I'm looking at an M1903 serial number 1.4M (1932 build date?)with a 6-27 barrel.  Could this be the original barrel?  Rifle has a c stock with no markings.  Rifle is in great shape with excellent bore.  My Joe Poyer book says no "service" rifles were built after 1927.  What does this mean?

The Poyer book actually says no "production" after 1927.  Does this mean component manufacture stopped in 1927 but assembly continued?

'bote' - I don't think the Poyer book on the 1903 Springfield is very highly regarded or trusted.

IIRC - Springfield Armory experienced vast cut backs between the World Wars. Barrelled Actions and components continued to be made and held in reserve. There were adequate complete arms for the peace time army. During the late 1920's and 1930's complete arms were mainly National Match Rifles and arms for civilian sales.

The equipping for WW-2 led to the store of parts and components being made into rifles or used in rebuilding rifles.

FWIW - I have a 1903 Springfield, #1,492,690, with a likely original barrel, dated 11/35. This action never was updated with a 'Hatcher hole', (vent hole added to left side of receiver ring and found on most WW-2 rebuilds).

I would be suspicious of a #1,4xx,xxx serial number range, 1903 Springfield, with a 1927 dated barrel. I believe an original barrel would be dated 1934 or 1935.

If this receiver has a Hatcher hole, it could then be a WW-2 build or rebuild and then things can get stranger.

If you are buying it for its shooting merits and not as an all original pristine collection piece, it should make you happy and be worth around $750.

Thanks for the info.  No Hatcher hole on the left side.  The rifle is owned by the son of a former CMP employee who bought it in the 80s.  He did say the wood was replaced with a C stock but other than that it's just as the CMP received it.  The Parkerizing looks recent and the barrel and receiver match.  The rear sight looks great, the barrel bore and crown look perfect.  Just not much wear evident overall.  It's a very odd combination.  It was cheap so it's mine now.   

Sounds like you did great! Enjoy!

I don't think she's a collector but she looks nice and didn't cost a lot.  I haven't fired her yet.  The bore is about +4 but shiny with strong rifling.  Not sure what the B28179 stamped on the handguard is.  Not really sure how you use the rear sight but I like the notch on my Krags better than the peep.

---

Sweet looking 1903 Springfield. The number on the hand-guard is the (blue-print?) part number. That seems to have been done on some parts during the 1930s - IIRC.

What numbers, letters, or symbols are on the bolt-handle root? 'N.S.' would be great.

You have a wonderful 1903 for fun at the Range!

It has "9796" engraved by hand on the side.  It has what looks like "BFI" and something else stamped on the top of the root.  It has "C" and something illegible stamped on the bottom.  Prolly a replacement?

---

The B.F. on your bolt is for Bonney Forge & Tool. I believe Springfield Armory finished these bolts from forgings, supplied by Bonney Forge, during WW2.

(I don't know the significance of the numbers stamped and scribed on your bolt. Maybe, it was 'matched' to the serial number of another 1903 at one time)?

The 'C' on the bottom of the bolt-handle root is probably a steel lot I.D.

My 1935 vintage, 1903 Springfield, had a Remington bolt when I got the rifle. I replaced it with a new 'H.O.' (Hoover Bearing) bolt, made during WW2. The finish matched my rifle and 'head-space' was spot on.

This rifle I 'restored' to be a good looking 'Shooter'. I was not worried about 'collector' perfection. I was not going to invest $175 for a N.S. marked bolt. My rifle also lacks the 'Hatcher Hole'.

There is enjoyment in having a good looking parts gun and you don't feel guilty shooting it.

My sentiments exactly.  I was surprised at how hard it is to find nice, original 1903s without breaking the bank.  I found this along the way.  I don't know how much of it is original (barrel, etc.) but it gives the feeling of an almost brand new 1903.  I have Remingtons 1903A3 and A4 but they just don't feel as nice as the Springfield.  When you handle a Springfield and then pick up a model 1917 you can understand how soldiers were reportedly upset about the change.  The 1903 is like a thoroughbred race horse while the 1917 is like a Clydesdale.  I still love the 1917s though.

The Pattern 1914 Enfield and Model of 1917 Enfield have always felt clumsy to me. They are great rifles, but, I prefer shooting the British S.M.L.E. and model 1903 Springfield rifles.

I am really bonded to my Remington 1903A3. I once hated the look of them, but, came to like mine a lot!

Most people really like the A3.  My A3 looks almost new but is just not that accurate.  I haven't fired it in two years.  I'm sure there are things that can be done to improve it.  I've been shooting a Krag when I compete in bolt matches but have an Eddystone I plan to shoot sometime this year.  Also, I'll see how the new girl works out.

Your 1903 looks pretty nice!  I'll bet it's pretty accurate too...

My 03A3 has a two-groove barrel and is a tack driver!  Eventually, I'd like to get a 1903, a 1917, and an SMLE... but that's after I win the lottery and retire.  For now, my rifles are about all I can afford and they keep me plenty busy shooting in local and National matches. 

I have an A3 with accuracy problems.  Slugged the barrel.  One pair of grooves was .308, the other was .3085.

The number on the bolt handle probably means that it was a Greek ( Lend Lease ? ) return sold through the CMP about 7 or 8 years ago. You could order either a straight stock (type S ) or a pistol grip ( type C ).