles took a larger caliber round they could shoot 30-06 ammunition in their rifle, but of course, we could not shoot Japanese ammunition in our rifles. This was totally bogus as I tried to get a 30-06 round in a 7.7 Arisaka and it won't fit in the magazine and I could not close the bolt.

Memory is quite inexact and it is very possible the author you quote, remembered something that did not actually happen. I do not know if it takes a mallet to chamber an 8mm Mauser in a M1903 or M1917 chamber, but if it does, it is unlikely that shooting German service rifle ammunition in American service rifles was a common practice. It would be a highly dangerous practice if the case neck of the 8mm cartridge was pinched. This would be similar to a bore obstruction and would likely burst the case. In fact, the tin coating on the bullets of the called 1921 NM ammunition created a dangerous condition by cold welding to the case neck. The intermetallic bond was such that the case neck did not expand to release the bullet. Months before the 1921 National Matches, Townsend Whelen wrote in the Arms and the Man descriptions of tearing cases apart in an attempt to pull bullets from the tin can ammunition. Recently a NRA technical expert said the NRA has a collection of fired bullets from the 1921 NM and these bullets all have case necks attached! Of course rifles blew up at the 1921 National Matches with the tin can ammunition, the Army did not acknowledge the problem was of their making, in fact claimed that the ammunition was perfectly safe. Regardless, case head rupture is very bad in any M1903 because these things don't handle gas well. I do remember Micheal Petrov fired 8mm Mauser cartridges in a couple of low number receivers, and apparently, the actions held. He removed the pictures before I could see them and I don't remember any specifics from his stunt.

I would suggest to those who say it is safe to fire 8mm Mauser cartridges in M1903's, or worse, low number actions, to go to the range and shoot around 50 rounds of 8mm Mauser in their low number 03's and tell us the results. Actual tests are worth a thousand philosophical speculations.

you cannot fire a 8mm Mauser or 7.7 Jap out of a 1903 or 1917. Both rounds are shorter than the 30-06. You can use 30-06 brass to make 7.7 or 8mm brass all it takes is trimming and reforming by moving the shoulder back.

I own three M1903s. I have tried several flavors of 7.92x57mm ball in them to see if I could get the bolt to close on them, well no joy on that; it wasn't even close. I suppose there is someone out there with the arms of a gorilla who crammed the Mauser round into an '03 chamber because I understand it has been done but you would have to work real, real hard at it.

The 7.7x58 mm round for the Type 99 Arisaka was in fact modeled after the .303 British round. This was done because the japs wanted to approximate the performance of the Enfield rifle. As Dragonfly stated, you can't chamber and fire a 7.7x58 round out of a 1903 because of the difference in case length. The same is true in reverse, as a 30-06 round is too long to chamber in a Type 99. The same is also true for the 8mm round. In addition, some have had their Type 99s rechambered for 30-06, and while this solves the problem of a lack of ammo for the Jap rifle, the difference in bullet diameter prevents usable accuracy.

I have an old green and red box of commercial Remington 8mm Mauser ammunition that will chamber in a 1903. In a discussion of the failures reported by Hatcher I dug out the box, and while it doesn't chamber freely, only slight pressure on the bolt handle is needed.

Attachment 36623 FA 18, .30-06 left; S67 MW 3 18, 8mm right

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Johnny P

I have an old green and red box of commercial Remington 8mm Mauser ammunition that will chamber in a 1903. In a discussion of the failures reported by Hatcher I dug out the box, and while it doesn't chamber freely, only slight pressure on the bolt handle is needed.

---

Remington, and the other commercial U.S. companies loaded bullets for the old Winchester .32 Special in their 8mm Mauser ammunition. These bullets are slightly smaller .321" than the 7.92mm Mauser which is .323" to .324." They work fine though, just loaded very light, just a bit over .30-30 Winchester velocities. The Remington's are also seated deeper in the case. For an accurate comparison you should use either European commercial or 7.92 mm military ball. See if those chamber in your '03.

A thread in another forum had a copy of an Oct 1945 American Rifleman article "Why the Winchester Model 95 was Discontinued". The first and foremost reason was lack of sales. A number of M95's were blown up by WW1 veterans chambering 8mm rounds in their 30-06 rifles. Another article said tested pressures of 8mm's in 30-06 M1895's were between 90,000 psia and 120,000 psia. Such pressures would burst the Win M95. Winchester claimed that the rifle got a reputation of being unsafe and that affected sales, and so it was discontinued. The article said chambering an 8mm round was difficult in a 30-06 M1895, but, obvious where there is a will, there is a way.

I am still skeptical of the claims that any American WW1 unit was using German 8mm in their M1903's.

