Best rifle for Military matches?

  • 11K Views
  • Last Post 01 February 2010
Vassal posted this 10 July 2009

Hello, I have been shooting and reloading and casting for a few months now---I Love It! As I am going to be purchasing a new rifle and corrolary equipment in a few weeks, and I hope to practice, join CBA and then take part in matches (postal first then maybe a trip to Illinois) I want to know what you think the best rifles for this purpose are. I really want to research this buy and get something great instead of what happens to be on the shelf in front of me (which is usually great also but,,,) I am not rich, and by “all considered” i mean to include availibility of rifles, parts and brass, selection of bullets and molds, PRICE, et cetera. Thanks guys.

                                                                                    Vassal-of-One

Attached Files

Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
Ed Harris posted this 10 July 2009

For military issue class, IMHO the 03A3 Springfield has the best sights, useable trigger, shoots well and uses common brass and bullets. Hard to beat. The Swiss K-31 is common and affordable, but better for somebody under age 40 with good eyesight.

For my money look for a nice condition original Remington 03A3 with 2-groove barrel and perfect bore. Pay what you must to get a good one. Try any 150-200 grain bullet that fits, cast of wheelweights+ 2% tin and 15 grs. of #2400. If you want to get serious, have Veral Smith cut a mould to fit your rifle. My two cents.

73 de KE4SKY In Home Mix We Trust From the Home of Ed's Red in "Almost Heaven" West Virginia

Attached Files

BruceV posted this 10 July 2009

There are many good military surplus rifles available. Given how they are designed, etc., some are more easily used for cast bullet military rifle matches.

I prefer to use either a 1903 or a 1903-A3 for military rifle shooting using either jacketed or cast bullets. I have had sterling results with my 03 using cast bullets. In both of my 03-A3 rifles, results are equally good. I simply prefer to use my 03.

Good shooter grade 03 and 03-A3 rifles are available. With a decent load and some basic attention to the details of position, etc., one of these rifles can produce shockingly good results on target. In fact, I've used my Smith-Corona 03-A3 to not only win on the rifle range, I've used it with hunting ammunition to make nice one-shot kills on deer. I like the fact that with it, skills learned on the range transfer to the woods and fields when hunting.

Get yourself a good 1907 sling for your rifle. Learn to use the sling with your rifle. Load plenty of ammunition and practice the positions. You will be pleased at your results. Sincerely. Bruce.

Attached Files

JetMech posted this 10 July 2009

Vassal,

Ed and Bruce's advice is right on the money. Order some back issues of the Fouling Shot, and you'll find most of the folks are shooting 1903A3s for the Military, Issue Sight class. Much better sight picture than the 1903's, IMHO. I have one of each, the A3 getting a NOS 2 groove HS barrel and the 1903 getting a slightly used 1944 4 groove barrel (they're at the gunsmith as we speak). The 1903 was already drilled for the Lyman sight, so I'll use it in the Modified Sight class. As Ed pointed out, a Remington is a good buy and I'd advise you to shop the Milsurp website. Those guys know their stuff and will sell a great shooter that's not collector grade for a decent price. Gunbrokers, AuctionArms, and GunsAmerica, most of those sellers claim everything they have is  "all original", “collector grade", “one of a kind", etc. Those guys from Milsupr (Jouster.com) can spot a replacement part from an original just from the pictures.

Shoot, someone here may have one to sell. Jeff Bowles had a good shooter for $500 awhile back, I believe.

Attached Files

big boar posted this 10 July 2009

Mr Harris, a bit off topic but you mentioned WW + 2% tin. WW are getting scarce around here, if I use pure Pb and about 4% tin, can I heat treat to get the hardness to about 15BHN? Sorry if this is off topic but you're here right now and you mentioned a load for that alloy. Many thanks Brian.

Attached Files

KenK posted this 11 July 2009

I'm no Ed Harris but the tin is not what makes bullet alloys heat treat, it is the antimony.

rotometals has some 30% antimony alloy you could use, it is a lot cheaper than tin.

Edit: I think arsenic is important to heat treating also.  You can get that from shot.  There are several articles on the LASC site about it.  I don't  fool with it myself.

