Posted: 9/11/2016 11:43:20 PM EDT
|
I inherited a Springfield 1903 from my dad, after he passed 2 years ago.
Year of manufacture is 1941, according to an online database. The Historical significance of the rifle is already destroyed, but whomever did the conversion did a nice job. 2 main questions: 1. Is this a rifle that I should worry about the metallurgy? I know some early models weren't heat treated well. 2. The Weaver scope that is installed id damaged, it's a 2-7x adjustable. It will only go up to 4x, then the zoom gets stuck. Is it worth sending back to fix? I do plan on getting a new stock from Richard's Microfit Stocks, looking at a Benchmark or Marksman style and dropping in a Timney adjustable trigger. I'd love to turn this rifle into a decent deer rifle. |
|
Quoted:
I inherited a Springfield 1903 from my dad, after he passed 2 years ago. Year of manufacture is 1941, according to an online database. The Historical significance of the rifle is already destroyed, but whomever did the conversion did a nice job. 2 main questions: 1. Is this a rifle that I should worry about the metallurgy? I know some early models weren't heat treated well. 2. The Weaver scope that is installed id damaged, it's a 2-7x adjustable. It will only go up to 4x, then the zoom gets stuck. Is it worth sending back to fix? I do plan on getting a new stock from Richard's Microfit Stocks, looking at a Benchmark or Marksman style and dropping in a Timney adjustable trigger. I'd love to turn this rifle into a decent deer rifle. Depends on who made the reciever. Rock Island Aresnal has issues with the heat treament, and they were brittle and should not be shot period, end of story. You dont want a 30-06 blowing up in your face. Any other manufacturer is fine though (like remington) As for the scope, eh its up to you. I'd personally get a cheap leupold. Edit: if you DO have a rock island arsenal rifle, if the serial number is above 286,000 then it should be fine as well. |
|
If your Dad did it ,keep it the way it is.
My Grandfather had friends order them after WWll, surplus. They were in decent shape but had markings and wear on them. So He ordered one. His came, and it was still in the cosmoline. His buddies were jealous. But He sporterized it anyway. It was a good job. I wish I had it. Because it was something he did with his own hands. |
|
Quoted:
Depends on who made the reciever. Rock Island Aresnal has issues with the heat treament, and they were brittle and should not be shot period, end of story. You dont want a 30-06 blowing up in your face. Any other manufacturer is fine though (like remington) As for the scope, eh its up to you. I'd personally get a cheap leupold.. Quoted:
Quoted:
I inherited a Springfield 1903 from my dad, after he passed 2 years ago. Year of manufacture is 1941, according to an online database. The Historical significance of the rifle is already destroyed, but whomever did the conversion did a nice job. 2 main questions: 1. Is this a rifle that I should worry about the metallurgy? I know some early models weren't heat treated well. 2. The Weaver scope that is installed id damaged, it's a 2-7x adjustable. It will only go up to 4x, then the zoom gets stuck. Is it worth sending back to fix? I do plan on getting a new stock from Richard's Microfit Stocks, looking at a Benchmark or Marksman style and dropping in a Timney adjustable trigger. I'd love to turn this rifle into a decent deer rifle. Depends on who made the reciever. Rock Island Aresnal has issues with the heat treament, and they were brittle and should not be shot period, end of story. You dont want a 30-06 blowing up in your face. Any other manufacturer is fine though (like remington) As for the scope, eh its up to you. I'd personally get a cheap leupold.. Those Rock Islands weren't WWII production and the Remington receivers are marked Remington. |
|
Quoted:
Those Rock Islands weren't WWII production and the Remington receivers are marked Remington. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I inherited a Springfield 1903 from my dad, after he passed 2 years ago. Year of manufacture is 1941, according to an online database. The Historical significance of the rifle is already destroyed, but whomever did the conversion did a nice job. 2 main questions: 1. Is this a rifle that I should worry about the metallurgy? I know some early models weren't heat treated well. 2. The Weaver scope that is installed id damaged, it's a 2-7x adjustable. It will only go up to 4x, then the zoom gets stuck. Is it worth sending back to fix? I do plan on getting a new stock from Richard's Microfit Stocks, looking at a Benchmark or Marksman style and dropping in a Timney adjustable trigger. I'd love to turn this rifle into a decent deer rifle. Depends on who made the reciever. Rock Island Aresnal has issues with the heat treament, and they were brittle and should not be shot period, end of story. You dont want a 30-06 blowing up in your face. Any other manufacturer is fine though (like remington) As for the scope, eh its up to you. I'd personally get a cheap leupold.. Those Rock Islands weren't WWII production and the Remington receivers are marked Remington. He did say 1941 didnt he? You're right. |
|
Thank you for the replies.
My dad bought it as is, he wasn't into guns as much as I am. The stock is decent, but the barrel hugs one side of the barrel channel. It doesn't fit me very well. I will look into a new scope as well. The Weaver shows some damage on one end, probably why it doesn't function. |