Remington 1903 vs Remington 03a3

[PeterCav21]

I just received a M1903 from CMP. Serial number comes back to late 42 and it was rebarreled in 44 by HS. It’s looks like it’s seen some use but good functioning condition.

I also have a 03a3 from 1943.

which one of these is a “better” WWII example.

my understanding is the 1903 Remington modified may have seen more front line use as Garand production ramped up, but by time 03a3s came around those went to rear echelon troops.

could be wrong about that.
Ultimately may only keep one so in fact finding.

[MAC702]

...may only keep one...

Well, there's your problem.

[SkyKid]

Such a terrible problem to have
Keep both

[PeterCav21]

lol well I refer to basic laws of economics.

-My resources are limited.
-Marginal utility: I experience less satisfaction after obtaining additional units of the same thing.
-everyone faces trade offs. Keeping both means not spending the money on another gun I want more

[browningautorifle]

which one of these is a “better” WWII example.

So a pointed answer to the pointed question. The 1903A3 was built for WW2 to speed production and that was a mark of WW2. Fast and dirty. I'd think the 1903A3 speaks directly of WW2. If it's a beauty, it should shoot perfectly as long as you can see the black.

[John Beard]

The Remington M1903 was probably issued to the Army and most saw very little use. The replacement High Standard barrel, however, suggests that your rifle found usage somewhere, or was not well cared for.

And you are correct that early and mid-production M'03-A3's were issued to rear echelon troops and saw little or no combat action. And most late M'03-A3's were never issued.

Good Luck!

J.B.