Springfield 1903/A4 "Sniper" Rifle

[Sooter76]

So with my promotion to Captain and the bump in pay, my wife is allowing me to gift myself something and I'm really eyeing the Creedmore Sports reproduction 1903/A4. I've always loved these rifle in their 'sniper' configuration, and I really like that these come with reproductions of the scope, rings, mount, and even the GI manual. I can't exactly tell you why, and I know even in WWII there were better rifles out there, but still I love these rifles. A couple quick questions tho...

1) For those who have had hands on experience with the Creedmore reproduction, how good are they? Are they worth the cost or are there better options available?

2) How accurate are these really?

3) I know the big limiting factor for these rifles was the 2.75X Weaver telescopic sight... Out of curiosity, has anyone ever mounted a better scope to really push the rifle and find out how much accuracy and distance they can wring out it?

 

[classicshooter]

My personal experience with all 03a4 replicas is this, and I know you were asking specifically about Creedmore, but I will give you my experience.

I've seen and shot each of the major 03a4 builders (Creedmore, JRA, Gibbs) and each one seems to be a hit or miss. I have owned a JRA, and was pretty happy with it, and of all 03a4's that came from those three companies it was my favorite, and was very accurate, but now from what I understand JRA and Gibbs are the same, so I do not know how that has helped or hurt each other. The Creedmore's (I've seen two, and shot one) that I have had interaction with were almost night and day from each other, one was very accurate and a solid looking rifle, the other was alright in terms of looks and could hit a bowling pin, but only if it was setup a foot in front of the barrel. From what I understand Creedmore has stepped up their game since the CMP has started to throw their name around, and even have a link to their website on the CMP website.

Now onto what I currently own. I have a Remington 03a4 replica that was built by a gunsmith who is very well known in older battle rifle community. I did have to make some slight adjustments to the rifle after receiving it, but they were minimal. This rifle did not come from a recovered drill rifle (not against those rifles, but it was important for this one not to be, for me at least), and has all GI parts, some NIW. I did pay more for this rifle than other 03a4 replicas out there, but when sitting side by side, next to the JRA I owned, this one did look better, not sure why, but I think it may have to do with the "consistent" finish.

As for the optics, well a 2.5 power scope is not much at all. I recommend having small orange dots for your bullseye, this way the crosshairs do not get lost in the target, but as a whole it is kind of fun and in itself a challenge. With surplus M2 ball I can get about 2 inch groups, with the occasional flyer. Hand loads with a heavier bullet (168gr+) I can get it to about a 1 inch group. I am currently just sticking with the M2 for now, but after I get more fire formed brass I will work up a specific load for this rifle, so hopefully I can get sub MOA with it. The Weaver (M73) scope that comes on the Creedmore is difficult to get proper eye relief,or at least that was my experience. I am currently using a Weaver K2.5, which is still CMP "legal" and correct, but much easier to see thru. As for putting other optics on it and seeing what it can really do, I have thought about it, but it is a 70+ year old design, so that is working against you, but guys are doing pretty good with them out to 600 yards at the CMP matches.

I personally would suggest maybe keeping an eye open for a 03a4 replica on the CMP forums (that is were I sold my JRA for a lot less than I paid for it). I see them for sale pretty often, and the benefit is you know what you are getting rather than mail ordering and crossing your fingers. The other benefit is there are pretty good deals that will save you some money, and you can possibly get the scope of your choice (Lyman Alaskan, Weaver K2.5, M73, M82 or M84). Also maybe keep an eye open at the gun shows, but be careful, I have seen some absolute train wrecks being sold at gun shows.


PS- Oh yeah, and congratulations on the promotion. I pin my advancement on this fall, and have been thinking about what I should get myself as a present to myself.

 

[303_enfield]

Spend your money on a "REAL" 1903A4 not a repro. Real goes up in value repros loose money. CMP is selling real M1D's right now. An you can find real 1903A4's in the CMP classifieds.

My 2¢.

 

[pmclaine]

Just to note. You may already know this.

A real 03A4 has the Springfield Armory stamping offset to the left side of the receiver ring so that it could be read with the scope base mounted. The designation "03A3" and serial number are in their approprite place on the right side of the ring.

Everything from the commercial builders will be service 03A3's converted to A4.

CMP just auctioned an A4. I think it went for around $4K. Ive seen them for $2500 +/- in the 4-5 years such things caught my interest. All things sniper are real popular now with the added CMP comp class.

I dont own an A3 or A4. I like to abuse myself with A1's.

Of the manufavturers you mention, I have had very good service from Creedmore. Dennis DeMille is a world class shooter/ retired mil (USMC) / answers the phone, personally returns calls from customers with questions.

I think Creedmoor will stand behind what they sell.


Correction - Offset makers name should be Remington not Springfield Armory. SA made no 03A3's being too busy pumping out Garands.

