Craigman
Member
Can somebody please help me identify these? I don't have access to the numbers on them right now but will be able to see more tomorrow. I'm trying to help a friend figure out what these are exactly?
Help with ID of old milsurps?
- Thread starter Craigman
- Start date
- Status
Can somebody please help me identify these? I don't have access to the numbers on them right now but will be able to see more tomorrow. I'm trying to help a friend figure out what these are exactly?
someguy2800
Member
Left to right
K98k Mauser, M96 Swedish Mauser, m1917 eddystone, m1903 Springfield
That’s my guess. I’m not an expert.
K98k Mauser, M96 Swedish Mauser, m1917 eddystone, m1903 Springfield
That’s my guess. I’m not an expert.
NIGHTLORD40K
Member
Some nice guns there. The M1903 and M1917 are worth quite a bit of coin. The '03 is almost certainly an arsenal rework, figure 7-900, and the '17 could be worth even more if it is all original......quite a bit more if it's a Winchester produced example.
Post some more pics of the tops of the receivers if you can for all three. Just above the bolt is where all the good info is. The Mauser's will have most of their parts numbered- this will indicate the degree of originality, (I.e. "matching numbers"). The US rifles will have barrel dates (and barrel makers ID) near the front sight next to a flaming bomb symbol. The US guns will often have tiny letters on the small parts (E for Eddystone, R for Remington, etc.....) which will tend to indicate if they are matching or assembled from mixed parts.
A note of warning: some low-serial numbered M1903s have poor metallurgy and most experts agree they are unsafe to shoot. The CMP website has the details if you are interested.
Post some more pics of the tops of the receivers if you can for all three. Just above the bolt is where all the good info is. The Mauser's will have most of their parts numbered- this will indicate the degree of originality, (I.e. "matching numbers"). The US rifles will have barrel dates (and barrel makers ID) near the front sight next to a flaming bomb symbol. The US guns will often have tiny letters on the small parts (E for Eddystone, R for Remington, etc.....) which will tend to indicate if they are matching or assembled from mixed parts.
A note of warning: some low-serial numbered M1903s have poor metallurgy and most experts agree they are unsafe to shoot. The CMP website has the details if you are interested.
Last edited:
Glockula
Member
Sounds correct. I have a much more beat up version of m the swede. The K98 has quite a polish on it but that means someone took care of it most likely. Both the Eddy stone and the 03 look good and as mentioned before are probably quite valuable.
Craigman
Member
Thanks everyone. The k98 may have been redone, my buddy just inherited them and seems to remember his father doing that. He says I can have one...any one I want. I really like the eddystone, but always wanted a m1903. But I didn't even know what an eddystone was till today. I will likely shoot whatever I get. He has all bayonets as well.
Craigman
Member
These we likely collected in the early 90s or 80 even. Probably why they are so nice still.
shuvelrider
Member
You have a very generous friend then, does he intend to keep/shoot the others or sell for some coin?
NIGHTLORD40K
Member
Just make sure the '03 is a high number Springfield or Rock Island.......or a Remington. The best shooter '03s are the '03A3s, honestly, as they are made of nickel steel and have better sights- though many folks don't think they are as elegant looking.
All of the '17s have good steel and make dandy shooters, though a few that were refitted with Johnson barrels will sometimes have cracked receivers. The '17s have more user friendly sights (and a much longer sight radius) than the '03s.
It is also getting to be much harder to find unmolested '17s than '03s. I would pick the '17 and think about getting an '03 later.
Interesting fact, most American Doughboy's carried M1917s in the First World War rather than '03s. The government arsenals couldn't match the output of Remington, Eddystone, and Winchester and many '03s were held in reserve due to their questionable steel.
Last edited:
NIGHTLORD40K
Member
BTW, that '03 has the stacking swivel in the wrong spot (it should be in the top band), and is missing the upper sling swivel. Not a big deal, those can still be found, though a complete machined lower band can be pricey.
someguy2800
Member
In the interest of fairness you may want to tell your friend what they are worth before he gives you one. Just a total spitball guess but the k98k is probably $400-$500. Mabey $600 for the Swede, $800 for the m1917 and the m1903 is likely $1000+. They could all be considerably more if they are rare or special models.
The one I would pick is the m1917, one of the best bolt action service rifles ever made.
The one I would pick is the m1917, one of the best bolt action service rifles ever made.
Have we confirmed the 17 is indeed a 30-06 17 and not the 303 P14 or whatever the British version was called?
NIGHTLORD40K
Member
Most P14s were equipped with volley sights and lacked grasping grooves, but would need to see the receiver and barrel markings to be sure.
AlexanderA
Member
Or, the grasping grooves were considerably shorter than on M1917's.
Rifles that went through the Weedon rebuild process before or during WW2 had the volley sights removed and some had new wood fitted.
Pattern 14 rifles in good condition are getting surprisingly hard to find. For a long time, these were mistreated as the "black sheep" of the collecting world. Neither the British nor the American collectors wanted them.
I'm pretty sure that the rifle in question is an M1917.
Craigman
Member
Craigman
Member
The 1903 was a High number, numbers all matching Remington. But it had 4 holes drilled and tapped in it, close together, probably from an old peep or something
There are nickel steel 03s, I have two of them, one is a never barreled action I bought from Sarco in the early 80s (for $95) and built into a sweet 25-06. The other one is a late WWII production one my FIL bought in the 50s. It's true 03A3s are better shooters, maybe because of the sights, I don't know.
AlexanderA
Member
This is good news, and I'll explain why.
There were three factories making M1917's -- Winchester, Remington, and Eddystone. (Eddystone was a former locomotive factory in Pennsylvania, managed by Remington.) Each of the makers marked almost all of their parts with their initial. What you have is a 1918 Eddystone barrel on an Eddystone receiver. That's the original barrel, and means that the rifle has not been rebarreled.
Eddystone (but not Remington or Winchester) tended to over-torque barrels during factory installation. If these over-torqued barrels were later removed without a relief cut being made, often that would result in a hairline crack in the receiver ring. Hairline cracks are found in (a) Eddystone receivers that (b) have WW2 barrels by Johnson Automatics (marked JA) or High Standard (HS). Such a combination has to be carefully inspected for a hairline crack. You are safe in this regard.
The "W" on the front of the stock means that the stock was made by Winchester. This is nothing to be concerned about since stocks were often swapped around in service. Later, you might want to trade someone for an "E" stock.
NIGHTLORD40K
Member
Sure, my point was that all the A3s are nickel, but relatively few '03s. If the gun in question was a Remington, then it was a nickel receiver, and, most likely, bolt.
Shanghai McCoy
Member
You chose... Wisely. 
tark
Member
Too bad the 03 was drilled and tapped. If all original it would have been the most valuable of the four.
Yea that 100 year old rifle that has been in two world wars might blow up on you.
When will this stupid myth die.
rbernie
Contributing Member
The rifle family was used in two wars. Any specific model has an unknown provenance and may or may not have been well used over time (for both good or ill), may or may not have been re-arsenalled or altered (for good or ill), may or may not have been pulled from service and used for presentation purposes (for good or ill), and so forth.
To assume that you can know anything specific regarding the metallurgy of most any firearm made before the mid-1920's, much less to assert an opinion regarding general mechanical soundness from afar, is polyannish at best and borders on recklessness. More to the point, there are specific documented issues with early 1903 metallurgy that ought not be ignored.
Last edited:
someguy2800
Member
Possibly when they stop blowing up. Look for yourself if you do not believe.
- Status
