-
Forum Update: We've upgraded the software to improve security, performance, and the overall experience.
👉 Read why we made the change | Support the Forum
British Enfield Rifle
- Thread starter PuertoRican
- Start date
DWalt
Member
I believe all of the pre-M98 Mausers cocked on closing. The P-14 was originally designed by the British as an improvement over the SMLE, but it was pretty much abandoned for British service when hostilities began in 1914. The Enfield 1917 was basically the P-14 modified for US issue by rebarreling for the .30-‘06 cartridge. Many believed it to be a superior battle rifle vs. the Springfield ‘03. The sights were also much superior.
That allowed it to hold 1 more cartridge than the .303 rifles allowed!
Engine49guy
Member
Well it is know as a Enfield.
I own a few of each, the P17 is definitely not an Enfield,
The P17 bolt actually resembles the Mauser bolt more especially the extractor...
perhaps if an Mauser K98 married an SMLE and they had a baby.....
On a side note IMO the P17 has a better rear site and longer site radius than Remington 1903 and 03A3 and the SMLE, The Enfield #4 flip up rear site is a nice unit but the P17 is a superior rifle chambered in the superior 30-06 round
The 1914 Enfield is an 'Enfield' in name was it was developed/designed by the Brit War Dept in the Enfield Arsenal.
The orig design was the pattern 1913 Enfield and was for the 276 caliber cartridge.
That ever got made in any number as WW1 came around fast.
The redesign resulted in the Pattern 1914 Enfield in 303.
Vickers was supposed to be the original production mfg'r picked by the Brit Gov't but couldn't take up the contract as war-time needs already filled their time.
The Brits turned to still neutral USA to make the P14.
Rem, Win and Eddystone were the contractors.
We made them at those plants untill the USA entered the War in 1917.
At that time the USA stopped making the P14.
The rifle design was slightly changed to take the US 30-06 cartridge and supply a second battle rifle for our troops going 'over there'.
The new rifle was called the US Model 1917 Rifle.
Common language use gave it the name of the 1917, P17,
or just '17 Enfield.
Enfield from it's roots in the original Brit design is a correct assuption.
Purists Collector fanantics cringe when anyone calls them anything but a US Model 1917 Rifle .
But most everyone knows what you are talking about when '17 Enfield is said in conversation.
It's one of those to be listed with clip/magazine,,bullet/cartridge.
Doesn't bother me but it does some and I can understand that.
The orig design was the pattern 1913 Enfield and was for the 276 caliber cartridge.
That ever got made in any number as WW1 came around fast.
The redesign resulted in the Pattern 1914 Enfield in 303.
Vickers was supposed to be the original production mfg'r picked by the Brit Gov't but couldn't take up the contract as war-time needs already filled their time.
The Brits turned to still neutral USA to make the P14.
Rem, Win and Eddystone were the contractors.
We made them at those plants untill the USA entered the War in 1917.
At that time the USA stopped making the P14.
The rifle design was slightly changed to take the US 30-06 cartridge and supply a second battle rifle for our troops going 'over there'.
The new rifle was called the US Model 1917 Rifle.
Common language use gave it the name of the 1917, P17,
or just '17 Enfield.
Enfield from it's roots in the original Brit design is a correct assuption.
Purists Collector fanantics cringe when anyone calls them anything but a US Model 1917 Rifle .
But most everyone knows what you are talking about when '17 Enfield is said in conversation.
It's one of those to be listed with clip/magazine,,bullet/cartridge.
Doesn't bother me but it does some and I can understand that.
eveled
Member
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2013
- Messages
- 2,612
- Reaction score
- 3,448
I think I agree. My No5 hurt.
merl67
SWCA Member
In case no one said so wear ear plugs and ear muffs when you do touch that thing off. That megaphone attached to the end of the barrel make the report off the charts...
LVSteve
Member
One good thing about the P14 and M1917 being based on the P13 is that the action is stupid strong. IIRC the Remington Model 30 used the same receiver without the ears.
The drawback to that is that the P14 and M1917 actions are not that slick and the rifles overall are heavier than their contemporaries. I have a very slick Enfield No1 MkIII* and the P14 is ponderous to operate by comparison. My well worn 1903A3 is as good as many No1s and No4s, and definitely much nicer than the M1917.
As for neutral USA in WWI, rifles for France and Russia were also produced here. The Mosin Nagants were washed through a contract with some shadow company in England, hence the stocks were stamped "English Order" in Russian. No giveaway there.
IIRC, more M1917 rifles were produced for the US army during WWI than Springfield 1903s.
