Go Back   CMP Forums > CMP Sales > CMP Bolt Action Rifles
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-28-2018, 06:41 AM
bodydenny bodydenny is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Valrico,Florida
Posts: 63
Default Sedgely 10/43 Barrel?

I know the common wisdom is that most later USMC barrels were not used,but I recently came across a 10/43 USMC "S" barrel with wrench marks on the barrel. Significant or old news?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-28-2018, 02:22 PM
howardhuge howardhuge is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: nc
Posts: 1,285
Default

Most late barrels were 43/44 DOM used for MC rebuilds. as you may know some were de-milled post ww2...although many were flat NOS and never damaged. Ck the bore for any signs of bending.. its my understanding they are quite good barrels. I just bought a 1903 mk1 with a NOS 44 barrel installed but have not shot it yet.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-28-2018, 03:15 PM
cplnorton cplnorton is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Van Wert, Ohio
Posts: 1,431
Default

I've been tracking USMC rifles for about 20 years, and have cataloged or owned more than I could ever count.

As of right now, the last Sedgley barrel I have ever seen on a legit Marine M1903 is a 9/42 Sedgley.

I know there are about five or ten of us that are hardcore into USMC M1903's and we have talked on this many times. Usually one of us buys everyone that comes up for sale and we have a little group of us that we talk often. None of us so far have found a legit 1943/44 SEdgley barrel used on a for sure Marine M1903.

What I mean is every rifle we find with a 43/44 Sedgley, they look assembled in the commercial market.

I would be very curious to see the pattern of the vise marks. Since many of the patterns on the vise marks are identical.

My honest first thoughts are, the vise marks might have been done commercially. I've seen vise marks of someone using a pipe wrench to get a barrel off or on. Which the pattern is for sure not Marine.

I won't say it's impossible, but so far I've traced so many 43/44 SEdgley barrel M1903's and it's made me very, very skeptical they were ever used.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-28-2018, 04:09 PM
bodydenny bodydenny is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Valrico,Florida
Posts: 63
Default

Sending you a PM . It's a live auction.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-28-2018, 04:59 PM
jarhead2007 jarhead2007 is offline
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Surf City, NC
Posts: 360
Default

I have a 1903 with the rockwell hardness test punch mark before the serial number. No discernible vice marks on the barrel, stippled buttplate, BF bolt, oneida rear sight, and .36 numbered front sight. Had a scant stock that i replaced with a finger groove stock.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-29-2018, 01:38 PM
cplnorton cplnorton is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Van Wert, Ohio
Posts: 1,431
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jarhead2007 View Post
I have a 1903 with the rockwell hardness test punch mark before the serial number. No discernible vice marks on the barrel, stippled buttplate, BF bolt, oneida rear sight, and .36 numbered front sight. Had a scant stock that i replaced with a finger groove stock.
I would imagine your barrel date is a pre WWII date, i.e. I doubt it's a 1941 or 1942 dated barrel. It appears the barrel vise marks only show up during the WWII era. Also the numbered front sight is something that appears to have been discontinued by WWII, as you never see them on WWII dated barrels. I've maybe seen one on a 1941 dated SEdgley.

The rockwell hardness test punch mark seems to be only done around 1938 and possibly 1939, and then the Marines discontinued the rockwell hardness test.

I did take a look at the 10/43 Sedgley with vise marks. It doesn't give me the warm fuzzy's it's MArine. It could be, but looking at it, I still think it's commercial. I think someone used a pipe wrench to remove the barrel off a receiver. But it's hard to say for certain either way.

Thanks for pointing it out though. It's definitely something interesting and I would love to see a 43/44 Sedgley dated barrel on a rifle that I thought was real. I think it would be fascinating to find.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-29-2018, 01:59 PM
7,62x51mm 7,62x51mm is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: USA Illinois
Posts: 1,455
Default

During the late 1950's and into the early 1960's Great Lakes Naval Base had a retail store selling surplus items. Among these items were 1903A3 barreled actions for $10 each and 1903A1 barrels for $3 each. These came from rifles used in boot camp.

I have a SA 1-31 dated barrel that came from a friend that bought it from the Great Lakes retail store, it has the "vise marks". My friend still has a Sedgley 41 barrel from the same store also with the navy vise marks.

The best way to determine a Navy boot camp barrel is the surface rust that extends down the muzzle about one inch, caused by marching in the rain. I really doubt any of these barrels would have been used to fake USMC rifles, but there are a few still around with vise marks and different dates.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06-29-2018, 03:28 PM
jarhead2007 jarhead2007 is offline
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Surf City, NC
Posts: 360
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cplnorton View Post
I would imagine your barrel date is a pre WWII date, i.e. I doubt it's a 1941 or 1942 dated barrel. It appears the barrel vise marks only show up during the WWII era. Also the numbered front sight is something that appears to have been discontinued by WWII, as you never see them on WWII dated barrels. I've maybe seen one on a 1941 dated SEdgley.