 

I really like the Springfield  too but some fellers here shoot nice groups with those odd Swedish rifles.:D

Attached Files

CB posted this 11 July 2009

Another vote for the 03A3.. Any good bore will shoot well, the bullet fit is the critical aspect of the accuracy you will ring out of it.

Ken - there are other options for making metal that can be heat treated. I remember something about a thread here where you can use sulfur to realign the molecules in the metal so it can be heat treated.

Havent the slightest what thread that was, but I will see if I can find it. Should be cheaper than antimony if economy is a driving force.

Attached Files

Vassal posted this 11 July 2009

Thanks for all the great input. I have never seen an 03A3 in a shop, but I will definitely be looking. I guess what it really boils down to is what can I find with a good bore.

 

Attached Files

CB posted this 11 July 2009

A decent 03 or 03-A3 is going to set you back a fair amount of change. Get a K-31 set it up for scoped class if you can't see the sights and have at it.

Attached Files

Vassal posted this 12 July 2009

I have not done a great amount of looking but they do seem pretty pricy. I might be better off going for the scoped class. I am only 32 but my eyes are not that good (too many hours studying the computer screen.) I guess the issued sites on those rifles are just plain superior. sort of makes you question whether it is issued class or 03 class. Most all of the winners do seem to use them. I leave that to people who know; but I would like to “know” something someday myself, and as I will likely be working on less money than will buy a competitive 03-03a3 maybe I should consider modified iron or scoped. I suppose that opens some doors.

What do you guys think about 98/29 persian Mausers? Samco has some in exc for$500 unissued for$700. I could try the issued sites and then alter if I had to. They also have the k31 for about half that but probably more used. Either way (or most likely ANY way) I will probably have to order a rifle site unseen online; thats making me nervous and sick right now.

Attached Files

BruceV posted this 12 July 2009

Vassal wrote: I have not done a great amount of looking but they do seem pretty pricy. I might be better off going for the scoped class. I am only 32 but my eyes are not that good (too many hours studying the computer screen.) I guess the issued sites on those rifles are just plain superior. sort of makes you question whether it is issued class or 03 class. Most all of the winners do seem to use them. I leave that to people who know; but I would like to “know” something someday myself, and as I will likely be working on less money than will buy a competitive 03-03a3 maybe I should consider modified iron or scoped. I suppose that opens some doors.

What do you guys think about 98/29 persian Mausers? Samco has some in exc for$500 unissued for$700. I could try the issued sites and then alter if I had to. They also have the k31 for about half that but probably more used. Either way (or most likely ANY way) I will probably have to order a rifle site unseen online; thats making me nervous and sick right now. Look at places like Culver Shooting Page - Want To Sell/Buy.  Do not be so concerned about if the rifle is “original” or not.  Focus on a good barrel.  03-A3 rifles can be bought in good shooting condition without breaking the bank.  If you look at gunshows, gunshops, on line, you can find rifles that have been drilled/tapped and maybe had the stock cut but no otherwise altered from military.  With a couple of plug screws, a used stock and handguard, etc., such rifles can be returned to military configuration and will give very good service.

If you buy anything at all on-line, make absolutely certain what is the return policy.  Be absolutely certain as to if you are allowed to fire the rifle.  Do no assume anything.  Take photographs of the rifle upon receipt as you remove it from the box noting details, etc.  That way if a return is necessary, you have some way of proving your case about the condition, etc.

Back to price... for $500-700 you should be able to find a nice 03-A3 rifle.  It may not be pristine unissued... but it should be very nice indeed.  What's more, it will be in a standard caliber.

Sincerely,

Bruce

Attached Files

CB posted this 12 July 2009

Vassal wrote: What do you guys think about 98/29 persian Mausers? Samco has some in exc for$500 unissued for$700.  

I guess we have different ideas about inexpensive rifles. You should be able to find a decent A3 in the 5-700 dollar range I'd think. You don't need a pristine bore or an unissued rifle to shoot in the matches. I'd stick with the K31s or the Springfields and if money vs bang for the buck was the deciding factor it'd be a K31. 

