Model 1917 .45 Revolver
- Thread starter SFlanigan
- Start date
My S&W Model 1917 with serial number 21460 shipped from S&W in March of 1918
DWalt
Member
There was some debate in U. S. Army circles about adopting the M1917 Enfield as the standard postwar rifle as there were more of them made than Springfields and experience showed them be fully suitable for combat use. In fact some felt that they were better than the Springfield as the rear peep sight was mounted on the rear receiver bridge, much closer to the eye, vs. the Springfield's barrel-mounted open sight. I have a ca. 1916 Springfield '03 and I can tell you from personal experience that I really can't hit much using that Springfield rear sight. Part of the problem may be my eyes, but to me the Enfield has far better sights, and I would choose it over the Springfield for that reason alone. I had one of those Enfields also, but a long time ago. Further, the Enfield receiver was somewhat heavier and stronger than the Springfield's. Military Enfield actions were prized by gunsmiths for use in building custom magnum-caliber rifles. Some of the post-WWI Remington bolt action hunting rifles used, basically, the Enfield action. Anyway, it seems that the Army let the rifle decision drop after the war and most of the Enfields went into storage.
Last edited:
Your gun most likely shipped in Aug 1918. We'd love to see some pics if possible. Could you PM me the complete serial number for my database?
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2007
- Messages
- 27,669
- Reaction score
- 21,359
Click on Reply on any of your posts, then Manage Attachments. A pop-up window will open.
Click on Choose File and select the photo from your computer hard drive, then click Upload. You can attach up to 5 photos. If each photo is not too large you will see a blue hyperlink underneath showing the photo has loaded. Scroll to the bottom and click Close Window, then Submit Reply on your original reply window, and the photo should appear.
Jack Flash
Member
We sure would love to see your photos. Alan gave good directions, but just to be sure, here is my step-by-step guide:
HOW TO POST PICTURES
Easiest Method:
You can attach them directly as "thumbnails".
HOW TO POST PICTURES
Easiest Method:
You can attach them directly as "thumbnails".
Start your new post or reopen an old post
Scroll down till you see the "Attach Files" header
Click on the "Manage Attachments" Button
Browse to wherever you have your pictures (usually on your own hard drive)
Select the picture
Click Upload
Repeat till you upload all you want to.
Scroll down till you see the "Attach Files" header
Click on the "Manage Attachments" Button
Browse to wherever you have your pictures (usually on your own hard drive)
Select the picture
Click Upload
Repeat till you upload all you want to.
Jack Flash
Member
Did anyone see the article on the 10 mm in the American Rifleman? Amazingly, it mentions that the Danish Sirius Dog Sled Patrol (they cover the uninhabited areas of Greenland where disgruntled polar bears and musk oxen can be encountered) carries a Glock 20 10mm as their sidearm. Their primary arm? Can you believe it, the M1917 rifle in its original chambering!
.303 British?
"I don't think officers, inc. pilots, were issued pistols. Sidearms were private property of officers until much later."
I believe that during WW I, handguns were issued to officers. A friend of mine showed me his granddaddy's 1911 Colt. Granddaddy was an Army officer in WW I. He also has the letter where GD bought the 1911 from the Army after the war was over.
Of course, some officers, like George Patton, carried their personal sidearms. I remember reading where he preferred the Single Action Army to his issued 1911 because he had modified the trigger way too light and had the 1911 go off in the holster.
I believe that during WW I, handguns were issued to officers. A friend of mine showed me his granddaddy's 1911 Colt. Granddaddy was an Army officer in WW I. He also has the letter where GD bought the 1911 from the Army after the war was over.
Of course, some officers, like George Patton, carried their personal sidearms. I remember reading where he preferred the Single Action Army to his issued 1911 because he had modified the trigger way too light and had the 1911 go off in the holster.
Last edited:
ABPOS
Member
A quote from the American Rifleman article about the 1917 rife in WWI. Sorry for the sidetrack, but it came up, so.....
"As the war progressed, the combined output of Model 1917 rifles produced by the three commercial firms greatly exceeded Springfield Armory's and Rock Island Arsenal's Model 1903 production. It is estimated that about three-quarters of the AEF was armed with Model 1917 rifles at the time of the Armistice. Ordnance Dept. records indicate 1,123,259 Model 1917 rifles had been shipped to France prior to the cessation of hostilities. The vast majority of these rifles were acquired by the U.S. Army, but limited numbers were also procured by the U.S. Navy and U.S. Marine Corps, although the Model 1903 remained the predominant rifle used by the latter two branches of service. The Model 1917 remained in production until mid-1919, by which time a total of 2,422,529 rifles had been manufactured."
