Was rewatching Band of Brothers and during the Battle of the Bloody Gulch I noticed that it looks like several Americans were operating Springfield 1903s. If you pause at 4:33 with the American who loses a couple of fingers you can clearly see he is shooting a 1903 with no optics.

This struck me as odd. I had always assumed that the 1903s had been replaced by M1s entirely at that point in the war for the Army, except for specialist roles, and especially for premier frontline infantry. I of course have no problem imagining that some stayed in service all through the war but again just struck me as an oddity from my previous assumptions about American small arms use.

Was this more common that I thought? A fluke? Bad production in error here?

Sniper/marksman with optics removed?

Not an expert by any means but I know that 1903's were used.

Here's an excerpt from Ammoland Shooting Sports news in an article by [url=http://www.ammoland.com/author/marc-cammack/]Marc Cammack written in August 19, 2015:[/url]



World War Two and the 1903A3

The outbreak of World War Two saw production start again of the 1903 rifle, despite it being officially replaced by the semi automatic M1 Garand. Remington rather than Springfield Armory, produced the rifle. Prior to Pearl Harbor, Remington had entered into a contract to produce 500,000 1903s in .303 British for the British government. Remington did not completely go through with the contract, and as a result the rifles were produced but in .30-06 rather than .303 British. Some rifles did go to Britain but not nearly the full 500,000 that was in the early contract.

Remington produced 1903 rifles for the US government as well in larger numbers. Remington had received older manufacturing equipment and tooling from Rock Island Arsenal to build these rifles.
Unlike earlier rifles, the Remington 1903's had many shortcuts in manufacturing to save time and money. Some Remington 1903s stocks lacked the grasping grooves of earlier rifles. About 348,000 Remington 1903 rifles were produced. Further changes were made to Remington's 1903, including the complete elimination of grasping grooves on the rifles stock, and most importantly a rear peep sight instead of the older open M1905 sight.

These changes mentioned above resulted in the 1903A3 rifle, which was produced by Remington and the Smith Corona type writer company. Production of the 1903A3 began in late 1942 and ended in February of 1944. Remington produced over 707,000 rifles compared to 234,000 by Smith Corona. Despite the manufacturing shortcuts, the 1903A3 had was a strong and safe weapon due to the fact that the receiver was made out of nickel steel. The rifles saw use during World War Two in all theaters of war. Military police used the weapon, and the rifle also served as a grenade launching platform. 1903A3s were supplied to other Allied nations during World War Two, such as the Nationalist Chinese.

Other than a sniper, I don't think a 101st soldier would be armed with a Springfield. The Marine Corps were late adapters and they only initially went into Guadacanal With Springfields.

From a post on Gunboards;

"The Army did often use the '03 as a dedicated grenade launcher rifle throughout the war. In old videos of combat troops you'll see a man carrying an M1 and with an '03 fitted with a launcher slung over his shoulder.

Army MP's were often issued the '03 and the M1917 since they weren't actual combat troops. In the old videos you'll see combat MP's shooting '03 rifles at Germans in cities along side infantry troops armed with the M1.

The Marines used the '03 through Guadalcanal, and many didn't want the M1 until they used one in combat. Then they couldn't loose the '03 fast enough.

The Navy usually had M1 Carbines and '03 rifles aboard ship. An old Navy vet told me that they never saw an M1 during the war except in Army or Marine troop hands.

All branches used the '03 for much of the war as state side guard rifles. Other than the very early war, the '03 was used mostly for troops who weren't involved in actual combat and where a bolt rifle would fill the need."

A dedicated grenadier ?

And just to make sure everyone's on the same page, that's an 03-A3 in the BoB clip in the OP. The rear sight is a dead giveaway.

Sharp shooters during WW2 were allowed to choose which rifle they used and how it was configured.


Case in point, Shifty Powers. Mr. Powers opted not to use the standard M1903A4 or make his Garand a M1C.


Shifty was an iron sight beast.

quote:

---

Was this more common that I thought? A fluke? Bad production in error here?

---

Not very common, but possible and most certainly not a fluke.

BoB was a HUGE undertaking that Spielberg insisted to be historically accurate, especially when it cam to field gear and troop appearance.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Was this more common that I thought? A fluke? Bad production in error here?

---

Not very common, but possible and most certainly not a fluke.

BoB was a HUGE undertaking that Spielberg insisted to be historically accurate, especially when it cam to field gear and troop appearance.

---

Even to how the men carried, serviced and used their weapons and reacted "under fire". Actors went through a 40 day(?) boot camp to learn to be "soldiers" The didn't let Matt Damon do it so the "soldiers" would treat him "differently" in the movie.

The boot camp was 10 days.

quote:

---

A dedicated grenadier ?

---

Very plausible. The grenade launcher for the Garand required a different gas plug to be inserted. Grenade launchers for Carbines came about a bit later and required no changes to the weapon to be used.

Nice!

Well I think we can chalk it up as accurate. The grenadier or sniper without optics for whatever reason sounds the most plausible. I did read elsewhere that some front line units fielded them as options for main field duty till the end of the war. Which if I were armchair QB'ing would strike me as inefficient for paratroopers who would be expected to not have regular resupply at times. Would just seem to not be very smart to have a few dudes potentially behind enemy lines that used different ammo feed systems as everyone else.

Either way, appreciate the feedback and discussion. It just jumped out at me for some reason and learned a few things now. Always a plus.

Wasn't Matt Damon in Saving Private Ryan, not BoB?

quote:

---

Wasn't Matt Damon in Saving Private Ryan, not BoB?

