I was interested in this rifle but was not the first caller so it was sold.
Features I liked, reversed safety, headless firing pin, nice checkering, very nice wood to metal
fit, horn fore end tip and ivory pistol grip cap. It is listed by TAG Gun Shop and has several photos. The buttplate
was trash and a sling swivel was missing but should be easily replaced. It appeared to have an NRA Sporter barrel but
the sn is not listed in SRS. Hope someone on this forum got it. A search for 1903 Springfield on Guns International
will find it.

Herschel,

How much were they asking for the rifle?
Dan

$1,300.00 plus. I believe $1325.00 plus actual shipping.

This the one you are referring to?
Springfield

That is the one.

Is that a rework of an NRA sporter stock?

The NRA Sporter stock would have had two reinforcing crossbolts. It might have been a 1922 (.22 cal.) stock but I never saw a 1922 stock
with that nice of grain. The 1922 stock would have a filled hole where the butt sling swivel was removed. There would have been two holes
for screws that attached the butt sling swivel. One hole would have been used for the detachable swivel base but the other hole would
have been filled but still visible.

I'd say no. No crossbolts, inletting is to good, don't think you could get that tight of a grip out of a NRA sporter stock. Also looks to be something other than Black Walnut.

John

There are several unique and well executed features on that rifle, but they don’t point to any specific stocker to me.

I agree it isn’t a Sporter stock. There is far more wood in places where it wouldn’t be on a Sporter stock. The figure looks like English walnut, rather than the typically plain black walnut found on armory stocks.

Neat rifle, thanks for sharing!

Nice looking 03 Sporter.
The ivory grip cap looks like a lot more attention was given to when made.
It actually is the shape of a nice sporter rifle grip cap.

Most times the mention of an Ivory Grip Cap and I expect to see a rather thick, plain, slightly rounded over blob of a cap with a screw thru the center.

This one likely held an initial plate or maybe a small inscription on (perhaps) a gold oval sunken into the flat.

The gold prospectors of the 2000's may have pried it out for scrap. Anything is fair game in that activity it seems.
Maybe it just fell free from old glue letting go.

Yeah, had I seen it, it would be on its way to my house. Clean it up and install a new solid red thin pad and bingo!- a nifty sporter with pretensions of being by a "name" pre-war builder if not actually in fact.

I feel kind of dumb about thinking it was a rework of an NRA sporter stock, that being said, did anyone take a good look at the 3rd picture?
It looks like the stock was originally made for a different action with the receiver sight a bit forward of the current one.

I hate to get roasted but I can feel the flame coming. I never got Springfields. I even had one once. It was a MK II that looked like it just came from the arsenal. Cost me $100. I don't think I even shot it before a collector friend saw it and wanted it and gave me my $100. Give me an original, the Mauser 98.

I can't speak for you, but I think I understand. I grew up in Wisconsin, but spent 5 years in Britain, some of the people that I knew in Britain would go on about how cricket was superior to baseball and how rugby was superior to American football, I would nod and be diplomatic and say, "you know, if I had grown up watching and playing this or that, I would feel the same way." In my formative years, I read about custom 1903's and wanted someday to own one. Now I have a bunch and will always want more.
I actually have more Mausers than 03''s. To inlet a 1903 action into a stock requires a lot more work than a Mauser 98, to me that is part of the charm, though I can certainly understand someone feeling the opposite way. Whenever I get a 1903, the first thing that I do is to take it apart and look at the inletting. I think if circumstances ould have been different, I might be voicing the same opinions as you, that being said, I am glad that the circumstances have been different. I love my 1903's

Pic#4 if you enlarge it (click on the pic) gives a pretty good look at it.
What I would say is a horn inlay in the wood that outlines the existing recv'r sight w/ about an even 1/8" perhaps extra outside of the actual sight .
It makes a nice arc coming off the straight vertical front side of the inlay to then form another short portion which shadows the elevation bar of the sight.
The rear edge is most all hidden by the bolt handle and shadow. But my guess is that it matches in shape to what you can see.

I think it's purpose done extra detail inlay. Not something done to cover a mistake or opening left from a secondary use of the stock.
If the rear sight is not perfectly centered on the horn inlay, perhaps the rear sight was not the one on the rifle when the inlay was done when making the stock.

Horn matrl matches the forend tip nicely and doesn't jump out at you like a 1970's style long aspect white diamond inlay on the side of the stock.
Maybe the orig grip cap to the rifle was that matrl as well. The ivory grip cap was an added feature of a secondary owner wanting to add his/her own 'name' to it with an initial inlay,,again just thinking out loud on the key board.

I'm thinking the likely stockmaker is Barney Worthen. The checkering pattern is one clue, and the grip cap, with missing inlay, is just like the one Mchael Petrov writes about only different material. Whoever got this rifle has a nice sample of classic American work.

Kutter, I think you're right about the inlay. I've seen that detail once before on a Krag stocked by Wundhammer.

Bill,
I don't think it's Barney Worthen because the stock is too thick thru the wrist. Michael told me that he could tell a Worthen stock in the dark just by feeling how thin it was thru the wrist. Worthen even rounded the TG tangs to make the stock thin.

Dan