"As the war progressed, the combined output of Model 1917 rifles produced by the three commercial firms greatly exceeded Springfield Armory's and Rock Island Arsenal's Model 1903 production. It is estimated that about three-quarters of the AEF was armed with Model 1917 rifles at the time of the Armistice. Ordnance Dept. records indicate 1,123,259 Model 1917 rifles had been shipped to France prior to the cessation of hostilities. The vast majority of these rifles were acquired by the U.S. Army, but limited numbers were also procured by the U.S. Navy and U.S. Marine Corps, although the Model 1903 remained the predominant rifle used by the latter two branches of service. The Model 1917 remained in production until mid-1919, by which time a total of 2,422,529 rifles had been manufactured."
I think its interesting that the Danes have been using the 30-06 since '53, must be some bad blood between them and the Swedes and the 6.5x55.
Jack Flash
Member
Ok, you got me.
Strictly speaking, however, the Pattern 14 (later Rifle Number 3) was chambered in .303 British. When modified to fire .30-06 and accepted by the US Army, they designated it the Model of 1917.
DWalt
Member
As the AR article mentions, the main problem with the M1917 Enfield was the non-interchangeability of some parts between Winchester production and Remington/Eddystone production. That was because Winchester began 1917 production first, before standardization issues among manufacturers had been resolved.
It was very fortunate that American P-14 Enfield rifle production for the British was already underway before the USA entered the conflict so the P-14 could have been easily modified to produce the M1917. Springfield Armory would have never been able to manufacture enough Springfield '03s to meet AEF needs, and they might have needed to use British and/or French rifles. As it was, the AEF was forced to use mainly French machine guns as the USA had essentially none in service prior to the US entry. It wasn't until almost the Armistice that US-made Browning M1917 MGs and BARs landed in quantity on French docks. Even so, very few saw action.
The M1917 rifle I had was a crude sporterization of a service rifle, done mainly by shortening the stock with a saw, and not much else. I bought it for $15 back around the early 1970s. After several years I sold it for about the same amount. Another one I wish I could have kept, as it shot quite well after you got over its looks.
It was very fortunate that American P-14 Enfield rifle production for the British was already underway before the USA entered the conflict so the P-14 could have been easily modified to produce the M1917. Springfield Armory would have never been able to manufacture enough Springfield '03s to meet AEF needs, and they might have needed to use British and/or French rifles. As it was, the AEF was forced to use mainly French machine guns as the USA had essentially none in service prior to the US entry. It wasn't until almost the Armistice that US-made Browning M1917 MGs and BARs landed in quantity on French docks. Even so, very few saw action.
The M1917 rifle I had was a crude sporterization of a service rifle, done mainly by shortening the stock with a saw, and not much else. I bought it for $15 back around the early 1970s. After several years I sold it for about the same amount. Another one I wish I could have kept, as it shot quite well after you got over its looks.
Last edited:
Jim Watson
Member
As I understand it, arms production was ramping up enormously in 1918. Nobody really expected the Germans to fold in November, preparations were under way for the Spring Offensive of 1919.
There would have been a lot more BARs and BMGs on the line then.
Not just officers got pistols and revolvers; handguns were just too handy for trench raiding to be left to the brass. Colt and S&W were making lots of revolvers to supplement Colt, Springfield, and Remington-UMC 1911s. Not to mention the contract to North American Arms of Canada but only 100 pistols made before the end of hostilities. There were six other 1911 contractors but nobody got into production except Savage Arms who turned out a fair supply of slides eventually used for repair.
I worked for TVA which, when organized in 1933, picked up US Nitrate Plant No 2 which had been completed shortly AFTER the Armistice and was immediately mothballed. TVA shifted it from explosives to fertilizers as the nucleus of the National Fertilizer Development Center, a lesser known function than dams and power plants.
There would have been a lot more BARs and BMGs on the line then.
Not just officers got pistols and revolvers; handguns were just too handy for trench raiding to be left to the brass. Colt and S&W were making lots of revolvers to supplement Colt, Springfield, and Remington-UMC 1911s. Not to mention the contract to North American Arms of Canada but only 100 pistols made before the end of hostilities. There were six other 1911 contractors but nobody got into production except Savage Arms who turned out a fair supply of slides eventually used for repair.
I worked for TVA which, when organized in 1933, picked up US Nitrate Plant No 2 which had been completed shortly AFTER the Armistice and was immediately mothballed. TVA shifted it from explosives to fertilizers as the nucleus of the National Fertilizer Development Center, a lesser known function than dams and power plants.
Jack Flash
Member
I have a crudely sporterized M1917 rifle, originally made by Eddystone. I bought it because it was a good deal, and I always intended to replace it with a collector-quality rifle, maybe even one by Winchester. Alas, prices seem to stay just over my personal definition of reasonable.
