Manufacturing the M1903 Rifle

mrerick · 01-31-2013, 02:41 PM

I think that one of the things that has interested me in firearms and collection is the metal working and machining involved. My grandfather was a Swedish machinist, and I suspect it runs in the family.

I recently came across a remarkably detailed series of articles that were published in 1916 and 1917 by the "American Machinist" magazines.

After reviewing US military rifle history, they go step by step into the manufacturing engineering involved with making these (basically Mauser designed) bolt action rifles.

I have taken the two annual volumes (numbers 45 and 46) and edited them down to just the M1903 articles.

These are so detailed, I almost wonder why they were not considered secret during WW-I...

The original volumes are on Archive.org at:

http://archive.org/details/americanmachinis45newyuoft

and

http://archive.org/details/americanmachinis46newyuoft

I have also posted the extracted articles on my server at:

http://cma.dyndns.tv/blog/wp-content...nMachinist.pdf

If you download from my server, be patient. It's about 28MB and the link is relatively slow.

Marc

mrerick · 01-31-2013, 08:58 PM

Reading through the production steps in the articles really gives you an appreciation for the complexity of manufacturing modern firearms.

There was also a good description of rust bluing (referred to as "browning") in the barrel article, as well as the chemical mix for the rusting solution.

I'm still a bit amazed that Springfield Armory would go to this level of detail in published material during war time (even though the US had not entered the war at this point). I wonder if there was a shortage of production machinists that they were trying to attract with the articles.

Seeing this information just makes me appreciate our precision firearms even more...

Marc

Vlim · 02-01-2013, 01:07 PM

Hi Marc,

I think they were not secret because everybody else already had the rifle. As you say, the design is a Mauser design which was copied (without consent) from Mauser at the time.

Since the Germans already had their own rifles, and the M1903 was already a rip-off, there was not much left to be 'stolen' to begin with

.

mrerick · 02-02-2013, 09:57 PM

Hi Gerben,

Yes - the design was stolen from Mauser (I think it took years for that to be worked out with the US finally making payment to Mauser)....

But the manufacturing engineering, and construction process must have been original at Springfield. I doubt that Mauser provided any guidance on how to actually construct things - as described in these articles.

Do we have records of Mauser helping the Swedish and Turkish setup their in country manufacturing processes? I wonder if those could have been copied...

Marc

skeeter4206 · 02-02-2013, 10:58 PM

Marc,
I downloaded the entire copies of both of your links with all the additional things in them besides the 1903. Very cool reading no doubt. Some of the pictures in that book are pretty amazing. Thanks for the information. I just recently got offered a 1903 springfield with the Augusta Arsenal markings from a good friend of mine that has his C&R liscence. Well, seeing that I live in Augusta, GA. he thought I would definitly be interested. I said HELL YEAH! You can still ride through what is now Augusta College and see some of the old Arsenal buildings still there. I think it'll be a good piece for my collection. Cant wait for it to get here.

Vlim · 02-03-2013, 06:16 AM

Hi Mark,

The official Mauser contacts followed a completely different course. Mauser, by the late 1880s, was under control of the Ludwig Loewe company in Berlin, and Loewe had specialized in the production of tools, production machines, jigs and gauges. So when a contract was awarded to Mauser, this usually meant that Loewe could deliver machines, tools and know-how.

When we started our book project a number of years ago, I decided to do a test (re)print of a 1911 booklet which I had digitally restored. This booklet called 'Moderne Gewehrfabrikation' (Modern Riflemaking) was published in Germany, with aid of Loewe, DWM, Mauser and FN, and illustraties the then current state of affair on large scale rifle production.

So there was a tendency to publish on their efforts, I think it was part of the efforts of the countries and the companies to generate some publicity in order to demonstrate their technological advance over other countries and industries.

