Rifle Patents

[David]

chilidog

Registered to :Aug 22, 2001
Messages :100
From :Baton Rouge, LA USA
Posted 02-10-2001 at 14:59
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I was watching a program on The History Channel the other day, but I wasn't paying close attention. I think they said that the '03 Springfield rifle was a refined version of a Mauser patent that the United States military bought. Is this right?


chilidog


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Profile Email Qoute
frisco-kid

Registered to :Aug 23, 2001
Messages :174
From :S.F. Bay Area
Posted 02-10-2001 at 19:42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
David,

I don't know the answer, but I know who probably would. Give Steve/82 RIGGER a heads-up on your question. Also, Col Murph. I don't know how much he monitors over here. You might have to go to the other site for him. They're both gun collectors/shooters/hobbiests.
-----------------
PROUD TO BE A PARATROOPER! Tom


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Profile Qoute
82Rigger

Registered to :Aug 21, 2001
Messages :47
From :Ft. Walton Beach, FL
Posted 13-10-2001 at 18:29
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Chili,

Yes, that's correct. I don't remember the exact details, but the U.S. did, around 1900 I think, purchase patent rights from Paul Mauser. It turned into a stickey business, because the Mauser rifle design also involved patented features from several smaller companies which the U.S. "didn't bother" to purchase.
The U.S. has, through the years, incorporated many former weapons features into their designs. The .50 caliber BMG cartridge is basically a scaled up version of the 8mm Mauser cartridge. Our M60 machine gun has MANY similarities to the German MG-42 of WW2.

Airborne! Steve / 82Rigger



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Profile www Qoute
chilidog

Registered to :Aug 22, 2001
Messages :100
From :Baton Rouge, LA USA
Posted 14-10-2001 at 22:59
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, was the '03 better than the Mauser? What would be the criteria to judge it by? Is there a point where a bolt action combat rifle just won't get any better? It would seem that the "Law of diminishing returns" would apply somewhere.

chilidog


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Profile Email Qoute
Keith_Hixson

Registered to :Aug 23, 2001
Messages :445
From :Ellensburg, Washington
Posted 30-10-2001 at 19:39
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It all depends if you are German or American.

Seriously, Both fine bolt action rifles. Mausers used the 8mm and 7mm which are slightly less powerful than the 30-06. Many believe that the Mausers function a little better than the 03. I have owned and hunted with a sporterized 03 for years. It is as accurate as any modern 30-06 bolt action I know of. I can still bench rest a .50 cent piece at 200 yds. and if I was really good it probably would be better than that. From shooting the Mauser and 03 I believe the Mauser has a little smoother action. But not anymore accurate. The 03 is a little more powerful. Two fine bolt action rifles which have stood the test of time.

Lots of countries made Mausers for their military. Including the USA in the 03 version. They used the 03 as a snipers rifle in WW II, it was also the primary infantry rifle at the beginning of WW II. I understand that but not positive that some even used the 03 as a snipers rifle in Vietnam.

Keith


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Profile Email Qoute
bits

Registered to :Aug 25, 2001
Messages :148
From :Ruston, LA
Posted 24-12-2001 at 11:51
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A good read all the way, troops.

I have heard it said the biggest problem with the original German Mauser as a weapon of war was that it, (typically), was a German machinists marvel, and consequently it was simply made up of too many little pieces, which led to failures from trash getting in it.

My addition is what I know about '03's and their role in SVN. Although I can't speak to whether they were used by either side as a sniper weapon when we were there, I can say something about them having been there.

On my first tour, in 1963, '03's were plentiful as captured VC weapons. Getting them right out of the package was not uncommon. The US Mail laws were easier back then and I sent several '03's and M1 Carbines home to family and friends, and brought an '03 home myself. I also brought back an M2 Paratrooper's .30 Carbine with the folding wire stock. Since it was a machine gun I could not send it through the US mail.

I also managed to get hold of two Thompsons, and some other "souveniers" that I eventually just gave away before leaving.

Our guess back then was that the weapons were either furnished for WWII use by Ho Chi Minh's Vietnamese guerillas against the Japanese, or they could have been given to the French after WWII for their use against Ho Chi Minh's Viet Minh army. . . . The one the French lost which resulted in the country being divided into North and South Viet Nam. . . . and eventually led to the US getting involved.