Attached Files

JetMech posted this 12 July 2009

pat i. wrote: I'd stick with the K31s or the Springfields and if money vs bang for the buck was the deciding factor it'd be a K31.  I'd second that. K31s can be had at half the price as a Springfield.

Competitive is a relative term. When I shot competatively long time ago (not in CBA then), it was more a matter of competing against myself to improve my performance with the equipment I had. In this sport (cast bullet matches) I think any decent rifle can be made competative. Half the challenge is finding the right bullet, getting it to match the throat of the rifle, then refining your load to produce the best groups from the bench. Then you have to be able to perform where the rubber meets the road. That's another story.

Attached Files

Vassal posted this 12 July 2009

Looks like I really have to spend some time looking and thinking about this purchase. I wouldn't say that I have a different idea about the price of rifles; for this purpose That price is really getting up there and would be a major commitment on my part, but I want to take that step and try to excell, in order to do that I will neeed a realy good bore and I am not sure about how easy they are to find. I am getting some great input here though most of it is at least modestly encouraging. It seems like it can be done.

After shooting the Mosin 91-30 today though I am not feeling great about my eyes and abilities. at 100 yds I wasn't grouping at all, but I was using surplus ammo and wasn't comfortable with my bags. (uhh hello,,,,) I question again the iron site class, but i just won't know till I try. Thanks guys for the great advice. With all these questions the reduced price of a good k31 might be the best start. Quick gimme one of each before they take my money.

Attached Files

Ed Harris posted this 15 July 2009

big boar wrote: Mr Harris, a bit off topic but you mentioned WW + 2% tin. WW are getting scarce around here, if I use pure Pb and about 4% tin, can I heat treat to get the hardness to about 15BHN? Sorry if this is off topic but you're here right now and you mentioned a load for that alloy. Many thanks Brian. IMHO you don't need alloy as hard as 15 BHN for target loads in most militaries. Keep the velocities below about 1700 f.p.s. and 12-13 BHN works fine.  Tin is the most expensive element in the alloy, but as little as 1/2% is adequate to make wheelweights or common backstop scrap cast OK.  More than 2% tin is a waste of money. If blending bullet metal from commercial alloys a 50-50 mix of linotype and pure lead casts wonderfully and yields about 13 BHN which I think is almost perfect.   If you blend commercial 92Pb-6Sb-2SN “Hardball” alloy 50-50 with pure lead you get a similarly nice casting, soft alloy, great for hunting, which will be about 12 BHN.

I approximate this alloy by salvaging backstop lead from an indoor police range where they shoot mostly 9mm and .40 cal. handguns, with a smattering of 12-ga. slugs, buckshot and .30 M1 carbine. My plumbers pot holds a 50 pound heat of this metal.  After skimming off the dirt and jacket metal I flux, then skim again, add one pound of 60-40 solder to the melt and flux again immediately before pouring my ingots. This gives an alloy approximately 96-3-1 which casts nice well filled out buillets at 12 BHN.   A good general purpose alloy for most use.

In the .30-'06 try 10 grs. of 7625, or 12 grs./ of PB, 15 grs. of #2400,  20 grs. of 4227, 22 grs. of 4198,  24 grs. of RL-7 or 26 grs. of 4895, RL-15 or Varget.  All good loads

73 de KE4SKY In Home Mix We Trust From the Home of Ed's Red in "Almost Heaven" West Virginia

Attached Files

Vassal posted this 08 October 2009

Well, I don't know if its the best but I just inspected an unissued 1968 finnish “sneak” M39. I bought it.

Attached Files

nimrod posted this 08 October 2009

I'm looking for something to use in the military matches myself and have wondered about the 1917 Enfield? It has peeps too, just not windage adjustable, heavier than the Springfield, looks like it would make a good match rifle. Is there something wrong with it?

