Witness Marks Report--Revised and Expanded

wterrell · 09-04-2003, 07:57 PM

No flame. But please be candid and site your source for the machining procedure at Springfield Armory in the year 1903.

Are your sources for the procedure followed for the WWII rifles or the first models ever produced?

May we see pics of the perfect match of the "draw" lines on the Springfield 03 as has been shown for the Luger?

Does the Springfield 1903 have an obround as the front sight blade mount as an integral part of the barrel as does the Luger? Or is it a separate piece of metal?

Which of the manufacturers of the Springfield used the methods sited by you.

(As an aside: Common sense did not rule the day, concerning the Springfield 1903. Teddy Roosevelt remarked that the rod bayonet of the 03 model was a most idiotic invention.)

09-04-2003, 07:57 PM	#7
wterrell User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Colorado Posts: 1,096 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	No flame. But please be candid and site your source for the machining procedure at Springfield Armory in the year 1903. Are your sources for the procedure followed for the WWII rifles or the first models ever produced? May we see pics of the perfect match of the "draw" lines on the Springfield 03 as has been shown for the Luger? Does the Springfield 1903 have an obround as the front sight blade mount as an integral part of the barrel as does the Luger? Or is it a separate piece of metal? Which of the manufacturers of the Springfield used the methods sited by you. (As an aside: Common sense did not rule the day, concerning the Springfield 1903. Teddy Roosevelt remarked that the rod bayonet of the 03 model was a most idiotic invention.) __________________ Noli me vocare, ego te vocabo, wes --------------------