1903A4 7/8" scope ring height (Lyman M81/M82)

[Richard H Brown Jr]

Darreld:

I was on the 2 1903 groups on facebook, and somebody was asking about the safety hitting the scope. I looked in all my epub tm's and fm's and there didn't seem to be a scope safety for the A4's. I suspect that either the snipe just hand loaded 5 rnds into the mag well, and hit the cut off to keep the cartridge from loading, and closed the bolt on an empty chamber. Or had to dismount the scope and put it in it's carry case, to use the safety.

R Brown

PS Damn Book of Farce, wants me to upload a pix to review to see that I'm me, But since I never put a photo up to begin with... How magical is that? Idiots, and you can't contact support, except by logging in, and of course I can't log in, because I haven't a pix for them to compare with an uploaded one... circular idiotcy.

[Col. Colt]

If you look at the original US Ordnance photos of the M1903A4 (probably taken before they realized they could not get enough M73 Alaskans and had to go with the less good Weaver M73B1 to get the rifles into service) the Alaskan/M73/M81/M82 was always intended to be mounted forward in the rings, and in that position it clears the safety fine.

The Alaskan has plenty of eye relief, and there is no reason to mount it back over the safety - also, mounted in the rear position there is a great opportunity to whack you in the eye under recoil. I did the same thing when I built my 03-AForgery, and immediately realized the Army would not issue a rifle that could not engage the safety. I moved it to the intended position and everything made sense. You are mounting the scope wrong if the safety doesn't work. The Alaskan was a far superior scope, but Bausch & Lomb (who supplied the lenses to Lyman for the Alaskan) was too busy with more critical optical demands (like Submarine periscopes) to provide the optical glass and the Weaver was "what was available". Note the M73 "B1" designator - not the first choice......CC