 

[classicshooter]

Just to note. You may already know this.

A real 03A4 has the Springfield Armory stamping offset to the left side of the receiver ring so that it could be read with the scope base mounted. The designation "03A3" and serial number are in their approprite place on the right side of the ring.

Keep in mind that it would not say Springfield, rather it would say Remington.

Spend your money on a "REAL" 1903A4 not a repro. Real goes up in value repros loose money. CMP is selling real M1D's right now. An you can find real 1903A4's in the CMP classifieds.

My 2¢.

Yes you can find them, but they will cost about 4 times what you can get a reproduction for, and the OP sounds like he would actually like to shoot the rifle purchases. As far as increase in value, well if he plans on shooting it very much, how much value will be increased when the barrel is shot out, and maybe some extra dents and dings from transportation? Probably not much.

 

[samnev]

The one replica 03A4 I saw was a Gibbs and after just a few shots the guys replica scope reticle failed. I don't know what brand scope was on it the guys was really ticked and muttered "I am sending this piece of junk back" as he packed up and left.

 

[pmclaine]

Keep in mind that it would not say Springfield, rather it would say Remington.

Absolutely! I need to engage brain, think, than type.

 

[Tazaroo]

With your raise in salary OP save a bit more and get a real 03A4.

 

[Sooter76]

As someone pointed out already I'd like to shoot this thing... If I was to ever get my hands on a WWII-era A4 it would be a safe-queen that would probably never see the light of day other than when I took it out to lovingly clean and inappropriately caress it.

Besides, so long as it meets the specs, being a reproduction doesn't make it any less 'real' than one that saw service in WWII.

 

[Walsh]

I would definately suggest a better optic, I saw a picture, I think on thehighroad.org of one with a 10x42 SS scope. It was a real fine looking rifle.

 

[303_enfield]

As I said, get a real one. I've been trying to "shoot the barrel out" for years. If I do, I'll screw a new one on. Rifles are made to be shot!

My 2¢

 

[Tazaroo]

As someone pointed out already I'd like to shoot this thing... If I was to ever get my hands on a WWII-era A4 it would be a safe-queen that would probably never see the light of day other than when I took it out to lovingly clean and inappropriately caress it.

Besides, so long as it meets the specs, being a reproduction doesn't make it any less 'real' than one that saw service in WWII.

So..............still get a real one. Do you have any idea how many thousands of rounds it will take to make serious changes in TE and MW with no effect on value of the rile? No offense but a repro still isn't a real one FWIW.

 

[pmclaine]

Brand new in the wrap 03A3 barrels on the CMP Forum Bolt Action WTS right now.

You will probably never need it but its comforting to know you have them in the back of the safe. My Garand and 03 spares give me a warm and fuzzy feeling in the dark back corner of my safe but at +/- 300 rounds per rifle per year they will be there a long time.

 

[classicshooter]

As I said, get a real one. I've been trying to "shoot the barrel out" for years. If I do, I'll screw a new one on. Rifles are made to be shot!

My 2¢

So then why are you worried about the collector value going up? As for a new barrel, then it technically is not original anymore, and then you also have to make sure all the dates match up.

Brand new in the wrap 03A3 barrels on the CMP Forum Bolt Action WTS right now.

You will probably never need it but its comforting to know you have them in the back of the safe. My Garand and 03 spares give me a warm and fuzzy feeling in the dark back corner of my safe but at +/- 300 rounds per rifle per year they will be there a long time.

As I said before about a new barrel, then it technically is not original anymore, and then you also have to make sure all the dates match up. I do understand that it may take a while to shootout a barrel, but there is also the other things that may and have happened to people with their guns that bring on other wear and tare that will decrease the value.

If the OP is going to shoot it every month or so, maybe more, and possibly in some matches, then get a replica for a fraction of the price. The replicas have the same chances of shooting strait as the originals, maybe even better, with the same frills as the originals.

 

[ivankonev]

Well, I actually have a Gibbs reproduction 1903/a4 and it is my most prized rifle. The original repro scopes (M73B) on these were terrible, but they have long since switched over to the Hi-Lux Leatherwood M73G-2 or G-4 scopes, which are awesome. They are crystal clear although only 2.5 power. I shoot mine every six weeks or so, and love it. Always gets lots of attention from folks at the range.

The only problem I see with these rifles is not with the quality of the reproductions, but with the original design. The 30-06 cartridge starts to pull away from its rivals at 1000 meters and beyond. A 2.5 power scope ain't much good at that range. Therefore I took off the Hi-Lux scope and set it carefully aside, and I put a Weaver K-6 fixed 6X scope on it to take better advantage of the full potential of the magnificent 30-06.