The rockwell hardness test punch mark seems to be only done around 1938 and possibly 1939, and then the Marines discontinued the rockwell hardness test.

I did take a look at the 10/43 Sedgley with vise marks. It doesn't give me the warm fuzzy's it's MArine. It could be, but looking at it, I still think it's commercial. I think someone used a pipe wrench to remove the barrel off a receiver. But it's hard to say for certain either way.

Thanks for pointing it out though. It's definitely something interesting and I would love to see a 43/44 Sedgley dated barrel on a rifle that I thought was real. I think it would be fascinating to find.
Doh, I was typing and talking to my wife on the phone at the same time. Forgot to mention that my barrel is marked USMC Sedgley 12/43. SN is 900XXX dated June 1918ish
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06-30-2018, 02:33 PM
Kaliman Kaliman is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 431
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cplnorton View Post
I would imagine your barrel date is a pre WWII date, i.e. I doubt it's a 1941 or 1942 dated barrel. It appears the barrel vise marks only show up during the WWII era. Also the numbered front sight is something that appears to have been discontinued by WWII, as you never see them on WWII dated barrels. I've maybe seen one on a 1941 dated SEdgley.

The rockwell hardness test punch mark seems to be only done around 1938 and possibly 1939, and then the Marines discontinued the rockwell hardness test.

I did take a look at the 10/43 Sedgley with vise marks. It doesn't give me the warm fuzzy's it's MArine. It could be, but looking at it, I still think it's commercial. I think someone used a pipe wrench to remove the barrel off a receiver. But it's hard to say for certain either way.

Thanks for pointing it out though. It's definitely something interesting and I would love to see a 43/44 Sedgley dated barrel on a rifle that I thought was real. I think it would be fascinating to find.
I think regarding the WWII rebuilds and front sights it's probably around 50/50. I assume it's probable they got lazy, or just saw no need to swap the front sight blade.

I'll message you with some examples lol
__________________
3rd Battalion, 5th Marines '10-'13
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 06-30-2018, 04:10 PM
cplnorton cplnorton is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Van Wert, Ohio
Posts: 1,431
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jarhead2007 View Post
Doh, I was typing and talking to my wife on the phone at the same time. Forgot to mention that my barrel is marked USMC Sedgley 12/43. SN is 900XXX dated June 1918ish
Hey thank you for the additional info. I'm pretty sure I've seen this rifle before.

Let me start by saying before we had documents, all we had were the actual rifles. So that is all we studied. So we would buy as many as we could find, catalog them, then moved onto another. After a while you start to pick up on trends about certain times in MArine rebuild history. So some traits always seem to go with others, and some you wouldn't expect to see with each other.

After we found the documents, it only backed up why you see certain traits at certain times and why there is a change .

From your description of your 10/43 Sedgley barreled rifle, some traits you think would be there are missing, and some that seem not to be likely, are present.

The biggest thing I worry about these days, is a lot of information has been released to the public about these rifles. Which I think is great. Because when I first got in this hobby, every rifle you got, you would just post pics and someone would say yea or nay for Marine, and that was it. You didn't get any explanation on the "Why." But in a way I do think the release of all this info it is making the waters sort of muddied on studying traits.

For instance back in my day, every time a Marine M1903 was sold, it always had a set of #10 sights. Because everyone knew #10 sights were a trait correct for MArine rifles. Well now we know by the docs they discontinued them in 1936, and if you have a 1942 dated Sedgley barrel with #10 sights. You can bet the Marines didn't put those on them.

Well now I'm starting to see a lot of rifles floating around with numbered front sight blades. Which Tim found that document at the archives and we looked for them for probably a couple years before we released the info to the public. Which they were sort of rare and only seemed to show up in that period right before WWII. The Marine doc detailing they were being used on rifles from the depot is dated March 1940. And you have to remember there were mass rebuilds in 1941 and especially 1942 where the Marines used up a huge amount of the available parts really fast and were constantly searching for more.

Now what I have noticed is numbered front sight blades are becoming more common. Which these numbered sights are not rare to find loose if someone wanted to add one.

I'm just starting to wonder if numbered front sight blades are becoming the new #10 sights.

But I will never say it's not possible. If it's a rifle that you have had for say for over five years, that predates us releasing that document, then I say ok cool, it's unlikely anyone has messed with it. I forget when we released that doc, but it's been out several years now.

Its the one sort of downfall about releasing info. Some Marine trait are very easy to add or fake if someone has the intent.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:56 AM.