I might have found a pretty nice one

[SteveC]

Gents,

I picked up a pretty nice 1903 Springfield Armory this week at my LGS. SN is 3840XX, SA bbl dated 12-09, J.F.C. cartouche, faint but there circle serif P behind trigger guard. All I see looks right and original. I'm going to attempt to post some photos. Let me know what you think. I'm in the rifle right, so if it isn't all original, I'm still golden.

Thanks!
Steve1903 a.jpg1903 b.jpg1903 c.jpg1903 d.jpg1903 e.jpg

[SteveC]

1903 f.jpg1903 g.jpg1903 h.jpg1903 i.jpg1903 j.jpg

[SteveC]

1903 k.jpg1903 l.jpg1903 m.jpg1903 n.jpg1903 o.jpg

[Pete Davis]

Looks awesome. I see a replacement windage knob.

PD

[John Beard]

You have a nice rifle. Like Pete, I notice a few replacement parts. In addition to the windage knob, the lower band, the trigger, and the buttplate appear to be replacements from later rifles. Nevertheless, you did well.

Thanks for sharing!

J.B.

[SteveC]

John, so good to hear from you Sir! Thank you for your input on this rifle. I'm in it for ~650 clams so I feel great about it even with the couple replacement parts. It's still the closest thing to correct I've ever owned. Can you tell me what windage knob, lower band, trigger, and buttplate would be correct? I think the butt should be smooth, right? the other parts I have no idea on...

Steve

- - - Updated - - -

Thank you Pete! I thought you would like to see this one...

Steve

[Merc]

Buttplates:

http://www.vishooter.net/m1903/buttplates.jpg

[John Beard]

The buttplate should be smooth, the trigger should be thin, smooth, and pointed, the lower band should be marked with a serifed "U", and the windage knob should be dished and grooved like the slide binding screw.

J.B.

[SteveC]

Thanks Merc and John. Last question for John - are these replacements likely field (unit armorer or "direct support" as it was known in my day) or are they indicative of arsenal rebuild (given the lack of any rebuild stamp)? I'm particularly curious about that because I was a Small Arms Repairman, direct support level when I was in the Army.

John - just a reminder, you helped me out a LOT back when I first joined Jouster and started collecting US Martial Arms more seriously. That's been nearly 20 years ago. I have appreciated your input and knowledge, not to mention your willingness to share, immensely through the years!

Steve

[John Beard]

Thanks Merc and John. Last question for John - are these replacements likely field (unit armorer or "direct support" as it was known in my day) or are they indicative of arsenal rebuild (given the lack of any rebuild stamp)? I'm particularly curious about that because I was a Small Arms Repairman, direct support level when I was in the Army.

John - just a reminder, you helped me out a LOT back when I first joined Jouster and started collecting US Martial Arms more seriously. That's been nearly 20 years ago. I have appreciated your input and knowledge, not to mention your willingness to share, immensely through the years!

Steve

I see no significant evidence indicating that the rifle was arsenal-overhauled. I foresee two reasonable explanations for the replacement parts. (1) The company armorer replaced the parts at the request of and as a favor to whom the rifle was issued. (2) The rifle was stripped and cleaned as part of a large batch of rifles, then re-assembled from mixed parts.

And you're very welcome for the assistance in the past! I'm glad I could help.

J.B.