Who knows about 1917s? Enfields, that is.

[sigp220.45]

My sister got me this for my birthday. She went into a local shop and asked for something old that might have been in a war.

What a cool old gun. My modest research indicates the gun (at least the receiver) was a very late production for 1917s - part of a "cleanup lot" made after the war.

The barrel is from 11/18, when the war ended. I guess the R means Remington manufacture?

AA is Augusta Arsenal? The P just seems to be a nearby proof stamp. There is a P on the inside of the pistol-ish grip, too.

There are the usual flaming bombs to be found. My concern is the two-tone receiver. Is this normal? Some kind of heat-treating? It doesn't look like a weld.

The stock has a waxy feel to it. Any suggestions on cleaning it off, without affecting the stampings?

I have some .30/06 ball in my stash, so its off the BLM to see if this old soldier can still march.

 

[venomballistics]

I cut my 30 cal rifle teeth on an eddystone. My specimen didn't have that two tone thing, but then I know my father had refinished the rifle.
its a safe bet mine did see combat action as part of that refinish work included sanding nearly all the teeth marks out of the but end of the stock. Presumably from it having been fed to an enemy unit. just a trace of the incisor marks remain.

 

[jdlii]

Beautiful 1917! As you suspect, a WW II rebuild but, an original barrel. The two tone receiver is showing the heat treating. Original 1917's were blued and then parkerized for WW II.

There were three manufacturers for the U.S. Enfield, Winchester, Remington and Eddystone. Eddystone was owned by Remington and the plant to produce these rifles was set up in an old locomotive factory, I believe in Penn..

Prior to the entry of the U.S. forces into WW I, these rifles were produced by the same manufactures for the British army. The receivers were marked; WRA, RA and I believe ERA or EA. The caliber was changed from .303 to 30'06.

All of the smaller parts are generally stamped with the first letter of the manufacturer, W, R and E. Bayonets can be difficult to find but are out there.

They have a 26" barrel and, if like mine, they are extremely accurate. Mine will hold the 10 & X ring at 200 yards, from the prone position, with G.I. ball ammo.

Contrary to what some articles state, fellow Tennessean, Sgt. Alvin C. York, did not carry an Enfield. While issued one in the states, he "acquired" his 03' in a midnight requisition from a Marine unit next to the 82nd's camp in France.

Enjoy!

 

[bishopm14]

Best bolt action we ever issued. I've got an Eddystone about 130,000 older than yours. As you guessed, the R on the barrel indicates rebarreling with a Remington barrell. No known sharing of parts between Winchester, Remington, or Eddystone went on during production. Most 1917s were rebuilt post war, so mixmaster parts are pretty much the norm. They are also some of the most profusely marked weapons, inspectors marks everywhere. Makes for interesting research.

The Eddystones have a rep for cracking the receiver during the rebarreling process if relief cuts weren't made. Might wanna check yours for that.

Not sure of the two tone look your receiver has, almost looks like the lead dipped Garand receivers. C.S. Ferris wrote the best, and one of the only books on the 1917, lots of good info in there.

 

[brucev]

Good looking M-1917. Clean the barrel and chamber, load it up with some good quality M-2 ball and have fun! As for the two-tone finish color on the receiver wall, that is simply a consequence of the heat treatment. You see the same thing on WWII era M-1 rifles where the heel of the receiver is annealed to avoid cracking when it was used with rifle grenades. The R marked barrel indicates Remington, which owned and operated the Eddystone operation. More than likely the barrel is a replacement. IIRC, AAP means Augusta Arsenal. HTH. Sincerely. brucev.

 

[dswancutt]

The accepted way of cleaning military stocks is to wipe them down with mineral spirts and then treat them with boiled linseed oil or tung oil. If the stock is oily from cosomoline, remove the stock from the rifle, wrap it in paper towels and then in a black garbage bag and put it on the dash of your car. It will safely leach the cosmoline out of the stock. Then folowup with mineral spirts as above.
The CMP forum has people who can give you more info on the rifle.

 

[2152hq]

Very nice! Accurate, reliable rifles.
Finding one with all matching mfg'r marks on the parts is rare these days, but then some 'collectors' spend their time building such by switching parts which are still available.

The AAP is 'Augusta Arsenal, Rebuild' marking. The P is most likely a specific inspector but I don't know who or even if it is known.

Mine were always great shooters. A favorite was a Remington mfg. A DCM rifle I bought at an OGCA show years back for $100. Shows you how long ago that was!
They are great cast bullet shooters too. Most of my time was spent using that ammo as opposed to GI MilSurp.
One of the first center fire rifles I ever bought was while in HS from a classmate. A 1917 Eddystone for $20.
He brought it to school,,I bought it there and kept it in my locker till the end of the day and walked home with it.