Very easy to mount a different scope on these, just have to change out the small rings to larger 1" diameter rings, such as Weaver Grand Slam dovetails. Make sure you get them high enough, because you have to clear the wood fore end for the scope objective bell. I had to use 1" high rings for the scope I mounted.

Accuracy is very good. Not spectacular but very good.

Cheers.

 

[Nook]

Well, I actually have a Gibbs reproduction 1903/a4 and it is my most prized rifle. The original repro scopes (M73B) on these were terrible, but they have long since switched over to the Hi-Lux Leatherwood M73G-2 or G-4 scopes, which are awesome. They are crystal clear although only 2.5 power. I shoot mine every six weeks or so, and love it. Always gets lots of attention from folks at the range.

The only problem I see with these rifles is not with the quality of the reproductions, but with the original design. The 30-06 cartridge starts to pull away from its rivals at 1000 meters and beyond. A 2.5 power scope ain't much good at that range. Therefore I took off the Hi-Lux scope and set it carefully aside, and I put a Weaver K-6 fixed 6X scope on it to take better advantage of the full potential of the magnificent 30-06.

Very easy to mount a different scope on these, just have to change out the small rings to larger 1" diameter rings, such as Weaver Grand Slam dovetails. Make sure you get them high enough, because you have to clear the wood fore end for the scope objective bell. I had to use 1" high rings for the scope I mounted.

Accuracy is very good. Not spectacular but very good.
Cheers.

I reviewed one from a couple years ago, I have only shot walmart 30.06 ammo through it and the first time out: Sub MOA. My original scope reticle also fell apart and I got the newer Hi-lux M73G2 from Gibbs swapped in there. Still pulling sub-moa with Walmart ammo ;-).


N

 

[JGaynor]

The early Gibbs "m1903A4's" had a scope marked: M73G1 Manufactured by FM Optics. Anyone thinking of buying a used one should probably discount the rifle by the value of a replacement HiLux Malcolm M73G2 or G4 replica.

 

[Sooter76]

So from what I'm getting the JRA rifles were the best of the bunch but it doesn't appear that they offer them anymore. So between the Gibbs and the Creedmore offering is there any difference to make me choose one over the other?

 

[ivankonev]

I can only attest to the Gibbs, which I own. It is absolutely beautiful, and I love it. Shoots great, cycles great, excellent wood to metal fit. Stock was a little dry when I got it, so I put on a few more coats of BLO. And as I said, I changed out the scope to a higher power. No complaints here.

I have heard that Gibbs and Creedmore are just different marketers, and the rifles were actually made at the same place, although I cannot be sure. I don't think Gibbs markets them anymore either.

 

[classicshooter]

Here is one for sale on the CMP forums.

WTS Gibbs M1903-A4 - CMP Forums

 

[81Z4ME]

I used to see the scopes on e-bay now and then.

Funny how prices go up over the years. I paid $135 for my 03A4 in 1978 and $60 for the scope. The 3/4" split rings cost me $15. It had a Weaver 2.5X scope with a horizontal cross hair and vertical post on it when I bought it but I put the 330 on it later. The old 2.5X 1" scope is way more/better than the original 3/4" 2X (?) that they came with.

Mine actually is stamped 03A3 with the 3 stamped out/over with a 4. And yes, it is out on the left side of the receiver instead of on top.

 

[classicshooter]

I used to see the scopes on e-bay now and then.

Funny how prices go up over the years. I paid $135 for my 03A4 in 1978 and $60 for the scope. The 3/4" split rings cost me $15. It had a Weaver 2.5X scope with a horizontal cross hair and vertical post on it when I bought it but I put the 330 on it later. The old 2.5X 1" scope is way more/better than the original 3/4" 2X (?) that they came with.


Mine actually is stamped 03A3 with the 3 stamped out/over with a 4. And yes, it is out on the left side of the receiver instead of on top.

I hate hearing stories like this, especially the one that start off with "for $15 at K-Mart, they had pile of rifles...."

 

[pmclaine]

My local store had two correct A4's the other day. Both came from the attic of the same 90 plus year old man (God rest his soul). One in a straight stock was just under $4K and had the Weaver 330 style scope. The second was in a C stock and had the later M1C scope (M82?). The second was a couple or three C's over $4K.

 

[Mike Radford]

My local store had two correct A4's the other day. Both came from the attic of the same 90 plus year old man (God rest his soul). One in a straight stock was just under $4K and had the Weaver 330 style scope. The second was in a C stock and had the later M1C scope (M82?). The second was a couple or three C's over $4K.

A straight stock is not correct period ever, no matter how old the prior owner was. An M82 is not original either, no matter who owned it before.

I have seen WW2 vets who are selling stuff for the last 40 years and they are like everyone else, not 100% honest and wanting money.

 

[pmclaine]

A straight stock is not correct period ever, no matter how old the prior owner was. An M82 is not original either, no matter who owned it before.