As a rambling aside, before WWII Cambodia, Laos, and Viet Nam was a place called "French Indo-China". The French never went back into Cambodia and Laos after the war, but they did go back into Viet Nam. After 4 years of German occupation and destruction of their homeland in France, they were broke as a nation and could not stand the cost of re-colonializing Viet Nam, so we picked up the tab. They lost it anyway. Our loss was not the war itself. We lost because our hands were tied by our own Secretary of Defense, Robert McNamara. At least that's what he said later when he wrote his stinking book.

I have discussed my '03 with, and sent photos to, 82 Rigger and he says it is a conglomeration of newer and older parts, reassembled as a workover at some time or other. I still have the original package it was in when it came out of the box. It is in essentially new parkerized condition, except for edge wear marks due to my own poor attention to care over the years. It has a Springfield Armory stamp on the barrel, along with the date "1938", and some other features Rigger said were improvements that were incorporated over the years. It also has a pistol grip stock rather than the more common "carbine" stock.

Steve, (Rigger), says I may have something of a collector's weapon. I fully intend to take it and let him see it and tell me what it "really" is.

Some day.

SF

H_______




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Profile Email Qoute
chilidog

Registered to :Aug 22, 2001
Messages :100
From :Baton Rouge, LA USA
Posted 06-01-2002 at 22:51
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bits,
The '03 was not uncommon still in the box? We gave them to "Uncle Ho" for use in WWII? That's surprising. If they were still in the box, that would mean that they weren't used in WWII or against the French. Were VC weapons that plentiful that they would still have some in the box? Was their ammo from WWII also? How long is the shelf life for ammo?

Chilidog


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Profile Email Qoute
phuloi

Registered to :Aug 24, 2001
Messages :358
From :Sequim,Wa.
Posted 06-01-2002 at 23:56
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My 2 cents, I also am the fortunate owner of the Springfield `03-A3...Can`t tell you anything about the history-can say it`s the best shooting rifle I own..or ever have.Not original condition..Like Keith`s mine has been bastardized into a sporting arm.I`ve got it chambered in .308 Norma Magnum,which I had Jeremiah Shannon lengthen a tad bit from Norma`s specs=.308 Norma Mag XL. She`s my elk gun..One shot-one kill..Anchors em... Speaking of which,I`d never heard of US snipers using the `03 in Vietnam..The one sniper I know used a .270 Remington-He`s still got it
-----------------
War is fear cloaked in courage...... Westmoreland...Peace..Griz


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Profile www Qoute
Keith_Hixson

Registered to :Aug 23, 2001
Messages :445
From :Ellensburg, Washington
Posted 08-01-2002 at 02:26
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Springfield 1903 A3
I got a new stock, new bent bolt, new safety, fiberglass bedded, target trigger adjustable down to half pound pull (I use 2 and half pound pull), redfield rings, 3 - 9X Sovereign Scope. I use 165 gr bullet. I believe it is as accurate as any commercial rifle I've shot.

It cost me 75 bucks in 1966. I spent about $200 bucks on sporterizing it. I could have a good Winchester or Remington for that price. But, I thought I was saving myself lots of money. Live and learn. Now I wouldn't trade it, too many memories.

Keith

[colmurph]

Is a "Direct Descendent" of the Mauser. The Mauser action has been copied by just about every manufacturer of hunting rifles since it came out. The main advantage of the '03 over the Mauser was the ease of manufacture. The Mauser was better made but didn't fire any better, it just cost more and took longer to make. The Japanese Arisaka is also a Mauser "Spin off" but the action is so crappy that I'd be afraid to fire one. A note of caution to any of you who have the "Low Serial Number '03's" DONT SHOOT THEM even if you have shot them before. The receivers of many of them were not properly heat treated and can fail "Catastrophicaly" (meaning LIKE A HAND GRENADE) and there are absolutely NO WARNING SIGNS. They will just come apart at some part because they are too brittle. Kinda hard to watch the telly with a bolt protruding from your forhead.