Want to get on the wrong side of the collectors in a hurry,,just refer to these as P-17's.

Have fun!

 

[Faulkner]

Want to get on the wrong side of the collectors in a hurry,,just refer to these as P-17's.

Good tip. That would be because they are not P-17's, only the ignorant/uninformed refer to them as such.

 

[2152hq]

Good tip. That would be because they are not P-17's, only the ignorant/uninformed refer to them as such.

See, I told ya...

 

[mkk41]

Model of 1917 is indeed the correct name for these rifles. They have a very interesting history in themselves. They had their good points , and bad. If you're interested , try to find the Ferris book shown here.

 

[sipowicz]

its a safe bet mine did see combat action as part of that refinish work included sanding nearly all the teeth marks out of the but end of the stock. Presumably from it having been fed to an enemy unit. just a trace of the incisor marks remain.

It would have been cooler to have left them on the gun!

 

[Cyrano]

Original WW I barrels will have 5 groove rifling, left hand twist, Enfield pattern, left over from the Pattern 14 Enfields made for Great Britain. The bores were merely reduced to 30-06 dimensions. WW II replacement barrels will have 4 groove, right hand twist rifling, like the Springfield. Original WW I barrels don't like boat tail bullets, but will shoot very accurately with flat based bulles.

 

[LouisianaJoe]

The Ferris book is excellent. It documents all of the parts. I recently acquired an Eddystone made in 10/18, one month before the end of the war. According to the Ferris book, they started parkerizing the M1917 that month and mine is parkerized and does not have any rebuild stamps. All of the metal parts have an E on them but the hand guard has a R. I fired 3 shots almost touching at 50 yds about 5" above point of aim with M2 Ball. The Ferris book states that the rifles were battle sighted at 400 yds. This gives you + or - 15" from 0 to 500 yds. M2 ball would be 5" high with a 400 yd zero.

Also Enfield asked the US to not call the M1917 an Enfield so as not to confuse the troops using SMLE's. The Brits call the guns made here Pattern 14 Rifles so they would not be confused with the SMLE.

The original SMLE Mk III was a Pattern 1907.

I have a Australian made SMLE Lithgow made in 1941. Here is a photo that you can use to compare it to the M1917.

 

[LVSteve]

Also Enfield asked the US to not call the M1917 an Enfield so as not to confuse the troops using SMLE's. The Brits call the guns made here Pattern 14 Rifles so they would not be confused with the SMLE.

Not quite true. The Pattern 14 rifle was supposed to be a substitute for the Lee Enfield and it fired the .303 British cartridge. The M1917 was a redesign of the P14 to US specs and 30-06 ammo.

After Dunkirk the UK was desperately short of rifles and bought a bunch of M1917s from the US. AFAIK, none saw front line service, but they were issued to the Home Guard. In British hands, the M1917 was painted with a red stripe to indicate that it did not take the .303 round. Much to my annoyance as a collector, most US owners attempt to remove the red stripe and usually make a mess and destroy the history of the rifle.

The M1917 is a fine rifle and there were probably more of them with the Doughboys than 1903s. It failed to keep its place in the US arsenal for several reasons.

1) It was heavy and unwieldy compared to a 1903.. or a telegraph pole for that matter.

2) It was based on a foreign design. Yeah, like the 1903 wasn't a Mauser ripoff?

3) It did not have windage adjustable sights for competition at Camp Perry. Hmm, how many folk in battle really have time to fiddle with a windage adjustment when the bullets are flying.

 

[LoboGunLeather]

Others have covered the facts of the 1917's development and history.

The US Rifle Model of 1917 has an excellent reputation for strength. Many were converted to sporting rifles over the years and were the prefered action for some of the magnum calibers.

Remington used the basic design for the later Model 721, 722, and finally the Model 700 rifles that are still in production today.

 

[shep854]

My maternal grandfather walked across France in 1918, carrying an M1917, though he never caught up to the fighting.
I had one for a while, but thought I had to sell it...

The soft thumping you may be hearing is me kicking myself around the room...

 

[kraigwy]

No Model 1917 is complete without a bayonet.

 

[oldRoger]

I have one (Winchester) which my Uncle bought “between the wars” it is on its way back from being re-barreled
It shot in many Army Matches and I think at least once at Camp Perry.
Sometime after WWII it was milled for Redfield sights the old barrel shortened and target crowned and now has a Bishop Stock and Griffin & Howe mounts.

My uncle could never understand the thinking involved in converting them to cock on opening, cock on closing at least with this action is very quick and smooth.