The last receiver failure listed by Hatcher was 801548, from firing a German service cartridge in it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slamfire

A thread in another forum had a copy of an Oct 1945 American Rifleman article "Why the Winchester Model 95 was Discontinued". The first and foremost reason was lack of sales. A number of M95's were blown up by WW1 veterans chambering 8mm rounds in their 30-06 rifles. Another article said tested pressures of 8mm's in 30-06 M1895's were between 90,000 psia and 120,000 psia. Such pressures would burst the Win M95. Winchester claimed that the rifle got a reputation of being unsafe and that affected sales, and so it was discontinued. The article said chambering an 8mm round was difficult in a 30-06 M1895, but, obvious where there is a will, there is a way.

I am still skeptical of the claims that any American WW1 unit was using German 8mm in their M1903's.

---

I understand that cartridges hotter than 30-40 Krag or .303 British were tough on the Model 95, but did not hear that they were unsafe. I do know that the Russian Army bought a bunch of Model 95 military rifles complete with full length stocks, charger guides and bayonet lugs. They were used through both World Wars though in a rear echelon role and the .76x254r was every bit as hot as the early 20th century .30-06 loads. I actually saw one of these rifles once, it had been "rode hard and put up wet" but was still waaaaaay out of my price range. I suspect that the superiority of the bolt action repeater along with the wear the hotter cartridges would put on the '95 both were considerations in its demise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slamfire

..

In fact, the tin coating on the bullets of the called 1921 NM ammunition created a dangerous condition by cold welding to the case neck. The intermetallic bond was such that the case neck did not expand to release the bullet. Months before the 1921 National Matches, Townsend Whelen wrote in the Arms and the Man descriptions of tearing cases apart in an attempt to pull bullets from the tin can ammunition. Recently a NRA technical expert said the NRA has a collection of fired bullets from the 1921 NM and these bullets all have case necks attached! Of course rifles blew up at the 1921 National Matches with the tin can ammunition, the Army did not acknowledge the problem was of their making, in fact claimed that the ammunition was perfectly safe....

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maj. Dick Culver

Actual firing of the ammunition however, showed normal chamber pressures. It was finally decided that the bullets were "cold soldering" themselves into the neck of the cartridge cases. This unexpected phenomena was causing the extreme effort necessary to extract them using a bullet pulling machine. When fired however, the neck of the case would apparently expand against the neck of the chamber thus breaking the seal of the inadvertent solder job. Once broken free by case neck expansion the projectile was free to be launched without raising the chamber pressure...

...under NO circumstances should they attempt to lubricate the tin-plated bullets! Frankford and Springfield found that the incompressible grease would not allow the neck of the case to expand and release the bullet from the "cold solder job" in the neck of the case. Greasing the bullets had the potential of creating an explosive situation. Needless to say, this advice was handily ignored by many of the old time shooters...

...many continued to lubricate the new ammunition causing several wrecked rifles. In every instance, the cause was traced to the prohibited use of grease on the ammunition. At least one projectile was found downrange with the neck of the cartridge case still firmly attached to the bullet and exhibiting rifling marks on the brass...

---

http://www.odcmp.org/1101/can.pdf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Art

I own three M1903s. I have tried several flavors of 7.92x57mm ball in them to see if I could get the bolt to close on them, well no joy on that; it wasn't even close. I suppose there is someone out there with the arms of a gorilla who crammed the Mauser round into an '03 chamber because I understand it has been done but you would have to work real, real hard at it.

---

Just an observation and a question: "throat erosion." One would suspect that the German 7.92mm may in fact chamber if the throat erosion of the .30-06 rifle was severe much easier than if it was pristine.

For the 1921 matches brand new rifles were provided. Army Ordnance magazine claims that the tin bullets fouled the bore worse than the previous bullets. It's in "small arms development" in 1922.

8mm surplus in my very worn 03A3 barrel I sectioned. It will not chamber in my 03's.

Attachment 37291

I remember reading somewhere that "some" German ammunition would fit. I know that one fellow that I met long ago said that they used the smaller German ammunition in their rifles during the battle of the Bulge--Now the question, was it 7mm Mauser Ammunition or 8mm kurtz ??This was only done when they ran out of ammunition for their rifles--

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Art

Remington, and the other commercial U.S. companies loaded bullets for the old Winchester .32 Special in their 8mm Mauser ammunition. These bullets are slightly smaller .321" than the 7.92mm Mauser which is .323" to .324."...

---

And vice versa works too. Have a c. 1900 Winchester SS in .32 Spl. with very pitted bore; about 3.5 MOA was the best I could get out of it. Loaded 8mm and groups tightened to under 2 MOA, which is about as good as can be reasonably expected from any Win. SS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slamfire

Memory is quite inexact and it is very possible the author you quote, remembered something that did not actually happen...

---

This is certainly the most likely explanation. Being a vet does not exempt one from the frailties of memory. Maybe there's some germ of truth to the tale, such as a particular rifle so badly worn that it would chamber 8mm, but the proposition that it was common practice in his unit can't be right.

