Pitted bore,safe to shoot???

[RoyP]

The father in law gave me a 1903a3.Unfortunately the last time he fired it(about 4 years ago)he used some surplus ammo that was corrosive.Not knowing this he didn't clean it,just but it back in the safe.I was suprised when I removed the bolt to clean it.It looked like hair growing in the barrel.I got all the loose rust out.You can still see the rifling,which cleaned up pretty good.Most of the rust pitting is in the grooves.I don't care about accuracy.Just if it would still be safe to shoot?,

[hodaka]

I would scrub it out and shoot it. I would not be surprised if the accuracy was still there as well.

[rem33]

If it was me I would shoot it, after a good cleaning.

Bought a old Mauser at a yard sale once that was very badly eroded, especially in the throat area. It would shoot about 4 inch groups till it had fired 4 or 5 rounds. Then you were lucky to hit a 9 inch paper plate at 100 yards, until it was cleaned again.

[Wildalaska]

Watch carefully for pressure signs as copper enters the pits and builds up...

WildorsumpinlikethatAlaska

[The Gamemaster]

I would clean it very well and not shoot it.

I would spend the money to either buy a new barrel or try to get that one chambered to something else.

If the corrosion was that bad. Nothing is a certainty except that anything that can happen, will happen.

My life is worth more than some old gun full of rust and corrosion.

I just hope that more people read your story and will take it to heart that you should not use old ammo in any gun.

The fulminate of mercury and potassium chlorate was the main components of the early primers and was discontinued in the US military around 1900.
But they were still being used by other countries until 1950 ..

Some of the early ammo was so bad that the US stopped production at the Frankford Arsenal during WW I and did not produce any more ammo until they solved the problems with the early primers. Even though they could have just used primers from other countries that were not as corosive.

That is the reason why Alvin York was carrying a Enfield Rifle and not a M1A Springfield into battle during WW I.

Potassium chlorate, used as an oxidizer, was a primary ingredient in most of these mixes. Upon firing, some of this is deposited in the bore in the form of potassium chloride. Being very similar to ordinary table salt, potassium chloride is extremely hygroscopic, which is to say it attracts and holds moisture.

One ingredient that proved to be a great source of trouble in early priming compounds was fulminate of mercury. Easy to manufacture and very sensitive, fulminate of mercury was the basis for most early percussion caps and primers. The real problems began when brass cartridge cases and smokeless propellants began to see widespread use. Upon firing, the mercury in the primer amalgamated with the brass, chemically attacking and weakening the case. As long as black powder was the primary propellant used in small arms ammunition, this effect was minimized by the milder primers then in use, and the lower operating pressures inherent to this type of propellant. When smokeless propellants became more prevalent, the damage caused by mercuric primers immediately began to create major difficulties. While the mercury caused no damage to the firearm itself, cases fired with this type of primer became brittle, rendering them useless for further reloading. The damage was caused instantly upon firing, could not be prevented, and could not be corrected afterwards. Mercury was soon identified as the culprit, and was promptly eliminated. Virtually all commercial primers have been made without fulminate of mercury since around the turn of the century, and are still clearly labeled as being “non-mercuric.” The U.S. military completely suspended the use of mercuric primers around 1898, so the likelihood of running into mercuric primers in anything other than extremely old, or some foreign ammunition is remote.

Eventually a priming compound was developed that omitted the potassium chlorate, using lead tri-nitro-resorcinate instead. Usually referred to as lead styphnate, this is still a common oxidizer in many of today’s primers. This mixture proved to give the stability and reliability demanded by the military, and was finally adopted after extensive testing. On the commercial front, many American manufacturers were already using noncorrosive primers in any of several different mixtures.

Corrosive primers may still be encountered, even though their use was discontinued in U.S. commercial ammunition shortly after the First World War. Foreign military surplus ammunition containing corrosive primers (often of the Berdan type) is still frequently found at discount prices. Considering the problems that may be associated with its use, this ammunition may not be the bargain that it first appears to be. In U.S. military ammunition, chlorate primers were discontinued around 1950, but they may still be encountered in old lots of .45 ACP and .30-06 rounds. The .30 Carbine was the first U.S. martial cartridge that was loaded exclusively with noncorro-sive primers. Later U.S. surplus ammunition in either 7.62mm NATO or 5.56mm NATO poses no problem in this regard.