 

[LouisianaJoe]

Not quite true. The Pattern 14 rifle was supposed to be a substitute for the Lee Enfield and it fired the .303 British cartridge. The M1917 was a redesign of the P14 to US specs and 30-06 ammo.

After Dunkirk the UK was desperately short of rifles and bought a bunch of M1917s from the US. AFAIK, none saw front line service, but they were issued to the Home Guard. In British hands, the M1917 was painted with a red stripe to indicate that it did not take the .303 round. Much to my annoyance as a collector, most US owners attempt to remove the red stripe and usually make a mess and destroy the history of the rifle.

The M1917 is a fine rifle and there were probably more of them with the Doughboys than 1903s. It failed to keep its place in the US arsenal for several reasons.

1) It was heavy and unwieldy compared to a 1903.. or a telegraph pole for that matter.

2) It was based on a foreign design. Yeah, like the 1903 wasn't a Mauser ripoff?

3) It did not have windage adjustable sights for competition at Camp Perry. Hmm, how many folk in battle really have time to fiddle with a windage adjustment when the bullets are flying.

My information on this came from page 3 of the Ferris book. The P-13 was made at Enfield. The P-14, a different design, was made in the US. A British Lt Col wrote to the Chief of Ordnance about the use of the word Enfield in reference to the M1917 which was a redesign of the P-14.

 

[Texas Star]

My information on this came from page 3 of the Ferris book. The P-13 was made at Enfield. The P-14, a different design, was made in the US. A British Lt Col wrote to the Chief of Ordnance about the use of the word Enfield in reference to the M1917 which was a redesign of the P-14.

The P-13 was in a hot .280 (.276 ?) caliber and was slated to replace the SMLE. When war came, it was produced (here) in .303 as a supplement to the SMLE, which proved so well suited for warfare that it was retained. The only real difference between the P-13 and the P-14 was in caliber and in the grasping grooves on the forearm.

Few P-14's seem to have served on the front lines, save in a sniper capacity.

One man above posted that Remington used the M-1917 as a basis for the Model 700-725 rifles. That is only mildly true. Those were so extensively modified for mass production at a cheap price that there isn't a lot of relationship. The safety was derived from the Enfield, and the location is distinctive.

What Remington did do was to use the M-1917 as the basis for their excellent M-30 and M-30S sporting rifles. They competed with Winchester's Models 54 and 70 during the 1920's and '30's. The revised Model 720 was never made in large quantities, as the war came. Postwar, Remington "went cheap" and designed the Model 721 series.

Also, a good many of the surplus rifles were modified into hunting rifles, sometimes with the actions modded to accept the long .375 H&H Magnum or .416 Rigby cartridges. The long action is one of the best for this, the true Magnum Mauser and Winchester M-70 being the other two of note.

The reason why the action is longer than needed for the .303 or .30/06 is that it was, remember, originally designed as the P-13 for that long .276 round, which I suspect recoiled too much to be appreciated by most soldiers. The 7mm caliber was a response to what the British encountered at the hands of the Boers with their M-95 Mausers from 1899-1902 in South Africa. They learned what it was to face accurate long range fire from magazine rifles in the hands of expert marksmen! That must have been a real revelation to a nation used to facing muskets and spears in the hands of wild tribes in their empire. It was even a shock to those who studied fighting Napoleon, when rifles were still primitive. The Baker was hardly a Mauser, and most arms then were still muskets, the old Brown Bess against whatever the French had, Charlevilles, I guess.

The P-13 can be easily distinguished from the P-14 by the grasping groves in the forearm in lieu of the more conventional long ones for the P-14 and Model 1917. They are uncommon, never having been put into mass production, as the war came in August, 1914, and existing rifles had to be used and production rapidly increased. And, reality showed that the SMLE was in fact a surpeb choice for that war. This is why the successor rifle developed during the 1930' s was based on the SMLE, the Rifle No. 4.

I honestly believe that the No. 4 is the best bolt-action battle rifle of all time. It is not the optimum for sniper use, although it fared very well in that role. But for general use, it's fine.

One of the late Jack O'Connor's .416's was made on a Model 1917 action. Too many associated Jack with just his beloved .270, but he had and used .338, .375, and .416 rifles when appropriate. Not to mention 7X57mm and .30/06... I miss his droll prose in, "Outdoor Life" and other titles.

The Eddystone- made 1917's have a rep for cracking the receivers. This was due to faulty heat treatment and did not affect those made by Remington and Winchester. Anyway, for WW II, many were re -heat treated.

Many M-1917's were sent to the Phillipines, and some sold to Latin American countries. Remington made a modified one for some of the later contracts. I think Guatemala may have ordered some. It had some Springfield features, as I recall, but I saw just one photo, many years ago.

M-1917's in really nice condition are now collectors' items.