doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion Classic & Custom Single Barreled Sporting Rifles @ doublegunshop.com Found my first dangerous low-numbered 1903.

I acquired this rifle (SA-17449) back in the winter and had a new Silvers pad fitted, the old one was junk. Finally took it along to the range today and just touched the trigger and it fired. Felt light in the shop but a little shocking at the bench. Brought it home and found it had a 1lb-3oz trigger. Now has a 3lb-10oz so will try it again.

Good looking rifle and I really like the deep butt.

30-06? Just to clarify.

30-06 it is!

OK, Michael - it's dangerous (obviously), has a new pad, etc. but who made it? It looks early, but I'm not going to guess yet. Kinda suprised I'm the first to ask.

The rifle is unmarked but IMO the work of Griffin, post 1923 so G&H time frame. I was slow to make any attribution because of some non-typical things like the long pistol grip and short forend but feel comfortable saying it came out of the G&H shop.

Just how dangerous are these low number guns?

Michael,
I hate to think of you facing the danger of shooting it. Since I am old guy who has lived a great life, I would be happy to take it off your hands.
Seriously, many years ago I had an M2 Springfield that was obviously converted to a box magazine fed, .22 Hornet by G&H. The bottom of the receiver was machined in typical G&H fashion to feed, and a new box and follower along a with beautifully finished '03 trigger guard/floor plate were fitted. The stock, sights and scope mounts were all G&H, yet it was not marked G&H. The answer I was given by the gentleman who was running G&H back then was that they only marked firearms that they rebarreled and this one still had an M2 barrel although the rifling and bore diameter were the only vestiges left. Is it possible yours has a Springfield barrel?

Shooting a 150gr bullet at 2700fps is pretty darn dangerous.

Seriously, the majority of folks believe them to be a danger to the shooter and do not recommend shooting them. Obviously I'm in the minority and for reasons that have to do with research and hands on.

If someone will take up the other side and present their evidence (more then everyone knows they are bad or I have a copy of Hatcher's Notebook) I would be happy to debate the subject, in detail.

To summarize, the double heat treated and the nickle steel 1903's have an increased margin of safety over the single heat treated (low-number) 1903's. A few of the LN's had burnt steel but now all LN are considered unsafe and most people feel that even a proper made LN rifle will fail if the case head fails.

This one does have the original Springfield barrel but I have seen many marked G&H's (I have one) with the original Armory barrel.

Unfortunately there is no RULE why some rifles were not marked.