03 Springfields

[WheelsUpHeelsUp]

I know the price of poker is way up from my last one but...... 1980 or so I picked up one (sporterized) for $150.00 and like a dummy I dumped it pretty shortly afterwards. Last weekend I saw one in a gunshop on consignment semi sporterized I guess, original NICE iron sights but the furniture didn't go all the way to the muzzle. It had more of a forearm, still very nice. Springfield mfg, SN around 1 million, crisp clean rifling, bluing was nice and they wanted $575.00, we haggled and I could get it for $425.00.
Tempting but I passed, what do you guys think is fair for a nice shooter?

 

[A4sForever]

....I could get it for $425.00.
Tempting but I passed, what do you guys think is fair for a nice shooter?

Sporterized ... 90%+ condition .... I'd probably have purchased it. As a shooter ....

You could have purchased a "correct" USGI stock and turned it into @ $1000 rifle, assuming the receiver and barrel match and the condition was 90%+. Other things, too -- but those are the biggies. It's a dirty shame that some guys take a HIGHLY collectible USGI rifle and "sporterize" it for hunting. A shame and a waste of irreplaceable US military history.

Original USGI (even arsenal reworks - which most are these days) -- coming in @ 85%+ = big bucks. It depends on who/what/when/where it was made, the stock, cartouche's, finish, and ALWAYS originality.

I've never bought the sporterized versions as they have no collector value. I've got some USGI '03's that have gone up 400% in the last 10 years. Overall -- a good investment.

 

[BlkPny]

I don't know what "semi sporterized" means, but between the wars several gunsmiths turned out sporterized '03's. Griffin & Howe was the most famous, but Hoffman Arms and Segley Arms are very, very collectible. The latter two would be worth in excess $1500 in decent condition. G&H way more than that. Great shooters, too.

 

[WheelsUpHeelsUp]

I don't know what "semi sporterized" means, but between the wars several gunsmiths turned out sporterized '03's. Griffin & Howe was the most famous, but Hoffman Arms and Segley Arms are very, very collectible. The latter two would be worth in excess $1500 in decent condition. G&H way more than that. Great shooters, too.

It means someone cut down the front of the stock but blended it nicely. No Fajen or aftermarket but it looks good. The iron sights were USGI and perfect, click, click, click precision.

 

[A4sForever]

I don't know what "semi sporterized" means.....

ANY ALTERATIONS from the original, as issued, USGI condition is considered "sporterized" ... be it barrel, stock, buttplate, sights, optics, sling, you name it -- "semi" or otherwise. It's usually done for guys who are really, really into quality hunting rifles and want a strong, reliable action/barrel with which to build their hunting stick upon. My great Uncle used to fall into this category. He bought quality new production rifles and had a few former military "sporters".

While the total value of the work -- parts and labor -- may well come in at the prices you're describing when performed by a quality and competent gunsmith -- the collector value -- as a USGI piece -- is reduced by a factor of 50% or more. In effect, there is no collector value. A nice rifle, to be sure -- just not collectible. And when selling -- it's ALWAYS tough to recoup your investment in "improvements" and most certainly labor.

And as a general rule -- that's where the $$$$ is today --- USGI and some foreign military specimens -- in original and as nice as condition as possible. Please note I'm not talking about some items such as arsenal produced 1903 "Sporters" which were built as such and command huge figures on the used collectible gun market as very few were made.

It's just a fact of life in firearms collecting. Unimproved, original, and good condition count for everything. Ironic, too ... as you can take a beater car, gut it, completely restore it to "original" condition and have a wonderful investment. I have some pieces that I can't shoot as they are new, unfired, NIB -- literally . I COULD shoot them, for sure -- I'd just immediately lose @ 25% of the current value.

With firearms -- if they're "restored" ... or most certainly "sporterized" they have lost most of their $$$$$ for collector purposes.

 

[WheelsUpHeelsUp]

Sporterized ... 90%+ condition .... I'd probably have purchased it. As a shooter ....

You could have purchased a "correct" USGI stock and turned it into @ $1000 rifle, assuming the receiver and barrel match and the condition was 90%+. Other things, too -- but those are the biggies. It's a dirty shame that some guys take a HIGHLY collectible USGI rifle and "sporterize" it for hunting. A shame and a waste of irreplaceable US military history.

Come on, you're old. I'm sure you remember the pre 68 magazines that had USGI unmolested stuff for $79.00! Carcano's and Enfields were at the bottom of the heap for 29 dollars. M1's at 89 bucks were at the top. They sold them by the zillions OTC at places like Sunny's Surplus for almost nothing.
I think "customizing" an old rifle with little value at that time was "the thing to do".

Hell, you remember the OLD GI bill allowing private pilot lessons? Almost every AE or Tweet had Heathkit Color TV's they bought under the GI bill as well! Magazines had some neat shit in em back then!

 

[A4sForever]

Come on, you're old. I'm sure you remember .....M1's at 89 bucks were at the top. ....

I kick myself every week for not starting collecting USGI firearms 40 years earlier .... ... better than real estate or diamonds.

 

[BlkPny]

Sporterized

This is why I asked what "semi-sporterized" means. This is my ORIGINAL 03 Springfield M2. Its a full sized 03, but is a 22 cal rimfire. Made for marksmanship training for the Army's snipers and rifle teams. This is completely original, except I removed the peep sight ring and I added the scope. Cleaned up the stock, too.
Some of these old Springfields that people think are semi sporterized are actually original and very rare. Also, if it has a "Star Gauged" barrel, it was tested for accuaracy. Buy it.

