doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion Classic & Custom Single Barreled Sporting Rifles @ doublegunshop.com Christmas came early, but Santa will be late

Since he will have to bring this in a Big Brown Truck. All I have is the auction link, but it looks like I will be the caretaker of this for a while. She is a little rough around the edges, but should clean up reasonably well. Now I would like your opinions on whether I am right in my thoughts on her. First is the fact it is a rod bayonet receiver from what would be the first week of production (second day if they met the quota of 250 a day). Besides the stock hickies; the bolt, safety and magazine cut off are not correct, but that does not come as a surprise. No knowledge of the barrel date. Second is; I am 99% sure based on my limited knowledge, Michael's books and comparison to my own that this is a Sedgley, of course I could be 100% wrong. So based on what you can see in the 4 pictures, what say those of you who have more knowledge and experience? Sedgley?
Thaine
And a Merry Christmas and safe and Happy New Year to all of you.

For what it is worth, I thought so too. The stock pattern,
barrel band and front sight scream Sedgley. Hopefully Dan
and Rocky Mtn Bill will see your post and chime in, they know more about Sedgley's than I do.

I see a couple things that don't look Sedgley, there is wood missing at the cut-off on the left side but someone may have done that later. It may just be the photo angle but the PG shape and relief cut at the comb don't look right. If it is a Sedgley I would say that it was rebarreled with a military barrel as you can see the rear sight spline cut on the barrel. Sedgley only used military barrels on the very early guns and when they did they turned the barrel down to remove the spline cut. Sedgley used barrels from Winchester. Then the most obvious thing is that there is no mention of Sedgley markings on the barrel. I'm sure if it is marked the auction house would have mentioned that.

Actually when you get the gun and take it apart there should be assembly numbers on the stock, action, barrel, barrel band and T/G if it is a Sedgley. Plus the serial number should be on the back side of the bolt handle. I think there may be some Sedgleys out there without markings that may have been made on customers rifles.
Dan

Dan
That's exactly the input I was looking for. My guess on the cut-off wood was it was an crude repair to an "accident" since it is not finished off smoothly. I believe camera angle/lens distortion is playing a part with the grip perspective. I've seen that several times when I've gambled and once I had the stock/rifle in hand it looked "normal". I agree and wondered about the lack of markings or mention of any. A rebarrel would not be out of the question considering the age and the ammunition of the period. Hopefully that is it. I guess the silver lining is there can't be more than 257 people with a Springfield 03 with a lower serial number! LOL

Once it is in hand I'll take it apart and hopefully we will have some answers.
Thaine

Didn't someone make a rear sight that replaced the magazine cut-off? Maybe the wood was removed for that? Parker Hale possibly? Sure looks for all the world to me like a Sedgley stock, right down to the chip behind the tang. Like to know if it has the speed lock conversion. My thought someone put either a new barrel, or whole new barreled action on there sedgley stock.

John

Yes, Marble-Goss made a sight like that, here is an example of a rifle with that sight

Marble-Goss on an 03

Though if the stock was already modified for a Lyman, it would look
pretty awful with that missing.

I hope to read more about this rifle when it arrives.

I guess we'll all have to wait for the big brown truck. It looks like a Sedgley to me, too.

As to the auction house not mentioning the maker's mark, I was at an auction in San Francisco about20 years ago. Included were two custom Springfields with some unusual features indicating the same owner with specific ideas. The catalog just called them .30-06 sporting rifles; I found Barney Worthen's marks on one, nothing on the other. I called Michael Petrov and he bought both of them.

Marble-Goss sights are extremely high quality in their original state, IMO. I used to compete in NMLRA matches with roundball "light" benchrest and X-sticks rifles. They were generally equipped with Redfield 75s, but one of them has a Marble-Goss. The quality is second to none.

One interesting note about them, tho' ....... the threads on the MG are reversed from the Lyman's ........ i.e., you turn one of them one way to raise elevation and change windage, and you turn the other the opposite way. The old MG sights commanded a premium even way back in the late '80s.

Would a thread on this forum with some pics and info about the X-sticks roundball competition rifles be appropriate? Even so, there may not be any interest in them. Just curious. The accuracy level that can be achieved with patched round balls may be surprising to some.

SRH

Yes, yes, yes! At least I would be interested.