1903 Just showin off

KRS, I couldn't have said it better. Nice job. It is astounding the kind of money the original A4s are commanding but my gut feeling is that market is going to go bust before too long as people realize the A4s were nothing special. They were just standard issue A3s with the receiver markings stamped in a slightly differnet location then were drilled and tapped for a Redfield mount and then was topped of with some sort of really crappy scope. Now to make a comparison to it with another contemporary sniper rifle, oh say, a M41B Swede sniper, there is no comaprison. The Swede is a real sniper rifle. I know, I have one.
But as you stated with a little technical expertise and TLC the standard A3 receiver/barrel/bolt combo can become extremely accurate. Then you top it off with some state-of-the-art optics to allow the potenial accuracy to shine and bingo, you have a beautiful 1903A4 that is superior to the originals in every way.
Here's a few pics of my personal 1903A4 Hybrid in it's final incarnation.
This was a complete rebuild with a Kreiger match grade barrel, Timney trigger, completely bedded and all 1903 milled hardware.

Hey and KRS if you don't like the old beater 1903A4 anymore I'll take that orphan off your hands

Still yet another 1903A4 Hybrid. It's a Smith Corona and once again it's an original receiver/barrel/bolt combo that has been put together with some technical expertise and TLC. I topped it off with a tacticle Millett 4-16 power, 30mm tube, 56mm objective lens, mil-dot scope. It will also shoot sub MOA groups.

Krs, first, thanks for your service to our nation. We need more like you. Thanks
Ok, is it possible for you to provide me with some detailed photos of the A4 bolt and in particular the handle?
What do you know about the process used to create the A4 bolt? I'm curious as I am always looking to upgrade the detailes of my rifles.

It's somewhat a mystery as to why a Smith Corona is more desirable than a Remington. Or a Rock Island Arseanl is more desirable than a Remington. As if the Remington is in some way inferior. I know, I know it's got to do with the numbers produced for each. I also realize that the accuracy is a non-factor from manufacturer to manufacturer. I think they were all built to an exceptional level considering they were being mass produced. In that process though some of the details that could have produced a rifle that was more in line with the legendary accuracy of the Swedes and Swiss rifles was overlooked. Understandably so as the U.S. was engulfed in a war.
Here's a few pics of a national match Springfield 1903 I own. It was built in 1923 and according to the paper work was sent back to Springfield in 1948 to have the Weaver 3x scope installed for a Col. Oliver. I have the original complete polished, numbered bolt with it also. It was apprently used in Camp Perry matches as it came with score cards. I got this rifle a number of years ago from his widow's estate sale. I would put this up against any Swede or Swiss K31. This one may trump your A4s on the open market.

Thanks Krs. Over the years I have had virtually every type of military rifle, from turn of the century (20th century) to ARs, FALs and H&K things. You name it, I've owned it, shot it, rang it out for what it was worth and either kept or discarded. But I have come to like the 1903 series rifles the best. And yes you are very correct. The A3 series of rifles although very good are not in the same league as the Springfield 1903s. They truely are the standard of old world craftsmanship. As the saying goes, "they don't make 'em like that anymore." The fit, the finish, the metal work, the attention to detail on my NM 1903 is at a whole different level. To the point that in just handling the two there is a noticeable difference in how the firearm feels in your hands. As the dust settles I find I have discarded all others and kept my 30 cal. U.S. military rifles (with the exception of a Swiss K31 because it's made like a Swiss watch and an M44 Mosin because it's cheap in every respect, indestructable, fun, reasonably accurate, powerful and I don't feel bad if I don't clean it after shooting, handloads of course, no corresive). And of my 30 cal. U.S. military I have 3 that are the real deal. The NM 1903 of course, a NM Springfield M14 and a Kreiger built NM M1 Garand. Nevertheless my others are 1903s and A3s and I still find them quite superb given the context we are dwelling in. Even the WWII A3's with some TLC can prove to be quite accurate.
KRS, I very much appreciate you posting the pics of the A4 bolt/handle. I have no doubt that what you have is the original and I wanted to see the particular contour of the bolt handle for identification. The bolt is a give-away many times to a fake (among others things too). Those bolts are scarce. And as you stated many people claim they have the real deal but few really do. Everytime I see a "real" A4 it always has that exact same bolt as yours. If I could get a few of those I'd be a happy camper. I make no bones about it. Although my A4 Hybrids are functionally and cosmetically 110%, and the mods I do on them are an improvement over the originals and will definitely out shoot the originals, they are NOT the real A4s. I would have to say in the market right now, genuine A4s should be valued at about $1000 to $1200. I would absolutely love to have a genuine A4 but even if I had the coin I would still not pay the prices that are being asked right now. That would be just plain stupid. I have also built a number of 1903 and A3s with match grade sights. Mostly Lyman, some Redfield. I find them to be slick and very accurate also with the match grade sights being far superior to the combat sights.
Anyway KRS remember nations build soldiers, but God empowers the United States Marine Corp.
Here's a couple of pics of a 1903 "scout" rifle I put together a while ago. Very old school and kind of crossbreed being it is a 1903 without the sight collar and an A3 handguard and retaining ring instead. The ring actually covers up the last digit in the serial #. It's a bastard but it has proved to be deadly accurate. oh, and the bi-pod is not actually attached to the stock. It's just placed under the rifle for photo purposes