 

[FMRAM]

This is why I asked what "semi-sporterized" means. This is my ORIGINAL 03 Springfield M2. Its a full sized 03, but is a 22 cal rimfire. Made for marksmanship training for the Army's snipers and rifle teams. This is completely original, except I removed the peep sight ring and I added the scope. Cleaned up the stock, too.
Some of these old Springfields that people think are semi sporterized are actually original and very rare. Also, if it has a "Star Gauged" barrel, it was tested for accuaracy. Buy it.

Very nice!

 

[A4sForever]

[FONT=&quot]

This is why I asked what "semi-sporterized" means. This is my ORIGINAL 03 Springfield M2. Its a full sized 03, but is a 22 cal rimfire. Made for marksmanship training for the Army's snipers and rifle teams. This is completely original, except I removed the peep sight ring and I added the scope. Cleaned up the stock, too.

[/FONT]Sorry for the tardy response, but I guess the network was down this weekend, anyway. Probably another attack by the Red Chinese .... but better late than never. Sooooooooooooo ... here's my take:

Excellent piece, I also have an M1922M1 and an M2 .22 cal as well. The M1 and later 'improved" M2 models were originally conceived to utilize the cheaper .22 LR ammunition for training vice the more expensive .30-06 in the lean post WW1 years. They were generally used for range training and many were sold through the DCM-NRA programs as well. Their production ended somewhere @ 1942 and cheaper .22 rifles, such as the Winchester 75, Stevens 416, and Remington513T were substituted for gallery training. A gallery rifle is either a lightweight sporting rifle in .22 inch rim fire caliber or a center fire rifle chambered for a recognized pistol round.

It's questionable how improved the original was with primarily "bolt upgrades" and adjustable head space -- for a .22 LR??? Anybody and everybody was eligible for range training with them ... they were not for "sniper specific" training ... as we did not have a USA dedicated "sniper" effort in the years between the wars. Not for training "army snipers" ..... until the USMC brought it back @ the time of the Guadalcanal campaign. It's not that we didn't HAVE snipers --- just nothing dedicated to their training.

But your rifle is NOT 'original'. The thing that WILL detract from the "collector value" is the drilling/tapping/and-or mounting of the aftermarket scope. They usually only had the original Lyman aperture receiver sight, if anything was added for improved sights. And "cleaning" the stock can have adverse effects if you did any sanding or removed any inspector cartouches.

Sorry -- I'm not tryin' to bust your chops or argue with you -- believe that -- you're too good for that and I have too much respect for you to do that .... but I've been collecting/buying/selling 1903 Springfields and many of the "family" for a long time and that's the reality of "collectible" '03's ..... I don't make the rules .... that's just the way it is. Alterations from the "original" issue condition lowers the value. But Springfield .22 cal M1's and M2's are getting harder to come by these days ---just trying to find decent magazines is a minor hassle in and of itself -- so it's still got value left -- just not as much as if it had never been "scoped".

And thus ... altered. It's NOT an original, unaltered example, as below:

 

[WheelsUpHeelsUp]

What A-4 said but Blk, I wouldn't mind having yours.

 

[BlkPny]

You're absolutely correct. Every slight alteration of a collectible firearm lowers its value to some degree. However, I don't collect firearms. I shoot everything I have. I will clean them up a little, put on a modern scope if needed, and shoot the hell out of them. The very last thing I want to do is to leave anything of great value to my kids, for two reasons; 1) I've done enough for them already, and 2) I don't want them to be happy when I die.

Also, there was a functioning sniper training program in the 1930's, and they quickly learned that they could fire many more rounds from one of these 22's, and work on ther technique, than from a 30-06. Also, many bases had rifle teams, and they used these I'm told.

At any rate, the rifle shoots great, and is absolutely dead accurate. Its hell on ground squirrels. All I did to the stock was to wash with warm soapy water, rinse, let dry, then hand-rub a few coats of oil. By "original", I meant the shape of the stock, which I've had people try to tell me is "sporterized".

 

[A4sForever]

.....Also, there was a functioning sniper training program in the 1930's.....

You say potato, I say potahto --- let's work the whole thing out.

Gimme a link for reference as to what you're saying re: dedicated training program(s) for snipers between the "big" wars .... the USMC maintained "the capability" to a limited degree -- I've got one of the period 'O3's with a Winchester A-5 mounted ... but the Army?? U.S. Army Sniper.org website is very quiet about that period ....

BUT: in any case, I highly admire your retirement overview, especially items #1 and #2 ....

 

[BlkPny]

"Gimme a link...." Yeah, right. I'm too old to "give links". :icon_wink

In Col. Townsend Whelen's books "Small Bore Rifle Handbook", 1935, and his "The Hunting Rifle", 1940, he talks at length about the '03, and also the M2 version. In one of the books he talks about various units having rifle teams that competed with the M2, and later individual bases would form teams. These informal teams were the germination of sniper training. He states that when the sniper training was formalized, candidates were drawn from these teams.

I think it was Ned Crossman that wrote a book about the '03 in which he mentioned using the M2 for sniper training, but I can't find the book right now.