How does /k/ feel about the M1903 Springfield?

>>32166854
It's Ping Lite

>>32166854
>Tfw can't pick bolt action rifle
>So many Springfields, Mausers, Nuggets, Enfields, Remingtons, Winchesters, and Mannlicher-Schönauers

How the fuck do you do it, /k/?

>>32167124
>How the fuck do you do it, /k/?
One of each

>>32167124
Start with the rifle of your country, expand later on.

On a side note, how hard is it to get authentic long range scopes from the 1910-1930 era? Or is that gonna run me thousands of dollars?

it was really good in farcry 2

>>32166854
Its a rip off of the shittiest mauser clone. Its a clone of a clone.

>>32167124
Get one of each.

Though I'm not particularly fond of most Mausers.

>>32166854
Shit compared to the M1917. The only thingthe M1903 did better was weight.

>>32167359
Then it's perfect for those flabby meat-logs you call arms.

>>32167631

>heavy guns are better because im a /fit/izen >:)

>>32167851
>heavy

>>32167124
It used to be "start with the nugget since it's cheap to buy and shoot" but now nuggets are so expensive you might be better off with a 1903 or a Yugo M48.

exactly how common are 1917 Enfields anyways?

>>32166854
Sweet Mauser carbine that unfortunately has a retarded magazine cutoff. I prefer the M1917 because it is a proper rifle. Regardless, I'd love to have one and probably would if they didn't cost as much or more than a modern American Mauser variant.

>>32167869
>1903 or M48
>As if one isn't double the price of the other

Anon plz.

>>32166854
M1917 was better, but it's not a bad rifle

Pretty much every bolt-action rifle of the time was generally good to decent, with few exceptions

>>32167149
Bumping, really want an answer to this.

>>32167869
>Yugo anything

Fuck Serbshit

>>32167899
Few hundred thousand out there that aren't fudded up.

>>32167869

problem with the nugget is that it has considerable recoil for a new shooter, and i dont buy the meme of 'start with a bolt action then move to semi auto' like life is a fucking RPG.

id say nowadays a good first gun would be an sks or AR

File: 1917 Enfield.jpg (1008KB, 3202x1057px) Image search: [Google]

1008KB, 3202x1057px

>>32167851

The 1917 was and is a beast.

>>32167851
>heavy
Are you 10?

>>32167999

how much do they usually go for? I think I saw one in my LGS unmolested

>>32167851
>heavy
>not being a big guy

File: Service Rifles.jpg (421KB, 1224x1632px) Image search: [Google]

421KB, 1224x1632px

>>32168174

Got mine >>32168132 for $200. With patience you can still find them for about $600. They're not quite as desirable as the 1903 so deals can still be found.

>>32168207
What are those red caps on the Garand?

>>32168207

what makes the 1903 more sought after than the 1917 anyways?

>>32168174
$600- $900 depending on a bunch of shit.

>>32168271
Fame.

>>32168236

Some CMP rifles came with them to protect during transport. They come right off.

>>32168271

The 1903 is seen as more of a real US service rifle. The 1917 is kind of an also-ran. It exists mostly because they couldn't make enough 1903s for WWI. That doesn't make it a bad rifle though.

What's the average price on an 03-A3?

One of the shops around me has a good condition Remington 03-A3 for $760

>>32168375
Depends on a bunch of shit
All original or mix matched, pre or post war etc.
I paid 300 for my mix matched 03a3

>>32167926
yugo mausers are rebuilt kraut mausers

>>32168440
Wrong.

It's like the more upmarket, well-to-do, socially excepted brother to the workman like, blue collar M1917.

I like the 1917s a lot better as shooters go.

>>32166854
I have loved the 1903 since I was a kid. I have a Low Number Rock Island and a Remington 03A3. Both are really accurate and fun. Low Number fear is a meme and the 1903 vs 1917 debate is retarded. Its more of a personal preference thing then which is better

>>32168475
Somewhat wrong. They rebuilt captured k98s

>>32168475
ok, read a book

>>32168440
The 98/48s are, but not the M48s.

>>32168573
>yugo mausers are rebuilt kraut mausers

You generalized.
You're wrong.
Get educated.

>>32166854
Inferior in every way to the M1917 Enfield

>>32166854
I would love to buy one but I'm not to sure on prices.

>>32168706
Objectively wrong by matter of personal preference and weight. It would be right if you had said that this was applicable to yourself, or stated that it was an opinion.

>>32168788
>1903 has a weaker action, worse sights, smaller magazine, and rougher action.
1917 really is superior in every MEANINGFUL way. Your shitty opinion is not of merit.

>>32168840
Once again, your opinion, which isn't more valuable than anyone elses. Many people prefer the 1093. Those things are better for YOU.

The 1917 was in many ways a better combat rifle than the 1903. The 1903 however had much better sights for paper-punching, and saw a lot of use in competition shooting, while the 1917 sat on armory racks. When they did start showing up in civilian hands, far too many of them got butchered into 'muh deer rifa'.

>>32168788
>Objectively wrong by matter of personal preference
You don't really know what that word means, do you?

>>32166854
bought one from a guy at work whose wife divorced him for 400 bucks plus 200 rounds of 30.06 stripper clips and the bandoliers its fucking money but i wouldn't pay 500 plus for one

>>32168711
$800+.

>>32169053
He's objectively wrong for stating an opinion as fact and also stating that the 1917 was better in EVERY way.