Just how much is an 03 with a ser# under 800,000 unsafe to shoot? Would that not depend upon the bore measurement?
Ed
Printable View
Just how much is an 03 with a ser# under 800,000 unsafe to shoot? Would that not depend upon the bore measurement?
Ed
Rock Island Arsenal changed heat treatment around 285500.
This has been debated over and over for as long as there as been an internet and I don't know of anyone who has had their mind changed one way or the other with a long drawn out debate. You can find tons of information on the internet supporting either shoot or don't shoot with a little searching.
The unsafe part has to do with the heat treating of the receiver during production . If it was overheated making it the (steel) too brittle and subject to breaking.Quote:
Originally Posted by RetArmyNoncom
Yes, I have read many pros and cons, thought I'd ask here on this 03 thread for opinions. With the above count you gave, are you saying those 03s with ser# before that were heat treated correctly or incorrectly?Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny P
The early rifles were single heat treatment, but you mentioned the 800,000 serial number range where Springfield changed to double heat treatment , but Rock Island changed to the double heat treatment method at the serial number I posted.
With the single heat treatment the receivers were the same hardness all the way through, and with the receivers that were heated too high during the forging process were burned and brittle all the way through. Along with better controlling forging temperatures, the double heat treatment gave the receiver a hard outer surface with a softer and tougher inner core.
Thanks....I only knew of the SA 800,000 number and under to avoid.Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny P
I do not understand why people even ask this question. There are plenty of 'hi number' rifles around to shoot, more then low numbers in fact. So why take a chance, no matter how slim, with a nice collectable low number???