I’d like to summarize what I have covered so far. Because the 1917 problems were all related to a bore obstruction. As soon a people realized that you can't shoot out the grease or cleaning patch the problem with them became a non-issue. The 1903 has always been under the cloud of bad metallurgy and will stay that way. The LN 1903 was designed for a cartridge around 50,000 pounds and around double that pressure the action will fail. The later 1903 actions, when they fail they deform and do not shatter, never mind that in both cases the rifle is junk. I don’t try to get people to shoot or not shoot the LN’s but I do tend to voice my opinion when I see the same old tired stuff that keeps getting parroted. Only damascus shotguns get more incorrect press than the LN 1903. Here are a couple of responses to the LN question back in BC (before computers).
1936 “American Rifleman” I see that the practice of exchanging the low-number receivers for high-numbers when a rifle was sent in by a civilian for work was stopped unless the person requested it. Seems some people did not like loosing these (hard) smooth working actions. This question is not new, from Nov, 1932 American Rifleman, person asking if his low-number was still serviceable. Answer: “These older receivers are safe to use with any standard factory ammunition of old or modern ballistics, providing the cases are in good condition. There should be no grease on the cartridge or in the bore, and the breech space must be no greater than about .005 inch.”
American Rifleman March 1, 1925 By Major Whelen….”It happens; that beginning with serial number somewhere about 800,000, Springfield Armory adapted a new method of heat treatment for their receivers. This new method gives greater tensile strength than the old method. It is simply progress and improvement, and does not mean at all that previous receivers were defective in any way. As a matter of fact they are not, and from a practical point of view the difference between the two heat treatments means nothing at all. I would just as soon have an old receiver as a new one. In fact the receiver of my favorite Springfield sporter rifle is in the 200,000s, and I would not think of changing it for anything.”