Krs, if I had the time and money I'd shoot the barrels out of all my rifles
And it is kind of sad that nowadays guns in general, because of the bleeding-heart liberals with their limp-dick handshakes, rainbow stickered Priuses and gray ponytails, guns are seen as evil. Unfortuneately it is a self fulfilling prophecy what with the clinically medicated 20 and 30 somethings having been indoctinated into this garbage for a couple of generations now in the public school systems and universities. The boys don't even know if they are men or women and the women are only concerned with finding a pointy pair of shoes and having orgasms. Is it any surprise we see the kind of acts of violence involving guns. And boy howdy the media is right there to splash it across the headlines.
We are quickly becoming a nation of sissified obese comatose amoral ignoramuses while the rest of the world is toughening up and salavates, like hungry wolves over the soon to be carcass of what used to be the United States of America. And we now even have ring master Ned to orchestrate this freak show. Pathetic :banghead:

Sunray you are completely incorrect. The majority of A3s were produced with 4 groove barrels. So go back to taking your happy pills and reading your Doctor Suss documenteries.

Liberty ... got pics?

Thanks Revals. If I remember right I think they are Leupold rings. Yes, I did have to inlet the handguards on the hybrids as I was wanting to keep the scope as low as possible for obvious reasons. Here's a pic of an inlet handguard for the rifle at the first posting in the thread. And the second one is for the rifle with the Leupold scope. It seemed to work out rather well and the scope centerlines are barely more than 1/2 inch above where the rear peep combat sights were. No cheek piece needed. And using the 1 piece Refield mount adds rigidity to the whole receiver which ultimately helps accuracy.

Rshooter, that is sweeeeeeeeet !!!!! I like it So when you say rechambered you mean it was one of the rifles that had the 30.03 cartridge and it now is 30.06, yes? Looks like it has nice wood. Hardware a combo of 03 and A3.
After reading the stats on the failure rates on low numbered 03s I think a person stands a better chance of getting eaten by a great white shark provided you use proper ammo.

Riss, yes the bolts need to be modified. As of yet I've not had to "modify" a standard bolt. I cruise the gun shows and such looking for ones that have already had the handle turned down. I think there is plenty of the modified bolts out there already. I don't want to ruin anymore perfectly good bolts.
I too have a Mann accuracy device. I have decided to take off the heavy barrel and replace it with a new correct mil-spec barrel. The receiver on my Mann is a Remington with a serial # of 1-43 manufacture. A huge amount of material would have to be "whittled" off the heavy barrel to get it to even come close to fitting in a mil-spec stock that it would defeat the whole purpose of the accuracy barrel. So I will install a new correct 4 groove Remmy barrel and have my gunsmith ream the chamber squeaky tight as was the Mann barrel. I too have everything to put together a complete 03A3. I'll probably sell the heavy barrel.

Riss none of the bolts above are chromed. I polished them.

I wipe the bolts down after use to remove anything that may start the corrosive process. I also wipe the bolt down with light machine oil before storing. The polishing process does provide an amazing resistance to corrosition though.