m1903 w/ m82 scope

[357_]

I am looking for information on a Springfield m1903 rifle.

It is S/N: 1312463

On the barrel it has an S in a circle with a bomb below it and a 145 below that

On the stock it has AAS stamped on the side

Below the trigger it has a P stamped.

The Scope is m82

Stock No. 84374
Ser. No. 32703

I'll get some pictures up later. I have another post in regards to the lot of guns we found in my father in laws storage but this one in particular interests me so I am asking for more detailed information here.

 

[Jim Watson]

I am not a collector or expert but here is what I have been able to find.

It is S/N: 1312463

Made in 1929.

On the barrel it has an S in a circle with a bomb below it and a 145 below that

That is a Sedgley replacement barrel made January 1945. Hey, that makes it MY age.

On the stock it has AAS stamped on the side

That is an inspector's mark for work at Augusta Arsenal. Likely where the Sedgley barrel was installed.

Below the trigger it has a P stamped.

That is the proof mark showing the gun was proof tested with an overload.

The Scope is m82

That is the scope used on the M1C sniper rifle and some 1903A4s either right at the end of WW II or after the war or for Korea. I do not think it correct for a 1903 of this vintage.

 

[357_]

Any idea what scope would be appropriate for it? I did a few searches on the m82 and found that the scope and bracket are pretty rare.

 

[Whitman31]

Are you curious about what scope it would have been supplied with originally, or the one that would have been put on it at the time it was re-barreled?

 

[357_]

Are you curious about what scope it would have been supplied with originally, or the one that would have been put on it at the time it was re-barreled?

Either one, I'd like to keep the rifle original. If it is going to have a scope it will be the correct scope. Being as the rear sight appears to be a terrible investment I'd very much like a scope.

~ Edit ~ I am definitely keeping the m82 as it is just too cool NOT to have. It'll make an awesome deer gun for sure!

 

[357_]

Removed.

 

[357_]

Just went out and shot it today, took one adjustment to get it on paper. After 3 shots I was consistently grouping 2" at 100yds. If anybody else has ever used an old m82 scope they know how much fun that is. It completely covers the 100yd rifle target with the post in the scope.

I was absolutely amazed at how well the gun functioned, it was the easiest shooting 30-06 I'v ever shot. The recoil was a gentle push, much like an A/R's recoil. The action worked great with every round feeding, firing and extracting just as it should. The on/off selective fire was awesome too (after I figured out how it worked).

I am positively thrilled that a weapon made in 1929 and used in WWII and the Korean war is still so accurate. The history in this gun is great, I can't wait to take a deer with it this year! Pics will be up tonight for sure.

 

[Jim Watson]

Sorry, I was not clear.
The 1903 Springfield was not scope sighted at all except for small numbers of sniper rifles.
The odd looking WW I Warner-Swasey scope did not continue in use to amount to anything after the war.
The USMC put Unertl target scopes on some Springfields as the Model 1941.
The Army had Remington build the 1903A4 with Weaver scope during WW II. Some were fitted with Lyman Alaskan, M82 or M84 scopes after the war and during the Korean War.
A Springfield with M82 scope as you describe is probably a gunsmith combination of surplus rifle and scope.
It sounds like a good shooter but was not GI as you have it.

 

[357_]

@ Jim,

I am okay that it wasn't GI after shooting it. It's just too much cool in one rifle. The m82 is only 2.5x and makes it pretty fast to pick up targets. I think it'll be amazing to hunt with and plink. I know some folks may not like shooting older guns, but as soon as I found out it wasn't complete or collector grade I am a lot happier. It makes me feel good to know I have a gun that can be shot and enjoyed rather than stared at on a wall, to each their own.

The photo's are uploading as we speak and will be up in a few minutes.

 

[357_]

 

[357_]

It is pretty rusty still, but it looks worse in the pictures after shooting. It managed to find more oil in it than I thought possible and make a mess all over the receiver. I'll post some in a week or 2 once I get all the guns we found cleaned up (including that m1 as well)

Let me know what you think and if there is anything I should do in particular, this is my first super old rifle.

 

[Jim Watson]

Fascinating.
That is a G&H double lever side mount as used on the M1C.
I'm wondering if FiL got a complete M1C scope and mount and had it put on the 1903 with either a new base or the M1 base altered to fit the bolt action.

Heck, maybe some unit armorer did it in service... but you'd never prove it.

There are a few shops around that refurbish scopes, I am trying to contact one myself.
IronsightInc says they work on M84s, might be worth a call on your M82.
It seems optically ok, just kind of ugly.
http://www.ironsightinc.com/

 

[nwilliams]

That is quite a piece of history you have there!