DWalt
Member
About 2.2 million 1917s were made during the war, vs. about 300,000 Springfields. but the USA entered WWI with around 600,000 Springfields already in service. Even so, there were around twice the number of 1917s in American service than Springfield ‘03s during the war.
Exactly. Enfields are not Mausers. My first thought after reading the initial problem was “cock on close”. .303 British is an underrated round. It was good enough for a lot of African game for a long time.
Tucked away in the back of my safe are three Enfields: A 1942 No. 1 Mk. III Lithgow, a 1955 No. 4 Mk I Fazakerley, and a No. 4 Mk. I converted to a No. 5 Jungle Carbine by Miltech.
Like many other British machines, there is an elegance to the look and feel of Enfields, and they're beautifully made. The action is smooth, they're very ergonomic, and they shoot well.
No argument there. That conical flash hider and that little, narrow buttplate magnify the recoil and drive the Jungle Carbine hard into the shooter. Any trip to the range with mine ends with a nice bruise on my right shoulder...
I have 4 of the talked about guns in this thread, nothing special just what your ordinary grunt would be issued. Their buried in the back of the safe so I did not get specific info from them.
Let sleeping rifles sleep!A 1917, a Remington Springfield 03, a SMLE and a Mosin Nagant carbine.
Of all I enjoy using the 1917 the most, I have no problem with cock on close. For a fact the MN does kick a bit and has a roar like my MIL had.
I had a 1943 Longbranch No 4, Mk1and a “carbine” modded No 4, Mk1. Both kicked HARD. The No 4, Mk1 “carbine” harder still. Whoever worked on the modded “carbine” No 4 did a good job. Looked just like a standard No 4 but about 6” shorter. Lots of fun to shoot for the first 20 or so rounds. Then just painful. Sold them both….. sorry I did……
The Remington Mod 30 is the same rifle Remington was making as the US Model 1917.
After WW1 ended, Remington saw a way to use the existing tooling, parts and knowledge in the Illion factory to convert the Military to a good sporter.
The belley in the magazine was straighted out so the sporters are a 5 shot instead of 6rd cap.
The 'ears' are gone from the rear ring and the bolt release is lengthend to the rear of the actin edge, reshaped and other small changes in styling.
The dog leg bolt handle stayed as well as the perfectly good side safety.
The earliest models were lacking in a decent stock design. But the Express models later are more of the classic American stock style and are
beautiful rifles and great shooters, Heavy I will admit.
Some great chamberings like 257 Roberts , 7mm Mauser. Classic 30-06.
Some great oldies 30, 32, 35 and 25 Remington. The latter often found rechambered to 257Roberts.
Lyman 48 , Redfield or Marble-Goss aperture rear. Your choice upon order.
I found a 30L Express (Lyman 48) in 30-06 at a show just before the c19 thing. Excellent condition begging for a buyer at $300.
I asked to look at it and was immedietely given a price of $250 OTD.
A beautiful rifle.
Remington later made the Model 720 based on the same action when the Mod 30 was closed out in '39 or '40.
The 720 was only made for 2 yrs.
I'll add my offering to hard recoiling Milsurps as the Austrian M95 straight pull carbines in 8x56R cal.
They were sure cheap at around $65 FFl price in the $90's.
The orig card boxes of 1937/38 mfg German ammo,,2 5rd packet clips per box were $1.50 each.
The heavy 215 gr (?) bullets out of the little carbine with it's less than ergonomic pleasurable stock design was quite a thrill!
Fun at the time for sure. All gone now except for a few rds of ammo.
After WW1 ended, Remington saw a way to use the existing tooling, parts and knowledge in the Illion factory to convert the Military to a good sporter.
The belley in the magazine was straighted out so the sporters are a 5 shot instead of 6rd cap.
The 'ears' are gone from the rear ring and the bolt release is lengthend to the rear of the actin edge, reshaped and other small changes in styling.
The dog leg bolt handle stayed as well as the perfectly good side safety.
The earliest models were lacking in a decent stock design. But the Express models later are more of the classic American stock style and are
beautiful rifles and great shooters, Heavy I will admit.
Some great chamberings like 257 Roberts , 7mm Mauser. Classic 30-06.
Some great oldies 30, 32, 35 and 25 Remington. The latter often found rechambered to 257Roberts.
Lyman 48 , Redfield or Marble-Goss aperture rear. Your choice upon order.
I found a 30L Express (Lyman 48) in 30-06 at a show just before the c19 thing. Excellent condition begging for a buyer at $300.
I asked to look at it and was immedietely given a price of $250 OTD.
A beautiful rifle.
Remington later made the Model 720 based on the same action when the Mod 30 was closed out in '39 or '40.
The 720 was only made for 2 yrs.
I'll add my offering to hard recoiling Milsurps as the Austrian M95 straight pull carbines in 8x56R cal.