Attached Files

Ed Harris posted this 08 October 2009

Some of the U.S. Enfield barrels run large, but as long as you use cast bullets that fit they shoot fine. I have a Winchester M1917 with Eddystone barrel which was a WWII San Antonio Arsenal rework which shoots very well. I found a Parker-Hale 5A receiver sight in UK which fits the similar .303 Pattern 14, and the combination shoots very well. I used to shoot it with cast in regular NRA highpower matches back to 600 yards, suppose I should dust it off and try it in the postals in mil-Modified.

In mine I use a 200-gr. LBT .312 pointed bullet with .303 bore riding nose and for short range to 200 yards 15.5 of #2400 with the bullet as-cast at 12BHN, for 300 yards and back around 50 grs. of W760 or 4350 or 54 grs. of 4831 with the ww+tin alloy quenched.

73 de KE4SKY In Home Mix We Trust From the Home of Ed's Red in "Almost Heaven" West Virginia

Attached Files

Vassal posted this 08 October 2009

I didn't think that cast could handle the loads using 50 or so grains of slow powders (760/4350). Thats full-house! I have often heard others talking of poor accuracy and/or leading at those pressures/velocities.?. apparently I have a great deal more experimentation to do. In fact I even argued with a guy over this very subject teh other day. He insisted (without any cast experience) that his normal full-house jacketed loads would work fine with a lead bullet of similar weight. am I to believe that he wasn't as wrong as I thought he was?

  

Attached Files

billwnr posted this 08 October 2009

Vassal, I see you are a CBA member so go over to the Military match results and check out some of the loads being used by the 7.62x54R shooters. Very good starting points and usually they are pretty accurate. Pay attention to bullet diameter also and it will give you an idea of which moulds to use.

Attached Files

robertwilliam posted this 09 October 2009

IRT the K31s. How do you load for them? I have tried to load cast and jacketed bullets for mine but the nearly non existant throat gives me fits. The rifling begins about .040 in front of the case mouth. All the cast bullets I have tried end up with the GC way back inside the case, way past the neck.

  I do like my Mk1 m1903, it seems to shoot cast wheel weights nearly as goo as m2 ball. I'll try it at the next Service Rifle match. While I do belive the 03A3 has much better sights fir hunting and combat, I like the old 03 sights at the range. The small circular appature and fine front sight allow for a very fine picture even for my old eyes.

Attached Files

JetMech posted this 09 October 2009

Vassal wrote: He insisted (without any cast experience) that his normal full-house jacketed loads would work fine with a lead bullet of similar weight. am I to believe that he wasn't as wrong as I thought he was?  From his perspective, cast bullets, being softer than copper-jacketed, would result in lower pressures. The fact that the best cast bullets generally have greater bearing surface area and do not perform as well at jacketed velocities is simply beyond his range of experience. Yes, using the same load, with a similarly shaped bullet at the same seating depth, it'll squirt out of the barrel, but the results will be less than satisfactory.

Attached Files

beemer posted this 09 October 2009

Vassal, You could have, in my opinion, done a lot worse than the M39. They have sights as good as any milsurp this side of peep sights and the front has windage adjustments, they are usually accurate as well. Another plus is that you are already set up to load the Russian.

My M39 is the least fussy cast shooter I have. I have not really twisted it's tail for the best load but it would do well with any reasonable load I tried. Haven't shot it in a while,I might have to dig it out.

beemer

Attached Files

CB posted this 10 October 2009

Vassal

In your situation I would look for the 03A3. While looking be aware that many have sat in arsenals some treared badly. I bought one from a louse that had a cracked stock on the inside. He was a veteran shooter so he knew he dumped it on me. Gun dealers can be worse than car dealers so seek several opinions before jumping on the first 03 you see.

If you can't find what you want in a 03 check out a Mauser. I bought 3 Turkish 1938-40 Mausers. All 3 are shooters.

Stephen Perry

Angeles BR:fire

Attached Files

cityboy posted this 10 October 2009

I'm not all that keen on a Mauser action. I have a 30-30 built on a small ring M98 and have had a hard time getting it to shoot well. The bolt is a sloppy fit and the receiver lugs cannot be lapped to better match the bolt lugs. The action is case hardened, so if the lugs are lapped there is always a chance of breaking through the hard case. If this happens, headspace will soon increase.

