I found this at the local cabellas last week and after thinking about it I picked it up today. I traded them a sporterized Enfield, Mossberg 500 Turkey thug and $50 for it. The rifle has been rebarrled so I think it's safe to shoot, what do you guys think?

Attached File


Attached File


Attached File


Attached File


Attached File

Attached File


...and it'll go well with my 1918 Springfield MK1

Attached File

 beauty!

Usually, Springfields above 800,00 and Rock Islands above 285,507 are considered safe to shoot. Anything below these numbers,the recievers were subject to single heat treating, and can be brittle.

True but I figured that since the original barrel was replaced that it's probably safe to shoot. I'll find out tomorrow if it doesn't rain.

I have a similar one that had been bubba-ized: fucky stock, rifle sights, etc.  Picked it up for $200.

But it clearly has been out and about.  Probably safe, but who knows for sure; I don't really want a face full of receiver bits.

I plan to restore it when I get a round tuit and then not shoot it.  I have others.

I shot it today using some Korean M2 ball. It shoots high and to the left at 50yds but groups well

Attached File


I adjusted the rear sight and aimed at the bottom of the target

Attached File


Then the barrel started heating up

Attached File


Overall I'm happy with my purchase, still doesn't shoot as well (at least point of aim, point of impact) as my 1918 MK1 Springfield though

Attached File


Attached File

I am by no means an authority on the subject but I don't believe rebarreling changes the concern. In fact, IIRC, it is rebarreling that could cause the improper heat treatment of the receiver to manifest into a problem.

Please, somebody who really knows the issue, chime in. I'd like to know for sure too.

Gen Hatcher can probably be considered "somebody who really knows" about this topic.
Chapter IX of Hatcher's Notebook (a copy of which everyone really should have) is "Receiver Steels and Heat Treatment", and goes into the history of the problem, the investigations, and the conclusions drawn. As noted by varg above, Rock Island receivers above about 285,507 are considered safe because they have the revised heat treatment.

While the entire chapter is well worth reading (especially for those who own a low number receiver), the semi-TLDR crux is that the Board convened to look at this issue determined that these low-number receivers should be withdrawn from service and scrapped, and that they could not be "fixed" by re-heat treating: the steel was over-heated and "burnt" in the original heat treat.

It is worth noting that, in the catastrophic failures, the receivers gave way with the barrels undamaged. A rebarrelled low-number receiver is no safer than one with its original barrel, and might even (as Makarov noted) be more likely to fail due to the stresses of rebarrelling.

Were it my rifle, it would either be a wall hanger or be restricted to low-velocity cast bullet plinking loads.

Would be a great parts gun if you could find a sported gun and use your rifle as parts.

I wouldnt shoot it.

Is that a chip out of the left side of the stock or is that a MK I stock?  Can't tell by the pictures but it is missing some wood on the left side of the stock in the area of the MK I hole in the receiver.

It's a MK1 stock, ironically my Springfield MK1 doesn't have a MK1 stock on it. Maybe I'll switch them.

It is a dice roll. It may be shot extensively and never fail, or fail in spectacular fashion on the next shot. One never knows. This will probably be a never ending debate as countless numbers of people will claim to have shot
Low numbers without Ill effect. Also while the order was given to remove from service low number guns, early in WW2 due to the shortage of weapons they reversed course and allowed low numbers to be used in conus for training guards and other low key duties. It has also been stated the marines ( who did not adopt the M1 until late 1942) never withdrew low numbers from service

Every rifle was proofed. When it was rebarreled, it was proofed again. Proofing was (1) 68Kpsi proof round and (5) regular 52K psi service rounds. Low number receivers don't just fail. It's how they handle an overpressure. The SHT receivers shattered; the DHT and NS receivers bent (but would also shatter if the pressure was great enough). A good blow with a hammer or a drop to the floor could also shatter a SHT receiver. I had one where half the front trigger guard screw hole was broken off.

there has been some relatively new info come to light on early receivers , thanks to some guys doing Archive research ,

I guy that goes by CplNorton over on Gunboards, and I think jouster, has posted some really good info on low numbers,  etc,

if you go to gunboards, look in the American Arsenal section
https://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?1059335-low-number-value

he is post #8.  search his past posts for info,

I wish 1903s were easier to find at reasonable prices...

To me, if you look at what they were doing wrong with the heat treat... they weren't all wrong. It's just that you couldn't tell which were right. They were going by color, and that really isn't a good, reliable measurement.

That said... any rifle that survived long enough to be rebarrelled, I would think, had tons of rounds put through it, and didn't fail. So it's probably one of the 'good' ones.

That said... I'm not sure I'd shoot it much. But I have a lot of Milsurps I don't shoot much.

I don't know that I'd shoot it, but I also don't know that I could fault someone for saying "what the heck, let's do this."

I always liked this write-up.

Interesting, good link.

I swapped the stock today to put on my MK1 Springfield

Some Mark's on the barrel, not sure if they're from a vice or what.

Attached File


Attached File


Attached File

The REP code is the steel lot # of the barrel. The marks previous posters mentioned would be from a pipe wrench and be very obvious.

I would shoot it all day long with M2 type loads.

I have a much lower serialized 03 as well.

the scuffs you see on the sight base are where a pin was filed (rather roughly) off,
that pin holds the sight base in place,

The receivers are the part that may be brittle not the barrel. I believe the low number guns that failed were the result of the ammo case failures releasing high pressure gasses into the action causing them to blow up. As long as you don't have any case head separations or something similar I would feel ok shooting it. But that is just me, and it does go against the recommendations of not shooting low number rifles. It is up to you to decide how much risk you wan to take.