They were sure cheap at around $65 FFl price in the $90's.
The orig card boxes of 1937/38 mfg German ammo,,2 5rd packet clips per box were $1.50 each.
The heavy 215 gr (?) bullets out of the little carbine with it's less than ergonomic pleasurable stock design was quite a thrill!
Fun at the time for sure. All gone now except for a few rds of ammo.
DWalt
Member
I once had an Austrian 95, never fired it as no ammo was available. It required that the ammo had to be in clips, sort of like the M1. Some 95s were rechambered to 8x57, I wouldn’t want to fire those. I don’t remember what happened to mine, I probably sold or traded it off many years ago.
Swedish Mausers, one of the best bolt action military rifles ever, cock on closing.
I bought one of the Yugoslavian M95M straight pull rifles at a show maybe 15yrs ago. Probably more.
That's when I was in to the Austrian Straight Pull rifles.
These were conversions of the Austrian 8x56R that used the packet loading enbloc style system to a 5rd staggered mag using loose rounds. It could be loaded with Mauser stripper clips as well.
Cal 8x57 Mauser.
The heart of the system was a sheet metal magazine 'box' that took the place of the Mannlicher style single lever follower. Very unique and it worked well.
The M95M conversions rifles are often missing their unique extractor that was fashioned for the conversions. One thing to check if buying.
I shot it a some with likely the worst available ammo for testing such a rifle...Turkish 8mm Mauser surplus mfg 1941.
But hey that was cheap too at $5 /per bandolier of 70rds!
What could be better.
Many of the case necks split upon firing. But it wasn't the Yugo rifles fault. The ammo did the same in a CZ Mauser 98.
It all went bang though.
Another heavy hitter gone somewhere. I think I sold it on an on-line auction.
Still have a good supply of that smokin' Turk ammo though!
I did buy one of those magazine conversion inserts for the M95M Yugo rifle at one time. No one knew what it was in a junk box of parts at a show. $2 bought it.
On-line IIRC it brought $75 at the time.
I may have pics and dimensions of that magazine box somewhere thinking I might make some. But that never happened.
That's when I was in to the Austrian Straight Pull rifles.
These were conversions of the Austrian 8x56R that used the packet loading enbloc style system to a 5rd staggered mag using loose rounds. It could be loaded with Mauser stripper clips as well.
Cal 8x57 Mauser.
The heart of the system was a sheet metal magazine 'box' that took the place of the Mannlicher style single lever follower. Very unique and it worked well.
The M95M conversions rifles are often missing their unique extractor that was fashioned for the conversions. One thing to check if buying.
I shot it a some with likely the worst available ammo for testing such a rifle...Turkish 8mm Mauser surplus mfg 1941.
But hey that was cheap too at $5 /per bandolier of 70rds!
What could be better.
Many of the case necks split upon firing. But it wasn't the Yugo rifles fault. The ammo did the same in a CZ Mauser 98.
It all went bang though.
Another heavy hitter gone somewhere. I think I sold it on an on-line auction.
Still have a good supply of that smokin' Turk ammo though!
I did buy one of those magazine conversion inserts for the M95M Yugo rifle at one time. No one knew what it was in a junk box of parts at a show. $2 bought it.
On-line IIRC it brought $75 at the time.
I may have pics and dimensions of that magazine box somewhere thinking I might make some. But that never happened.
Last edited:
DWalt
Member
I bought over five hundred rounds of the cheap Turk 8mm ammo, just a bit too hot for me to use in my Hakim. I pulled all of the bullets, saved all the powder, and reloaded them by dropping the charge by 5 grains using the original powder. Far more comfortable to shoot and I didn’t worry about the Hakim coming apart. No problems with case neck splits or anything like that. I remember when the Turk M98s were selling for around $70, but all of them I saw had been ridden hard and put away wet.
I also reformed some of that Turk brass to 7x57, and loaded it with 7mm bullets for use in my Spanish Mausers.
I also reformed some of that Turk brass to 7x57, and loaded it with 7mm bullets for use in my Spanish Mausers.
Last edited:
LVSteve
Member
I think even the nice ones were put away wet. I bought one with a lovely bore and overall condition that shot patterns. Removing the action revealed that with the rear action screws tight and the barrel bands removed, the barrel sat over an inch high of the wood at the muzzle end. Oops.
I have a very nice No. 5 and have killed several deer with it. I have never found the recoil that objectionable. I handliad 180 gr RN bullets for mine. I had a scope on it for a while in a no-drill mount that worked quite well; made by B-square IIRC. I have shot 1.25" 100 yard groups with it with hunting loads. I like these old rifles.
Similar threads