---

That is correct. The Post above left me puzzled as well.

Hey, OP.


If you have the time and coin, I highly suggest you go on this trip. My Father and I went together this past May and it was amazing. Our lead historian was Ron Drez, the man who helped Ambrose write BoB.

Ron first met and interviewed members of BoB at a 1988 reunion in New Orleans. During our tour, he would incorporate direct knowledge heard first hand from BoB members. Pretty amazing stuff. Easily the best trip of my entire life.



Cheers.

quote:

---

The boot camp was 10 days.

---

Damd it. 40 sounds better though. Anyone can stand it for 10 days. 40 is pushing it.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Wasn't Matt Damon in Saving Private Ryan, not BoB?

---

That is correct. The Post above left me puzzled as well.

---

Okay!!! Okay!!! .

quote:

---

Nice!

Well I think we can chalk it up as accurate. The grenadier or sniper without optics for whatever reason sounds the most plausible. I did read elsewhere that some front line units fielded them as options for main field duty till the end of the war. Which if I were armchair QB'ing would strike me as inefficient for paratroopers who would be expected to not have regular resupply at times. Would just seem to not be very smart to have a few dudes potentially behind enemy lines that used different ammo feed systems as everyone else.

Either way, appreciate the feedback and discussion. It just jumped out at me for some reason and learned a few things now. Always a plus.

---

They both use the same ammo..... 30.06. M1 in 8 round clips and '03 in 5 round stripper clips.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Nice!

Well I think we can chalk it up as accurate. The grenadier or sniper without optics for whatever reason sounds the most plausible. I did read elsewhere that some front line units fielded them as options for main field duty till the end of the war. Which if I were armchair QB'ing would strike me as inefficient for paratroopers who would be expected to not have regular resupply at times. Would just seem to not be very smart to have a few dudes potentially behind enemy lines that used different ammo feed systems as everyone else.

Either way, appreciate the feedback and discussion. It just jumped out at me for some reason and learned a few things now. Always a plus.

---

They both use the same ammo..... 30.06. M1 in 8 round clips and '03 in 5 round stripper clips.

---

I realize that. That's why I said ammo feed systems. I am sure you can finagle a way to load an M1 with stripper clips and vice versa. Maybe. Probably just have to unload the rounds from the clips and load individually . Either way it makes it nearly incompatible while under fire.

quote:

---

Hey, OP.


If you have the time and coin, I highly suggest you go on this trip. My Father and I went together this past May and it was amazing. Out lead historian was Ron Drez, the man who helped Ambrose write BoB.

Ron first met and interviewed members of BoB at a 1988 reunion in New Orleans. During our tour, he would incorporate direct knowledge heard first hand from BoB members. Pretty amazing stuff. Easily the best trip of my entire life.



Cheers.

---

Oooooo. I've heard good stuff about that. Unfortunately, in my extremely poor broke college kid phase right now. I hope they still have it running when I am able to save up for it.

Loading multiple rounds in a M1 without a bandolier is virtually impossible. The weapon just want feed correctly.

Single shot is possible, but not semi.

Do it, man. You will never forget it.

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Nice!

Well I think we can chalk it up as accurate. The grenadier or sniper without optics for whatever reason sounds the most plausible. I did read elsewhere that some front line units fielded them as options for main field duty till the end of the war. Which if I were armchair QB'ing would strike me as inefficient for paratroopers who would be expected to not have regular resupply at times. Would just seem to not be very smart to have a few dudes potentially behind enemy lines that used different ammo feed systems as everyone else.

Either way, appreciate the feedback and discussion. It just jumped out at me for some reason and learned a few things now. Always a plus.

---

They both use the same ammo..... 30.06. M1 in 8 round clips and '03 in 5 round stripper clips.

---

I realize that. That's why I said ammo feed systems. I am sure you can finagle a way to load an M1 with stripper clips and vice versa. Maybe. Probably just have to unload the rounds from the clips and load individually . Either way it makes it nearly incompatible while under fire.

---

Easy... you strip them out of the 5 round clip and put them in a 8 round M1 clip or vice versa. The same way the 101st and other units stripped rounds out of M-1919 machine gun belts to use in M-1s . And as S&C1970 mentioned, you can single load M-1 very easily......be quick with the thumb though.Correct, Not the preferred method while under fire

M1 thumb is a mother ****er.

Honestly, having used the stripper clip on a 1903, I almost think single loading is faster. You'd probably carry a bandolier of the M1 clips and just put them in as needed. But it's not like re-loading a stripper clip is all that difficult, so on your down time you could pre-load a few using ammo from an M1 bandolier.

I've tried single loading the M1. **** that.

Loading your own en-bloc clips is a m-fer as well. Not something I'd want to do in combat.

Haven't experienced M1 thumb. yet...
Sure as hell don't want to!

quote:

---

Do it, man. You will never forget it.

---

It's definitely on my list of things to do now for sure. Thanks for the headsup on it.

I spent some time in the Landstuhl hospital and one weekend managed to sweet talk my way into a trip to visit Belleau Wood. (Air Force liaison woman was desperate for attention). Easily one of the most humbling experiences I have ever had. As a Marine, I had a connection that went deeper than just surface emotions. I will never forget that experience.

I had an opportunity to visit Normandy the next weekend (same liaison chick was VERY desperate) but ended up getting sent back stateside before that happened. Bummed about that.

Either way I would dearly love to get back over there and see these places before I go. Only been to one but it was a hard reality check for me.