Jim

Attached Files

Bob S posted this 11 October 2009

Ed Harris wrote: I used to shoot it with cast in regular NRA highpower matches back to 600 yards, suppose I should dust it off and try it in the postals in mil-Modified.

Ed:

Where around here were you able to shoot full-distance NMC or Regional Course with cal. .30 cast bullets? 

I was considering shooting my heavy 03A3 at Quantico when Dave Willis was CO, WTB, but it was NO WAY.  He was concerned about the plunging trajectory.  I know they shoot BPCR there now, so maybe this is not an issue anymore?

 

Resp'y,

Bob S.

P.S.  How long is the waiting list at FFRGC now?

 

 

Attached Files

CB posted this 11 October 2009

Jeff

Talking to my Cast mentor if there is such a thing, maybe I'm mentoring him at the same time. I've known and shot benchrest with Bob for 15 years. He lives in Arizona in Mesa, goes to all the gunshows and scavenges and sells brass in the hills. Bob has casted since 1975 so I have a couple years on him. Right now he has a new Krieger barrel 1-12 twist in 7.62x39 on one of his XP 100 BR guns. He has several Cast molds he works with in 30 swears he going to go up to a .314 truncated bullet we'll see. Bob's favorite 30 cal mold is a 31141 but he feels it is too much of a bullet for what he's doing here. He wants to go to a 130 grn cast to get more bullet speed. He's probably right. Bob is in  Ed's class in load development but has no interest or time for computer gymnastics.

Bob advised me to salt the two new 2 groove 03A3 barrels my other Cast buddy has away. Finding a good 03A3 will be no problem he sees them all the time at the shows. If he finds one we'll make a trade. Probably trade one or two of my old Hart BR barrels for the Springfield, I have plenty old BR barrels. He could chamber for 6mm Cast. Like I always say barrels never wear out shooters wear out. I have a smith in California and one in Arizona that can take care of any projects Bob and I come up with. Oh by the way Jeff I finally got me a RCBS 8mm 170 FP mold, I have three Mausers that will get the treament.

Stephen Perry

Angeles BR:fire

Attached Files

CB posted this 11 October 2009

Ed

None of your opinions are humble wrote for a purpose. Just a displaced Farmer John in green jeans.

Stephen Perry

Angeles BR:fire

 

Attached Files

CB posted this 11 October 2009

Robert

If you have a smith with a throating reamer have him cut the lands forward where you want them. If you want to change the leade he can do that too.

Stephen Perry

Angeles BR:fire

Attached Files

billwnr posted this 11 October 2009

The RCBS 180-SP does good in the K31's and will do as good in the wind as any other bullet.

Attached Files

CB posted this 12 October 2009

ED

You shouldn't be giving out load recommendations to guys buying new guns. Your 760 load is over book and your 4831 is questionable given the variations of H and IMR loads. Primer variations could add as much 10 % to your data. I know you try and help but sometimes your logic is twisted. Besides that have a good day.

Stephen Perry

Angeles BR:fire

Attached Files

CB posted this 12 October 2009

Stephen The load Ed wes referring to is still used today by a couple of the high power shooters at my club. Of course as with any of the load information here is it use at your own peril. I have a load for my 06 that is 50 grs of 4064 behind a 168gr bullet that is a target cleaner at 600. No it is not published, but there are many that use that load at Camp Perry to win all of the time. I dont recommend that one rushes right out and use this load, it is equipment dependent. Besides, I dont think Ed was giving load advice, I think he was making a statement as to what he had done.

Attached Files

CB posted this 12 October 2009

Jeff

That's obvious about Ed's load info. But you know as well as other Comp shooters there are different grades of the same military guns and different equivalecies in military cases. Not mention differences in powders lot to lot and primers lot to lot.

Some of the newer Casters live and hopefully not die on the veterans info on loading for Cast. I obviously am not one of those. I said before I only talk Unique powder in Cast and then on the minimum side. Thank God Ed is not a small rifle caliber officianado hate to see what he would display there.

I think the Comp guys in Cast should discuss what powder what lot and what primer that's it. I ain't looking to be right or wrong here I am right.

