WW1 Shortage of '03 Springfields

[cplnorton]

If we didn't jump into the war so fast in the summer of 1917, Winchester had been gearing up to produce 1903's since 1916. I found all the documents when I pulled all the Marine A5 docs. But the Govt had been tryin to outsource the production of 1903s, and Winchester was trying hard to get the contract. And it appears from the correspondance they had been successful. But the war started, and they told the govt it would take them to long to get into production the numbers they requested, so they mentioned they could produce the 1917's and well the rest is history.

But yeah WRA was going to make 1903's, how cool is that. lol

[el Woodman]

I concur that R/W/E were better for industrialized mass production than SA/RIA ever dreamed of being.....But the main difference is quality...The 1917 is a Ford F150;Rugged and effective, but don't dream about shooting a 1917 in a National Match......The 1903 is more like a Ferrari 308GTS; Precision crafted by a man who was more of an artisan than assembler....I guess what I'm saying is that 1917s were built by armorers;The 1903s were built by gunsmiths.....But like Kruschev said in WWII as a Soviet Arms Kommissar "Quantity has a quality all its own"......My $.02.

[clintonhater]

The 1917 is a Ford F150;Rugged and effective, but don't dream about shooting a 1917 in a National Match......The 1903 is more like a Ferrari 308GTS

If that's the difference, and I found myself squatting in the mud at the bottom of a trench, I know which one I'd want in my hands.

[bruce]

Reifference. Ah ... no. Pre-war 03's were of course produced slowly as there was not need to hurry. There was no urgent demand. Rifles produced during the war were fine rifles, but not artful. Comparing quality of fit/finish, consistency of bores, barrels, and comparing the actual practical usefulness of each in combat, there is no meaningful advantage to the 03 or disadvantage to the 17. For what it's worth, I've handled, fired and used both rifles over years since 1979. I've shot them with ball and handloads. I've found that a good 03 will as expected give good on target results. The exact same is true of a good 17. For shooting in a hurry, the 17 is superior given it's aperture rear sight. The 17 front sight is easier to acquire simply b/c of the way it is made. That single thin blade of the 03 is fine for targets. In the field it is not so good. If the rear sight of the 03 was more finely adjustable for windage, it would be more useful. But given its gross graduations of scale, it is questionable just how useful those adjustments might be in the field. Stocking on either rifle left a lot to be desired, both would have benefited from a higher comb. With the C stock, the 03 really came into its own. JMHO. Sincerely. bruce.

[Kaliman]

Good points all around gents. Makes you wonder, however, if the Marines would have had such good success at long ranges (and earned their reputation) if they had been outfitted with 1917s and not 03s.

[clintonhater]

For shooting in a hurry, the 17 is superior given it's aperture rear sight.

For ANY kind of shooting an aperture is superior. But an aperture located half-way down the brl as on the '03 is not the same.

[bruce]

Re: Aperture. Agree. The aperture is superior. The location of the rear sight on the 03 was unfortunate. The 03-A3 while not as finely finished was an improvement given that the rear sight was properly located on the receiver. It would have been even better had the rear sight been more substantial and finely adjustable coupled with a thicker more useful front sight. JMHO. Sincerely. bruce.

[psteinmayer]

The 1917 is a Ford F150;Rugged and effective, but don't dream about shooting a 1917 in a National Match

Interesting, because I have witnessed 1917s out shoot 1903s and 1903A3s many times in CMP matches, AND at Camp Perry in the National Matches!

[John Beard]

The 1917 National Matches were cancelled because of U.S. entry into WWI. The 1918 National Matches were fired with Remington M1917 rifles. And the rifles promptly set record-high scores in their competitions, especially rapid-fire. And the M1917 rifles were promptly outlawed for the 1919 National Matches. Do you smell a foul odor?

Happy Holidays!

J.B.

[bruce]

Re: Nat. Matches. Remarkable! Who'd have thought it! Were these rifles fitted with different rear sights that would permit both fine windage and elevation adjustments or were they fired using the standard issue type sights? Sincerely. bruce.