A couple of things about the Eddystone:
1. The magazine does indeed hold six rounds. That's a 20% increase over the much-vaunted M1903.
2. Its sights are indeed better than the M1903. The M1903A3 negates this advantage, but that improvement didn't arrive till years later.
3. When shooting this rifle, I seem to invariably put the first shot out of a cold barrel dead center on target (a bulls eye with a six o'clock hold). Subsequent shots seem to wander around a little (ok, maybe more than a little), but that first shot really endears it to me. Some day I'll have to take it to a rifle state to hunt with it.
Edited to add:
4. The M1917 rifle doesn't have that ridiculous magazine cut off.
A couple of things about the Eddystone:
1. The magazine does indeed hold six rounds. That's a 20% increase over the much-vaunted M1903.
2. Its sights are indeed better than the M1903. The M1903A3 negates this advantage, but that improvement didn't arrive till years later.
3. When shooting this rifle, I seem to invariably put the first shot out of a cold barrel dead center on target (a bulls eye with a six o'clock hold). Subsequent shots seem to wander around a little (ok, maybe more than a little), but that first shot really endears it to me. Some day I'll have to take it to a rifle state to hunt with it.
Edited to add:
4. The M1917 rifle doesn't have that ridiculous magazine cut off.
Last edited:
DWalt
Member
"Nobody really expected the Germans to fold in November, preparations were under way for the Spring Offensive of 1919."
I suppose most know what the Pedersen Device was. A Top-Secret method to convert the '03 Springfield to a semautomatic rifle firing what was essentially an elongated .32 ACP round from a high-capacity magazine. There were plans to make the PD to fit both the 1917 Enfield and the M91 Moisin-Nagant also, but only a very few of those were made. The whole idea was to arm allied troops with "Assault Rifles" for the big planned "1919 Offensive" which of course never happened. After the Great War, most PDs were destroyed but there are still a few in collector hands and museums. .30 PD ammunition in full boxes is, surprisingly, fairly common (at least among ammo collectors) as very large quantities were loaded in expectation of using the PD-equipped rifles for the 1919 Offensive.
There has been a story that a large number of PDs (maybe all of them) was buried in concrete at the San Antonio Arsenal in the early 1930s. The SA Arsenal has long been closed and is now the headquarters of the large H-E-B supermarket chain, so I doubt if anyone will ever be allowed to discover if that story is true. Most of the PD story is to be found here: American Rifleman | Never In Anger: The Pedersen Device One of the older editions of Gun Digest also carried a feature article about the PD. An upcoming auction of a well-known gun auction house will include a PD. But it will not go cheap.
I suppose most know what the Pedersen Device was. A Top-Secret method to convert the '03 Springfield to a semautomatic rifle firing what was essentially an elongated .32 ACP round from a high-capacity magazine. There were plans to make the PD to fit both the 1917 Enfield and the M91 Moisin-Nagant also, but only a very few of those were made. The whole idea was to arm allied troops with "Assault Rifles" for the big planned "1919 Offensive" which of course never happened. After the Great War, most PDs were destroyed but there are still a few in collector hands and museums. .30 PD ammunition in full boxes is, surprisingly, fairly common (at least among ammo collectors) as very large quantities were loaded in expectation of using the PD-equipped rifles for the 1919 Offensive.
There has been a story that a large number of PDs (maybe all of them) was buried in concrete at the San Antonio Arsenal in the early 1930s. The SA Arsenal has long been closed and is now the headquarters of the large H-E-B supermarket chain, so I doubt if anyone will ever be allowed to discover if that story is true. Most of the PD story is to be found here: American Rifleman | Never In Anger: The Pedersen Device One of the older editions of Gun Digest also carried a feature article about the PD. An upcoming auction of a well-known gun auction house will include a PD. But it will not go cheap.
Last edited:
ABPOS
Member
I would imagine that thing would've not had any recoil. Bullet hose.
DWalt
Member
The idea was to engage the enemy at long range using the rifle and the standard cartridge, then everyone was to install the PD into their rifles and advance on the enemy using rapid fire at close range. I always wondered how well that plan would have worked. It's probably good that the Armistice deal was struck before there was a chance to find out.
While the PD cartridge ballistics don't compare to the ballistics of the 30-06, 1300fps and 300 ft-lbs ME is nothing to sneeze at. Somewhere between modern 9mm Luger and 9mm Makarov. Better than most sidearms available at the time. I can see the appeal.
white cloud
Member
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2009
- Messages
- 1,142
- Reaction score
- 1,561
I assume you are speaking of time spent in Vietnam?