Fry me Die me whatever you want to do with me. I would say it worse about presented un-published Comp loads the second time around. I have my own Comp loads with N 133 and H322 but they are mine for my eyes only.

Stephen Perry

Angeles BR:fire

 

 

Attached Files

JetMech posted this 13 October 2009

:offtopic:Stephen Perry wrote: ED

You shouldn't be giving out load recommendations to guys buying new guns. Your 760 load is over book and your 4831 is questionable given the variations of H and IMR loads. Primer variations could add as much 10 % to your data. I know you try and help but sometimes your logic is twisted. Besides that have a good day.

Stephen Perry

Angeles BR:fire With all due respect, “The way we found out what caliber it was the kid the gunsmith checked all the mid size 6mm ammo he had in the shop after getting a rough headspace we took the gun to Arizona on a quail hunt. We shot the rifle several times on the way back and measured the cases when we got back to the shop.” Sound familiar? It should. You said it and it has to be about the most dangerous thing I've ever seen written on this, or any other forum with regards to determining what a rifle is chambered for. Talk about twisted logic. It's true that sometimes, we forget that not everyone on this forum is as knowledgeable as we believe. Hell, there was even a guy who seemed to think that gas check design would be influenced by leade angle. Goes to show, ya never can tell.

BTW, the CBA has this standard disclaimer that the cognizant handloader should already be aware of:

"The following are examples of the types of material which reflect only the experiences of the individual and do not imply the endorsement or recommendation by The Cast Bullet Association.

<>Any loading data published on this web site. <>Any loading practices published on this web site. <>Machining operations. <>Advertisements. <*>Mention of ANY product or service. While these activities are normally practiced without risk of injury, proper training in these practices is recommended before beginning the activity.

All such information should be used with the understanding that the user assumes ALL risk and responsibility for damages or injury which might result from the use of such information."

While Ed's load recommendations may not be in your books, they clearly work in HIS rifle, as he stated.

As a CBA member, I would ask that you refrain from personal attacks, especially against another member who's life time of work has contributed vastly to this organization and the shooting community as a whole. That also goes for Veral Smith, another incredible asset we are fortunate to have with us.

Oh, I forgot. Have a nice day.

Attached Files

CB posted this 13 October 2009

NUTS.

Attached Files

JetMech posted this 14 October 2009

I got news for ya, buddy. You ain't General McAuliffe, this isn't Bastogne, and you don't have the 101st Airborne behind ya.

Attached Files

Vassal posted this 16 October 2009

Man oh Man, Man oh man, Man oh man.,,,,,,,

  I wish this had not happened.

I have said many times that I appreciate a TREMENDOUS amount The PRICELESS advice and information that I recieve from all those who post. I have benefited greatly from posts written by Mighty Ed. (So much so that I have chosen to affix a casual title of respect to his name) I personally DO understand that using anothers data is NOT a good idea (i.e. one should contemplate, research, perhaps reduce&work-up et cetera.) I also believe that along with reminders to safely handload, specific data IS IMPORTANT. Without specific data, learning from each other would be even more difficult than it already is.

The “etiquitte” that has developed for discussion about handloading is a good one, AND i think ADEQUATE for safety. There is no way to make this entirely safe. That being said, I DO understand the concern that some have about giving load data on the higher end of things.

Specifically, this situation, HAS resolved itself perfectly and safely. I saw a load, I asked about the load, I recieved advice and discusion. I also learned by asking about that load and had it not been there I would NEVER have questioned my understanding of high velocity Cast loads.

Mighty Ed was not suggesting that others use his load, but rather describing his experiences in a detailed way that allows his fellows to understand and learn. I don't have any idea what velocity that produces (unless he said it) and I have no intention on trying to produce it. But some day I may decide that I would like a similiar load, At that point I'll develop one for my guns using what I have learned from Ed, Stephen, Duane and MANY others.

