doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion Classic & Custom Single Barreled Sporting Rifles @ doublegunshop.com Springfield receiver on Gunbroker.

For the propose of this discussion a "massive gas escape" would be for a hole many times larger than the primer hole to open up, such as a case head failure.

The Krag used the same steel and heat treatment as the LN 1903's. When a Krag lets go, I have one here, they shatter and do not deform, just like the LN 03's.

speaking of gas------run some test than talk MP

Ben,
I don't think tests are required just look at how much of the case is not supported in a Springfield. When all you have to hold pressure is the case head you need good brass. Too hard or too soft and you can have problems. I am not aware of any modern action that does not try to give the case as much support as it can get. When putting a barrel on a Springfield one can do a better job of supporting the case than was done on the original but some brass is still not surrounded/supported by steel. I remember when Winchester changed the model 70 that was the one advantage to the new action that made any sense.

How ever if you want to donate some actions I can get together with Sherman Bell and we could do some. I have spare bolts and
barrels so all that would be needed are actions.

Cheers,
Laurie

>
Thank you for the info on the steel. One point that was never made clear to me.
I still would ask why is no one asking that all the Krags be retired, never to be fired again with any loading, as is the oft printed experts opinion of the low# '03.

Not sure I understand this post.

Could you amplify?

Now that's an interesting wreck. Looks like the front lug failed which transfered the load to the rear of the receiver through the bolt rib with the rear of the receiver breaking off by brittle fracture. Interestingly the receiver ring looks like it held just fine.

Any information on the load or what may have lead to the failure other than poor metalurgy?

Jerry Liles

fb why even talk about 03 junk----no gas right now.

gv no i can not out of fear.

Ben,
Sorry. I thought you were interested in why the 03 low # receivers may have problems.
Cheers,
Laurie

To clarify some points, IMO the following is a fair summation of my opinions of the available data:

Krags and low-# 1903s are basically the same composition and respond in similar ways to a catastrophic overload, that is, the receivers tend to shatter rather than deform as would the double-heat-treats and Mausers

Some Krags and low-# 1903s have 'burnt steel' and are irretrievably weaker than the norm, but others can be annealed or otherwise re-heat-treated to improve their strength and there's no way to tell beforehand

There's enough missing and contaminated data from the early years to totally occlude a clear conclusion about a comparison

Normal loads will normally give no trouble even in faulty receivers since the main failure mode is from shock/vibration load rather than total applied force, meaning that usually, as long as the case head remains intact, the rifle will be fine. However a blown case head or a hammer blow might shatter a faulty example; the classic instance is that given by a gunwriter (whose stupidity was only exceeded by his ignorance or vice versa) who suggested that any suspect receiver be given a solid hammer whack across the feed rails to see if it would crack.(!)

As My Daughter the Teenager used to say, "Well DUUUHHH, Dad!" or as Gomer Pyle used to say, "Surprise, Surprise, Surprise!"

Some folks are apparently so stupid that IMO they shouldn't be allowed to even reproduce much less vote, but I digress...

IMO the reference to Sherman Bell was most apropriate, for his much-appreciated debunking of the damascus-barrel Old Wives' Tale. As I said before, I won't build a low-# but will shoot one any time.
Regards, Joe