1903 Springifled question

Discussion in 'General Military Arms & History Forum' started by 81GRUNT, Sep 26, 2010.

  1. 81GRUNT

    81GRUNT New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
    Messages:
    2
    Location:
    Upstate New York
    Hey ya'll,
    i don't have a 1903 to answer this question for me and have tried looking it up on the net but anywyas here's the question. Have found some 1913/17 remington knife/sword bayonets and am wondering if they will fit on a 1903 Springfield???? Any info would be Great.

    John
  2. Alpo

    Alpo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2007
    Messages:
    11,166
    Location:
    NW Florida
    As I understand it, the same bayonet will fit on the Springfield and the Garand, while a completely different bayonet will fit on both the 1917 and the Winchester 97 Trench Gun. This is quite annoying, as the bayonet for the 1917 is both easier to find and much cheaper than the one for the Springfield.

    However, this is just my understanding. I've never tried it, as I don't have a 1917 bayonet. No sense in buying one if it won't fit my gun. :(
  3. gdmoody

    gdmoody Moderator Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2007
    Messages:
    10,545
    Location:
    Northeast Georgia
    I can tell you without a doubt that the same bayonet fits the Garand and the 1903, cause I just tried it. I no longer have a P17 and Trench Gun so I can't test them for you.
  4. jim brady

    jim brady Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    1,379
    Maybe I can help. I have a small collection of US rifles and bayonets. That '1913-1917' bayonet is made for the U.S. Model 1917 Rifle (Eddystone/Remington/Winchester) accepted for use in World War 1. The same bayonet was fitted to the US 'Trench' shot guns used up until the end of the Viet Nam War.

    Fooling around with them one day, I tried a US Krag bayonet (Mfg 1902) on my 1903 Springfield, and it fit perfectly. It also fitted my M1 Garand. Alpo, I did test that 1913/1917 Bayonet on the Springfield 1903, and there is no way that it fits. Both the muzzel of the barrel and the bayonet lug is wider on the Springfield.

    Not surprisingly, the 1913/1917 bayonet also fits perfectly on a WW1 No3Mk1 British rifle, while the same British bayonet fits the 1917 Eddystone.
  5. Smoke Rise'n

    Smoke Rise'n New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    10
    Location:
    In my last set of foot prints, Co.
    Jim B. I have a Remington bayonet W/U.S. Ord. markings stamped 1918. It doesn't fit my 03's or Garand, and the only Eddy Stone I have was sporterized along time ago, and has no bayonet lug. Just wondering, is the 1918 the same as the 1913/1917?
  6. Jim K

    Jim K New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2009
    Messages:
    6,397
    "Not surprisingly, the 1913/1917 bayonet also fits perfectly on a WW1 No3Mk1 British rifle, while the same British bayonet fits the 1917 Eddystone."

    Not surprisingly indeed, since the No.3 Mk I is just the revised British nomenclature for what had been the Pattern 1914. The Pattern 1913 (.276 caliber), Pattern 1914 (.303 Caliber) and U.S. Model 1917 (.30-'06 caliber) are all basically the same rifle and bayonets are interchangeable.

    (FWIW, it was the use of the large diameter .276 Enfield that made the large magazine necessary, a boon when the change was made to the rimmed .303, also the reason the M1917 will actually hold six rounds, though it is usually considered a five round rifle.)

    Note that the P13/P14/M1917 bayonet is NOT the same as the Pattern 1907 bayonet used with the Rifle No. 1 Mk III SMLE. It was to distinguish the former bayonet from the latter that two grooves were cut in the scales of the newer bayonet.

    The fact that the M1892 Krag bayonet will fit the M1903 Springfield seems coincidental. I have seen nothing indicating it was a deliberate choice or advising troops that they could use the older bayonet with the M1903 rifle. In fact, the M1905 bayonet was longer by six inches than the 10" Krag bayonet, and for an interesting reason. When the Krag rifle, with its 30" barrel, was replaced by the 24" barrel M1903, the M1903 had a rod bayonet. When that mistake was corrected, there was concern for the "reach" of the rifle-bayonet combination in bayonet fighting. So the six inches removed from the Krag barrel was added onto the Springfield bayonet, bringing it to 16" and, lo and behold, they had the same "reach."

    All silliness as bayonet fighting was a thing of the past or maybe a thing that never really was. (After the Wilderness campaign, a survey was made of some 7800 wounded; only six had wounds from bayonets, sabers, or other edged or stabbling weapons! And that was in an era of single shot muzzle loading muskets.)

    Jim
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2010
  7. jim brady

    jim brady Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    1,379
    Smoke Rise'n - Jim K pretty much covered it. That bayonet you have is for the M1917 U.S. Enfield. Every one of those that I've seen have been made by Winchester or Remington. By the way, did you know that MOST U.S. Army infantry were issued the U.S. Model 1917, while most U.S.M.C. personnel in France were issued the M1903 "Springfield"?

    Interesting to me. I'd thought that the 1903 Springfield was THE front line rifle of the Army in WW1. Not so. There were far more of the Model 1917 rifles issued to Army front-line troops.

    I'm not too surprised that the Krag bayonet worked on the Springfield. The bayonet lug attachment point on the Krag was just re-done for the Springfield when that flimsey ramrod bayonet was discontinued. After all, the Army still had plenty of Krag bayonets in inventory, and there was no need to completely re-invent the wheel.

    In the 60s when I went thru Army Basic, our Drill Sergeant told us to label one M-14 mag "Bayonet" and the other one "Hand-To-Hand" and to forget everything else they taught us. He warned us that if we tried to use the bayonet or hand-to-hand stuff we learned in Basic that some Commie would end up kicking our behinds......
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2010
  8. Jim K

    Jim K New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2009
    Messages:
    6,397
    True about the Krag bayonets in inventory, but I have never seen anything to indicate that there was any intent to issue them with the 1903, even in an emergency. As Jim Brady says, the attachment system was the weak point of the Model 1892 (Krag) bayonet, and it would not stand up to the greater recoil of the M1903. They did try the Krag bayonet at first, and ended up shooting some bayonet rings, which was the convincer that the old bayonet just wouldn't do, aside from being too short for the bayonet fighters.

    The use of the Springfield bayonet on the M1 rifle was deliberate, in order not to have to issue new bayonets as well as a new rifle (remember, this was still in the depression era). John Garand protested the decision, as the use of the old bayonet restricted the size of the gas cylinder and he wanted to use a larger one for greater efficiency.

    Jim
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
General Military Arms & History Forum National Match Springfield 1903 Jul 30, 2013
General Military Arms & History Forum Got a really NICE 1903; would like to know some of its history Feb 2, 2012
General Military Arms & History Forum Springfield 1903 information Apr 6, 2011
General Military Arms & History Forum Need 1903 Springfield stock Feb 1, 2011
General Military Arms & History Forum 1903 Springfield sporter Jul 13, 2010

Share This Page