Stephen's notions and concerns are not baseless either. (as stated I don't share them exactly but,)  His appraoch does seem to be. There are communication cues lacking on-line that make this a different sort of conversing, (sometimes I just aske a question that I essentially know the answer to because I need more information and explaining EXACTLY what I know and don't know, simply takes too many words - people wouldn't want to read it And I don't want to type it.) It may lead people to believe that I know less than I actually do. It can lead to misinterpretations of comments in other ways also; some jokes won't work very well here. In these circumstances, all name calling is beyond the bounds of polite decency and can not be tolerated. Perhaps even Mighty Ed is wrong, maybe he doesn't like it or think it is taking him too lightly; the fact is I don't know. Of course sometimes people aren't innocent or joking. 

There WILL be disagreements among so many individual-minded people, but they must be parsed with respect and decency. Most are pretty good about doing that. I hope that all involved here will continue to offer help and specific accounts of what they have done, so that I, and others, can learn from it and engage in a dangerous hobby, safely.

Perhaps sharing specific data is not the safest thing to do. I think that in MOST instances (even stout loads) it makes things MORE SAFE, but I could be wrong.

I can understand and respect both sides.

Attached Files

Ken Campbell Iowa posted this 18 October 2009

Great  Post, there, Vassal (g).

I love a good conversation,  and this thread is throwing off sparks like a stick of titanium held against a grindstone (g)......

Hope we all are only temporarily blinded by the light show ...

... as the Borg mentioned, ” resistance is futile    ” ....   after all, Kharma is self-leveling...

regards, ken campbell, Iowa

Attached Files

Clod Hopper posted this 31 January 2010

Based on this thread, I just bought a Remington 1903. (Yes, A 1903, not the 3A.) It has a Lyman or Williams target front sight with a circle inside. The regular rear in front of the bolt is gone, but I plan to replace it and the front at some point with the proper parts. Otherwise, it appears issue. It is drilled and tapped for a Lyman or Williams target rear on the right side behind the bolt. How do I tell if its a Lyman or Williams? Does it make a difference? Are they the same configuration for size and distance between holes? If so, which target rear sight should I buy? I understand the new ones are aluminum and no longer made of steel. Should I get a steel one? For now, I just intend to shoot it with target sights (and cast bullets, of course).

I went with the 1903, because our firing squad has all 1903's, and I fell in love with them (The 1903's, not the firing squad). I keep their rifles working for shooting blanks. Thus I have a cache of 1903 parts, especially sears, strikers, and safeties. Cold hands and worn sears do not mix at a funeral.

I know my terminology is not all correct. I am too lazy and too old to look it all up.

Dale M. Lock

Attached Files

JetMech posted this 31 January 2010

Lyman and Redfield used the same spacing @ 0.625 center to center. Mine's threaded 6X48. Redfield is a fine sight and about 1/2 to 1/4 the price of a Lyman. I'm not sure about the Williams sights.

Attached Files

Clod Hopper posted this 31 January 2010

Redfields are cheaper? I thought (My mistake) they were more expensive and no longer made. I was leaning towards the Lyman that is about $80-$90 at Brownells.

Dale M. Lock

Attached Files

JetMech posted this 01 February 2010

I spent alot of time shopping and bought a Lyman 48S long slide for $100. A week later, a couple guys sent me messages that they had the old Redfields, which are from the same era and work just as well, for $40, minus target knobs. You can get the target knobs for $10.

Attached Files

raytear posted this 01 February 2010

The bases for the Williams sights I have used are the same hole spacing as the Lyman and Redfield.

Williams has several versions, with varying prices. The better Williams have screw adjustments for both windage and elevation. On the entry level sight, the windage adjustment has 2 lock screws holding a sliding piece into which the aperture screws. Loosen the screws and move the slider from side to side.

The Williams are aluminum with a black finish that may be anodizing of some sort. I have a couple of these with all screw adjustments. They are not rugged enough for battle sights, but for target shooting, serious plinking, and hunting they are more than adequate. With the right front sight, they give a sight picture about like an M-1 or M-14.

Attached Files

Clod Hopper posted this 01 February 2010

I want to go with the target knobs for now. Will call brownells tomorrow and see what they recommend. Now I are edumacated enuf to ask a dum question at least.

Thank you all!

Dale M. Lock

Attached Files

Close