01-31-2013, 02:41 PM	#1
mrerick Super Moderator - Patron LugerForum Life Patron Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Eastern North Carolina, USA Posts: 3,900 Thanks: 1,372 Thanked 3,094 Times in 1,503 Posts	Manufacturing the M1903 Rifle I think that one of the things that has interested me in firearms and collection is the metal working and machining involved. My grandfather was a Swedish machinist, and I suspect it runs in the family. I recently came across a remarkably detailed series of articles that were published in 1916 and 1917 by the "American Machinist" magazines. After reviewing US military rifle history, they go step by step into the manufacturing engineering involved with making these (basically Mauser designed) bolt action rifles. I have taken the two annual volumes (numbers 45 and 46) and edited them down to just the M1903 articles. These are so detailed, I almost wonder why they were not considered secret during WW-I... The original volumes are on Archive.org at: http://archive.org/details/americanmachinis45newyuoft and http://archive.org/details/americanmachinis46newyuoft I have also posted the extracted articles on my server at: http://cma.dyndns.tv/blog/wp-content...nMachinist.pdf If you download from my server, be patient. It's about 28MB and the link is relatively slow. Marc __________________ Igitur si vis pacem, para bellum - - Therefore if you want peace, prepare for war.

01-31-2013, 08:58 PM	#2
mrerick Super Moderator - Patron LugerForum Life Patron Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Eastern North Carolina, USA Posts: 3,900 Thanks: 1,372 Thanked 3,094 Times in 1,503 Posts	Reading through the production steps in the articles really gives you an appreciation for the complexity of manufacturing modern firearms. There was also a good description of rust bluing (referred to as "browning") in the barrel article, as well as the chemical mix for the rusting solution. I'm still a bit amazed that Springfield Armory would go to this level of detail in published material during war time (even though the US had not entered the war at this point). I wonder if there was a shortage of production machinists that they were trying to attract with the articles. Seeing this information just makes me appreciate our precision firearms even more... Marc __________________ Igitur si vis pacem, para bellum - - Therefore if you want peace, prepare for war.

02-02-2013, 09:57 PM	#4
mrerick Super Moderator - Patron LugerForum Life Patron Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Eastern North Carolina, USA Posts: 3,900 Thanks: 1,372 Thanked 3,094 Times in 1,503 Posts	Hi Gerben, Yes - the design was stolen from Mauser (I think it took years for that to be worked out with the US finally making payment to Mauser).... But the manufacturing engineering, and construction process must have been original at Springfield. I doubt that Mauser provided any guidance on how to actually construct things - as described in these articles. Do we have records of Mauser helping the Swedish and Turkish setup their in country manufacturing processes? I wonder if those could have been copied... Marc __________________ Igitur si vis pacem, para bellum - - Therefore if you want peace, prepare for war.

02-01-2013, 01:07 PM	#3
Vlim Moderator Lifetime LugerForum Patron Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Europe Posts: 5,035 Thanks: 1,020 Thanked 3,888 Times in 1,187 Posts	Hi Marc, I think they were not secret because everybody else already had the rifle. As you say, the design is a Mauser design which was copied (without consent) from Mauser at the time. Since the Germans already had their own rifles, and the M1903 was already a rip-off, there was not much left to be 'stolen' to begin with .

02-02-2013, 10:58 PM	#5
skeeter4206 User Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Augusta, GA Posts: 448 Thanks: 52 Thanked 88 Times in 49 Posts	Marc, I downloaded the entire copies of both of your links with all the additional things in them besides the 1903. Very cool reading no doubt. Some of the pictures in that book are pretty amazing. Thanks for the information. I just recently got offered a 1903 springfield with the Augusta Arsenal markings from a good friend of mine that has his C&R liscence. Well, seeing that I live in Augusta, GA. he thought I would definitly be interested. I said HELL YEAH! You can still ride through what is now Augusta College and see some of the old Arsenal buildings still there. I think it'll be a good piece for my collection. Cant wait for it to get here.

02-03-2013, 06:16 AM	#6
Vlim Moderator Lifetime LugerForum Patron Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Europe Posts: 5,035 Thanks: 1,020 Thanked 3,888 Times in 1,187 Posts	Hi Mark, The official Mauser contacts followed a completely different course. Mauser, by the late 1880s, was under control of the Ludwig Loewe company in Berlin, and Loewe had specialized in the production of tools, production machines, jigs and gauges. So when a contract was awarded to Mauser, this usually meant that Loewe could deliver machines, tools and know-how. When we started our book project a number of years ago, I decided to do a test (re)print of a 1911 booklet which I had digitally restored. This booklet called 'Moderne Gewehrfabrikation' (Modern Riflemaking) was published in Germany, with aid of Loewe, DWM, Mauser and FN, and illustraties the then current state of affair on large scale rifle production. So there was a tendency to publish on their efforts, I think it was part of the efforts of the countries and the companies to generate some publicity in order to demonstrate their technological advance over other countries and industries.