[radom]

Most M-1 carbine ammo from WW-2 was what they called semi corrosive and most other calibers used corrosive ammo thru most of the 50s. I would just take some bore buffing type stuff and run that thru the tube on a patch till it comes up clean. Works pretty dern good with the rough rusted bores. I also dont belive that they halted ammo production in the middle of a war due to dirty primers too. Remington used the same type primers and made how many billions of rounds during that war?

[RoyP]

Thanks for all the great info.

[Jimro]

I'd like to see gamemasters source for this: Some of the early ammo was so bad that the US stopped production at the Frankford Arsenal during WW I and did not produce any more ammo until they solved the problems with the early primers. Even though they could have just used primers from other countries that were not as corosive.

That is the reason why Alvin York was carrying a Enfield Rifle and not a M1A Springfield into battle during WW I.

Jimro

[Tim R]

I too would like to see gamemaster's source. The M-1A was invented by Springfield (don't confuse with the real "Springfield") as a semi- auto version of the M-14.

Anybody got a Hatcher's Note Book to verify his info?



That is the reason why Alvin York was carrying a Enfield Rifle and not a M1A Springfield into battle during WW I.

[Gewehr98]

http://mauser98.com/ambergbenchweaverright.jpg

The previous owner Bubba'ed the gun beyond my capabilities to restore it, so I finished it as a sporter (Hence the Remington 700 iron sights). The barrel is original to the gun, albeit a bit shorter. Inside the bore, it looks like 20 miles of bad sewer pipe, all pitted and garfed. However, the rifling is still fairly sharp, from the throat all the way to the muzzle. I've added an 11-degree target crown, glass bedded the action and 1st inch of the barrel into the stock, and free-floated the rest of the barrel. It also sports a Dayton trigger.

The damned thing will group 5 rounds well inside an inch at 100 yards when I feed it my 170gr to 220gr handloads. It's not a benchrest gun, but my Wisconsin whitetail and Wyoming elk rifle, so it's not like I'm trying to keep sub-MOA groups for the purposes of putting venison in the freezer. But it's darned nice to know where the crosshairs on the vintage Weaver V8 are, that's where the hole will appear in the target.

It will also copper foul a bit after about 20 rounds are fired, if I don't moly-coat the bullets. I find that a minor distraction in what's an otherwise stellar performer, and since it performs so well, I have decided not to rebarrel the old girl.

So, yeah, scrub out as much rust and grunge as you can from your 1903A3, then go shoot it. If it copper fouls quickly, perhaps you can firelap it. Not only that, but you can buy brand-new 1903A3 barrels, still in the cosmoline and paper wrap, even on e-Bay. Otherwise, see how it shoots, you may be pleasantly surprised!

[saands]

That is the reason why Alvin York was carrying a Enfield Rifle and not a M1A Springfield into battle during WW I.

Huh :confused: :confused: :confused: Sorry, but I think that a "Fact Check" is needed on register #2 ...

York's Enfield wasn't a SMLE in .303 Brit ... it was an M1917 Enfield that shot the same 30-06 round as the Springfield of the day ... so how could ammo availability come into play?

IMHO, you can shoot all the corrosive ammo you want, just make sure that you clean the darn thing when you are done. A slathering with Windex does a great job of neutralizing the corrosives, then just clean it as you normally would.

[Jim Watson]

Hatcher's Notebook does indeed describe how in May 1917 Frankford started getting bad ammo which turned out to be due to overloading the primer drying houses trying to increase production. They changed the primer formula to a variation of what Winchester was using, tightened up specs on drying and went back into production, though with several months lost time.

There were other sources of ammunition, Army contracts to the commercial makers and several war plants, so there were reasonable supplies available to tide Frankford over the change.

Sgt York is now thought to have carried a 1917 US Enfield, in .30-06, nothing to do with .303 SMLE or P14 British rifles.

[cheygriz]

Go ahead and shoot your 1903. A little pitting might effect accuracy, but not safety.

I would agree that a new GI surplus barrel is a great idea, but go ahead and enjoy it in the meantime.