Shooters Forum banner
1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2 ·
Just thought I should correct myself before I make myself out to look like a moron.

The respective numbers on older Springfield model 1903's are those made at Springfield Armory with numbers below 800,000 and Rock Island Armory below 285,000 + don't remember the exact number on the Rock Island Armory serial numbers.

Anyway I have one that has a potentially brittle bolt.  And I would like some information on where I may find a replacement for it.
 

·
The Hog Whisperer (Administrator)
Joined
·
38,084 Posts
I thought that the entire receiver of the low-numbered Springfields was supposably brittle?

James Gates, where are you?  Someone surely knows more about this than me.

For parts, try www.e-gunparts.com

This is the Numrich Gun Parts Corp.  I just got an ejector for a 1917 Enfield from them.
 

·
Inactive account
Joined
·
7,768 Posts
Hi, Defender:
   Mike is right. It's the whole receiver that's brittle on the low number Springfields. See Hatcher's Notebook, Chapter IX, Receiver Steels and Heat Treatment. Rock Island numbers after 285,507 and Springfield Armory numbers after 800,000 are OK, with a few exceptions. General Hatcher notes that a few Springfield Amoury receivers got set aside and were later issued with 800,000+ numbers. #801,548 blew up.

  The military load was a 150 grain bullet at 2700 fps, compared to the current commercial load at 2900 fps.

Bye
Jack
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,116 Posts
Both Mike and Jack are correct, it is with the receiver to be concerned. Martial arms collector and NRA staffer Bruce Canfield recently had an article at his website regarding this condition. Go to

<a href="http://www.brucecanfield.com/cc-article.html" target='_blank'>http://www.brucecanfield.com/cc-article.html</a>

and scroll down this page for the piece in question.




(Edited by Bill Lester at 10<!--emo&:0--><img src="http://beartoothbullets.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':0'><!--endemo-->6 am on July 7, 2001)
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top