Having been fascinated by "old stuff" since Jr. High, I began at that age putting questions about everything from old guns to old cars to any "oldster" who'd tolerate my interrogations. As I simultaneously began to read about the subjects of my interest, I soon discovered that many things I was being told just didn't jibe with the books. "Oral history," unsupported by documentation or other means of verification, just can't be trusted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 5MadFarmers

For the 1921 matches brand new rifles were provided. Army Ordnance magazine claims that the tin bullets fouled the bore worse than the previous bullets. It's in "small arms development" in 1922.

---

No ideal where most of this stuff comes from. The one think I know for sure is life was not fair to Farr. He arrived without a rifle; he selected one from a rack, he then was taken to an armoire where he selected another rifle, in all appearance there was nothing outstanding about the appearance of the rifle like being new. No consideration was given to Farr because of the late start.

8mm57: I have fired 8mm57 ammo in an 8mm06 rifle. There is .127" difference in length between the 8mm06 and 8mm57 from the shoulder to the case head. That means when the 8mm57 is fired in the 8mm/06 there is .127" clearance between the shoulder of the chamber and shoulder of the case. When the cases were ejected after firing the case took on the appearance of a 30/06 case with a short neck. The case head did not separate and the case did not stretch between the case body and case head.

8mm57: I have fired 8mm57 ammo in a 30/06 chamber. When the case was ejected it had the appearance of a case that was fired in a rifle with pistol power. The primer pocket was opened up, the case head was crushed between the cup above the web and case head, the case head expanded and the flash hole opened up. When 8mm57 is fired on a 30/06 chamber there is no way for the neck of the case to open up when releasing the bullet. And then there is that problem with the bore; in the perfect world the perfect 30/06 barrel has two diameters; one is .300" the other is .308". The perfect Mauser 8mm barrel has two diameters, one is .311 " and the other is .323". When it comes to destroying a case the difference in diameter between the 8mm bullet and 30/06 is enough to destroy the case and rifle.

A gunsmith in North Texas removed a 308 W case from a 25/06 rifle, it took him 4 hours, most thought the bullet had to be 4 inches when it left the barrel; I said had he not purchased cheap ammo he would have destroyed the rifle. And as expected everyone was soooo confused.

To chamber an 8mm57 round in a 30/06 chamber the case neck must be crushed at least .009". Because the of the shorter length of the 8mm57 all of the neck is ns not crushed.

And then there are other factors, some increase the danger and some forgive the reloader.

F. Guffey

https://www.americanrifleman.org/art...mp-perry-1921/

F. Guffey

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fguffey

No ideal where most of this stuff comes from. The one think I know for sure is life was not fair to Farr. He arrived without a rifle; he selected one from a rack, he then was taken to an armoire where he selected another rifle, in all appearance there was nothing outstanding about the appearance of the rifle like being new. No consideration was given to Farr because of the late start.

---

No idea why people make stuff up when they post. One would think it'd be easier to just check.

Perhaps Farr, like most, arrived without a rifle as brand new service rifles were being provided? Rifles which were intentionally made for the matches and received considerable attention to accuracy?

http://5madfarmers.com/images_2016/match_1921.png

http://5madfarmers.com/images_2016/match_1921-2.png

New rifles. Made from the $100,000 appropriated for the matches that year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 5MadFarmers

No idea why people make stuff up when they post. One would think it'd be easier to just check.

Perhaps Farr, like most, arrived without a rifle as brand new service rifles were being provided? Rifles which were intentionally made for the matches and received considerable attention to accuracy?

http://5madfarmers.com/images_2016/match_1921.png

http://5madfarmers.com/images_2016/match_1921-2.png

New rifles. Made from the $100,000 appropriated for the matches that year.

---

Farr used a rifle that had been repaired. Again, he picked a rifle from a rack. If life was fair everyone would have been been required to pick a rifle from a rack. If all rifles were equal it would not have been necessary for him to road test his first pick. And then there was that part that should have embarrassed the organizers. He should have been given the rifle he shot; he should have been able to leave with the rifle, instead a collection was taken to purchase the rifle and then it was shipped to him. I thought that was a disgrace, that was no way to treat an old shooter from Washington.

F. Guffey

Quote:

---

No idea why people make stuff up when they post. One would think it'd be easier to just check.

Perhaps Farr, like most, arrived without a rifle as brand new service rifles were being provided? Rifles which were intentionally made for the matches and received considerable attention to accuracy?

---

When picking a rack rifle there was a remote chance a shooter could have picked a Springfield 03 made in 1911, not all 03s made in 1911 were select but if Springfield's number one objective was accuracy all Springfield's would have been accurate.

F. Guffey

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Johnny P

I have an old green and red box of commercial Remington 8mm Mauser ammunition that will chamber in a 1903. In a discussion of the failures reported by Hatcher I dug out the box, and while it doesn't chamber freely, only slight pressure on the bolt handle is needed.

---

The old Remington ammo used .321" bullets. This was done so the ammo would be safer in the .318" bores of the 1888 Commission Rifles. This may be why the ammo you have chambered in a 1903.