I have seen WW2 vets who are selling stuff for the last 40 years and they are like everyone else, not 100% honest and wanting money.

I don't have the background to doubt or dispute either. Wish I had a means to take pictures. The 90 year old man isn't around to tell how he got them anymore and the store ended up with them as it is a dumping place for an estate auctioneer that comes across firearms.

Got to fondle a "burned" Pederson device and a Mk 1 with the correct parts while I was there neat stuff.

 

[classicshooter]

A straight stock is not correct period ever, no matter how old the prior owner was. An M82 is not original either, no matter who owned it before.

I have seen WW2 vets who are selling stuff for the last 40 years and they are like everyone else, not 100% honest and wanting money.

I agree 100% about the strait stock, but the M82 scope is a possibility after all there is a reason the CMP allows them in their matches on the 03a4 (and replica rifles).

 

[kraigWY]

A straight stock is not correct period ever

Both the "scant" stock and the "C" stock were used on M1903A4 rifles.

An M82 is not original either, no matter who owned it before.

The M82 was in fact used on post WWII M1903A4, in Korea and Vietnam.

 

[Mike Radford]

Both the "scant" stock and the "C" stock were used on M1903A4 rifles.



A straight stock is not a scant or full stock. A straight stock it totally wrong/incorrect, period.




The M82 was in fact used on post WWII M1903A4, in Korea and Vietnam.

I said that the M82 was not original to an A4. The A4s were originally built in 1943 and 44. The M82 was not used until post war and did not show up in the Technical Manuals till 1956 and listed as substitute standard. So they were not original to the rifle. They were in sort supply and the M1C got eveyone they could produce.

My response was to pmclaine saying there were 2 "correct" A4s from an estate. They do not sound very "correct" to me for the reasons I stated. Wrong stock and non-original M82. A rebuild or later updated rifle could correctly have an M82 and at those prices it better be nice.

 

[pmclaine]

My response was to pmclaine saying there were 2 "correct" A4s from an estate. They do not sound very "correct" to me for the reasons I stated. Wrong stock and non-original M82. A rebuild or later updated rifle could correctly have an M82 and at those prices it better be nice.

You are correct.

My reference to "correct" was wrong. They are not examples of factory fresh guns. They were nice examples though. The still had blued bands which I dont see much. My main thought to convey was that they werent Gibbs or Creedmoor guns. They were A4's most likely messed with in service and they had the right receiver markings.

 

[Mike Radford]

You are correct.

My reference to "correct" was wrong. They are not examples of factory fresh guns. They were nice examples though. The still had blued bands which I dont see much. My main thought to convey was that they werent Gibbs or Creedmoor guns. They were A4's most likely messed with in service and they had the right receiver markings.

You are noble to try to help out fellow collectors.

I look at every A4 I come across at shows, probably about 100 per year. I guess between 85-90% of the ones I look at are seriously messed with. Buyer best know what he is looking at or he/she may spending big money trying to correct it.

A few things just stick out like a sore thumb. A straight stock can be spotted from across the room. A 330S scope can be spotted almost as far away. There are things that will turn off a collector pretty fast. Even original rings are very expensive and often missing, not to mention the prices of original or even post war correct scopes. I saw a nice original stock recently sale for $700 but it had no rebuild marks and had good strong original cartouches.

 

[pmclaine]

My mistake it was a scant stock. I really don't look at the A3's too hard





The other was a Keystone fat stock







The pictures suck but is there anything really off base with these?

 

[mb3]

I have a RRA that is coming up on two years old. Mine has been flawless and shoots sub MOA with the CMP 06 match. I started reloading with RL 19 and 175 SMK's and she shoot even better. You need to shoot them to get used to the optics. The upgraded scope is very sturdy and clear but, the 2.5 magnification takes some getting used to. I can comment on whether it would be better to have an original, as I have never shot one. I would say I would love to have an original 03A4 but, I don't have the $. In addition, I don't know if there is any real difference between Creedmore, JRA, and Gibbs. I think they are all made at the same place. Most of them have reproduction bands, barrels, screws and small parts but, some have USGI small parts on them (kind of luck of the draw). Just like any 03A4 once you get them you must set them up to shoot well. The CMP has good info on this. Have fun.

 

[kraigWY]

Mine is totally built with USGI parts, the only exception is I had to make the Sear spring as I couldn't fine a GI one that would allow trigger to make wait. Put it together my self and won a Bronze metal the first match I shot with it.

I use the original Redfield Jr Base and vertical split rings with the El Paso Weaver K-2.5. Works good but I tried the Hi Lux M-82 w/mounts and rings that the CMP started recently selling. I can't get the Hi Lux to shoot near as good as I got the Weaver to shoot. Both have Post Sights, but being a High Power shooter that doesn't both me at all.