The stories they could tell if only they could speak!

 

[357_]

I think everybody has a million plans when they get a used gun, I know I definitely do. In looking at it in depth with my wife we've decided that we kind of like the hell-and-back look. I'm not sure I'd want to do anything beyond keeping the rust at bay and the metal clean and protected with Rem-Oil. And after some conversation with my wife she informed me her father (I never had the chance to meet him unfortunately) had that rifle as it sits in the Korean war.

I wish I'd asked her a bit more in depth questions on the rifle but just assumed she knew little about it as she never spoke of it before. I have to laugh at the "non-G.I." status. I understand it was not govt issued directly like that but I am quite sure it is possible for it to be modified at the unit level and used as it is seen. When I was in the Army 2002-2006 I saw aimpoint's, eotech's and tasco's on weapons. Each one has a story and 100 years from now I am sure people will argue over the worth of each. I personally think that the items I possess are correct to the Korean war and possibly WWII, nobody can do anything but speculate. But speculating is the coolest part, I just love the history of them! Everytime I've touched that rifle I find a new ding in the stock and try to imagine how it could have gotten there, what beach was it dropped on? Who's boot stepped on it? Which door was it used to break down? You just can't help but wonder, I do wish it could talk. Or at the very least that I could have asked her Father.

 

[PreMod70]

Just curious, does the muzzle of the barrel have any kind of stamp that favors a star. Also, what branch of service was the vet in during Korea.

 

[357_]

FiL was in the Army. And on the bbl is a S in a circle a flaming bomb and 145. I don't see anything else on it.

 

[Oohrah]

OK the rifle is not an military sniper, but the scope was a part of being used on a sniper.
I'm not sure of the side mount being used in any form. All the sniper rifles that I have seen are top mounted. The 03A4s I am most familiar with and the receivers are stamped to where the make and serial numbers are not paralelle to the barrel as shown here. Also it appeard two extra holes have been drilled and tapped on the side of the rear right hand of the receiver. Most likely for receiver rear sights. The A4s also had the bolt handle altered to clear the scope body, and no front sight or front sight base on the
barrel. The scope mount was a single piece Redfield with Redfield rings. The manner this scope is mounted is the way (side mount) the M-1 Garands are side mounted. For the Garand, it is because they are top loaded with an enboc clip of eight that would be impossible to load with a top mount. It appears that whatever it may be, a fun shooter for sure!

 

[Jim Watson]

Hah, I missed the holes for a receiver sight.

I also now see there is a number on the inside of the scope mount.
Might that be the serial number of the M1C it came off of? I dunno.

 

[357_]

A fun shooter for sure, I'm just bummed at the cost of ammo. I am curious, I have a case of "corrosive" ammunition, still sealed in the spam-can. Is it really that bad if I shoot it? I figure it has obviously shot quite a bit of that exact ammunition in it's life. My understanding is that the corrosive material is just salt and that a good cleaning after firing will stop any problems.

Any truth in that? In the meantime I'm looking at used reloading kits. Any idea on a price I could expect to pay and be in business?

Also, anybody reload and have an idea of a SAFE but effective load I could use? Want to use the handloading website to get an idea on the cost.

Thanks

With supplies off midway and a load I found in a quick search I found I can reload for a cost of about .50 a round, that sound right? It's a 150gr at about 2900fps. Said 59gr of IMR 4350.

 

[Jim Watson]

The corrosive compound left is potassium chloride, which is A salt, just not table salt which is sodium chloride. The key to cleaning it is water. Clear water, soapy water, emulsified oil in water, various homebrew and commercial formulas which contain water as made for black powder. Somebody used to make repro WW II era GI bore cleaner but I cannot find any today.
Water dissolves the salt and washes it out, after which you dry and oil.
You can't "neutralize" it with ammonia or anything, it is already chemically neutral.
Ed Harris says Breakfree and Ed's Red will work but as an old fertilizer engineer, I am more confident with washing KCl off with water or aqueous mixtures.
I clean my BPCR with Clorox Green (no chlorine bleach), oil with Ballistol at the range; reclean at home with M-Pro 7 which is a detergent mix, not an oily solvent.

Maybe some of the mil-surpers will comment on what they use.

As far as reloading, there are books full of .30-06 loads.
I'd load a Springfield with 46-47 grains of 4895 and a 150 gr bullet for 2700 fps or so; about what the early ammo would do.

 

[357_]

Thanks Jim! I've been posting here on and off for a little while and you've consistently been kind and helpful, just wanted to say thank you for that.